Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Facilitating and Inhibiting Effects of Organisational Ambidexterity in SME: an Analysis Centred on SME Characteristics

  • Published:
Journal of the Knowledge Economy Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The analysis of organisational ambidexterity in the small- and medium-sized enterprise context should consider their unique characteristics, including size, internal structure, the low level of use concerning management practices and great capacity to introduce innovative products. Aiming to understand how SMEs’ characteristics influence, or do not influence, organisational ambidexterity, this paper presents an explanatory theoretical model of that relationship. The paper contributes to an innovative systematisation of these firms from a multi-level perspective. This unique approach also advances theory by contributing to clarifying the debate on organisational ambidexterity and identifies important opportunities and directions for future research.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Abebe, M. A., & Angriawan, A. (2014). Organizational and competitive influences of exploration and exploitation activities in small firms. Journal of Business Research, 67(3), 339–345.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Acs, Z., & Preston, L. (1997). Small and medium-sized enterprises, technology, and globalization: Introduction to a special issue on small and medium-sized enterprises in the global economy. Small Business Economics, 9, 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1007945327618

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Adler, P. S., Goldoftas, B., & Levine, D. I. (1999). Flexibility versus efficiency_a case study of model. Organization Science, 10(1), 43–68.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ahmad, S. Z., & Muhammad Arif, A. M. (2016). Entrepreneurial characteristics, motives, and business challenges: Exploratory study of small and medium sized hotel businesses. International Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Administration, 17(3), 286–315. https://doi.org/10.1080/15256480.2016.1183550

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Albliwi, S., Antony, J., Abdul, S., Lim, H., & Van Der Wiele, T. (2014). Critical failure factors of Lean Six Sigma: A systematic literature review. International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, 31(9), 1012–1030. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJQRM-09-2013-0147.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Andrade, J. R. C., Ferreira, J. J. M., & Ratten, V. (2016). Ambidexterity revisited: The influence of structure and context and the dilemma exploration vs. exploitation. In J. J. Ferreira, L.-P. Dana, & V. Ratten (Eds.), Knowledge spillover-based strategic entrepreneurship. Routledge.

  • Arthur-aidoo, B. M., Aigbavboa, C. O., & Thwala, W. D. (2016). Attitudes of owners which impedes firm’s growth : A case of small and medium-sized construction firms in Ghana. Procedia Engineering, 164, 230–234. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proeng.2016.11.614

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Asif, M. (2017). Exploring the antecedents of ambidexterity: A taxonomic approach. Management Decision, 55(7), 1489–1505.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Azadegan, A., & Wagner, S. M. (2011). Industrial upgrading, exploitative innovations and explorative innovations. International Journal of Production Economics, 130(1), 54–65

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bagnoli, C., & Giachetti, C. (2014). Aligning knowledge strategy and competitive strategy in small firms. Journal of Business Economics and Management, 1–28. https://doi.org/10.3846/16111699.2012.707623

  • Baia, E., Ferreira, J. J., & Rodrigues, R. (2019). Value and rareness of resources and capabilities as sources of competitive advantage and superior performance. Knowledge Management Research & Practice, 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1080/14778238.2019.1599308

  • Bakotić, D., & Rogošić, A. (2017). Employee involvement as a key determinant of core quality management practices. Total Quality Management & Business Excellence, 28(11–12), 1209–1226. https://doi.org/10.1080/14783363.2015.1094369

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barney, J. B. (2001). Resource-based theories of competitive advantage: A ten year retrospective on the resource-based view. Jornal of Management, 27, 643–650.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bates, A.W. (2005). Technology, e-learning and Distance Education (2nd ed.). Routledge. 

  • Bayad, M., & Garand, D. J. (1998). VISION DU PROPRIETAIRE-DIRIGEANT DE PME ET PROCESSUS DECISIONNEL : DE L ’ IMAGE A L ’ ACTION VISION DU. Congrès International Francophone de La PME-CIFPME, Metz (França)

  • Benner, M. J., & Tushman, M. L. (2003). Exploitation, exploration, and process management : The productivity dilemma revisited. Academy of Management Review, 28(2), 238–256.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bianchi, C., Glavas, C., & Mathews, S. (2016). SME international performance in Latin America: The role of entrepreneurial and technological capabilities. Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development, 24(1).

