Marketing Ambidexterity Research: A Systematic Literature Review and Future Research Agenda
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.33751/jhss.v10i2.214Keywords:
Marketing ambidexterity, marketing exploration, marketing exploitation, SME performance, systematic literature reviewAbstract
This study systematically reviews the development of marketing ambidexterity research and proposes a future research agenda by examining publication trends, antecedents, consequences, and existing research gaps. This study employed a Systematic Literature Review (SLR) approach using the Scopus database. The search focused on reputable English-language journal articles published between January 1, 2020, and December 31, 2025. Of the 278 articles initially identified, 45 were selected for in-depth analysis. Bibliometric analysis and thematic synthesis were conducted to map publication trends, dominant themes, conceptual relationships, and future research directions. The findings indicate that marketing ambidexterity has increasingly been examined through the perspectives of market-driven orientation, market-driving orientation, digital marketing capabilities, entrepreneurial orientation, dynamic capabilities, and small and medium-sized enterprise performance. The main antecedents include entrepreneurial orientation, online marketing capabilities, digital capabilities, market knowledge, and cross-functional capabilities. Its primary consequences include business performance, innovation performance, competitive advantage, and sustainable competitive advantage. This review is limited to reputable English-language journal articles published within the specified period. Future studies should develop more robust measurement models, employ longitudinal and multilevel research designs, and extend the investigation to emerging markets, small and medium-sized enterprises, service industries, digital platforms, and crisis contexts. This study contributes to the literature by synthesizing fragmented knowledge on marketing ambidexterity and clarifying its antecedents, consequences, theoretical gaps, and future research agenda. It also provides practical insights for designing adaptive, data-driven, and innovation-oriented marketing strategies.
References
[1] Abuseta, H., Iyiola, K., & Aljuhmani, H. Y. (2025). Digital technologies and business model innovation in turbulent markets: Unlocking the power of agility and absorptive capacity. Sustainability, 17(12), 5296. https://doi.org/10.3390/su17125296
[2] Adiwijaya, K., Wahyuni, S., Gayatri, G., & Mussry, J. S. (2020). Does marketing ambidexterity boost marketing performance? Empirical evidence in Indonesia’s consumer goods. Journal of Global Marketing, 33(4), 266–288. https://doi.org/10.1080/08911762.2019.1696438
[3] Annosi, M. C., Mattarelli, E., Dentoni, D., & Messeni Petruzzelli, A. (2024). The micro-foundations of ambidexterity for corporate social performance: A study on sustainability managers’ response to conflicting goals. Long Range Planning, 57(1), 102412. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lrp.2023.102412
[4] Burkert, M., & Grossrieder, S. (2026). Individual ambidexterity and management controls: A systematic literature review. Management Review Quarterly, 76(1), 633–690. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11301-025-00493-w
[5] Carmine, S., & De Marchi, V. (2023). Reviewing paradox theory in corporate sustainability toward a systems perspective. Journal of Business Ethics, 184(1), 139–158. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-022-05112-2
[6] Chen, A., Li, L., & Shahid, W. (2024). Digital transformation as the driving force for sustainable business performance: A moderated mediation model of market-driven business model innovation and digital leadership capabilities. Heliyon, 10(8), e29509. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e29509
[7] Chigori, D. T., Chinyamurindi, W., & Rungani, E. C. (2024). Dynamic innovation model for ambidextrous SMEs: Insights from a bibliometrics analysis. South African Journal of Business Management, 55(1), a4282. https://doi.org/10.4102/SAJBM.v55i1.4282
[8] Dayangan, C., & Aykol, B. (2024). Dynamic capabilities research in international marketing: A systematic literature review and direction for future research. International Marketing Review, 41(6), 1618–1672. https://doi.org/10.1108/IMR-08-2023-0168
[9] De Fano, D., Schena, R., & Russo, A. (2026). Harnessing AI ambidexterity for competitive advantage: The role of dynamic capabilities in digital innovation ecosystems. European Journal of Innovation Management, 29(2), 490–504. https://doi.org/10.1108/EJIM-11-2024-1404
[10] Donthu, N., Kumar, S., Mukherjee, D., Pandey, N., & Lim, W. M. (2021). How to conduct a bibliometric analysis: An overview and guidelines. Journal of Business Research, 133, 285–296. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2021.04.070
[11] Elgarhy, S. D., & Abou-Shouk, M. (2022). Effects of entrepreneurial orientation, marketing, and innovation capabilities on market performance: The mediating effect of sustainable competitive advantage. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 35(6), 1986–2004. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJCHM-04-2022-0508
