Pursuing “flexible commitment” as strategic ambidexterity

Yiannis Kouropalatis · Paul Hughes · Robert E. Morgan

49 citations0/0 files storedEuropean Journal of Marketing

No readable copy stored yet — this record is metadata only.

No open-access location is known for this record yet.

Literature note Cite in a project Citation map

Innovation and Knowledge Management Business Strategies and Innovation Organizational Management and Leadership

Abstract

Purpose Firms face high velocity conditions today that render product market strategies increasingly temporal. Strategic flexibility is critical for enabling rapid adaptation to a changing environment. At the same time, managerial commitment to product‐market strategy signifies the extent to which a manager comprehends and supports the strategy and reflects a necessary sense of ownership for any chosen product‐market strategy. The purpose of this paper, then, is to examine strategically ambidextrous firms through the twin lenses of flexibility and commitment to determine whether performance benefits accrue from such characteristics. Design/methodology/approach While traditional research streams examine strategic flexibility and commitment to product‐market strategy as opposing ends of a continuum, this paper adopts a broader perspective and examines strategic flexibility and commitment to product‐market strategy as elements of strategically ambidextrous firms. Cluster analysis is used to identify groups of high and low strategically ambidextrous firms. Findings Strategically ambidextrous firms exhibit commitment to product‐market strategy, which enables the effective realisation of selected strategies through focusing managerial attention and firm resources, and strategic flexibility, which enables adaptation of the planned product‐market strategy based on feedback received, or abandonment followed by new strategic choices and impetus. The paper reveals that firms with high strategic ambidexterity exhibit significantly greater levels of strategic resources, decentralisation, product‐market strategy process effectiveness, and implementation effectiveness compared with low ambidexterity firms. Thus, strategic ambidexterity is revealed to endow significant performance benefits. Originality/value This paper addresses the need to examine ambidexterity as “flexible commitment”.

Paper brief

Loading…

Cite this work

Citation unavailable for this work.

BibTeX RIS CSL-JSON

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Citations in this library

Citation map →

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 49 citations exist upstream.

References

1999Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives 1991Firm Resources and Sustained Competitive Advantage 2004Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage 1992Alternative Ways of Assessing Model Fit 1988On the Evaluation of Structural Equation Models 1984A resource‐based view of the firm 1989Structural Equations with Latent Variables 1991Structural Equations with Latent Variables.

Cited by

2024Brilliance in resilience: operations and supply chain management’s role in achieving a sustainable future 2022Contradiction or Consistency: The “Double-Edged Sword” Effect of Asset Specificity on Organizational Resilience 2019A meta-analytic study on exploration and exploitation 2016Organizational ambidexterity as a new research paradigm in strategic management 2022Intended benefits and challenges of cooperation between FinTechs and commercial banks 2022

Explore the map →

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.

Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.