Since March outlined the importance of balancing exploration and exploitation in organizational learning, the exploration–exploitation paradigm has received substantial attention in the management literature. Recent studies have used computer-aided text analysis to construct measures of firms’ inclination towards exploration or exploitation, using the original set of keywords proposed by James G. March. We propose a structured series of tests to assess the validity of computer-aided text analysis-based measures and demonstrate that the approach used in prior studies is unlikely to deliver valid indicators. We demonstrate that an alternative approach, which relies on a larger library of keywords, including synonyms of the March keywords and selects only those keywords that are informative and that pass validity tests, delivers valid computer-aided text analysis indicators – both for unstructured (news articles) and structured text-bases (annual reports). Our study contributes to the literature on construct validity and has broader implications for the development of computer-aided text analysis-based indicators in strategy and organization research.
AbernathyW (1991) The Productivity Dilemma. Baltimore, MD: John Hopkins University Press.
2.
AguinisHEdwardsJR (2014) Methodological wishes for the next decade and how to make wishes come true. Journal of Management Studies51(1): 143–174.
3.
AhujaGLampertCM (2001) Entrepreneurship in the large corporation: A longitudinal study of how established firms create breakthrough inventions. Strategic Management Journal22(6/7): 521–543.
4.
AllenF (1993) Strategic management and financial markets. Strategic Management Journal, Winter Special Issue14: 11–22.
5.
AllisonTHMcKennyAFShortJC (2014) Integrating Time Into Family Business Research: Using Random Coefficient Modeling to Examine Temporal Influences on Family Firm Ambidexterity. Family Business Review27(1): 20–34.
6.
ArellanoM (2003) Panel Data Econometrics. New York: Oxford University Press.
7.
AroraSLLiYYoutieJ, et al. (2020) Measuring dynamic capabilities in new ventures: Exploring strategic change in US green goods manufacturing using website data. The Journal of Technology Transfer45(5): 1451–1480.
8.
BagozziRP (2011) Measurement and meaning in information systems and organizational research: Methodological and philosophical foundations. MIS Quarterly: 261–292.
9.
BarberBMOdeanT (2008) All that glitters: The effect of attention and news on the buying behavior of individual and institutional investors. Review of Financial Studies21(2): 785–818.
10.
BauerMLekerJ (2013) Exploration and exploitation in product and process innovation in the chemical industry. R&D Management43(3): 196–212.
11.
BebchukLCohenA (2020) The costs of entrenched boards. Journal of Financial Economics78: 409–433.
12.
BelderbosRCassimanBFaemsD, et al. (2014) Co-ownership of intellectual property: Exploring the value-appropriation and value-creation implications of co-patenting with different partners. Research Policy43(5): 841–852.
13.
BelderbosRFaemsDLetenB, et al. (2010) Technological activities and their impact on the financial performance of the firm: Exploitation and exploration within and between firms. Journal of Product Innovation Management27(8): 69–882.
14.
BelderbosRGrabowskaMKelchtermansS, et al. (2017) On the use of computer-aided text analysis in international business research: Global mindset and firm performance. Global Strategy Journal7(3): 312–331.
15.
BennerMJTushmanML (2003) Exploitation, exploration, and process management: The productivity dilemma revisited. Academy of Management Review28: 238–256.
16.
BleiDM (2012) Probabilistic topic models. Communications of the ACM55(4): 77.
17.
BlighMCKohlesJCMeindlJR (2004) Charisma under crisis: Presidential leadership, rhetoric, and media responses before and after the September 11Th terrorist attacks. The Leadership Quarterly15: 211–239.
18.
BlundellRWBondSR (1998) Initial conditions and moment restrictions in dynamic panel data models. Journal of Econometrics87: 115–143.
19.
BonsallSBGreenJMullerKA (2020) Market uncertainty and the importance of media coverage at earnings announcements. Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier69(1).
20.
BoydBKBerghDDIrelandRD, et al. (2013) Constructs in strategic management. Organizational Research Methods16(1): 3–14.
21.
BrighamKHLumpkinGTPayneGT, et al. (2014) Researching long-term orientation: A validation study and recommendations for future research. Family Business Review27(1): 72–88.
22.
BurnsTStalkerGM (1961) The Management of Innovation. London: Tavistock.
