The Role of the Operational Leader for the Development of Dynamic Ambidexterity in a Traditional Company: AcerlorMittal Brasil
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5007/2175-8077.2025.e100678Keywords:
Ambidexterity, Frontline Manager, Open innovationAbstract
Background and purpose of the study: The complex and unpredictable business environment requires organizations to become ambidextrous. The aim of the research was to investigate how (which mechanisms) lead to dynamic ambidexterity.
Methodology: From a process perspective, we studied the case of an incumbent organization that implemented dynamic ambidexterity, and the mechanisms that supported it.
Originality/relevance: Little is known about the organizational mechanisms that allow companies to achieve ambidexterity in a dynamic way, and how it takes place over time, with the involvement of different areas of the organization. We investigated the case of a world reference company in the steel sector (ArcelorMittal Brazil) that has adopted ambidexterity.
Main results: We concluded that the flexibility to learn of the support areas (such as contracts and procurement) facilitated the adoption of exploration practices. We also identified that rigidity in traditional management procedures, typical of incumbent organizations, combined with pressure for short-term results, hindered, but did not prevent, the development of exploration activities.
Theoretical and managerial contributions: We identified the importance of the frontline manager - an actor who has received little attention both in the literature and in managerial practices - in making ambidexterity viable. They do this through their integrative actions and their attention to the shift from exploration to exploitation.
References
Andriopoulos, C., & Lewis, M. W. (2009). Exploitation-exploration tensions and organizational ambidexterity: Managing paradoxes of innovation. Organization Science, 20(4), 696-717. http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1080.0406
Annosi, M. C., Mattarelli, E., Dentoni, D., & Petruzzelli, A. M. (2024). The micro-foundations of ambidexterity for corporate social performance: a study on sustainability managers’ response to conflicting goals. Long Range Planning, 57(1), 102412.
Blount, S., & Janicik, G. A. (2001). When plans change: Examining how people evaluate timing changes in work organizations. Academy of Management Review, 26(4), 566-585. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2001.5393892
Boehme, L., Russ‐Eft, D., Rovens, J., & Rovens, A. (2023). HR managers stereotyping frontline managers. International Journal of Training and Development, 27(3-4), 360-380.
Boumgarden, P., Nickerson, J., & Zenger, T. R. (2012). Sailing into the wind: Exploring the relationships among ambidexterity, vacillation, and organizational performance. Strategic Management Journal, 33(6), 587-610. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/smj.1972
Campbell, R. J., Short, C. E., & Graffin, S. D. (2025). Balancing the radical and the incremental: CEO affiliative humor and organizational ambidexterity. Research Policy, 54(1), 105131.
Chen, Y. (2017). Dynamic ambidexterity: How innovators manage exploration and exploitation. Business Horizons, 60(3), 385-394. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.bushor.2017.01.001
Chen, Y., Chan, C., & Lin, Y. (2014). The determinants of green radical and incremental innovation performance: Green shared vision, green absorptive capacity, and green organizational ambidexterity. Sustainability, 6(11), 7787–7806. http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/su6117787
Curtis, S. (2023). Frontline leadership: What is it and why is it important. TWI Institute. https://www.twiinstitute.com/frontline-leadership/
Duncan, R. B. (1976). The ambidextrous organization: Designing dual structures for innovation. The Management of Organization, 1(1), 167-188.
Edgar, F., Geare, A., & O'Kane, P. (2015). The changing dynamic of leading knowledge workers: The importance of skilled front-line managers. Employee Relations, 37(4), 487-503.
Escorcia-Caballero, J. P., Chams-Anturi, O., & Moreno-Luzon, M. D. (2024). The effect of ambidexterity on market performance: a new perspective and measurement from the dynamic capability framework. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 36(7), 1538-1550.
Frogeri, R. F., Portugal, P. dos S., Piurcosky, F. P. Jr., Sanacato, V., Calle, J. L. de, Gazzola, S. B., & Oliveira, F. F. de (2022). Dynamic ambidexterity: Proposal of a theoretical and hypothetical model. Revista de Administração Contemporânea, 26(6), e210088. https://doi.org/10.1590/1982-7849rac2022210088.en
Gianzina, O., & Paroutis, S. (2025). Ambidextrous leadership: A systematic review and roadmap for future research. Journal of Business Research 189, 115151.
