Ambidextrous management strategies in the tourism industry: a systematic literature review Open Access

In developing innovative and sustainable business models, tourism operators, regardless of size, must draw upon a broad and diverse knowledge base. One strategic approach is to invest in capabilities that support ambidextrous management. In the context of organizational strategy, ambidextrous management refers to an organization's ability to simultaneously pursue two often conflicting activities: (1) exploitation: managing current products, processes, and services, and (2) exploration: developing new innovations and opportunities (Birkinshaw and Gupta, 2013; O'Reilly and Tushman, 2013).

While prior research has primarily focused on organizational ambidexterity, a micro-foundational perspective, centered on individual cognitive and behavioral dynamics, is emerging. This perspective helps us to understand how managers and employees balance exploration and exploitation in daily work. Building on Birkinshaw and Gupta (2013) and O'Reilly and Tushman (2013), we argue that ambidexterity in tourism arises from the aggregation of individual-level cognitions and behaviors and is moderated by leadership and organization context. For example, the ability of employees to deliver streamlined guest service delivery (exploitation) while co-creating new value through guest interactions (exploration) exemplifies ambidextrous management in tourism (Pertusa-Ortega et al., 2021).

The adoption of ambidextrous strategies at the individual level is influenced by employees' learning orientation (Liu-Lastres et al., 2023) and their capacity to explore and exploit diverse knowledge resources (Alavi and Leidner, 2001). However, it has become harder for tourism businesses to adopt such strategies amid deep uncertainty and turbulence (Tiwari et al., 2021), such as COVID-19, geopolitical disruptions, and climate change. In this context, ambidextrous management in tourism is defined as “a systematic way of managing a destination or an organization at macro and micro levels of the tourism business environment” (Séraphin and Yallop, 2019). This study focuses on the micro-level, examining organizational dynamics within tourism businesses.

The concept of knowledge ambidexterity, first introduced by Duncan (1976) and later expanded by Tushman and O'Reilly (1996), involves the simultaneous pursuit of knowledge exploration and exploitation, which are essential capabilities for building a knowledge-based organization (Shrestha and Saratchandra, 2023). Such organizations treat knowledge as a core asset, leveraging it to gain competitive advantage and improve performance (Pertusa-Ortega et al., 2021; Thanh et al., 2020). However, we argue that tourism businesses must advance beyond a knowledge-based model by embracing digital transformation. This involves leveraging digital technologies to fundamentally reshape business processes, culture, and customer experiences in response to evolving market demands (Tiwari et al., 2022; Séraphin, 2022).

Digital technologies can facilitate knowledge exploration and exploitation, enabling innovative idea generation and application. Smart technologies generate vast amounts of data that, when integrated with existing organizational resources, can foster ambidexterity (Goo et al., 2022). Yet, many tourism operators rely heavily on internal knowledge and neglect external sources (Atuahene-Gima, 2005), a tendency compounded by challenges in servant leadership (Tuan, 2022). This is problematic, as most relevant knowledge resides outside the boundaries of small tourism operators (Roed, 2016). A robust knowledge orientation requires not only an internal employee mindset but also an understanding of external boundary conditions to master diverse knowledge and skills (Bechthold et al., 2021). Small family-run tourism businesses find it hard to be ambidextrous. They struggle without a digital environment that helps them to balance exploration and exploitation goals (Schindler, 2023).

Tourism is inherently ambidextrous, making this strategic approach both relevant and intuitive (Séraphin and Yallop, 2019). Operators depend on employee efficiency to enact ambidextrous behaviors (Pertusa-Ortega et al., 2021). However, small and family-run businesses often struggle due to resource limitations and traditional leadership styles (Vrontis et al., 2019). Many fail to capitalize on their knowledge capabilities, lacking the sustainable environment required for a knowledge-based organization (Gardiner, 2021).

