113 / 274
臺大管理論叢
第
27
卷第
3
期
113
Table 1 The Relationship between Exploration and Exploitation
Study period
Resource scarcity
Cross-sectional
Longitudinal
When resources are limited (a) Crowd-out (e.g., Benner and Tushman, 2002; Uotila et al., 2009)
When resources are abundant
(b) Ambidexterity (e.g., He and
Wong, 2004; Lubatkin, Simsek,
Ling, and Veiga, 2006)
(c) Alternative enhancing (e.g.,
Vermeulen and Barkema,
2001; Lavie and Rosenkopf,
2006)
A trade-off is necessary when the resources needed for exploration and exploitation are
limited. This is what we meant by a crowd-out relationship. Using patents and ISO 9000
quality program certifications data in the paint and photography industry, Benner and
Tushman (2002) found that exploitative innovation drove out explorative innovation, which
provides a good example for a crowd-out relationship between exploration and exploitation.
Uotila et al. (2009) employed a content analysis technique to measure the relative
exploration versus exploitation orientation and found an inverted U-shaped relationship
between the relative share of explorative orientation and firm performance.
When the resources relevant to exploration and exploitation are abundant, it is more
likely that a firm can master ambidexterity. For example, using survey data from a sample of
Malaysian firms, He and Wong (2004) demonstrated that the interaction between exploration
and exploitation is positively related to a firm’s performance. The work of Lubatkin et al.
(2006) focused on the top management team’s (TMT) role in pursuing ambidexterity in
small-to-medium-sized firms (SMEs) and found a positive effect for ambidexterity on firm
performance.
Advocates of the ambidexterity hypothesis have argued that a firm can alleviate the
trade-off problem by dynamically balancing exploration and exploitation using a loosely-
coupled organizational structure (Benner and Tushman, 2003). The implications of the
ambidexterity hypothesis provide valuable insight into the organizational structure effects on
exploration and exploitation.
The alternative enhancing perspective suggests that exploration and exploitation
cyclically reinforce each other over time such that they do not compete for limited resources.
For example, Holmqvist (2004) reasoned that more exploitation is more likely to lead to
more exploration, and vice versa. Vermeulen and Barkema (2001) confirmed this mutual
amplification effect of exploration (operationalized as acquisition) and exploitation
(operationalized as Greenfield). Lavie and Rosenkopf (2006) found alliance formation to be