IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v15y2022i1p324-d1014571.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Exploitation, Exploration, or Ambidextrousness—An Analysis of the Necessary Conditions for the Success of Digital Servitisation

Author

Listed:
  • Mirosław Matusek

    (Organization and Management Department, Silesian University of Technology, 41-800 Zabrze, Poland)

Abstract

The aim of this paper was to investigate the level of necessity for one of the three conditions (organisational capabilities), i.e., exploitation, exploration, and organisational ambidexterity to achieve the desired level of business performance in digital servitisation of manufacturing enterprises. Servitisation (at present, also in combination with Industry 4.0 solutions) is perceived as an important factor for the competitiveness of manufacturers. The idea of (digital) servitisation can also be considered in terms of sustainability. The main expectation here is that successful servitisation will result in a lower environmental impact by moving away from the traditional business model, in which the manufacturer produces the products and then transfers the responsibility for their ownership and use to the customer, towards achieving benefits from the customers’ use of the products (the product remains the property of the manufacturer). Achieving success in digital servitisation requires, among other things, appropriate use of dynamic capabilities, such as exploitation, exploration, or their combination, i.e., organisational ambidexterity. However, it is still unclear to what extent an ambidextrous organisation engages in both types of activities to increase the combined level of exploration or exploitation and how this affects company performance in digital servitisation. On the basis of a survey of a sample of 167 manufacturers, the necessary conditions for achieving the desired performance values were determined. For this purpose, one non-parametric method was used, i.e., necessary condition analysis (NCA). The results show that ambidexterity is not, in every case, a necessary condition for achieving better performance in digital servitisation. Organisational ambidextrousness is a necessary (but not sufficient) condition for better performance in dimensions such as market share, customer retention, sales growth, and overall firm performance. For competitive position, the limiting factor is exploration only, whereas for customer satisfaction, it is exploitation.

