approach to emergent innovation (i.e. exploration): the 3M way (Stewart, 1996). The overemphasis on
an exploration strategy creates instability as the organization exaggerates the importance of its
emergent innovation strategy. The resulting chaotic organization cannot retain a sense of continuity
over time (Weick, 1979). Random and chronic exploration creates a vicious circle that results in a
renewal trap characterized by conflict about authority, unclear responsibilities, inadequate controls,
lack of direction and shared ideology. One of the primary dangers is the fact that the purely
explorative organization undervalues institutionali]DWLRQWKHSURFHVVZKHUHE\³RUJDQL]DWLRQVDWWHPSW
to capture the patterns of interaction by formalizing theP ́(Crossan et al., 1999, p.529). This process
HPEHGV OHDUQLQJ LQ WKH ³V\VWHPV VWUXFWXUHV VWUDWHJ\ URXWLQHV >DQG@ SUHVFULEHG SUDFWLFHV RI WKH
RUJDQL]DWLRQ ́(Crossan et al., 1999, p.529). In doing so, the organization, as an entity, learns and
maintains its ³RUJDQi]DWLRQDOPHPRU\ ́(Crossan et al., 1999, p.529). Researchers such as Van de Ven
and Poole (1988) and Fry and Srivastva (1992) argue that many of the theories that are used to better
understand the nature of change emphasize either continuity or change. Srivastva and Fry (1992)
argue WKDWZKLOH³QRYHOW\DQGWUDQVLWLRQDUHWZRNH\DJHQGDVRIWRGD\¶VVRFLDOV\stems, managing
continuity is an emerging and critical third agenda. They define FRQWLQXLW\DV³WKHFRQQHFWHGQHVVRYHU
time among organizational efforts and a sense or experience of ongoingness that links the past to the
SUHVHQW DQG WKH SUHVHQW WR IXWXUH KRSHV DQG LGHDOV ́(p.2). Managing and/or leading change and
continuity is about reinforcing stabilizing forces while anticipating on a changing environment.
It is because of the exploitation of core competencies that firms maintain their trajectory and thus
achieve a sense of continuity in the mists of change (Fox-Wolfgramm et al., 1998). And it is in the
exploration for new opportunities that firms overcome the related problems of competency traps or
core rigidities (Leonard-Barton, 1992). The capacity to simultaneously stimulate long-term
adaptability (i.e. exploration) and ensure short-term continuity (i.e. exploitation) is termed
ambidexterity, referring to the human ability to use both hands at the same time (Duncan, 1976;
Tushman & O'Reilly, 1996). Many scholars have labeled this tension as a paradox (Atuahene-Gima,
2005; Gibson & Birkinshaw, 2004; Leonard-Barton, 1992; Raisch & Birkinshaw, 2008; Smith &
Tushman, 2005). There is a general agreement that achieving both exploitation and exploration can be
beneficial in terms of financial performance (He & Wong, 2004; Kristal et al.; Lubatkin et al., 2006;
Morgan & Berthon, 2008) and increased organizational durability (O'Reilly III & Tushman, 2011).
Examples from a wide variety of industries and locations highlight the benefits of ambidexterity at the
firm level. These include Canadian international new ventures (Han & Celly, 2008), high-tech firms in
Taiwan (Li et al., 2008), Indian pharmaceutical firms (Kale & Wield, 2008), German high-tech start-