[12] Felicetti, A. M., Corvello, V., & Ammirato, S. (2024). Digital innovation in entrepreneurial firms: A systematic literature review. Review of Managerial Science, 18(2), 315–362. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11846-023-00638-9
[13] Gnizy, I. (2025). The impact of ambidextrous traditional and contemporary data analytics on marketing innovation. Journal of Marketing Analytics, 13(4), 1219–1237. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41270-024-00316-z
[14] Gusenbauer, M., & Haddaway, N. R. (2020). Which academic search systems are suitable for systematic reviews or meta-analyses? Evaluating retrieval qualities of Google Scholar, PubMed, and 26 other resources. Research Synthesis Methods, 11(2), 181–217. https://doi.org/10.1002/jrsm.1378
[15] Ho, H., Osiyevskyy, O., Agarwal, J., & Reza, S. (2020). Does ambidexterity in marketing pay off? The role of absorptive capacity. Journal of Business Research, 110, 65–79. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.12.050
[16] Hoque, M. T., Ahammad, M. F., Tzokas, N., Tarba, S., & Nath, P. (2022). Eyes open and hands on: Market knowledge and marketing capabilities in export markets. International Marketing Review, 39(3), 431–462. https://doi.org/10.1108/IMR-01-2021-0003
[17] Hughes, M. (2018). Organisational ambidexterity and firm performance: Burning research questions for marketing scholars. Journal of Marketing Management, 34(1–2), 178–229. https://doi.org/10.1080/0267257X.2018.1441175
[18] Jing, H., Zhang, Y., & Ma, J. (2023). Influence of digital ambidextrous capabilities on SMEs’ transformation performance: The mediating effect of business model innovation. Heliyon, 9(11), e21020. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e21020
[19] Khan, H., Freeman, S., & Lee, R. (2021). New product performance implications of ambidexterity in strategic marketing foci: A case of emerging market firms. Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing, 36(3), 390–399. https://doi.org/10.1108/JBIM-01-2020-0003
[20] Kim, G., Lee, W. J., & Shim, H. (2022). Managerial dilemmas and entrepreneurial challenges in the ambidexterity of SMEs: A systematic review for execution system. Sustainability, 14(24), 16550. https://doi.org/10.3390/su142416550
[21] Kumar, S., Vandana, Kumar, V., Chatterjee, S., Mariani, M., & De Massis, A. (2025). The role of artificial intelligence capabilities in enhancing export performance: A study of ambidexterity and dynamic capabilities. International Marketing Review, 42(4), 698–714. https://doi.org/10.1108/IMR-10-2024-0426
[22] Lisboa, A. C. C., Skarmeas, D., & Robson, M. J. (2025). Juggling markets and products: How does ambidexterity impact export performance? Journal of International Marketing. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1177/1069031X251408340
[23] Liu, G., Chen, Y., & Ko, W. W. (2024). The influence of marketing exploitation and exploration on business-to-business small and medium-sized enterprises’ pioneering orientation. Industrial Marketing Management, 117, 131–147. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2023.12.012
[24] Mansouri, S., & Kaswengi, J. (2025). Linking dynamic capabilities to export performance in Africa: The moderating roles of institutional support, sociopolitical context, and perceived corruption. Thunderbird International Business Review, 67(5), 601–612. https://doi.org/10.1002/tie.70001
[25] Melkić, S. (2025). Mapping the field of multilevel ambidexterity research within organizations using bibliometric analysis. Dynamic Relationships Management Journal, 14(1). https://doi.org/10.17708/DRMJ.2025.v14n01a03
[26] Muis, I., Shafrullah, F., Ismail, S., Ervianto, L. R., & Indrawati, L. (2025). Assessing the elements that mediate the impact of innovation on business performance: Moderate accreditation ranking and competitive advantage. Journal of Posthumanism, 5(4). https://doi.org/10.63332/joph.v5i4.973
[27] Oduro, S., & De Nisco, A. (2024). From Industry 4.0 adoption to innovation ambidexterity to firm performance: A MASEM analysis. European Journal of Innovation Management, 27(8), 3060–3082. https://doi.org/10.1108/EJIM-02-2023-0106
[28] Page, M. J., McKenzie, J. E., Bossuyt, P. M., Boutron, I., Hoffmann, T. C., Mulrow, C. D., Shamseer, L., Tetzlaff, J. M., Akl, E. A., Brennan, S. E., Chou, R., Glanville, J., Grimshaw, J. M., Hróbjartsson, A., Lalu, M. M., Li, T., Loder, E. W., Mayo-Wilson, E., McDonald, S., . . . Moher, D. (2021). The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ, 372, n71. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n71
[29] Paul, J., Ueno, A., Dennis, C., Alamanos, E., Curtis, L., Foroudi, P., Kacprzak, A., Kunz, W. H., Liu, J., Marvi, R., Nair, S. L. S., Ozdemir, O., Pantano, E., Papadopoulos, T., Petit, O., Tyagi, S., & Wirtz, J. (2024). Digital transformation: A multidisciplinary perspective and future research agenda. International Journal of Consumer Studies, 48(2), e13015. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijcs.13015
[30] Peters, K., & Buijs, P. (2022). Strategic ambidexterity in green product innovation: Obstacles and implications. Business Strategy and the Environment, 31(1), 173–193. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.2881
[31] Pfajfar, G., Mitręga, M., & Shoham, A. (2024). Systematic review of international marketing capabilities in dynamic capabilities view: Calibrating research on international dynamic marketing capabilities. International Marketing Review, 41(1), 237–272. https://doi.org/10.1108/IMR-12-2022-0276
