The DOI matches its Crossref record; 7 of the 7 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Walking the Tightrope: An Assessment of the Relationship between High-Performance Work Systems and Organizational Ambidexterity
Abstract
This study explores central questions related to the connections between a firm's human resources (HR) system and its ability to exhibit “organizational ambidexterity.” We build from existing work on the behavioral view of ambidexterity to assess the extent to which the utilization of certain HR practices may be linked to a context marked by discipline, stretch, trust, and support. We further argue that these disparate practices may be combined into a single high-performance work system (HPWS), which allows the firm to achieve both the alignment and the adaptability necessary to produce ambidexterity. Thus, we examine HPWS as a systematic tool for enhancing organizational ambidexterity. We explore this link using data from 215 high-tech small to medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) and find that HPWS utilization is positively related to a measure of organizational ambidexterity. In turn, ambidexterity mediates the relationship between HPWS utilization and firm growth.
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
Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J.-Y., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2003) · Journal of Applied Psychology · doi:10.1037/0021-9010.88.5.879 · Cited by 82,194
Firm Resources and Sustained Competitive Advantage
Barney, J. (1991) · Journal of Management · doi:10.1177/014920639101700108 · Cited by 48,334
Sample Selection Bias as a Specification Error
Heckman, J. J. (1979) · Econometrica · doi:10.2307/1912352 · Cited by 28,779
Exploration and Exploitation in Organizational Learning
March, J. G. (1991) · Organization Science · doi:10.1287/orsc.2.1.71 · Cited by 21,942
HUSELID, M. A. (1995) · Academy of Management Journal · doi:10.2307/256741 · Cited by 9,342
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
How to Use a Monte Carlo Study to Decide on Sample Size and Determine Power
Muthén, L. K., & Muthén, B. O. (2002) · Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal · doi:10.1207/s15328007sem0904_8 · Cited by 2,362
Cited by
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
Benitez, J., Castillo, A., Llorens, J., & Braojos, J. (2018) · Information & Management · doi:10.1016/j.im.2017.09.004 · Cited by 318
Organizing public sector AI adoption: Navigating between separation and integration
Selten, F., & Klievink, B. (2024) · Government Information Quarterly · doi:10.1016/j.giq.2023.101885 · Cited by 147
Metadata
- Authors
- Patel, P. C., Messersmith, J. G., & Lepak, D. P.
- Venue
- Academy of Management Journal
- Publisher
- Academy of Management
- Published
- 2013-10
- Volume
- 56
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 1420-1442
- ISSN
- 0001-4273 (ISSN-L)
- 1948-0989
- OpenAlex
- W2074133060
- Cited by
- 474
- References
- 7
- FWCI
- 51.66
- 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: Walking the Tightrope: An Assessment of the Relationship between High-Performance Work Systems and Organizational Ambidexterity. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.5465/amj.2011.0255
- The paper
- Patel, P. C., Messersmith, J. G., & Lepak, D. P. (2013). Walking the Tightrope: An Assessment of the Relationship between High-Performance Work Systems and Organizational Ambidexterity. Academy of Management Journal. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2011.0255
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.