Gibson, C. B., & Birkinshaw, J. (2004). The Antecedents, Consequences, and Mediating Role of Organizational Ambidexterity. Academy of Management Journal, 47(2), 209–226. https://doi.org/10.5465/20159573
Greven, A., Kruse, S., Vos, A., Strese, S., & Brettel, M. (2023). Achieving product ambidexterity in new product development: The role of middle managers' dynamic managerial capabilities. Journal of Management Studies, 60(7), 1786-1818. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/joms.12886
Hwang, B. N., Lai, Y. P., & Wang, C. (2023). Open innovation and organizational ambidexterity. European Journal of Innovation Management, 26(3), 862-884. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/ejim-06-2021-0303
Hyde, K. F. (2000). Recognising deductive processes in qualitative research. Qualitative market research: An international journal, 3(2), 82-90. https://doi.org/10.1108/13522750010322089
Jansen, J. J. P., Tempelaar, M. P., van den Bosch, F. A. J., & Volberda, H. W. (2009). Structural Differentiation and Ambidexterity: The Mediating Role of Integration Mechanisms. Organization Science, 20(4), 797–811. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1080.0415
Jansen, J. J., Kostopoulos, K. C., Mihalache, O. R., & Papalexandris, A. (2016). A socio‐psychological perspective on team ambidexterity: The contingency role of supportive leadership behaviours. Journal of Management Studies, 53(6), 939-965. doi: 10.1111/joms.12183
Knapp, J., Zeratsky, J., & Kowitz, B. (2016). Sprint: how to solve big problems and test new ideas in just five days. New York: Simon & Schuster.
Kim, G., & Huh, M. G. (2014). Ambidexterity and organizational survival: Evidence from Korean SMEs. In B. S. Aharonson, U. Stettner, & T. L. Amburgey (Orgs.), Exploration and exploitation in early stage ventures and SMEs (pp. 123-148). Emerald Group Publishing Limited. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/s1479-067x_2014_0000014003
Lavie, D., Stettner, U., & Tushman, M. L. (2010). Exploration and exploitation within and across organizations. Academy of Management annals, 4(1), 109-155. http://dx.doi.org/10.5465/19416521003691287
Luger, J., Raisch, S., & Schimmer, M. (2018). Dynamic Balancing of Exploration and Exploitation: The Contingent Benefits of Ambidexterity. Organization Science, 29(3), 449–470. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.2017.1189
March, J. G. (1991). Exploration and exploitation in organizational learning. Organization Science, 2(1), 71-87.
Marín-Idárraga, D. A., Hurtado González, J. M., & Cabello Medina, C. (2022). Factors affecting the effect of exploitation and exploration on performance: A meta-analysis. BRQ Business Research Quarterly, 25(4), 312-336.http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2340944420972707
Mintzberg, H. (1978). Patterns in strategy formation. Management Science, 24(9), 934—948. http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.24.9.934
Mom, T. J., Chang, Y. Y., Cholakova, M., & Jansen, J. J. (2019). A multilevel integrated framework of firm HR practices, individual ambidexterity, and organizational ambidexterity. Journal of Management, 45(7), 3009-3034. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0149206318776775
Mueller, J., Renzl, B., & Will, M. G. (2020). Ambidextrous leadership: A meta-review applying static and dynamic multi-level perspectives. Review of Managerial Science, 14, 37-59.
O’Reilly, C.A., III, & Tushman, M.L. (2008). Ambidexterity as a dynamic capability: Resolving the innovator’s dilemma. Research in Organizational Behavior, 28, 185–206. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.riob.2008.06.002
O'Reilly III, C. A., & Tushman, M. L. (2013). Organizational ambidexterity: Past, present, and future. Academy of management perspectives, 27(4), 324-338. http://dx.doi.org/10.5465/amp.2013.0025
O’Reilly III Charles A, & Michael L. Tushman. (2016). Lead and disrupt : how to solve the innovator’s dilemma. Stanford: Stanford University Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.7202/1095760ar
Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research & evaluation methods. Thousand Oaks, California: Sage Publications.
Raisch, S & Birkinshaw J (2008) Organizational ambidexterity: antecedents, outcomes, and moderators. Journal of management, 34(3), 375-409. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0149206308316058
Raisch, S., & Zimmermann, A. (2017). Pathways to Ambidexterity: A process perspective on the exploration–exploitation paradox. In W. K, Smith, P. Jarzabkowski, M. W. Lewis, & A. Langley (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of organizational paradox (pp. 315-331). Oxford University Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780198754428.013.17
Rosing, K., Frese, M., & Bausch, A. (2011). Explaining the heterogeneity of the leadership-innovation relationship: Ambidextrous leadership. Leadership Quarterly, 22(5), 956–974. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2011.07.014
Rothaermel, F. T., & Deeds, D. L. (2004). Exploration and Exploitation Alliances in Biotechnology: A System of New Product Development. Strategic Management Journal 25(3), 201–221. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.376
Rubin, K. S. (2012). Essential scrum: A practical guide to the most popular agile process. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Addison-Wesley.
Sarasvathy, S. D. (2008). Effectuation: Elements of entre-preneurial expertise. Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar Publishing.