[32] Ramadani, A. N., Riptiono, S., & Wibawanto, S. (2025). The role of marketing ambidexterity in upscaling SMEs’ business performance. Jurnal Manajemen dan Kewirausahaan, 27(1), 43–52. https://doi.org/10.9744/jmk.27.1.43-52
[33] Restuputri, D. P., Masudin, I., Septira, A. P., Govindan, K., & Widayat, W. (2024). The role of knowledge management in improving organizational performance through organizational ambidexterity under conditions of uncertainty. Business Process Management Journal, 30(7), 2237–2282. https://doi.org/10.1108/BPMJ-08-2023-0614
[34] Rethlefsen, M. L., Kirtley, S., Waffenschmidt, S., Ayala, A. P., Moher, D., Page, M. J., Koffel, J. B., & PRISMA-S Group. (2021). PRISMA-S: An extension to the PRISMA statement for reporting literature searches in systematic reviews. Systematic Reviews, 10, 39. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-020-01542-z
[35] Saeed, M., Adiguzel, Z., Shafique, I., Kalyar, M. N., & Abrudan, D. B. (2023). Big data analytics-enabled dynamic capabilities and firm performance: Examining the roles of marketing ambidexterity and environmental dynamism. Business Process Management Journal, 29(4), 1204–1226. https://doi.org/10.1108/BPMJ-01-2023-0015
[36] Sannö, A., Rothenberg, S., & Leo, E. (2024). Utilizing organizational ambidexterity to implement long-term technical change in fast-paced manufacturing settings. Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management, 35(6), 1245–1263. https://doi.org/10.1108/JMTM-07-2023-0268
[37] Serrano-Bedia, A. M., & Pérez-Pérez, M. (2021). Knowledge ambidexterity within a business context: Taking stock and moving forward. Sustainability, 13(18), 10388. https://doi.org/10.3390/su131810388
[38] Snyder, H. (2019). Literature review as a research methodology: An overview and guidelines. Journal of Business Research, 104, 333–339. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.07.039
[39] Su, L., Cui, A. P., Samiee, S., & Zou, S. (2022). Exploration, exploitation, ambidexterity, and the performance of international SMEs. European Journal of Marketing, 56(5), 1372–1397. https://doi.org/10.1108/EJM-03-2021-0153
[40] Supriharyanti, E., & Sukoco, B. M. (2022). Organizational change capability: A systematic review and future research directions. Management Research Review, 46(1), 46–81. https://doi.org/10.1108/MRR-01-2021-0039
[41] Tolstoy, D., Nordman, E. R., & Vu, U. (2022). The indirect effect of online marketing capabilities on the international performance of e-commerce SMEs. International Business Review, 31(3), 101946. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ibusrev.2021.101946
[42] Tranfield, D., Denyer, D., & Smart, P. (2003). Towards a methodology for developing evidence-informed management knowledge by means of systematic review. British Journal of Management, 14(3), 207–222. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8551.00375
[43] Tuominen, S., Reijonen, H., Nagy, G., Buratti, A., & Laukkanen, T. (2023). Customer-centric strategy driving innovativeness and business growth in international markets. International Marketing Review, 40(3), 479–496. https://doi.org/10.1108/IMR-09-2020-0215
[44] Urbano, D., Turro, A., Wright, M., & Zahra, S. (2022). Corporate entrepreneurship: A systematic literature review and future research agenda. Small Business Economics, 59(4), 1541–1565. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-021-00590-6
[45] Van Neerijnen, P., Tempelaar, M. P., & Van de Vrande, V. (2022). Embracing paradox: TMT paradoxical processes as a steppingstone between TMT reflexivity and organizational ambidexterity. Organization Studies, 43(11), 1793–1814. https://doi.org/10.1177/01708406211058640
[46] Vlašić, G., Dabić, M., & Krupka, Z. (2024). Cognitive profiles of strategic decision-makers: Implications for exploration–exploitation strategies. Strategic Change, 33(4), 275–285. https://doi.org/10.1002/jsc.2578
[47] Wang, J., Kim, T., Bateman, T. S., Jiang, Y., & Tang, G. (2024). A paradox theory lens on proactivity, individual ambidexterity, and creativity: An empirical look. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 45(6), 896–911. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.2786
[48] Weiss, L., & Kanbach, D. K. (2022). Toward an integrated framework of corporate venturing for organizational ambidexterity as a dynamic capability. Management Review Quarterly, 72(4), 1129–1170. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11301-021-00223-y
[49] Zahoor, N., Khan, Z., Marinova, S., & Cui, L. (2024). Ambidexterity in strategic alliances: An integrative review of the literature. International Journal of Management Reviews, 26(1), 82–109. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijmr.12348
[50] Zahoor, N., & Lew, Y. K. (2023). Enhancing international marketing capability and export performance of emerging market SMEs in crises: Strategic flexibility and digital technologies. International Marketing Review, 40(5), 1158–1187. https://doi.org/10.1108/IMR-12-2021-0350
[51] Zupic, I., & Čater, T. (2015). Bibliometric methods in management and organization. Organizational Research Methods, 18(3), 429–472. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428114562629
