This article seeks to extend research on small to medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) and ambidexterity by investigating contingency factors that influence the relationship between contextual ambidexterity and SME performance. Acknowledging the importance of internal knowledge flows in leveraging ambidexterity, it offers unique insights into how internal and external rivalry conditions influence performance outcomes related to an ambidextrous posture. Using a sample of Canadian-based SMEs, the study shows that the contextual ambidexterity–performance relationship is suppressed at higher levels of internal rivalry and amplified at higher levels of external rivalry. The findings suggest that developing an ambidextrous posture should not be an end by itself, and they point to the need for SMEs to understand how the features of their internal and external environments affect the performance consequences of such posture.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.
Buy single article
Instant access to the full article PDF.
Price includes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.
Previous research uses different terms to label the dimensions underlying ambidexterity, but they essentially capture the same phenomena and can be used interchangeably (Raisch and Birkinshaw 2008). For parsimony, we use the terms “alignment” and “adaptability” hereafter.
A follow-up analysis showed that our reported results were robust when applied to the complete sample of 232 firms, indicating their applicability across a wide spectrum of firms. A comparison of the SME and non-SME participating firms did not reveal any significant differences in terms of the focal constructs either. Finally, we did not find any significant differences between responding and nonresponding firms (regardless of size) in terms of their industry and location (province) distribution.
To ensure that the responses would cover organization-wide phenomena rather than idiosyncratic issues that have to do with specific departments, in the cover letter and survey instrument, we referred to the firm’s functional areas broadly. For the measure of internal rivalry, we clarified that we were not interested in investigating resource competition between specific departments but rather between “the managers who typically are most preoccupied with technological (or technical) issues such as operations, engineering, or research and development on one hand, and those who are typically most preoccupied with commercial activities such as marketing or sales on the other.”
Adler, P., Goldoftas, B., & Levine, D. (1999). Flexibility versus efficiency? A case study of model changeovers in the Toyota production system. Organization Science, 10, 43–68.
Anderson, J. C., & Gerbing, D. W. (1988). Structural equation modeling in practice: A review and recommended two step approach. Psychology Bulletin, 1033, 411–423.
Armstrong, J. S., & Overton, T. (1977). Estimating non-response bias in mail surveys. Journal of Marketing, 51, 71–86.
Audia, P. G., & Greve, H. R. (2006). Less likely to fail: Low performance, firm size, and factory expansion in the shipbuilding industry. Management Science, 52, 83–94.
Barney, J. B. (1991). Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. Journal of Management, 17, 99–120.
Bergkvist, L., & Rossiter, J. R. (2007). The predictive validity of multiple-item versus single-item measures of the same constructs. Journal of Marketing Research, 44, 175–184.
Bierly, P., & Chakrabarti, A. (1996). Generic knowledge strategies in the US pharmaceutical industry. Strategic Management Journal, 17, 123–135.
Birkinshaw, J., & Gibson, C. (2004). Building ambidexterity into an organization. MIT Sloan Management Review, 45(4), 46–55.
Brockner, J., Siegel, P. A., Daly, J. P., Tyler, T., & Martin, C. (1997). When trust matters: The moderating effect of outcome favorability. Administrative Science Quarterly, 42, 558–583.
Brunninge, O., Nordqvist, M., & Wiklund, J. (2007). Corporate governance and strategic change in SMEs: The effects of ownership, board composition and top management teams. Small Business Economics, 29(3), 295–308.
Cohen, W., & Levinthal, D. (1990). Absorptive capacity: A new perspective on learning and innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly, 35, 128–152.
Cohen, J., Cohen, P., West, S. G., & Aiken, L. S. (2003). Applied multiple regression/correlation analysis for the behavior sciences. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Corso, M., Martini, A., Pellegrini, L., & Paolucci, E. (2003). Technological and organizational tools for knowledge management: In search of configurations. Small Business Economics, 21(4), 397–408.
Cosh, A., Fu, X., & Hughes, A. (2012). Organisation structure and innovation performance in different environments. Small Business Economics, 39(2), 301–317.
