Innovation and efficiency: It is possible to have it all

A firm that simultaneously engages in a high degree of both innovation and efficiency follows an approach that is often referred to as an ambidextrous strategy. Surprisingly, relatively few firms are able to balance these two emphases. Internal battles for resources often tip the scales in favor of efficiency over innovation, or vice versa. Management gurus frequently warn that simultaneously pursuing both can set the firm up for mediocre performance, yet the turbulent nature of today’s markets and cut-throat competition create a renewed need for firms to reconsider this dual approach for longer-term success. Unfortunately, practical insights from empirical studies regarding performance benefits and implementation issues are still scant. Perhaps this is one reason why few firms are successful in both efficiency and innovation. In this article, we provide evidence—using a cross-industry survey of senior marketing managers in publicly-traded U.S. firms—that firms which successfully employ an ambidextrous strategy outperform those which overemphasize either efficiency or innovation. Furthermore, we highlight marketing’s role as an example of the often overlooked need for successful functional implementation. Finally, we provide useful methods for managers to answer three key questions: (1) Is my firm ambidextrous?; (2) Should my firm be ambidextrous?; and, if so (3) How can my firm become ambidextrous?