  • Bloom, N., Lemos, R., Qi, M., Sadun, R., & Van Reenen, J. (2011). Constraints on developing UK management practices. BIS Research Paper, 58.

  • Bonesso, S., Gerli, F., & Scapolan, A. (2014). The individual side of ambidexterity: Do individuals’ perceptions match actual behaviors in reconciling the exploration and exploitation trade-off? European Management Journal, 32(3), 392–405. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.emj.2013.07.003

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bootz, J., & Sonntag, M. (2010). La Relation Stratégie-RH en PME : Enseignements d â€TM une Recherche-Action, 1–36.

  • Bouncken, R. B., Fredrich, V., & Pesch, R. (2016). Configurational answer to the ongoing riddle of formal and/or emergent planning practices. Journal of Business Research. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2015.12.064

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boxall, P., & Macky, K. (2014). High-involvement work processes, work intensification and employee well-being. Work, Employment & Society, (September).

  • Brouthers, K. D., & Nakos, G. (2004). SME entry mode choice and performance: A transaction cost perspective. Entrepreneurship: Theory and Practice, 28(3), 229–247. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6520.2004.00041.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brouthers, K. D., Nakos, G., & Dimitratos, P. (2015). SME entrepreneurial orientation, international performance, and the moderating role of strategic alliances. Entrepreneurship: Theory and Practice, 39(5), 1161–1187. https://doi.org/10.1111/etap.12101

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burgelman, R. A. (1991). Intraorganizational ecology of strategy making and organizational adaptation: Theory and field research. Organization Science, 2(3), 239–262.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Calof, J. L. (1994). The relationship between firm size and export behavior revisited. Journal of International Business Studies, 25(2), 367–387. https://doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.jibs.8490205

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cantarello, S., Martini, A., & Nosella, A. (2012). A multi-level model for organizational ambidexterity in the search phase of the innovation process. Creativity and Innovation Management, 21(1), 28–48.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cao, Q., Gedajlovic, E., & Zhang, H. (2009). Unpacking organizational ambidexterity: Dimensions, contingencies, and synergistic effects. Organization Science, 20(4), 781–796.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cao, Q., Simsek, Z., & Zhang, H. (2010). Modelling the joint impact of the CEO and the TMT on organizational ambidexterity. Journal of Management Studies, 47(7), 1272–1296.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cegarra-Navarro, J. G., & Dewhurst, F. (2007). Linking organizational learning and customer capital through an ambidexterity context: An empirical investigation in SMEs1. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 18(10), 1720–1735. https://doi.org/10.1080/09585190701570882

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chandrasekaran, A., Linderman, K., & Schroeder, R. (2012). Antecedents to ambidexterity competency in high technology organizations. Journal of Operations Management, 30(1–2), 134–151. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jom.2011.10.002

  • Chang, Y.-Y. (2016). High-performance work systems, joint impact of transformational leadership, an empowerment climate and organizational ambidexterity. Cross level evidence. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 29(3), 424-444. https://doi.org/10.1108/JOCM-09-2015-0150

  • Chang, Y., Hughes, M., & Hotho, S. (2011). Internal and external antecedents of SMEs’ innovation ambidexterity outcomes. Management Decision, 49(10), 1658–1676. https://doi.org/10.1108/00251741111183816

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chang, Y.-Y., & Hughes, M. (2012). Drivers of innovation ambidexterity in small- to medium-sized firms. European Management Journal, 30(1), 1–17.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen, H.-L., & Hsu, W.-T. (2009). Family ownership, board independence, and R&D investment. Family Business Review, 22(4), 347–362. https://doi.org/10.1177/0894486509341062

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Choi, Y. R., & Phan, P. H. (2014). Exploration, exploitation, and growth through new product development: The moderating effects of firm age and environmental adversity. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 61(3), 428-437.

  • Claver-Cortés, E., Pertusa-Ortega, E. M., & Molina-Azorín, J. F. (2012). Characteristics of organizational structure relating to hybrid competitive strategy: Implications for performance. Journal of Business Research, 65(7), 993–1002. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2011.04.012

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cos, P., Colom, A., & Cabasés, A. (2019). Geographic export diversification: Determinants and their link with export performance. Thunderbird International Business Review, 61(2), 397–411. https://doi.org/10.1002/tie.21991

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cui, A. P., Walsh, M. F., & Zou, S. (2014). The importance of strategic fit between host–home country similarity and exploration exploitation strategies on small and medium-sized enterprises’ performance: A contingency perspective. Journal of International Marketing, 22(4), 67–85. 