This study identifies three key challenges that hinder the adoption of ambidextrous management strategies in tourism. First, ambidexterity is often examined within broader organizational contexts (Mihalache and Mihalache, 2016), overlooking micro-level innovations and the realities of family-run firms (Bechthold et al., 2021; Pertusa-Ortega et al., 2021; Tuan, 2022). Second, while ambidextrous strategies emphasize innovation, there is limited focus on knowledge management within tourism businesses (Gala-Velásquez et al., 2024; Gardiner, 2021; Martínez-Pérez et al., 2016; Séraphin et al., 2021; Serrano-Bedia and Pérez-Pérez, 2021). Third, the role of digital technologies in fostering resilience and sustaining innovation in tourism remains underexplored (Busulwa et al., 2022; Séraphin, 2022; Shukla and Shamurailatpam, 2022; Tiwari et al., 2022).

In response to these challenges, we identify two major research gaps. First, there is a lack of literature and practical guidance for tourism businesses, particularly family firms and small operators, on building ambidextrous strategies. Existing studies often neglect the simultaneous pursuit of ambidextrous capacities, limiting the development of resilient and innovative business models. Second, tourism operators have yet to effectively leverage digital technologies in their efforts to become ambidextrous (Fan et al., 2022; Goo et al., 2022). To address these gaps, this study reviews the current state of ambidexterity research in tourism and offers key insights and a future research agenda.

The study employs a systematic literature review (SLR) to investigate ambidextrous management strategies in the tourism sector. Previous SLRs have examined specific dimensions of ambidexterity, such as over-tourism (Chaney and Séraphin, 2023), organizational ambidexterity (Pertusa-Ortega et al., 2021; Thanh et al., 2020) and family-run tourism enterprises (Roed, 2016; Schindler, 2023). In this study, ambidexterity is viewed broadly, combining individual skills, knowledge management and digital technology adoption. The central research question guiding this study is: How do ambidextrous management strategies influence organizational innovation and operational efficiency in the tourism sector? By addressing this question, the study aims to develop a balanced framework that supports both innovation and operational efficiency.

Specifically, the research explores how tourism operators can implement ambidextrous strategies through the interplay between knowledge management and digital transformation. It responds to three critical gaps in the literature: (1) the absence of micro-level insights into family and small tourism businesses, (2) Limited integration of knowledge management within ambidexterity frameworks, and (3) Insufficient attention to digital transformation as a mechanism for enabling ambidextrous management in tourism. This study contributes to the ongoing discourse by proposing an expanded view of ambidexterity–one that balances exploration (organizational innovation) and exploitation (operational efficiency) to support long-term sustainability in tourism enterprises.

Following this section, we outline the SLR methodology. We then present nine key themes, organized into six thematic clusters that illuminate the critical role of ambidextrous management strategies in the tourism industry. The paper concludes by offering a future research agenda and practical implications for the adoption of ambidextrous strategies in tourism.

This study follows the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines (Page et al., 2021) to systematically search, screen and synthesize existing literature on ambidexterity in the tourism sector. The SLR process is illustrated in Figure 1.

The search strategy employed the keyword “ambidext*” to capture variations of ambidextrous and ambidexterity, in combination with tourism. Searches were conducted across three major databases: Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar. Exclusion criteria included duplicate records, articles that did not address both ambidexterity and tourism, and studies that did not apply ambidextrous strategies within the tourism context. These criteria ensured the final corpus was relevant, high-quality, and aligned with the study's focus on ambidextrous management strategies in tourism.

The initial search, conducted in December 2024, yielded 127 records. After removing 18 duplicates, 81 articles remained following abstract screening. Backward and forward snowballing identified an additional four relevant records. Full-text reviews were then conducted on 85 articles, resulting in the exclusion of 12 papers that did not sufficiently address the core topic. The final corpus comprises 73 studies, listed in Appendix 1.

To contextualize the corpus, we first analyzed yearly publication trends, article sources, author contributions, citation patterns, country affiliations, and keyword usage. Several illustrative figures and tables are presented to support this analysis and provide a comprehensive overview of research on ambidextrous management strategies in the tourism sector.

Figure 2 presents the number of studies published per year, revealing a marked increase in publications since 2020. This upward trend reflects the tourism industry's response to global disruptions, particularly the COVID-19 pandemic, and underscores the growing relevance of ambidextrous management strategies during periods of uncertainty.