23.
CampbellDTFiskeDW (1959) Convergent and discriminant validation by the multitrait-multimethod matrix. Psychological Bulletin56: 81–105.
24.
ChenY (2017) Dynamic ambidexterity: How innovators manage exploration and exploitation. Business Horizons60: 385–394.
25.
ChoiBShyam KumarMVZambutoF (2016) Capital structure and innovation trajectory: The role of debt in balancing exploration and exploitation. Organization Science27(5): 1183–1201.
26.
CronbachLJ (1971) Test validation. In: ThorndikeRL (ed.) Educational measurement, 2nd edn.Washington, DC: American Council on Education, pp. 443–507.
27.
CronbachLJMeehlPE (1955) Construct validity in psychological tests. Psychological Bulletin52(4): 281–302.
28.
DaltonDRAguinisH (2013) Measurement malaise in strategic management studies: The case of corporate governance research. Organizational Research Methods16(1): 88–99.
29.
de VisserMFaemsDDe Weerd-NederhofP, et al. (2010) Structural ambidexterity in NPD processes: A firm-level assessment of the impact of differentiated structures on innovation performance. Technovation30(5/6): 291–299.
30.
DuriauVJRegerRKPfarrerMD (2007) A content analysis of the content analysis literature in organizational studies: Research themes, data sources, and methodological refinements. Organizational Research Methods10: 5–34.
31.
EdwardsJR (2011) The fallacy of formative measurement. Organizational Research Methods14: 370–388.
32.
EisenhardtKFurrNBinghamC (2010) Microfoundations of performance: Balancing efficiency and flexibility in dynamic environments. Organization Science21(6): 1263–1273.
FleissJLLevinBPaikMC (2003) Statistical Methods for Rates and Proportions. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
35.
GattiCVolpeLVagnaniG (2015) Interdependence among productive activities: Implications for exploration and exploitation. Journal of Business Research68(3): 711–722.
36.
GeertsALetenBBelderbosR, et al. (2018) Does spatial ambidexterity pay off? On the benefits of geographic proximity between technology exploitation and exploration. Journal of Product Innovation Management35(2): 151–163.
37.
GhemawatPRicartICostaJE (1993) The organizational tension between static and dynamic efficiency. Strategic Management Journal, Winter Special Issue14: 59–73.
38.
GrantRM (1996) Toward a knowledge-based theory of the firm. Strategic Management Journal17: 109–122.
39.
GravetterFJForzanoLB (2012) Research Methods for the Behavioral Sciences. 4th edn.Belmont, CA: Wadsworth, p. 78.
40.
HeZLWongPK (2004) Exploration vs. exploitation: An empirical test of the ambidexterity hypothesis. Organization Science15(4): 481–494.
41.
HeydenMLMOehmichenJNichtingS, et al. (2015) Board background heterogeneity and exploration-exploitation: The role of the institutionally adopted board model. Global Strategy Journal5(2): 154–176.
42.
HubermanGRegevT (2001) Contagious speculation and a cure for cancer: A nonevent that made stock prices soar. Journal of Finance56: 387–396.
43.
JancenelleVE (2020) Relative exploration and firm performance: Exploring curvilinear relationships and the role of industry, instability, and munificence. Long Range Planning53(6): 101926.
44.
JansenJJPTempelaarMPVan Den BoschFAJ, et al. (2009) Structural differentation and ambidexterity: The mediating role of integration mechanisms. Organization Science20(4): 797–811.
45.
JansenJJPVan Den BoschFAJVolberdaHW (2006) Exploratory innovation, exploitative innovation, and performance: Effects of organizational antecedents, environmental moderators. Management Science52(11): 1661–1674.
46.
KatilaRAhujaG (2002) Something old, something new: A longitudinal study of search behavior and new product introduction. Academy of Management Journal45(6): 1183–1194.
47.
KauppilaOP (2010) Creating ambidexterity by integrating and balancing structurally separate interorganizational partnerships. Strategic Organization8(4): 283–312.
48.
KetchenDBoydBKBerghDD (2008) Research methodology in strategic management: Past accomplishments and future challenges. Organizational Research Methods11(4): 643–658.
49.