  • Dankbaar, B. (1998). Technology management in technology-contingent SMEs. International Journal of Technology Management, 15(1-2), 70-81.

  • Dasí, À., Iborra, M., & Safón, V. (2014). Beyond path dependence: Explorative orientation, slack resources, and managerial intentionality to internationalize in SMEs. International Business Review, 24, 77–88.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Massis, A., Kotlar, J., Campopiano, G., & Cassia, L. (2015). The impact of family involvement on SMEs’ performance : Theory and evidence. Journal of Small Business Management, 55(4), 924–948.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dimitratos, P., Johnson, J. E., Plakoyiannaki, E., & Young, S. (2016). SME internationalization: How does the opportunity-based international entrepreneurial culture matter? International Business Review, 25(6), 1211–1222. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ibusrev.2016.03.006

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dolz, C., Safón, V., Iborra, M., & Dasí, A. (2014). Antecedentes y dinamismo de la ambidestreza organizativa en las pymes. Innovar, 24(53), 161–176.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ebben, J. J., & Johnson, A. C. (2005). Efficiency, flexibility, or both? Evidence linking strategy to performance in small firms. Strategic Management Journal, 26(13), 1249–1259. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.503

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eklinder-Frick, J., Eriksson, L. T., & Hallén, L. (2012). Effects of social capital on processes in a regional strategic network. Industrial Marketing Management, 41(5), 800–806.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • European Network for SME Research—ENSR. (2003). Observatory of European SMEs 2003, No7: SMEs in Europe 2003. In European Commission (Ed.), Brussels: European Commission.

  • Fernandes, S. B. (2009). A importância das PME para a inovação. Spatial and Organizational Dynamics Discussion Papers (Cieo/Repec), 14–39. Retrieved from www.cieo.ualg.pt

  • Fernández, Z., & Nieto, M. J. (2006). Impact of ownership on the international involvement of SMEs. Journal of international business studies, 37(3), 340-351.

  • Fernández-Ortiz, R., & Lombardo, G. F. (2009). Influence of the capacities of top management on the internationalization of SMEs. Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, 21(2), 131–154.

  • Forth, J., Bewley, H., & Bryson, A. (2006) Small and Medium Enterprises: Findings from the 2004 Workplace Employment Relations Survey. London: Department of Trade and Industry.

  • Fourné, S. P., Rosenbusch, N., Heyden, M. L., & Jansen, J. J. (2019). Structural and contextual approaches to ambidexterity: A meta-analysis of organizational and environmental contingencies. European Management Journal, 37(5), 564–576.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Franco, M. J. B. (2003). Collaboration among SMEs as a mechanism for innovation: an empirical study. New England Journal of Entrepreneurship, 6(1), 25-34.

  • Francioni, B., Musso, F., & Cioppi, M. (2015). Decision-maker characteristics and international decisions for SMEs. Management Decision. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1108/MD-03-2015-0094

  • Franco, M., & Haase, H. (2010). Failure factors in small and medium-sized enterprises: Qualitative study from an attributional perspective. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 6(4), 503–521. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11365-009-0124-5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Franco, M., & Matos, P. G. (2015). Leadership styles in SMEs: A mixed-method approach. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 11(2), 425–451. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11365-013-0283-2

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fu, N., Ma, Q., Bosak, J., & Flood, P. (2015). Exploring the relationships between HPWS, organizational ambidexterity and firm performance in Chinese professional service firms. Journal of Chinese Human Resource Management

  • Garavan, T., Watson, S., Carbery, R., & O’Brien, F. (2016). The antecedents of leadership development practices in SMEs: The influence of HRM strategy and practice. International Small Business Journal, 34(6), 870–890

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gedajlovic, E., Cao, Q., & Zhang, H. (2012). Corporate shareholdings and organizational ambidexterity in high-tech SMEs: Evidence from a transitional economy. Journal of Business Venturing, 27(6), 652–665. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusvent.2011.06.001

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gibson, C. B., & Birkinshaw, J. (2004). The antecedents, consequences, and mediating role of organizational ambidexterity. Academy of Management Journal, 47(2), 209–226. https://doi.org/10.2307/20159573

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goel, S., & Jones, R. J. (2016). Entrepreneurial exploration and exploitation in family business: A systematic review and future directions. Family Business Review, 29(1), 94–120. https://doi.org/10.1177/0894486515625541

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ghofar, A., & Islam, S. (2015). Corporate governance and contingency theory. Springer

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Gonzalez-Benito, Ó., González-Benito, J., & Muñoz-Gallego, P. A. (2014). On the consequences of market orientation across varied environmental dynamism and competitive intensity levels. Journal of Small Business Management, 52(1), 1–21.

