Ambidexterity and Entrepreneurship Studies: A Literature Review and Research Agenda

IF 1.5 Q3 BUSINESS Foundations and Trends in Entrepreneurship Pub Date : 2021-06-03 DOI:10.1561/0300000097
Maribel Guerrero
{"title":"Ambidexterity and Entrepreneurship Studies: A Literature Review and Research Agenda","authors":"Maribel Guerrero","doi":"10.1561/0300000097","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Originated by an individual capacity, organizational ambidexterity represents how organizations do two different things equally well (i.e., efficiency and flexibility, adaptability and alignment, integration and responsiveness, or exploration and exploitation). The versatility of the ambidexterity concept allows using it to test multiple research questions from various perspectives. It explains that in the last decades, the research in organizational ambidexterity has been exponentially rising. The authors argued that the proliferation of papers represents a consolidation stage of any phenomenon. Therefore, in this development cycle, the two possibilities maybe its decline or re-focus along new lines. Although the publication pattern focused on strategic management journals, it does not mean that organizational ambidexterity is only observed in established and mature organizations' strategies. Several entrepreneurial organizations have been born (e.g., new ventures) or have rejuvenated (i.e., established ventures with an entrepreneurial orientation) by implementing and developing an organizational ambidexterity capacity. This study is motivated by the apparent unrepresentativeness of organizational ambidexterity in entrepreneurship studies. Therefore, (a) we look back to the past 15 years of published research by focusing on the contribution of organizational ambidexterity to the fields of management studies and entrepreneurship studies;and (b) we look forward to the research in organizational ambidexterity by inspiring the analysis of ambidexterity's role in the current scenarios (social, economic, technological, environmental) in management and entrepreneurship studies. Based on this review and analysis, we show the underrepresentation of entrepreneurship in the published ambidexterity literature until the last decade (the 2010s). Motivated by this insight, we provoke the discussion about how the concept of ambidexterity, characterized by managing a double tension simultaneously, is a potential ingredient in the entrepreneurial decision-making process of individuals, teams, organizations, and eco-systems agents. We encourage new research lines that help refresh the analysis of ambidexterity in the entrepreneurship field and re-thinking its contribution to the reconciliation process between management, innovation, and entrepreneurship fields. Furthermore, several implications to managers, entrepreneurial organizations, and entrepreneurs emerge from this study. Concretely, we encourage them to consider this approach as a way of thinking to face the current social, economic, and health problems that we are living in due to the COVID-19 pandemic effects.","PeriodicalId":45990,"journal":{"name":"Foundations and Trends in Entrepreneurship","volume":"34 1","pages":"436-650"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2021-06-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"14","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Foundations and Trends in Entrepreneurship","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1561/0300000097","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"BUSINESS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 14

Abstract

Originated by an individual capacity, organizational ambidexterity represents how organizations do two different things equally well (i.e., efficiency and flexibility, adaptability and alignment, integration and responsiveness, or exploration and exploitation). The versatility of the ambidexterity concept allows using it to test multiple research questions from various perspectives. It explains that in the last decades, the research in organizational ambidexterity has been exponentially rising. The authors argued that the proliferation of papers represents a consolidation stage of any phenomenon. Therefore, in this development cycle, the two possibilities maybe its decline or re-focus along new lines. Although the publication pattern focused on strategic management journals, it does not mean that organizational ambidexterity is only observed in established and mature organizations' strategies. Several entrepreneurial organizations have been born (e.g., new ventures) or have rejuvenated (i.e., established ventures with an entrepreneurial orientation) by implementing and developing an organizational ambidexterity capacity. This study is motivated by the apparent unrepresentativeness of organizational ambidexterity in entrepreneurship studies. Therefore, (a) we look back to the past 15 years of published research by focusing on the contribution of organizational ambidexterity to the fields of management studies and entrepreneurship studies;and (b) we look forward to the research in organizational ambidexterity by inspiring the analysis of ambidexterity's role in the current scenarios (social, economic, technological, environmental) in management and entrepreneurship studies. Based on this review and analysis, we show the underrepresentation of entrepreneurship in the published ambidexterity literature until the last decade (the 2010s). Motivated by this insight, we provoke the discussion about how the concept of ambidexterity, characterized by managing a double tension simultaneously, is a potential ingredient in the entrepreneurial decision-making process of individuals, teams, organizations, and eco-systems agents. We encourage new research lines that help refresh the analysis of ambidexterity in the entrepreneurship field and re-thinking its contribution to the reconciliation process between management, innovation, and entrepreneurship fields. Furthermore, several implications to managers, entrepreneurial organizations, and entrepreneurs emerge from this study. Concretely, we encourage them to consider this approach as a way of thinking to face the current social, economic, and health problems that we are living in due to the COVID-19 pandemic effects.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
两面性与创业研究:文献回顾与研究议程
组织的双元性源于个人能力,它代表了组织如何将两种不同的事情做得同样好(即,效率和灵活性,适应性和一致性,集成和响应性,或探索和利用)。双灵巧概念的多功能性允许使用它从不同的角度测试多个研究问题。它解释说,在过去的几十年里,对组织双重性的研究呈指数级增长。作者认为,论文的激增代表了任何现象的巩固阶段。因此,在这个开发周期中,两种可能性可能是它的衰落或沿着新的路线重新聚焦。虽然这种出版模式主要集中在战略管理期刊上,但这并不意味着组织双元性只存在于成熟组织的战略中。通过实施和发展组织的双重能力,一些企业组织诞生了(例如,新的企业)或恢复了活力(即,建立了具有企业倾向的企业)。本研究的动机是创业研究中组织双元性的明显不代表性。因此,(a)我们回顾过去15年发表的研究,重点关注组织双元性对管理研究和创业研究领域的贡献;(b)我们期待对组织双元性的研究,激发对管理和创业研究中双元性在当前情景(社会、经济、技术、环境)中的作用的分析。基于这一回顾和分析,我们发现,直到最近十年(2010年代),在已发表的双元性文献中,企业家精神的代表性不足。受此启发,我们发起了一场讨论,探讨以同时管理双重紧张为特征的双重性概念如何成为个人、团队、组织和生态系统代理人的创业决策过程中的潜在因素。我们鼓励新的研究路线,以帮助刷新创业领域的双元性分析,并重新思考其对管理、创新和创业领域之间的调和过程的贡献。此外,本研究还对管理者、创业组织和企业家产生了一些启示。具体而言,我们鼓励他们将这种方法视为一种思维方式,以面对当前因COVID-19大流行影响而面临的社会、经济和健康问题。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
7
期刊介绍: Foundations and Trends® in Entrepreneurship publishes survey and tutorial articles in the following topics: - Nascent and start-up entrepreneurs - Opportunity recognition - New venture creation process - Business formation - Firm ownership - Market value and firm growth - Franchising - Managerial characteristics and behavior of entrepreneurs - Strategic alliances and networks - Government programs and public policy - Gender and ethnicity - New business financing - Business angels - Family-owned firms - Management structure, governance and performance - Corporate entrepreneurship - High technology - Small business and economic growth
期刊最新文献
Entrepreneurial Ecosystem Mechanisms Re-Conceptualizing Underrepresented Racial Minority Entrepreneurs Entrepreneurship in the Long-Run: Empirical Evidence and Historical Mechanisms The Impact of Constitutional Protection of Economic Rights on Entrepreneurship: A Taxonomic Survey Entrepreneurs’ Search for Sources of Knowledge
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1