Organisational Ambidexterity in the UK Financial Services: A Corporate Level Perspective

Abstract

This paper fills theoretical gaps in the scholarly discourse of organisational ambidexterity (OA) by focusing on the concepts of balanced dimension (BD) and combined dimension (CD) of OA. Through a qualitative cross‐comparative case study method it investigates BD/CD at corporate level within the dynamic and competitive UK financial services sector. The study brings greater clarity on the construct of OA and its use in real practice. It shows that forms of OA, CD and BD, are influenced by the firm's strategic choice in specific market segments. Niche players pursuing focused differentiation attain a CD, whereas large players pursuing cost leadership attain a BD of ambidexterity. Exploitation‐exploration efforts are triggered by sets of firm's contingencies that are distinctive to each dimension. Resource flexibility moderates the attainment of desirable ambidexterity's dimensions in contexts of munificent resources. At the corporate level, managers’ long tenure facilitates OA. Theoretical and practical implications are offered.

Dynamic capabilities and organizational ambidexterity: New strategies from emerging market multinational enterprises in Nigeria

“…Therefore, this is consistent with previous research on organizational ambidexterity, dynamic capabilities and adaptive strategies in the banking and financial sector (Costanzo, 2019;Sirmon & Hitt, 2009). In this study, findings show that selective strategic alliances and partnerships are considered crucial and being engaged in order to explore and derive knowledge of international best practices, to identify opportunities availed by new technologies, and be more committed to leveraging on them to evolve their traditional banking practices.…”

CEO regulatory focus as the microfoundation of organizational ambidexterity: A configurational approach

“…First, we used 12 years to represent full membership for CEO tenure because the evidence suggests that the effects of CEO tenure on firms' entrepreneurial activities tend to peak at 12 years (Boling et al, 2016). Second, we used 5 years to represent full non-membership for CEO tenure because the literature suggests that a tenure of 5 years allows people to gain sufficient knowledge about the practices of organizations (Costanzo, 2018). Third, we used the midpoint between these two thresholds as the crossover point (i.e., 8.5 years), following Fiss (2011).…”

Review of Organizational Ambidexterity Research

“…In relation to the measurement of organizational ambidexterity, the measures of ambidexterity differ considerably across studies (Costanzo, 2019; Lavie et al, 2010; Luger et al, 2018; Pertusa-Ortega & Molina-Azorín, 2018; Turner et al, 2013). Ambidexterity instruments are constructed according to how scholars perceive ambidexterity as balanced or combined (Cao et al, 2009; Knight & Paroutis, 2017a; Miron-Spektor et al, 2018; Smith et al, 2017).…”