  • Gredel, D., Kramer, M., & Bend, B. (2012). Patent-based investment funds as innovation intermediaries for SMEs: In-depth analysis of reciprocal interactions, motives and fallacies. Technovation, 32(9–10), 536–549.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gupta, A. K., Smith, K. G., & Shalley, C. E. (2006). The interplay between exploration and exploitation. Academy of Management Journal, 49(4), 693–706.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Güttel, W. H., Konlechner, S. W., & Trede, J. K. (2015). Standardized individuality versus individualized standardization: The role of the context in structurally ambidextrous organizations. Review of Managerial Science, 9(2), 261–284.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Halevi, M. Y., Carmeli, A., & Brueller, N. N. (2015). Ambidexterity in SBUs: TMT behavioral integration and environmental dynamism. Human Resource Management, 54(S1), 223–238.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hannan, M. T., & Freeman, J. (1977). The Population Ecology of Organizations. American Journal of Sociology, 82(5), 929-964.

  • Heavey, C., Simsek, Z., & Fox, B. C. (2015). Managerial social networks and ambidexterity of SMEs: The moderating role of a proactive commitment to innovation. Human Resource Management, 54(S1), s201–s221.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hendrawan, B. (2012). The small medium-sized enterprise’s characteristic in Batam Free Trade Zone that able to acquire debt. Procedia Economics and Finance, 4(Icsmed), 76–85.https://doi.org/10.1016/S2212-5671(12)00323-1

  • Hodgkinson, I. R., Ravishankar, M. N., & Aitken-Fischer, M. (2014). A resource-advantage perspective on the orchestration of ambidexterity. The Service Industries Journal, 34(15), 1234–1252. https://doi.org/10.1080/02642069.2014.942655

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Holátová, D.D., & Monika, B. (2013). Basic characteristics of small and medium-sized enterprises in terms of their goals. International Journal of Business and Social Science, 4(15), 98-103.

  • Jansen, J. J., Simsek, Z., & Cao, Q. (2012). Ambidexterity and performance in multiunit contexts: Cross‐level moderating effects of structural and resource attributes. Strategic Management Journal, 33(11), 1286-1303.

  • Jansen, J. J. P., Van Den Bosch, F. A. J., & Volberda, H. W. (2006). Exploratory innovation, exploitative innovation, and performance: Effects of organizational antecedents and environmental moderators. Management Science, 52(11), 1661–1674. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.1060.0576

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jaworski, B. J., & Kohli, A. K. (1993). Market orientation: Antecedents and consequences. Journal of Marketing, 57(3), 53. https://doi.org/10.2307/1251854

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jones, O., & Macpherson, A. (2006). Inter-organizational learning and strategic renewal in SMEs. Extending the 4I Framework. Long Range Planning, 39(2), 155–175. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lrp.2005.02.012

  • Kalafsky, R. V., & Duggan, D. T. (2016). Overcoming trade impediments: Considering SME exporters from Nova Scotia. The Professional Geographer, 68(4), 613-623.

  • Kammerlander, N., Burger, D., Fust, A., & Fueglistaller, U. (2015). Exploration and exploitation in established small and medium-sized enterprises: The effect of CEOs’ regulatory focus. Journal of Business Venturing, 30(4), 582–602. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusvent.2014.09.004

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kang, S. C., & Snell, S. A. (2009). Intellectual capital architectures and ambidextrous learning: A framework for human resource management. Journal of Management Studies, 46(1), 65–92.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Karlsson, H., Schaeffer, J., & Winbo, K. (2015). Assessment and support? AI, R – A pilot project on support systems for innovation in automation industry. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 195, 103–112. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.06.415

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Keskin, H. (2006). Market orientation, learning orientation, and innovation capabilities in SMEs: An extended model. European Journal of innovation management, 9(4), 396-417.