KimbroughSOChouCChenYT, et al. (2014) On developing indicators with text analytics: Exploring concept vectors applied to English and Chinese texts. Information Systems and E-business Management12(3): 385–415.
50.
KissANLibaersDBarrPS, et al. (2020) CEO cognitive flexibility, information search, and organizational ambidexterity. Strategic Management Journal41(12): 2200–2233.
51.
KleinknechtAVan MontfortKBrouwerE (2002) The non-trivial choice between innovation indicators. Economics of Innovation and New Technology11(2): 109–121.
52.
KlonekFEVoleryTParkerSK (2020) Managing the paradox: Individual ambidexterity, paradoxical leadership and multitasking in entrepreneurs across firm life cycle stages. International Small Business Journal39(1): 40–63.
53.
KnottAM (2002) Exploration and exploitation as complements. In: BontisNChooCW (eds) The Strategic Management of Intellectual Capital and Organizational Knowledge: A Collection of Readings. New York: Oxford University Press, pp. 339–358.
54.
KortmannS (2015) The mediating role of strategic orientations on the relationship between ambidexterity-oriented decisions and innovative ambidexterity. Journal of Product Innovation Management32(5): 666–684.
55.
KoryakOLockettAHaytonJ, et al. (2018) Disentangling the antecedents of ambidexterity: Exploration and exploitation. Research Policy47(2): 413–427.
56.
KoshutePZookJMcCullohI (2021) Recommending training set sizes for classification. Arxiv Preprint. Available at: https://arxiv.org/abs/2102.09382.
57.
KrippendorffK (1980) Validity in Content Analysis. In: MochmannE (ed.) Computerstrategien für die kommunikationsanalyse. Frankfurt/New York: Campus, pp. 69–112.
58.
KrippendorffK (2004) Content Analysis: An Introduction to Its Methodology, 2nd edn.Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
59.
KrippendorffK (2013) Content Analysis: An Introduction to Its Methodology, 3rd edn.Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
60.
LavieDRosenkopfL (2006) Balancing exploration and exploitation in alliance formation. Academy of Management Journal49: 797–818.
61.
LavieDKangJRosenkopfL (2011) Balance within and across domains: The performance implications of exploration and exploitation in alliances. Organization Science22(6): 1517–1538.
62.
LavieDStettnerUTushmanML (2010) Exploration and exploitation within and across organizations. The Academy of Management Annals4(1): 109–155.
63.
Leonard-BartonD (1992) Core capabilities and core rigidities: A paradox in managing new product development. Strategic Management Journal13: 111–125.
64.
LevinthalDMarchJG (1993) The myopia of learning. Strategic Management Journal14: 95–112.
65.
LevittBMarchJG (1988) Organizational Learning. Annual Review of Sociology14: 319–340.
66.
LiF (2010) The information content of forward-looking statements in corporate filings – A Naïve Bayesian machine learning approach. Journal of Accounting Research48: 1049–1102.
67.
LinZYangHDemirkanI (2007) The performance consequences of ambidexterity in strategic alliance formations: Empirical investigation and computational theorizing. Management Science53(10): 1645–1658.
68.
LiuYLohHTSunA (2009) Imbalanced text classification: A term weighting approach. Expert Systems with Applications36: 690–701.
69.
LubatkinMShrievesRE (1986) Toward reconciliation of market performance measures to strategic management research. Academy of Management Review11: 497–512.
70.
LugerJRaischSSchimmerM (2018) Dynamic balancing of exploration and exploitation: The contingent benefits of ambidexterity. Organization Science29(3): 449–470.
71.
LuoCYKumarSMallickDN, et al. (2019) Impacts of exploration and exploitation on firms performance and the moderating effects of slack: A panel data analysis. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management66(4): 613–620.
72.
LyonDLumpkinGDessG (2000) Enhancing entrepreneurial orientation research: Operationalizing and measuring a key strategic decision making process. Journal of Management26: 1055–1085.
73.
McKennyAFAguinisHShortJC, et al. (2018) What doesn’t get measured does exist: Improving the accuracy of computer-aided text analysis. Journal of Management44(7): 2909–2933.
74.
McKennyAFShortJCPayneGT (2013) Using computer-aided text analysis to elevate constructs: An illustration using psychological capital. Organizational Research Methods16(1): 152–184.
75.
