The effects of ambidextrous learning on exaptation: the moderating role of knowledge scope and knowledge reconstruction ability
Chaoyong Tang et al.
What the paper says
Purpose Exaptation is an important source of enterprise innovation, and its antecedents have attracted extensive attention. Drawing on the knowledge ecosystem theory, organizational learning theory, knowledge-based view and dynamic capability theory, this study focuses on how ambidextrous learning (AL) (exploratory and exploitative learning) affects exaptation and examines how knowledge scope (KS) and knowledge reconstruction ability (KRA) moderate the relationship between AL and exaptation. Design/methodology/approach Hypotheses were tested via hierarchical linear regression (SPSS) on 354 firm-level questionnaires from Chinese enterprises. Findings The results revealed that exploratory and exploitative learning improve exaptation, whereas KS and KRA, respectively, enhance the relationship between AL and exaptation. Further analysis demonstrated that the interaction between KS and KRA significantly strengthened the relationship between exploratory learning and exaptation, while the interaction failed to enhance the relationship between exploitative learning and exaptation. Practical implications The study suggests that high-tech firms should engage in both exploratory learning external and exploitative learning activities to promote exaptation. Moreover, leveraging KS and KRA can enhance exaptation. Originality/value This study contributes to the literature on AL outcomes by empirically exploring the effects of exploratory and exploitative learning on exaptation, thus extending the application field of the organizational learning theory. Additionally, by revealing the contingency effects of KS and KRA, this study enriching the research on knowledge-based view and dynamic capabilities theory. Furthermore, the research findings can provide helpful implications for enterprises to achieve exaptation effectively.
Evidence weight
Balanced mode · F 0.40 / M 0.15 / V 0.05 / R 0.40
| F · citation impact | 0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20 |
| M · momentum | 0.50 × 0.15 = 0.07 |
| V · venue signal | 0.50 × 0.05 = 0.03 |
| R · text relevance † | 0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20 |
† Text relevance is estimated at 0.50 on the detail page — for your query’s actual relevance score, open this paper from a search result.