  • Kim, T., & Rhee, M. (2009). Exploration and exploitation: Internal variety and environmental dynamism. Strategic Organization, 7(1), 11–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kodama, M., & Shibata, T. (2014). Research into ambidextrous R&D in product development–new product development at a precision device maker: A case study. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 26(3), 279–306.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Koschatzky, K., & Zenker, A. (1999). The Regional Embeddedness of Small Manufacturing and Service Firms: Regional Networking as Knowledge Source for Innovation? Fraunhofer Institute Systems and Innovation Research, Working papers Firms and Region, n. R2/1999.

  • Larimo, J., Zucchella, A., Kontkanen, M., & Hagen, B. (2018). Patterns of SME’s marketing mix combinations and their characteristics in export markets. Advances in Global Marketing, 333–364. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-61385-7_14

  • Laufs, K., & Schwens, C. (2014). Foreign market entry mode choice of small and medium-sized enterprises: A systematic review and future research agenda. International Business Review, 23(6), 1109–1126.

  • Laureiro-Martínez, D., Brusoni, S., & Zollo, M. (2010). The neuroscientific foundations of the exploration−exploitation dilemma. Journal of Neuroscience, Psychology, and Economics, 3(2), 95–115.

  • Lavie, D., & Rosenkopf, L. (2006). Balancing Exploration And Exploitation In Alliance Formation. Academy of Management Journal, 49(4), 797–818.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee, C., Lee, K., & Pennings, J. M. (2001). Internal capabilities, external networks, and performance: a study on technology‐based ventures. Strategic management journal, 22(6‐7), 615-640.

  • Leigh, N. G., & Blakely, E. J. (2016). Planning local economic development: Theory and practice. Thousand Oaks. SAGE publications.

  • Li, C.-R., Lin, C.-J., & Huang, H.-C. (2014). Top management team social capital, exploration-based innovation, and exploitation-based innovation in SMEs. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 26(1), 69–85. https://doi.org/10.1080/09537325.2013.850157

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Li, Y., Wei, Z., Zhao, J., Zhang, C., & Liu, Y. (2013). Ambidextrous organizational learning, environmental munificence and new product performance: Moderating effect of managerial ties in China. International Journal of Production Economics, 146(1), 95-105.

  • Link, A. N., & Bozeman, B. (1991). Innovative Behavior in Small Firms. Small Business Economics, 3, 179–184.

  • Lu, J. W., & Beamish, P. W. (2001). The internationalization and performance of SMEs. Strategic Management Journal, 22(6–7), 565–586.

  • Lubatkin, M. H., Simsek, Z., Ling, Y., & Veiga, J. F. (2006). Ambidexterity and performance in small-to medium-sized firms: The pivotal role of top management team behavioral integration. Journal of Management, 32(5), 646–672

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Madrid-Guijarro, A., García-Pérez-de-Lema, D., & Van Auken, H. (2016). Financing constraints and SME innovation during economic crises. Academia Revista Latinoamericana de Administración, 29(1), 84–106. Retrieved from http://www.emeraldinsight.com/doi/abs/10.1108/ARLA-04-2015-0067.

  • March, J. G. (1991). Exploration and exploitation in organizational learning. Organization Science, 2(1), 71–87. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.2.1.71

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mattes, J. (2014). Formalisation and flexibilisation in organisations–Dynamic and selective approaches in corporate innovation processes. European Management Journal, 32(3), 475–486

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mihalache, O. R., Jansen, J. J. P., Van den Bosch, F. A. J., & Volberda, H. W. (2014). Top management team shared leadership and organizational ambidexterity: A moderated mediation framework. Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal, 8(2), 128–148. https://doi.org/10.1002/sej.1168.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mom, T. J. M., Fourné, S. P. L., & Jansen, J. J. P. (2015). Managers’ work experience, ambidexterity, and performance: The contingency role of the work context. Human Resource Management, 54(5S), s133–s153. https://doi.org/10.1002/hrm.21663

  • Mom, T. J. M., van den Bosch, F. A. J., & Volberda, H. W. (2009). Understanding variation in managers’ ambidexterity: Investigating direct and interaction effects of formal structural and personal coordination mechanisms. Organization Science, 20(4), 812–828. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1090.0427.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mom, T. J. M., Van Den Bosch, F. A. J., & Volberda, H. W. (2007). Investigating managers’ exploration and exploitation activities: The influence of top-down, bottom-up, and horizontal knowledge inflows. Journal of Management Studies, 44(6), 910–931. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6486.2007.00697.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Monferrer, D., Blesa, A., & Ripollés, M. (2013). Orientación al mercado de la red y capacidades dinámicas de absorción e innovación como determinantes del resultado internacional de las nuevas empresas internacionales. Revista española de investigación de marketing ESIC, 17(2), 29-52.

