The DOI matches its Crossref record; 8 of the 8 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
A Network Perspective on Individual-Level Ambidexterity in Organizations
Open accessAbstract
Addressing the call for a deeper understanding of ambidexterity at the individual level, we propose that managers’ networks are an important yet understudied factor in the ability to balance the trade-off between exploring for new business and exploiting existing business. Analyses of 1,449 ties in the internal and external networks of 79 senior managers in a management consulting firm revealed significant differences in the density, contact heterogeneity, and informality of ties in the networks of senior managers who engaged in both exploration and exploitation compared with managers that predominately explored or exploited. The findings suggest that managers’ networks are important levers for their ability to behave ambidextrously and offer insights into the microfoundations of organizational ambidexterity.
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
Exploration and Exploitation in Organizational Learning
March, J. G. (1991) · Organization Science · doi:10.1287/orsc.2.1.71 · Cited by 21,942
Cultures and Organizations: Software of the Mind.
Triandis, H. C., & Hofstede, G. (1993) · Administrative Science Quarterly · doi:10.2307/2393257 · Cited by 17,696
Burt, R. S. (1992) · doi:10.4159/9780674029095 · Cited by 9,093
Social Capital: A Theory of Social Structure and Action
Lin, N. (2001) · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511815447 · Cited by 4,535
Exploration vs. Exploitation: An Empirical Test of the Ambidexterity Hypothesis
He, Z.-L., & Wong, P.-K. (2004) · Organization Science · doi:10.1287/orsc.1040.0078 · Cited by 3,737 · cited 2×
“A central insight of network theory is that the actions of individuals are shaped by the networks in which they are embedded (e.g. Burt 1992, Granovetter 1985; see Brass et al. 2004 for a review).”
Marsden, P. V., & Campbell, K. E. (1984) · Social Forces · doi:10.1093/sf/63.2.482 · Cited by 1,731
Fading Memories: A Process Theory of Strategic Business Exit in Dynamic Environments
Burgelman, R. A. (1994) · Administrative Science Quarterly · doi:10.2307/2393493 · Cited by 1,018
Bendapudi, N., & Leone, R. P. (2002) · Journal of Marketing · doi:10.1509/jmkg.66.2.83.18476 · Cited by 303
Cited by
Tong, S., Jia, N., Luo, X., & Fang, Z. (2021) · Strategic Management Journal · doi:10.1002/smj.3322 · Cited by 531
Metadata
- Authors
- Rogan, M., & Mors, M. L.
- Venue
- Organization Science
- Published
- 2014-12
- Volume
- 25
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 1860-1877
- ISSN
- 1047-7039 (ISSN-L)
- 1526-5455
- OpenAlex
- W2128623890
- Cited by
- 269
- References
- 8
- FWCI
- 29.89
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
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: A Network Perspective on Individual-Level Ambidexterity in Organizations. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1287/orsc.2014.0901
- The paper
- Rogan, M., & Mors, M. L. (2014). A Network Perspective on Individual-Level Ambidexterity in Organizations. Organization Science. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.2014.0901
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.