Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 734

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 57 of the 57 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Clarifying the Distinctive Contribution of Ambidexterity to the Field of Organization Studies

Birkinshaw, Julian, Gupta, Kamini·2013·Academy of Management Perspectives
DOI 10.5465/amp.2012.0167
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

The concept of organizational ambidexterity has been applied to a wide variety of phenomena in recent years. Its growing appeal is a reflection of its versatility, but this versatility carries the risk of a lack of clarity in meaning and measurement. In this paper, we attempt to bring a sense of perspective to the field of ambidexterity by documenting its growth and usage in scholarly work. We chart the evolution of ambidexterity since its inception, analyzing the diversity in the views held on the topic. We conclude by discussing how ambidexterity research can benefit from greater focus, and we suggest some key areas where it can make a unique contribution.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.5465/amp.2012.0167

Cites

57 of 57 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Cited by

See all 734

Metadata

Authors
Birkinshaw, J., & Gupta, K.
Venue
Academy of Management Perspectives
Publisher
Academy of Management
Published
2013-11
Volume
27
Issue
4
Pages
287-298
ISSN
  • 1558-9080 (ISSN-L)
  • 1943-4529
DOI
10.5465/amp.2012.0167
OpenAlex
W2117329012
Cited by
734
References
57
FWCI
108.44
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

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.