  • Nadkarni, S., & Herrmann, P. O. L. (2010). CEO personality, strategic flexibility, and firm performance: The case of the Indian business process outsourcing industry. Academy of Management Journal, 53(5), 1050–1073.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nakos, G., & Brouthers, K. D. (2002). Entry Mode Choice of SMEs in Central and Eastern Europe. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 27(1), 47–63.

  • Neto, A. I., & Junior, I. C. (2006). Classificação das principais dificuldades enfrentadas pelas pequenas e médias empresas ( PMEs ). XIII SIMPEP - Bauru, SP, Brasil

  • Oinas, P., & Malecki, E. J. (2002). The evolution of technologies in time and space: from national and regional to spatial innovation systems. International regional science review, 25(1), 102-131.

  • Okamuro, H. (2007). Determinants of successful R&D cooperation in Japanese small businesses: The impact of organizational and contractual characteristics. Research Policy, 36(10), 1529–1544. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2006.12.008

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Okręglicka, M., Gorzeń-Mitka, I., & Ogrean, C. (2015). Management challenges in the context of a complex view-SMEs perspective. Procedia Economics and Finance, 34, 445–452

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Onkelinx, J., Manolova, T. S., & Edelman, L. F. (2015). The human factor: Investments in employee human capital, productivity, and SME internationalization. Journal of International Management, 22(4), 351–364. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intman.2016.05.002

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • O'Reilly, C. A., Harreld, J. B., & Tushman, M. L. (2009). Organizational ambidexterity: IBM and emerging business opportunities. California Management Review, 51(4), 75-99.

  • O’Reilly, C. A., & Tushman, M. L. (2008). Ambidexterity as a dynamic capability: Resolving the innovator’s dilemma. Research in Organizational Behavior, 28, 185–206.

  • O’Reilly, C. A., & Tushman, M. L. (2013). Organizational ambidexterity : Past, present and future. Academy of Management Perspectives, in press, 1–30.

  • Parida, V., Lahti, T., & Wincent, J. (2016). Exploration and exploitation and firm performance variability: A study of ambidexterity in entrepreneurial firms. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11365-016-0387-6

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Patel, P. C., Messersmith, J. G., & Lepak, D. P. (2012). Walking the tightrope: An assessment of the relationship between high-performance work systems and organizational ambidexterity. Academy of Management Journal, 56(5), 1420–1442 https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2011.0255

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pertusa-Ortega, E. M., & Molina-Azorín, J. F. (2018). A joint analysis of determinants and performance consequences of ambidexterity. BRQ Business Research Quarterly, 21(2), 84–98.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pinho, J. C. (2007). The impact of ownership: Location‐specific advantages and managerial characteristics on SME foreign entry mode choices. International Marketing Review, 24(6), 715-734.

  • Poon, W. C., Mohamad, O., & Yusoff, W. F. W. (2020). Examining the antecedents of ambidextrous behaviours in promoting creativity among SMEs in Malaysia. Global Business Review, 21(3), 645–662.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Raisch, S. (2008). Balanced structures: Designing organizations for profitable growth. Long Range Planning, 41(5), 483–508. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lrp.2008.06.004

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Raisch, S., & Birkinshaw, J. (2008). Organizational ambidexterity: Antecedents, outcomes, and moderators. Journal of Management, 34(3), 375–409. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206308316058

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Raisch, S., Birkinshaw, J., Probst, G., & Tushman, M. L. (2009). Organizational ambidexterity: Balancing exploitation and exploration for sustained performance. Organization Science, 20(4), 685–695. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1090.0428

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rao-Nicholson, R., Khan, Z., Akhtar, P., & Tarba, S. Y. (2020). The contingent role of distributed leadership in the relationship between HR practices and organizational ambidexterity in the cross-border M&As of emerging market multinationals. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 31(2), 232–253.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Réale, Y., & Dufour, B. (2006). Le DRH stratège. Paris, Éditions d’Organisation. 