Table 1 lists authors with more than two publications in the corpus. Notably, Dr Hugues Séraphin of Oxford Brookes Business School leads with 18 publications, highlighting his significant contribution to the field.

Figure 3 and Table 2 present author affiliations by country, showing that China leads in research output, followed closely by the United Kingdom and Spain.

Finally, Figure 4 displays a word cloud of the 25 most frequently used author keywords. As expected, “ambidexterity” and “tourism” are the most prominent, reflecting the search criteria. However, the presence of terms such as “over tourism,” “innovation,” and “COVID-19” suggests a broader thematic landscape and highlights the evolving concerns within the field.

The key themes through which ambidextrous management strategies are applied in the tourism industry are summarized in Table 3. Unsurprisingly, the most prominent theme is organizational ambidexterity, with 28 studies addressing this dimension. In contrast, only three studies focus on individual ambidexterity, reflecting recent calls for further research at the individual level (Pertusa-Ortega et al., 2021). Additionally, only three studies explore the interface between organizational and individual ambidexterity, underscoring a significant gap in research with practical implications for tourism destination management.

Themes related to knowledge management and education/learning are also well represented, with nine studies emphasizing their role in fostering ambidexterity. The theme of innovation and new product development appears in eight studies, highlighting a strong link between ambidexterity and innovation in tourism. However, these studies often draw from product innovation literature, suggesting an opportunity to expand the discourse through a service-oriented lens, such as value co-creation.

Other notable themes include over-tourism (six studies), family businesses (five studies), and digital technologies (four studies). These areas represent concentrated domains where ambidextrous management strategies are being applied and studied within the tourism context.

Ambidexterity refers to the capacity of an organization or resource to simultaneously exploit existing capabilities and align operations while also adapting to environmental changes through exploration (Tushman and O'Reilly, 1996). Although ambidexterity has gained traction in broader business research, its application within tourism management remains relatively underexplored (Raisch and Birkinshaw, 2008). As a strategic concept, ambidexterity is still emerging in tourism scholarship (Séraphin and Yallop, 2019), yet its relevance is increasingly evident in dynamic and uncertain environments.

From an ambidexterity perspective, tourism businesses that successfully balance the development of new services (exploration) with the enhancement of existing offerings (exploitation) are better positioned to achieve competitive advantage (Cheng et al., 2016). Organizational ambidexterity, in particular, has been defined as the ability to leverage current capabilities while simultaneously identifying future opportunities and market trends (Yang et al., 2020). In the tourism context, Mihalache and Mihalache (2016) argue that ambidexterity is a key driver of sustained performance, enabling firms to attract new customers while optimizing existing resources.

This duality, that is, balancing present competencies with future-oriented innovation, is central to ambidextrous strategy (Séraphin and Yallop, 2020). For example, resort mini-clubs targeting children have adopted ambidextrous approaches by integrating “edutainment fun play” and “advertainment fun play” to enhance brand engagement and competitive positioning.

Recent studies have examined ambidextrous management strategies in tourism through various lenses. These include: balancing adaptability and alignment (Bechthold et al., 2021); negative and positive effects of overtourism (Chaney and Séraphin, 2023); managing generational diversity in the tourism workforce (Toubes et al., 2023); addressing tourist uncertainty and novelty-seeking behavior (Goo et al., 2022); and reconciling profitability with sustainability goals (Séraphin et al., 2023).

Other research has explored ambidexterity as a mechanism for balancing incremental and radical innovation (Tiwari et al., 2021), or metaphorical and objective thinking (Séraphin and Thanh, 2020). The concept has also been extended to ambidextrous leadership, which involves switching between opening and closing behaviors (Luu et al., 2019), and to public-private partnerships aimed at fostering long-term profitability in tourism (Séraphin et al., 2018a, b).

To deepen the analysis, Table 4 synthesizes the nine primary themes identified in the literature into six overarching thematic clusters. Each cluster is mapped against supporting and contradictory findings, highlighting key debates and connecting them to broader theoretical implications. This synthesis reveals the complexity and multidimensionality of ambidextrous management strategies in tourism, offering concrete understanding of how these strategies are conceptualized and operationalized across different contexts.

