Reacting to the ambidexterity mandate: How experienced tensions and cognitive dissonance influence innovative behaviors in a global organization

Abstract

In this study, we advance the literature on ambidexterity by investigating how employees interpret and react to a multinational organization’s overarching strategic mandate to become ambidextrous. Our grounded model, based on qualitative data collected from 78 employees and managers in a multinational corporation, reveals that individuals vary in their experience of the innovation–efficiency tension as either a dilemma marked by cognitive dissonance and charged with negative emotions or as a paradox lived as a stimulating challenge rife with positive emotions. Our findings further reveal a multiplicity of proactive responses, such as innovation via integration and segmentation, and conservative responses, including trivializing, rationalizing, and resisting innovation. We detail how this variation in experiences and responses is dependent on individuals’ understanding of the complexity of the global environment, and their relationships in the proximal context supportive of innovation. Our model extends our understanding of ambidexterity in multinational enterprises by bridging the macro–micro divide between the organizational strategic mandate and individuals’ cognitive, emotional, and behavioral responses, consequently revealing how ambidexterity unfolds across levels in a global organization.