MacleanMHarveyCGolantBD, et al. (2021) The role of innovation narratives in accomplishing organizational ambidexterity. Strategic Organization19(4): 693–721.
76.
ManningCDSchutzeH (1999) Foundations of Statistical Natural Language Processing. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
77.
MarabelliMFrigerioCRajolaF (2012) Ambidexterity in service organizations: Reference models from the banking industry. Industry and Innovation – IND INNOV19: 109–126.
78.
MarchJG (1991) Exploration and exploitation in organizational learning. Organization Science2(1): 71–87.
79.
MarchJGSuttonRI (1997) Organizational performance as dependent variable. Organization Science8: 698–706.
80.
MatthewsLHeydenMLZhouD (2022) Paradoxical transparency? Capital market responses to exploration and exploitation disclosure. Research Policy51(1): 104396.
81.
MessickS (1989) Test Validity: A matter of consequence. Social Indicators Research45(1–3): 35–44.
82.
MessickS (1995) Standards of validity and the validity of standards in performance assessment. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice14(4): 5–8.
83.
MihalacheOJansenJVan Den BoschF, et al. (2014) Top management team shared leadership and organizational ambidexterity: A moderated mediation framework. Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal8(10): 128–148.
84.
Miron-SpektorEIngramAKellerJ, et al. (2018) Microfoundations of organizational paradox: The problem is how we think about the problem. Academy of Management Journal61(1): 26–45.
85.
MohnenPRollerLH (2005) Complementarities in innovation policy. European Economic Review49(6): 1431–1450.
86.
MomTJVan Den BoschFAVolberdaHW (2009) Understanding variation in managers’ ambidexterity: Investigating direct and interaction effects of formal structural and personal coordination mechanisms. Organization Science20(4): 812–828.
87.
Morandi StagniRFosfuriASantalóJ (2021) A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush: Technology search strategies and competition due to import penetration. Strategic Management Journal42(8): 1516–1544.
88.
Moreno-LuzonMDValls-PasolaM (2011) Ambidexterity and total quality management: Towards a research agenda. Management Decision49(6): 927–947.
89.
MorrisR (1994) Computerized content analysis in management research: A demonstration of advantages & limitations. Journal of Management20(4): 903–931.
90.
MossTWPayneGTMooreCB (2014) Strategic consistency of exploration and exploitation in family businesses. Family Business Review27(1): 51–71.
91.
NeuendorfKA (2002) The Content Analysis Guidebook. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
92.
NosellaACantarelloSFilippiniR (2012) The intellectual structure of organizational ambidexterity: A bibliographic investigation into the state of the art. Strategic Organization10(4): 450–465.
NguyenBD (2015) Is more news good news? Media coverage of CEOs, firm value, and rent extraction. Quarterly Journal of Finance5(04): 1550020.
95.
O’ReillyCAIIIHarreldJBTushmanML (2009) Organizational ambidexterity: IBM and emerging business opportunities. California Management Review51(4): 75–99.
96.
O’ReillyCATushmanML (2011) Organizational ambidexterity in action: How managers explore and exploit. California Management Review53(4): 5–22.
97.
OehmichenJHeydenMLMGeorgakakisD, et al. (2017) Boards of directors and organizational ambidexterity in knowledge-intensive firms. International Journal of Human Resource Management28(2): 283–306.
98.
ParkGParkY (2006) On the measurement of patent stock as knowledge indicators. Technological Forecasting and Social Change73(7): 793–812.
99.
PennebakerJWMehlMRNiederhofferKG (2003) Psychological aspects of natural language use: Our words, our selves. Annual Review of Psychology54: 547–577.
100.
PrahaladCKHamelG (1990) The core competence of the corporation. Harvard Business Review68(3): 79–91.
101.
Quintana-GarcíaCBenavides-VelascoCA (2008) Innovative competence, exploration and exploitation: The influence of technological diversification. Research Policy37: 492–507.
102.
RaischSBirkinshawJ (2008) Organizational ambidexterity: Antecedents, outcomes, and moderators. Journal of Management34(3): 375–409.
103.
RaischSZimmermannA (2017) A process perspective on the exploration–exploitation paradox. In: SmithWKLewisMWJarzabkowskiP, et al. (eds) The Oxford Handbook of Organizational Paradox. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 315–332.