Covin, J. G., & Slevin, D. P. (1989). Strategic management of small firms in hostile and benign environments. Strategic Management Journal, 10(1), 75–87.
Cui, A. S., Griffith, D. A., & Cavusgil, S. T. (2005). The influence of competitive intensity and market dynamism on knowledge management capabilities of multinational corporation subsidiaries. Journal of International Marketing, 13(3), 32–53.
De Clercq, D., Dimov, D., & Thongpapanl, N. (2010). The moderating impact of internal social exchange processes on the entrepreneurial orientation–performance relationship. Journal of Business Venturing, 25(1), 87–103.
De Luca, L. M., & Atuahene-Gima, K. (2007). Market knowledge dimensions and cross-functional collaboration: Examining the different routes to product innovation performance. Journal of Marketing, 71(1), 95–112.
de Visser, M., de Weerd-Nederhof, P., Faems, D., Song, M., van Looy, B., & Visscher, K. (2010). Structural ambidexterity in NPD processes: A firm-level assessment of the impact of differentiated structures on innovation performance. Technovation, 30(5/6), 291–299.
Dess, G. G., Lumpkin, G. T., & Covin, J. G. (1997). Entrepreneurial strategy making and firm performance: Tests of contingency and configurational models. Strategic Management Journal, 18(9), 677–695.
Dillman, D. A. (1978). Mail and telephone surveys: The total design method. New York: Wiley.
Doty, D. H., & Glick, W. H. (1994). Typologies as a unique form of theory building: Toward improved understanding and modeling. Academy of Management Review, 19(2), 230–251.
Dougherty, D. (2008). Bridging social constraint and social action to design organizations for innovation. Organization Studies, 29(3), 415–434.
Dutton, J. E., & Ashford, S. J. (1993). Selling issues to top management. Academy of Management Review, 18, 397–428.
Fauchart, E., & Keilbach, M. (2009). Testing a model of exploration and exploitation as innovation strategies. Small Business Economics, 33(3), 257–272.
Fisher, R. J., Maltz, E., & Jaworski, B. J. (1997). Enhancing communication between marketing and engineering: The moderating role of relative functional identification. Journal of Marketing, 61, 54–70.
Floyd, S. W., & Lane, P. J. (2000). Strategizing throughout the organization: Managing role conflict in strategic renewal. Academy of Management Review, 25(1), 154–177.
Ford, J. D., & Ford, L. W. (1994). Logics of identity, contradiction, and attraction in change. Academy of Management Review, 19, 756–795.
Ghemawat, P., & Ricart i Costa, J. (1993). The organizational tension between static and dynamic efficiency. Strategic Management Journal, 14, 59–73.
Gibson, C., & Birkinshaw, J. (2004). The antecedents, consequences, and mediating role of organizational ambidexterity. Academy of Management Journal, 47, 209–226.
Grant, R. M. (1996). Toward a knowledge-based theory of the firm. Strategic Management Journal, 77, 109–122.
Grewal, R., & Tansuhaj, P. (2001). Building organizational capabilities for managing economic crisis: The role of market orientation and strategic flexibility. Journal of Marketing, 65, 67–80.
Griffin, A., & Hauser, J. R. (1996). Integrating R&D and marketing: A review and analysis of the literature. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 13, 191–215.
Gupta, A. K., & Govindarajan, V. (2000). Knowledge flows within multinational corporations. Strategic Management Journal, 21, 473–496.
Gupta, A. K., Raj, S. P., & Wilemon, D. L. (1986). A model for studying R&D-marketing interface in the product innovation process. Journal of Marketing, 50, 7–17.
He, Z., & Wong, P. (2004). Exploration vs. exploitation: An empirical test of the ambidexterity hypothesis. Organization Science, 15, 481–494.
Hitt, M. A., Beamish, P. W., Jackson, S. E., & Mathieu, J. E. (2007). Building theoretical and empirical bridges across levels: Multilevel research in management. Academy of Management Journal, 50, 1385–1399.
