Dynamic strategy: Investigating the ambidexterity–performance relationship

Abstract

This study aims to determine whether organisations in emerging economic contexts demonstrate ambidexterity for sustainable performance in the long term and what the effects of environmental turbulence are on the ambidexterity and sustainable performance relationship.Design/methodology/approach: This study used self-administered questionnaires and telephonic surveys. The sample consisted of profit-seeking organisations from many different industries within South Africa, including, but not limited to, manufacturing, business services, finance, hospitality and tourism, and retail and wholesale. The research was conducted during the 2017 financial year.Findings/results: It was found that moderate to strong relationships exist between the two sub-dimensions of ambidexterity and sustainable performance. The findings depict a strong relationship between exploration and exploitation as the sub-dimensional constructs of ambidexterity, reinforcing existing literature on simultaneous exploration and exploitation. There was no statistically significant information, indicating that environmental turbulence moderates the ambidexterity and sustainable performance relationship. Practical implications:Considering the strong positive relationship between the two subdimensions of ambidexterity and sustainable organisational performance, it is advisable for management of South African organisations to focus on ambidextrous strategies for sustaining performance in turbulent environments.Originality/value: This study contributes to the limited body of knowledge investigating ambidexterity as a dynamic capability in an emerging economic context. Moreover, this study contributes to clarify the ambidexterity and sustainable performance relationship in terms of whether organisations can simultaneously explore and exploit and what type of relationship exists between ambidexterity and sustainable performance as previous studies delivered mixed results.

The Effects of The Covid-19 Pandemic on Exploitative and Explorative Strategies of Pharmaceutical Industries in Brazil

“…);Koriak et al (2018);Morgan and Berthon (2008);Liao et al (2018);Severgnini et al (2019) andSilveira-Martins et al (2014).Finally, hypothesis H3, which suggested the relationship between ambidexterity and performance, in this case, ambidexterity calculated by the difference between the exploration and exploitation constructs (equilibrium perspective), a direct and positive correlation with performance was supported ( = 0.347 , p <0.05), a divergent result byCao et al (2009) andSevergnini et al (2018) and yet, going in the same direction asBattaglia et al (2018);Jacobs and Maritz (2020);Koriak et al (2018);Morgan and Berthon (2008);Liao et al (2018);Severgnini et al (2019) andSilveira-Martins et al (2014).…”

The intervention of strategic innovation practices in between regulations and sustainable business growth: a holistic perspective for Malaysian SMEs

“…Likewise, Chen et al (2016) reflect that open type of innovation process based on the improvement of external knowledge exploration, retention and exploitation can ensure sustainable innovations leading to business success. A recent study of Jacobs and Maritz (2020) on basis of South African industries has established a positive association between explorative-exploitative innovation practices and sustainable performance. At this point, innovation practices and spirituality are often connected with each other leading to business success (Kovács, 2020).…”

Digital transformation as the driving force for sustainable business performance: A moderated mediation model of market-driven business model innovation and digital leadership capabilities

“…Levinthal and March [ 10 ] define digital exploration capability as the firm's ability to adopt new models, resources, and knowledge to improve the firm's process. This proactive approach leads firms to adopt innovative practices, which are the fundamental promoter of sustainable performance [ 11 ] and business model innovation [ 12 ].…”