104.
RichardPDevinneyTYipG, et al. (2009) Measuring organizational performance: Towards methodological best practice. Journal of Management35: 718–804.
105.
RoodmanD (2009) How to do xtabond2: An introduction to difference and system GMM in Stata. The Stata Journal9(1): 86–136.
106.
RosenkopfLNerkarA (2001) Beyond local search: Boundary-spanning, exploration, impact in the optical disk industry. Strategic Management Journal22: 287–306.
107.
RussoAVurroC (2010) Cross-boundary ambidexterity: Balancing exploration and exploitation in the fuel cell industry. European Management Review7(1): 30–45.
108.
SaltonGBuckleyC (1988) Term weighting approaches in automatic text retrieval. Information Processing and Management24(5): 513–523.
109.
ShortJCPalmerTB (2008) The application of DICTION to content analysis research in strategic management. Organizational Research Methods11(4): 727–752.
110.
ShortJCBrobergJCCogliserCC, et al. (2010) Construct validation using Computer-Aided Text Analysis (CATA). An Illustration Using Entrepreneurial Orientation. Organizational Research Methods13(2): 320–347.
111.
SidhuJSCommandeurHRVolberdaHW (2007) The multifaced nature of exploration and exploitation: Value of supply, demand, and spatial search for innovation. Organization Science18(1): 20–38.
112.
StettnerULavieD (2014) Ambidexterity under scrutiny: Exploration and exploitation via internal organization, alliances, and acquisitions. Strategic Management Journal35(13): 1903–1929.
113.
SteyversMGriffithsT (2007) Probabalistic topic models. In: LandauerTMcNamaraDDennisS, et al. (eds) Latent Semantic Analysis: A Road to Meaning. Hillsdale, NJ: Laurence Erlbaum, pp. 77–84.
114.
TetlockPC (2007) Giving content to investor sentiment: The role of media in the stock market. Journal of Finance62: 1139–1168.
115.
TetlockPCSaar-TsechanskyMMacskassyS (2008) More than words: Quantifying language to measure firms’ fundamentals. Journal of Finance63(3): 1437–1467.
116.
TitusVHouseJMCovinJG (2017) The influence of exploration on external corporate venturing activity. Journal of Management43(5): 1609–1630.
TushmanMSmithWKBinnsA (2011) The ambidextrous CEO. Harvard Business Review89(6): 74–80.
119.
UngureanuPBertolottiFMattarelliE, et al. (2020) Collaboration and identity formation in strategic interorganizational partnerships: An exploration of swift identity processes. Strategic Organization18(1): 171–211.
120.
UotilaJ (2018) Punctuated equilibrium or ambidexterity: Dynamics of incremental and radical organizational change over time. Industrial and Corporate Change27(1): 131–148.
121.
UotilaJMaulaMKeilT, et al. (2009) Exploration, exploitation, financial performance: Analysis of S&P 500 corporations. Strategic Management Journal30: 221–231.
122.
VagnaniG (2015) Exploration and long-run organizational performance: The moderating role of technological interdependence. Journal of Management41(6): 1651–1676.
123.
Van LooyBMartensTDebackereK (2005) Organizing for continuous innovation: On the sustainability of ambidextrous organizations. Creativity and Innovation Management14(3): 208–221.
124.
VolberdaHBaden-FullerCVan den BoschFAJ (2001) Mastering strategic renewal: Mobilizing renewal journeys in multi-unit firms. Long Range Planning34: 159–178.
125.
WalraveBvan OorschotKERommeAGL (2011) Getting trapped in the suppression of exploration: A simulation model. Journal of Management Studies48(8): 1727–1751.
126.
WangHLiJ (2008) Untangling the effects of overexploration and overexploitation on organizational performance: The moderating role of environmental dynamism. Journal of Management34(5): 925–951.
127.
WangSLLuoYMaksimovV, et al. (2019) Achieving temporal ambidexterity in new ventures. Journal of Management Studies56(4): 788–822.
128.
WeberRP (1990) Basic Content Analysis, 2nd edn.Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
129.
WildenRHohbergerJDevinneyTM, et al. (2018) Revisiting James March (1991), whither exploration and exploitation?Strategic Organization16(3): 352–369.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