Sartori, P. P., & Garrido, I. L. (2023). Ambidestria Organizacional e Inovação: proposições para o avanço da teoria e prática. BBR. Brazilian Business Review, 20, 215-235.
Simpson, A., & Tamayo, A. (2020). Real effects of financial reporting and disclosure on innovation. Accounting and Business Research, 50(5), 401–421. https://doi.org/10.1080/00014788.2020.1770926
Simons, R. (2010). Accountability and control as catalysts for strategic exploration and exploitation: field study results (No. 10-051). Boston, MA, USA: Harvard Business School. http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1534745
Smith, P., & Beretta, M. (2021). The gordian knot of practicing digital transformation: Coping with emergent paradoxes in ambidextrous organizing structures. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 38(1), 166-191. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/jpim.12548
Sun, X., Rong, N., Sun, M., & Zhu, F. (2023). Combining Structural and Sequential Ambidexterity: A Configurational Approach Using fsQCA. Management and Organization Review, 19(4), 803-837. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/mor.2022.41
Tarba, S. Y., Jansen, J. J., Mom, T. J., Raisch, S., & Lawton, T. C. (2020). A microfoundational perspective of organizational ambidexterity: Critical review and research directions. Long Range Planning, 53(6), 102048.
Thøgersen, D. (2022). Managing innovation on the public frontline: three approaches to innovation leadership. International Journal of Public Sector Management, 35(2), 150-17
Tripathi, A., & Dhir, S. (2024). Flourishing organizational innovation through psychological capital and organizational culture: An empirical examination. Journal of Public Affairs, 24(3), e2939. https://doi.org/10.1002/pa.293
Tuncdogan, A., Ritala, P., & Karhu, P. (2024). Managers’ Regulatory Focus, Exploration-Exploitation, and Temporal Ambidexterity. The Oxford Handbook of Individual Differences in Organizational Contexts, 82.
Usman, M., Ogbonnaya, C., Roodbari, H., Yusuf, R., & Hirekhan, M. (2024). Servant leadership as a catalyst for middle managers’ learning ambidexterity: a resource‐based perspective. British Journal of Management, 35(3), 1336-1347.
van Lieshout, J. W., van der Velden, J. M., Blomme, R. J., & Peters, P. (2021). The interrelatedness of organizational ambidexterity, dynamic capabilities and open innovation: a conceptual model towards a competitive advantage. European Journal of Management Studies, 26(2/3), 39-62. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/ejms-01-2021-0007
Walrave, B., Romme, A. G. L., van Oorschot, K. E., & Langerak, F. (2017). Managerial attention to exploitation versus exploration: toward a dynamic perspective on ambidexterity. Industrial & Corporate Change, 26(6), 1145–1160. https://doi.org/10.1093/icc/dtx015
Yin, R. K. (2013). Validity and generalization in future case study evaluations. Evaluation, 19(3), 321-332. https://doi.org/10.1177/1356389013497081
Zimmermann, A., Raisch, S., & Birkinshaw, J. (2015). How Is Ambidexterity Initiated? The Emergent Charter Definition Process. Organization Science, 26(4), 1119–1139. http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/orsc.2015.0971
Zimmermann, A., Raisch, S., & Cardinal, L. B. (2018). Managing Persistent Tensions on the Frontline: A Configurational Perspective on Ambidexterity. Journal of Management Studies 55(5), 739–769. https://doi.org/10.1111/joms.12311
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Marisa Delfino, Ana Burcharth, Maria Elisa Brandão Bernardes
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
The author must ensure:
- that there is complete consensus among all co-authors to approve the final version of the paper and its submission for publication.
- that their work is original, and if the work and/or words of others have been used, these have been duly acknowledged.
Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. RCA reserves the right to use software or any other methods of plagiarism detection.
All submissions received for evaluation in the RCA journal are screened for plagiarism and self-plagiarism. Plagiarism identified in manuscripts during the evaluation process will result in the submission being archived. In the event of plagiarism being identified in a manuscript published in the journal, the Editor-in-Chief will conduct a preliminary investigation and, if necessary, retract it.
Authors grant RCA exclusive rights of first publication, with the work simultaneously licensed under the Creative Commons (CC BY) 4.0 International License.
Authors are authorized to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the version of the work published in this journal (e.g., publishing in an institutional repository, on a personal website, publishing a translation, or as a chapter in a book), with an acknowledgement of its authorship and initial publication in this journal.
This license grants any user the right to:
Share – copy, download, print, or redistribute the material in any medium or format.
Adapt – remix, transform, and build upon the material for any purpose, even commercially.
According to the following terms:
Attribution – You must give appropriate credit (cite and reference), provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made. You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use.
No additional restrictions – You may not apply legal terms or technological measures that legally restrict others from doing anything the license permits.