Hofstede, G. (2001). Culture’s consequences: Comparing values, behaviors, institutions and organizations across nations (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Houston, M. B., Walker, B. A., Hutt, M. D., & Reingen, P. H. (2001). Cross-unit competition for a market charter: The enduring influence of structure. Journal of Marketing, 65, 19–34.
Huy, O. N. (2002). Emotional balancing of organizational continuity and radical change: The contribution of middle managers. Administrative Science Quarterly, 47(1), 31–69.
Jansen, J., Van Den Bosch, F., & Volberda, H. (2006). Exploratory innovation, exploitative innovation, and performance: Effects of organizational antecedents and environmental moderators. Management Science, 52, 1661–1674.
Jansen, J., Tempelaar, M., Van Den Bosch, F., & Volberda, H. (2009). Structural differentiation and ambidexterity: The mediating role of integration mechanisms. Organization Science, 20(4), 797–811.
Jansen, 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, 1286–1303.
Jaworski, B. J., & Kohli, A. K. (1993). Market orientation: Antecedents and consequences. Journal of Marketing, 57, 53–70.
Karlsen, A. (2011). “Cluster” creation by reconfiguring communities of practice. European Planning Studies, 19(5), 753–773.
Kim, N., & Atuahene-Gima, K. (2010). Using exploratory and exploitative market learning for new product development. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 27, 519–536.
Kim, W. C., & Mauborgne, R. (1998). Procedural justice, strategic decision making, and the knowledge economy. Strategic Management Journal, 19, 323–338.
Kohli, A. K., & Jaworski, B. J. (1990). Market orientation: The construct, research propositions, and managerial implications. Journal of Marketing, 54, 1–18.
Kyriakopoulos, K., & Moorman, C. (2004). Tradeoffs in marketing exploitation and exploration strategies: The overlooked role of market orientation. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 21, 219–240.
Lahiri, S., Pérez-Nordtvedt, L., & Renn, R. W. (2008). Will the new competitive landscape cause your firm’s decline? It depends on your mindset. Business Horizons, 51(4), 311–320.
Lane, P. J., & Lubaktin, M. (1998). Relative absorptive capacity and interorganizational learning. Strategic Management Journal, 19, 461–477.
Leonard-Barton, D. A. (1992). Core capabilities and core rigidities: A paradox in managing new product. Strategic Management Journal, 13, 111–125.
Levinthal, D. A., & March, J. G. (1993). The myopia of learning. Strategic Management Journal, 14, 95–112.
Li, H., & Atuahene-Gima, K. (2001). Product innovation strategy and performance of new technology ventures in China. Academy of Management Journal, 44, 1123–1134.
Lubatkin, M. H., Simsek, Z., Ling, Y., & Veiga, J. F. (2006). Ambidexterity and performance in small to medium-sized firms: The pivotal role of TMT behavioral integration. Journal of Management, 32, 1–17.
Luo, X., Slotegraaf, R. J., & Pan, X. (2006). Cross-functional “coopetition”: The simultaneous role of cooperation and competition within firms. Journal of Marketing, 70(2), 67–80.
Maltz, E., & Kohli, A. (1996). Market intelligence dissemination across functional boundaries. Journal of Marketing Research, 33, 47–61.
March, J. G. (1991). Exploration and exploitation in organizational learning. Organization Science, 2, 71–86.
McDonough, E. F. (2000). Investigation of factors contributing to the success of cross-functional teams. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 17(3), 221–235.
Nahapiet, J., & Ghoshal, S. (1998). Social capital, intellectual capital, and the organizational advantage. Academy of Management Review, 23, 242–268.
O’Reilly, C. A., & Tushman, M. L. (2004). The ambidextrous organization. Harvard Business Review, 82, 74–82.
Ocasio, W. (1997). Towards an attention-based view of the firm. Strategic Management Journal, 18, 187–206.
Palacios, D., Gil, I., & Garrigos, F. (2009). The impact of knowledge management on innovation and entrepreneurship in the biotechnology and telecommunications industries. Small Business Economics, 32(3), 291–301.
Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Jeong-Yeon, L., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(5), 879–903.
Porter, M. E. (1996). What is strategy? Harvard Business Review, 74(6), 61–81.
Préfontaine, L., & Bourgault, M. (2002). Strategic analysis and export behaviour of SMEs: A comparison between the United States and Canada. International Small Business Journal, 20(2), 123–138.
Puranam, P., Singh, H., & Zollo, M. (2006). Organizing for innovation: Managing the coordination-autonomous dilemma in technology acquisitions. Academy of Management Journal, 49(2), 263–280.
Raisch, S., & Birkinshaw, J. (2008). Organizational ambidexterity: Antecedents, outcomes, and moderators. Journal of Management, 34(3), 375–409.
Rosenbloom, R. S., & Christensen, C. M. (1994). Technological discontinuities, organizational capabilities, and strategic commitments. Industrial and Corporate Change, 3(3), 655–685.
Ruef, M., & Scott, W. R. (1998). A multidimensional model of organizational legitimacy: Hospital survival in changing institutional environments. Administrative Science Quarterly, 43, 877–879.
Ruekert, R. W., & Walker, O. C., Jr. (1987). Marketing’s interaction with other functional units: A conceptual framework and empirical evidence. Journal of Marketing, 51, 1–19.
Sherman, J. D., Berkowitz, D., & Souder, W. (2005). New product development performance and the interaction of cross-functional integration and knowledge management. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 22(5), 399–411.
Simons, T., & Peterson, R. S. (2000). Task conflict and relationship conflict in top management teams: The pivotal role of intragroup trust. Journal of Applied Psychology, 83, 102–111.
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, 864–894.
Soderquist, K. E. (2006). Organising knowledge management and dissemination in new product development. Long Range Planning, 39(5), 497–523.
Song, X. M., & Parry, M. E. (1997). Teamwork barriers in Japanese high-technology firms: The sociocultural differences between R&D and marketing managers. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 14(5), 356–367.
Song, X. M., & Xie, J. (2000). Does innovativeness moderate the relationship between cross-functional integration and product performance? Journal of International Marketing, 8(4), 61–89.
Song, X. M., Dyer, B., & Thieme, R. J. (2006). Conflict management and innovation performance: An integrated contingency perspective. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 34, 341–356.
Spector, P. E. (2006). Method variance in organizational research: Truth or urban legend? Organizational Research Methods, 9, 221–232.
Strang, D., & Jung, D.-I. (2009). Participatory improvement at a global bank: The diffusion of quality teams and the demise of a Six Sigma initiative. Organization Studies, 30(1), 31–53.
Taylor, A., & Helfat, C. E. (2009). Organizational linkages for surviving technological change: Complementary assets, middle management, and ambidexterity. Organization Science, 20(4), 718–739.
Teece, D., Pisano, G., & Shuen, A. (1997). Dynamic capabilities and strategic management. Strategic Management Journal, 18, 509–534.
Tsai, W. P. (2002). Social structure of “coopetition” within a multiunit organization: Coordination, competition, and intraorganizational knowledge sharing. Organization Science, 13(2), 179–190.
Tushman, M. L., & O’Reilly, C. A. (1996). Ambidextrous organizations: Managing evolutionary and revolutionary change. California Management Review, 38(4), 8–30.
Van Looy, B., Martens, T., & Debackere, K. (2005). Organizing for continuous innovation: On the sustainability of ambidextrous organizations. Creativity and Innovation Management, 14, 208–221.
Zatzick, C. D., Moliterno, T. P., & Fang, T. (2012). Strategic (MIS)FIT: The implementation of TQM in manufacturing organizations. Strategic Management Journal, 33(11), 1321–1330.
About this article
Cite this article
De Clercq, D., Thongpapanl, N. & Dimov, D. Contextual ambidexterity in SMEs: the roles of internal and external rivalry. Small Bus Econ 42, 191–205 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-013-9471-2