  • Rhee, J., Park, T., & Lee, D. H. (2010). Drivers of innovativeness and performance for innovative SMEs in South Korea: Mediation of learning orientation. Technovation 30(1), 65–75

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ricci, G. L. (2011). Estudo Sobre As Especificidades Das Pequenas E Médias Empresas Hoteleiras Da Região Central. In XXXI Encontro Nacional de Engenharia de Produção, (p. 4, 01–15).Belo Horizonte, MG, Brasil

  • Ripollés, M., Blesa, A., & Monferrer, D. (2012). Factors enhancing the choice of higher resource commitment entry modes in international new ventures. International business review, 21(4), 648-666.

  • Ripolles Meliá, M., Blesa Pérez, A., & Roig Dobón, S. (2010). The influence of innovation orientation on the internationalisation of SMEs in the service sector. The Service Industries Journal, 30(5), 777–791.

  • Roper, S., & Hart, M. (2013). Supporting sustained growth among SMEs–policy models and guidelines. ERC White Paper, 7, 1–68.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rothaermel, F. T., & Alexandre, M. T. (2009). Ambidexterity in technology sourcing: The moderating role of absorptive capacity. Organization Science, 20(4), 759–780. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1080.0404

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Russo, A., & Vurro, C. (2010). Cross-boundary ambidexterity: Balancing exploration and exploitation in the fuel cell industry. European Management Review, 7, 30–45. https://doi.org/10.1057/emr.2010.2

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ruzo, E., Losada, F., Navarro, A., & Díez, J. A. (2011). Resources and international marketing strategy in export firms. Management Research Review, 34(5), 496–518. https://doi.org/10.1108/01409171111128698

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sammut, S. (2001). Processus de démarrage en petite entreprise : système de gestion et scénarios. Revue de l’Entrepreneuriat, 1(1), 61-76.

  • Sarkees, M., Hulland, J., & Chatterjee, R. (2014). Investments in exploitation and exploration capabilities: Balance versus focus. Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice, 22(1), 7–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Saunila, M., & Ukko, J. (2014). Journal of Engineering and Intangible aspects of innovation capability in SMEs : Impacts of size and industry. Journal of Engineering and Technology Management, 33, 32–46. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jengtecman.2014.02.002.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schmiemann, M. (2009). SMEs were the main drivers of economic growth between 2004 and 2006. Eurostat: Statistics in Focus, 61(71), 656. Retrieved from http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/documents/3433488/5284033/KS-SF-09-071-EN.PDF/7e1c1766-90e8-453d-aa57-352a1842dc2b

  • Schwens, C., & Kabst, R. (2011). Internationalization of young technology firms: A complementary perspective on antecedents of foreign market familiarity. International Business Review, 20(1), 60–74. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ibusrev.2010.06.003

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Senaratne, C., & Wang, C. L. (2018). Organisational ambidexterity in UK high-tech SMEs. Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development, 25(6), 1025–1050. https://doi.org/10.1108/JSBED-04-2018-0110

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simsek, Z., Heavey, C., Veiga, J. F., & Souder, D. (2009). A typology for aligning organizational ambidexterity’s conceptualizations, antecedents and outcomes. Journal of Management Studies, 46(5), 864–894.

  • Song, M., & Chen, Y. (2014). Organizational Attributes, Market Growth, and Product Innovation. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 31(6), 1312–1329.

  • Stettner, U., & Lavie, D. (2014). Ambidexterity under scrutiny: Exploration and exploitation via internal organization, alliances, and acquisitions. Strategic Management Journal, 35(13), 1903–1929. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj

  • Swart, J., Turner, N., Van Rossenberg, Y., & Kinnie, N. (2019). Who does what in enabling ambidexterity? Individual actions and HRM practices. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 30(4), 508–535.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tahar, S., Niemeyer, C., & Boutellier, R. (2011). Transferral of business management concepts to universities as ambidextrous organisations. Tertiary Education and Management, 17(4), 289–308.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tan, M., & Liu, Z. (2014). Paths to success: An ambidexterity perspective on how responsive and proactive market orientations affect SMEs’ business performance. Journal of Strategic Marketing, 22(5), 420–441.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Taylor, A., & Taylor, M. (2014). Factors influencing effective implementation of performance measurement systems in small and medium-sized enterprises and large firms: A perspective from Contingency Theory. International Journal of Production Research, 52(3), 847–866.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Taylor, A., & Helfat, C. E. (2009). Organizational linkages for surviving technological change: Complementary assets, middle management, and ambidexterity. Organization Science, 20(4), 718–739.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Teece, D. J., Pisano, G., & Shuen, A. (1997). Dynamic capabilities and strategic management. Strategic Management Journal, 18(7), 509–533.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Torrès, O. (1998). Vingt-cinq ans de Recherche en PME: une discipline entre courants et contre-courants. In O. Torres, PME: de nouvelles approches (chapter 1, 17-53). Paris: Economica (Serie Recherche en gestion).

