Be(come)ing Ambidextrous: What Works and What Doesn't

Much has been written (and argued) about "the Ambidextrous Organization" since the early 2000's when Charles O'Reilly and Michael Tushman found that ambidextrous organizations were significantly more successful in launching breakthrough products or services.

The idea makes perfect sense: ambidextrous organizations separate their new, exploratory units from their traditional, exploitative ones, allowing for different processes, structures, and cultures; at the same time, they maintain tight links across units at the senior executive level.

Yet is reality keeping up with the original idea? Are we indeed seeing better outcomes when innovation is structured with separate "units" for exploration vs exploitation?

During our recent Innov8rs Connect on Strategy, Leadership and Governance we heared what's working (and what not) from Tim Kidd, Line Lyst and Bernd Zimmermann, in conversation with Lysander Weiss