Antecedents, Consequences and Mediating Role of Organizational
Ambidexterity – Gibson & Birkinshaw (2004)
Components of ambidexterity
1. Alignment (of existing practices)
2. Adaptation (to new circumstances)
The ambidextrous organization achieves both
Value of Ambidexterity
In an organization there is likely conflict between different demands on its task environment
– so trade-offs have to be made.
These trade offs can never be 100% eliminated
However, the most successful organizations manage to reconcile them to a large degree in
order to enhance long-term competitiveness
Structural ambidexterity
Most authors have viewed ambidexterity in structural terms
Basic idea: organizations solve conflicts of interest by establishing “dual structures” –
meaning that some business units focus on alignment whilst others focus on adaptation
Approaches other than “dual structure” to achieve structural ambidexterity:
Task partitioning: one group adopts an organic structure, while another takes on a
mechanistic structure
Temporal separation: the entire unit focuses on one set of tasks first and then on another set
of tasks
Generally, in structural ambidexterity research, the focus is on trade-offs / either-or decisions
From structural to contextual ambidexterity
There has been a shift from trade-off-thinking (either/or) to paradoxical thinking (both/and)
This new form is called contextual ambidexterity – contextual because it arises from the context of
the organization
Also, there is a growing recognition of the role of the processes and systems present in a given
context – they contribute to achieving the desired balance between opposing demands
Contextual ambidexterity
The behavioural capacity to simultaneously demonstrate alignment and adaptability across
an entire business unit
Contextual ambidexterity is best achieved NOT through creating dual structures but by
building a set of processes or systems that enable individuals to make their own judgement
about how to divide their time between conflicting demands for alignment and adaptability
, Alignment = coherence among all the patterns of activities in the business unit; they are working
together towards the same goals
Adaptability = capacity to reconfigure activities in the business unit quickly to meet changing
demands in the task environment
Contextual ambidexterity emerges when leaders of a business unit develop a supportive
organization context
o That is, not through charismatic leadership / a formal org. structure / a strong culture
better performance can be achieved
o Rather, it is achieved through building a carefully selected set of systems and
processes that collectively define a context that allows the meta-capabilities of
alignment and adaptability to simultaneously flourish – and thereby sustain business-
unit performance
Characteristics of Contextual ambidexterity in organizations
Can be seen as a meta-level capacity for alignment and adaptability which permeates all
functions/levels in a unit
Is potentially more sustainable than structural separation of alignment and adaptability
because it facilitates the adaptation of an ENTIRE business unit, jot just the separate units
responsible for new business development
Avoids coordination problems between subunits
Contextual ambidexterity manifests itself in the specific actions of individuals throughout the
organization
In contextually ambidextrous units, the context is flexible and dynamic enough to allow
individuals to make their own judgements on how to divide their time between alignment-
and adaptation-oriented activities
Previous studies support the logic of creating a behavioral orientation toward dual capacities
rather than a higher-level separation of those capacities
Previous studies also imply that organizations must build systems and processes facilitating
these behaviours
Effect of Ambidexterity on Performance
Hypothesis: The higher the level of ambidexterity in a business unit, the higher the level of
performance
The results of the study support this hypothesis
Ambidexterity – Gibson & Birkinshaw (2004)
Components of ambidexterity
1. Alignment (of existing practices)
2. Adaptation (to new circumstances)
The ambidextrous organization achieves both
Value of Ambidexterity
In an organization there is likely conflict between different demands on its task environment
– so trade-offs have to be made.
These trade offs can never be 100% eliminated
However, the most successful organizations manage to reconcile them to a large degree in
order to enhance long-term competitiveness
Structural ambidexterity
Most authors have viewed ambidexterity in structural terms
Basic idea: organizations solve conflicts of interest by establishing “dual structures” –
meaning that some business units focus on alignment whilst others focus on adaptation
Approaches other than “dual structure” to achieve structural ambidexterity:
Task partitioning: one group adopts an organic structure, while another takes on a
mechanistic structure
Temporal separation: the entire unit focuses on one set of tasks first and then on another set
of tasks
Generally, in structural ambidexterity research, the focus is on trade-offs / either-or decisions
From structural to contextual ambidexterity
There has been a shift from trade-off-thinking (either/or) to paradoxical thinking (both/and)
This new form is called contextual ambidexterity – contextual because it arises from the context of
the organization
Also, there is a growing recognition of the role of the processes and systems present in a given
context – they contribute to achieving the desired balance between opposing demands
Contextual ambidexterity
The behavioural capacity to simultaneously demonstrate alignment and adaptability across
an entire business unit
Contextual ambidexterity is best achieved NOT through creating dual structures but by
building a set of processes or systems that enable individuals to make their own judgement
about how to divide their time between conflicting demands for alignment and adaptability
, Alignment = coherence among all the patterns of activities in the business unit; they are working
together towards the same goals
Adaptability = capacity to reconfigure activities in the business unit quickly to meet changing
demands in the task environment
Contextual ambidexterity emerges when leaders of a business unit develop a supportive
organization context
o That is, not through charismatic leadership / a formal org. structure / a strong culture
better performance can be achieved
o Rather, it is achieved through building a carefully selected set of systems and
processes that collectively define a context that allows the meta-capabilities of
alignment and adaptability to simultaneously flourish – and thereby sustain business-
unit performance
Characteristics of Contextual ambidexterity in organizations
Can be seen as a meta-level capacity for alignment and adaptability which permeates all
functions/levels in a unit
Is potentially more sustainable than structural separation of alignment and adaptability
because it facilitates the adaptation of an ENTIRE business unit, jot just the separate units
responsible for new business development
Avoids coordination problems between subunits
Contextual ambidexterity manifests itself in the specific actions of individuals throughout the
organization
In contextually ambidextrous units, the context is flexible and dynamic enough to allow
individuals to make their own judgements on how to divide their time between alignment-
and adaptation-oriented activities
Previous studies support the logic of creating a behavioral orientation toward dual capacities
rather than a higher-level separation of those capacities
Previous studies also imply that organizations must build systems and processes facilitating
these behaviours
Effect of Ambidexterity on Performance
Hypothesis: The higher the level of ambidexterity in a business unit, the higher the level of
performance
The results of the study support this hypothesis