  • Tushman, M. L., & O Reilly, C. A. I. (1996). Ambidextrous organizations : Managing evolutionary and revolutionary change. California Management Review, 38(4), 8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tushman, M., Smith, W. K., Wood, R. C., Westerman, G., & O’Reilly, C. (2010). Organizational designs and innovation streams. Industrial and Corporate Change, 19(5), 1331–1366. https://doi.org/10.1093/icc/dtq040

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Umidjon, A., Shuhua, H., Jayathilake, B., & Renyan, M. (2014). Characteristics of small and medium enterprise innovativeness : Cases of Uzbekistan and China. The International Journal of Management Science and Business Administration, 1(1), 12–27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Praag, C. M. (2003). Business survival and success of young small business owners. Small business economics, 21(1), 1–17.

  • Van de Vrande, V., de Jong, J. P. J., Vanhaverbeke, W., & de Rochemont, M. (2009). Open innovation in SMEs: Trends, motives and management challenges. Technovation, 29(6–7), 423–437.

  • Vaz, M. T., & Nicolas, F. M. (2000). Innovation in small firms and dynamics of local development. In Workshop ISEG, 24, 25.

    Google Scholar 

  • Venugopal, A., Krishnan, T. N., Kumar, M., & Upadhyayula, R. S. (2019). Strengthening organizational ambidexterity with top management team mechanisms and processes. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 30(4), 586–617.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Volery, T., Mueller, S., & von Siemens, B. (2015). Entrepreneur ambidexterity: A study of entrepreneur behaviours and competencies in growth-oriented small and medium-sized enterprises. International Small Business Journal, 33(2), 109–129. https://doi.org/10.1177/0266242613484777

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Voss, G. B., & Voss, Z. G. (2013). Strategic ambidexterity in small and medium-sized enterprises: Implementing exploration and exploitation in product and market domains. Organization Science, 24(5), 1459–1477. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1120.0790

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wang, C. L., & Rafiq, M. (2014). Ambidextrous organizational culture, contextual ambidexterity and new product innovation: A comparative study of UK and Chinese high-tech firms. British Journal of Management, 25(1), 58–76. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8551.2012.00832.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Winborg, J., & Landström, H. (2001). Financial bootstrapping in small businesses. Journal of Business Venturing, 16(3), 235–254. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0883-9026(99)00055-5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Xing, Y., Liu, Y., Tarba, S., & Wood, G. (2020). A cultural inquiry into ambidexterity in supervisor–subordinate relationship. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 31(2), 203–231.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yang, T. T., & Li, C. R. (2011). Competence exploration and exploitation in new product development: The moderating effects of environmental dynamism and competitiveness. Management Decision, 49(9), 1444–1470.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zacharakis, A. L., Meyer, G. D., & DeCastro, J. (1999). Differing perceptions of new venture failure: a matched exploratory study of venture capitalists and entrepreneurs. Journal of Small Business Management, 37(3), 1–14.

Download references

Funding

This paper is financed by National Funds of the FCT – Portuguese Foundation for Science and Technology within the project « UIDB/04007/2020».

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Advanced Studies in Management & Economics Research Center (CEFAGE-UBI), ISLA – Instituto Superior de Línguas e Administração, Leiria, Portugal

    José Andrade

  2. Advanced Studies in Management & Economics Research Center (CEFAGE-UBI), Universidade da Beira Interior, Covilhã, Portugal

    Mário Franco & Luis Mendes

Authors
  1. José Andrade
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Mário Franco
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Luis Mendes
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Luis Mendes.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Andrade, J., Franco, M. & Mendes, L. Facilitating and Inhibiting Effects of Organisational Ambidexterity in SME: an Analysis Centred on SME Characteristics. J Knowl Econ 14, 35–64 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13132-021-00831-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13132-021-00831-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation