The DOI matches its OpenAlex record; 134 of the 134 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Exploration and Exploitation Within and Across Organizations
Abstract
Jim March's framework of exploration and exploitation has drawn substantial interest from scholars studying phenomena such as organizational learning, knowledge management, innovation, organizational design, and strategic alliances. This framework has become an essential lens for interpreting various behaviors and outcomes within and across organizations. Despite its straightforwardness, this framework has generated debates concerning the definition of exploration and exploitation, and their measurement, antecedents, and consequences. We critically review the growing literature on exploration and exploitation, discuss various perspectives, raise conceptual and empirical concerns, underscore challenges for further development of this literature, and provide directions for future research.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Absorptive Capacity: A New Perspective on Learning and Innovation
Cohen, W. M., & Levinthal, D. A. (1990) · Administrative Science Quarterly · doi:10.2307/2393553 · Cited by 35,728
Exploration and Exploitation in Organizational Learning
March, J. G. (1991) · Organization Science · doi:10.1287/orsc.2.1.71 · Cited by 21,942
Competitive Strategy: Techniques for Analyzing Industries and Competitors
(1980) · Journal of Sustainable Competitive Intelligence · doi:10.24883/iberoamericanic.v2i2.38 · Cited by 16,592
(1993) · Journal of the American Dietetic Association · doi:10.1016/0002-8223(93)92196-5 · Cited by 11,976
Research in Organizational Behavior
Hammer, E. R., Cummings, L. L., & Staw, B. M. (1984) · The Academy of Management Review · doi:10.2307/258300 · Cited by 10,806
Teece, D. J. (1986) · Research Policy · doi:10.1016/0048-7333(86)90027-2 · Cited by 7,842
The Population Ecology of Organizations
Hannan, M. T., & Freeman, J. (1977) · American Journal of Sociology · doi:10.1086/226424 · Cited by 7,568
Levinthal, D. A., & March, J. G. (1993) · Strategic Management Journal · doi:10.1002/smj.4250141009 · Cited by 7,283
Burns, T., & Stalker, G. M. (1994) · doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198288787.001.0001 · Cited by 7,250
Structural inertia and organizational change
Hannan, M. T., & Freeman, J. (1984) · American Sociological Review · doi:10.2307/2095567 · Cited by 7,244
Cited by
Institutional Complexity and Organizational Responses
Greenwood, R., Raynard, M., Kodeih, F., Micelotta, E. R., & Lounsbury, M. (2011) · Academy of Management Annals · doi:10.5465/19416520.2011.590299 · Cited by 3,519
Organizational Ambidexterity: Past, Present, and Future
O'Reilly, C. A., & Tushman, M. L. (2013) · Academy of Management Perspectives · doi:10.5465/amp.2013.0025 · Cited by 2,580
Self-citationAdvancing Research on Hybrid Organizing – Insights from the Study of Social Enterprises
Battilana, J., & Lee, M. (2014) · The Academy of Management Annals · doi:10.1080/19416520.2014.893615 · Cited by 2,107
Paradox research in management science: Looking back to move forward
Schad, J., Lewis, M. W., Raisch, S., & Smith, W. K. (2016) · Academy of Management Annals · doi:10.5465/19416520.2016.1162422 · Cited by 1,385
Clarifying the Distinctive Contribution of Ambidexterity to the Field of Organization Studies
Birkinshaw, J., & Gupta, K. (2013) · Academy of Management Perspectives · doi:10.5465/amp.2012.0167 · Cited by 734
Metadata
- Authors
- Lavie, D., Stettner, U., & Tushman, M. L.
- Venue
- Academy of Management Annals
- Publisher
- Routledge
- Published
- 2010-01-01
- Volume
- 4
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 109-155
- ISSN
- 1941-6067 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W4247511298
- Cited by
- 1,650
- References
- 134
- FWCI
- 117.06
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Exploration and Exploitation Within and Across Organizations. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1080/19416521003691287
- The paper
- Lavie, D., Stettner, U., & Tushman, M. L. (2010). Exploration and Exploitation Within and Across Organizations. Academy of Management Annals. https://doi.org/10.1080/19416521003691287
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
