Exploration vs. exploitation

He, Z., & Wong, P. (2004). Exploration vs. exploitation: An empirical test of the ambidexterity hypothesis. Organization Science, 15(4), 481-494.

Type

Journal article

Intellectual base

Primary research

Year

2004

DOI

10.1287/orsc.1040.0078

Link

https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1040.0078

Cited from

biology_ecology, futurism_foresight, organizational_management, systems_cybernetics

Cited by

8 citations across 8 artifacts.

Each citation links to the sentence it supports in the citing article.

Primes

• Absorptive Capacity

  • This sourceEmpirical test showing the interaction of exploratory and exploitative innovation strategies relates positively to sales-growth rate. Bibliography-only (Tier C); not cited in the body.

• Adaptation
  • Listed in the references but not attached to a specific claim.
• Adaptive Capacity
  • Listed in the references but not attached to a specific claim.
• Ambidexterity (Exploit vs. Explore)
  • The resource allocation mechanism determining how organizational resources (budget, talent, time, attention) are divided between exploitation and exploration activities
• Diversity
  • Listed in the references but not attached to a specific claim.
• System Slack
  • Listed in the references but not attached to a specific claim.
• Three Horizons Analysis
  • Listed in the references but not attached to a specific claim.
• Variation Strategies
  • Listed in the references but not attached to a specific claim.

Verification

This reference passed the adversarial substantiation pipeline: it was checked to exist and to support the claim it is attached to. See how references were verified.

Registry ID ref:2153c414e922 · see in the full table