Suggested Citation

  • Mirosław Matusek, 2022. "Exploitation, Exploration, or Ambidextrousness—An Analysis of the Necessary Conditions for the Success of Digital Servitisation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(1), pages 1-20, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2022:i:1:p:324-:d:1014571
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/1/324/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/1/324/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Vandermerwe, Sandra & Rada, Juan, 1988. "Servitization of business: Adding value by adding services," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 6(4), pages 314-324, December.
    2. Morgan, Robert E. & Strong, Carolyn A., 2003. "Business performance and dimensions of strategic orientation," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 56(3), pages 163-176, March.
    3. Gregory G. Dess & G. T. Lumpkin & J. G. Covin, 1997. "Entrepreneurial strategy making and firm performance: tests of contingency and configurational models," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 18(9), pages 677-695, October.
    4. Michael Yao-Ping Peng & Ku-Ho Lin & Dennis Liute Peng & Peihua Chen, 2019. "Linking Organizational Ambidexterity and Performance: The Drivers of Sustainability in High-Tech Firms," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(14), pages 1-17, July.
    5. Tonci Grubic & Ian Jennions, 2018. "Remote monitoring technology and servitised strategies – factors characterising the organisational application," International Journal of Production Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 56(6), pages 2133-2149, March.
    6. Paul E. Bierly III & Paula S. Daly, 2007. "Alternative Knowledge Strategies, Competitive Environment, and Organizational Performance in Small Manufacturing Firms," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 31(4), pages 493-516, July.
    7. Michael Lubatkin & Zeki Simsek & Yan Ling & John F. Veiga, 2006. "Ambidexterity and Performance in Small-to Medium-Sized Firms : The Pivotal Role of Top Management Team Behavioral Integration," Post-Print hal-02311781, HAL.
    8. Robert E. Morgan & Pierre Berthon, 2008. "Market Orientation, Generative Learning, Innovation Strategy and Business Performance Inter‐Relationships in Bioscience Firms," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 45(8), pages 1329-1353, December.
    9. Gary Goertz & Tony Hak & Jan Dul, 2013. "Ceilings and Floors," Sociological Methods & Research, , vol. 42(1), pages 3-40, February.
    10. Qing Cao & Eric Gedajlovic & Hongping Zhang, 2009. "Unpacking Organizational Ambidexterity: Dimensions, Contingencies, and Synergistic Effects," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 20(4), pages 781-796, August.
    11. Li, Feng, 2020. "The digital transformation of business models in the creative industries: A holistic framework and emerging trends," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 92.
    12. James G. March, 1991. "Exploration and Exploitation in Organizational Learning," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 2(1), pages 71-87, February.
    13. Kohtamäki, Marko & Parida, Vinit & Patel, Pankaj C. & Gebauer, Heiko, 2020. "The relationship between digitalization and servitization: The role of servitization in capturing the financial potential of digitalization," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 151(C).
    14. Zi-Lin He & Poh-Kam Wong, 2004. "Exploration vs. Exploitation: An Empirical Test of the Ambidexterity Hypothesis," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 15(4), pages 481-494, August.
    15. Bustinza, Oscar F. & Vendrell-Herrero, Ferran & Gomes, Emanuel, 2020. "Unpacking the effect of strategic ambidexterity on performance: A cross-country comparison of MMNEs developing product-service innovation," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 29(6).
    16. Wolfgang Ulaga & Werner Reinartz, 2011. "Hybrid Offerings: How Manufacturing Firms Combine Goods and Services Successfully," Post-Print hal-00642039, HAL.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Úbeda-García, Mercedes & Claver-Cortés, Enrique & Marco-Lajara, Bartolomé & Zaragoza-Sáez, Patrocinio, 2020. "Toward a dynamic construction of organizational ambidexterity: Exploring the synergies between structural differentiation, organizational context, and interorganizational relations," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 112(C), pages 363-372.
    2. Mavroudi, Eva & Kesidou, Effie & Pandza, Krsto, 2023. "Effects of ambidextrous and specialized R&D strategies on firm performance: The contingent role of industry orientation," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 154(C).
    3. Partanen, Jukka & Kohtamäki, Marko & Patel, Pankaj C. & Parida, Vinit, 2020. "Supply chain ambidexterity and manufacturing SME performance: The moderating roles of network capability and strategic information flow," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 221(C).
    4. Hansen, Eric & Nybakk, Erlend & Panwar, Rajat, 2015. "Pure versus hybrid competitive strategies in the forest sector: Performance implications," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 51-57.
    5. José Andrade & Mário Franco & Luis Mendes, 2021. "Technological capacity and organisational ambidexterity: the moderating role of environmental dynamism on Portuguese technological SMEs," Review of Managerial Science, Springer, vol. 15(7), pages 2111-2136, October.
    6. Wenke, Kathrin & Zapkau, Florian B. & Schwens, Christian, 2021. "Too small to do it all? A meta-analysis on the relative relationships of exploration, exploitation, and ambidexterity with SME performance," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 132(C), pages 653-665.
    7. Bustinza, Oscar F. & Vendrell-Herrero, Ferran & Gomes, Emanuel, 2020. "Unpacking the effect of strategic ambidexterity on performance: A cross-country comparison of MMNEs developing product-service innovation," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 29(6).
    8. Soetanto, Danny & Jack, Sarah, 2016. "The impact of university-based incubation support on the innovation strategy of academic spin-offs," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 50, pages 25-40.
    9. Marina Estrada-Cruz & Noelia Rodriguez-Hernández & Antonio J. Verdú-Jover & Jose Maria Gómez-Gras, 2022. "The effect of competitive intensity on the relationship between strategic entrepreneurship and organizational results," International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, Springer, vol. 18(1), pages 1-24, March.
    10. Jorge Ferreira & Sofia Cardim & Arnaldo Coelho, 2021. "Dynamic Capabilities and Mediating Effects of Innovation on the Competitive Advantage and Firm’s Performance: the Moderating Role of Organizational Learning Capability," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 12(2), pages 620-644, June.
    11. Wim Coreynen & Arjen van Witteloostuijn & Johanna Vanderstraeten, 2021. "Toward Servitized Research: An Integrated Approach for Sustainable Product-Service Innovation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(15), pages 1-21, July.
    12. Marina Estrada-Cruz & Noelia Rodriguez-Hernández & Antonio J. Verdú-Jover & Jose Maria Gómez-Gras, 0. "The effect of competitive intensity on the relationship between strategic entrepreneurship and organizational results," International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, Springer, vol. 0, pages 1-24.
    13. Chang, Yi-Ying & Hughes, Mathew, 2012. "Drivers of innovation ambidexterity in small- to medium-sized firms," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 30(1), pages 1-17.
    14. Young Rok Choi & Seongwook Ha & Youngbae Kim, 2022. "Innovation ambidexterity, resource configuration and firm growth: is smallness a liability or an asset?," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 58(4), pages 2183-2209, April.
    15. Céline Bérard & Marc Fréchet, 2020. "Organizational antecedents of exploration and exploitation in SMEs: The role of structural and resource attributes," Post-Print halshs-02570775, HAL.
    16. Zhongfeng Su & Jingyu Li & Zhiping Yang & Yuan Li, 2011. "Exploratory learning and exploitative learning in different organizational structures," Asia Pacific Journal of Management, Springer, vol. 28(4), pages 697-714, December.
    17. Martin Owusu Ansah & Nicholas Addai-Boamah & Abeeku Bylon Bamfo & Lucy Afeafa Ry-Kottoh, 2022. "Organizational ambidexterity and financial performance in the banking industry: evidence from a developing economy," Journal of Financial Services Marketing, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 27(3), pages 250-263, September.
    18. Heinrichs, Simon & Walter, Sascha, 2013. "Don’t Step Into Your Parent’s Shoes – How Exploitation and Exploration Affect Spin-out Growth," EconStor Preprints 68591, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics.
    19. Matsuno, Ken & Kohlbacher, Florian, 2020. "Proactive marketing response to population aging: The roles of capabilities and commitment of firms," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 113(C), pages 93-104.
    20. Sabyasachi Sinha, 2015. "The Exploration–Exploitation Dilemma: A Review in the Context of Managing Growth of New Ventures," Vikalpa: The Journal for Decision Makers, , vol. 40(3), pages 313-323, September.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2022:i:1:p:324-:d:1014571. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.