For instance, while organizational ambidexterity is widely recognized as a driver of resilience and adaptability (Bechthold et al., 2021; Zehrer et al., 2021), its effectiveness may be contingent on contextual factors such as leadership transparency and organizational culture (Jacobs and Maritz, 2020). Similarly, the limited empirical focus on individual ambidexterity underscores a theoretical gap in understanding micro-foundational behaviors that enable frontline innovation (Tuan, 2022; Lin and Cheung, 2023).

Table 4 also surfaces tensions in the literature, such as whether knowledge ambidexterity directly drives innovation or is mediated by social capital (Wang et al., 2017), and whether family firms are inherently constrained by non-economic goals (Hauck and Prügl, 2015). In the realm of digital transformation, the debate centers on whether incremental technological adoption is sufficient, or whether strategic shocks are necessary to catalyze ambidextrous innovation (Séraphin, 2022). Finally, the cluster on over-tourism illustrates how ambidextrous strategies: balancing exploitative operations with exploratory innovation; can offer a dual lens for managing structural challenges in tourism destinations (Chaney and Séraphin, 2023; Tiwari et al., 2022).

Ambidextrous management strategies involve the simultaneous pursuit of seemingly contradictory processes: exploitation and exploration, to enhance organizational adaptability and resilience (Séraphin and Jarraud, 2022). This study highlights the need for further investigation into how tourism businesses navigate co-exploration and co-exploitation, particularly in destination management contexts (Marco-Lajara et al., 2022). Building on the work of Thanh et al. (2020), who emphasized community engagement and digital innovation, this paper calls for more targeted research into the impacts of ambidextrous strategies on both visitor experiences and local livelihoods.

The systematic review of 73 studies reveals that ambidexterity in tourism is often driven by professional knowledge among entrepreneurs. However, family-run and individual operators frequently overlook the importance of systematic knowledge, which is essential for sustaining operations during turbulent periods such as the COVID-19 pandemic, as reflected across the corpus. Ambidextrous strategies enable tourism entrepreneurs to leverage existing market dynamics while preparing for unforeseen risks through strategic planning and forecasting. This paper reinforces the conceptual value of ambidexterity in both planning and development, offering a pathway to economic efficiency in stable conditions and resilience during crises.

The study synthesizes a fragmented body of literature on ambidextrous management in tourism, arguing that addressing persistent challenges such as seasonality, political instability, and shifting consumer behavior requires tourism businesses to develop ambidextrous capabilities. While Pertusa-Ortega et al. (2021) focus primarily on organizational ambidexterity, this paper extends the discourse by emphasizing individual-level ambidexterity, which is especially relevant in the personnel-intensive tourism sector. Complementing the leadership-focused work of Thanh et al. (2020), this study integrates leadership with digital transformation and knowledge management, offering a comprehensive account of ambidextrous strategy.

This study finds that ambidextrous management strategies can positively influence both organizational innovation and operational efficiency in the tourism sector by enabling firms to simultaneously leverage existing capabilities and pursue new opportunities. Organizational ambidexterity fosters resilience and adaptability (Bechthold et al., 2021; Zehrer et al., 2021), allowing tourism businesses to respond effectively to environmental turbulence and shifting market demands. For example, Cheng et al. (2016) demonstrate how lifestyle hotels integrate innovative service design with operational excellence to gain competitive advantage. Similarly, Mihalache and Mihalache (2016) argue that ambidexterity is a key driver of sustained performance in tourism, as it enables firms to optimize current resources while developing new ones to attract emerging customer segments.

Moreover, the synergistic integration of digital technologies and knowledge management further enhances the dual impact of ambidextrous strategies. Digital platforms support real-time decision-making and personalization (Busulwa et al., 2022), while knowledge ambidexterity, through bonding and bridging social capital, facilitates both incremental and radical innovation (Serrano-Bedia and Pérez-Pérez, 2021; Elche et al., 2021). These findings suggest that ambidextrous management is not merely a balancing act but a strategic capability that enables tourism organizations to innovate while maintaining operational excellence. As such, ambidexterity should be viewed as a foundational strategy for long-term sustainability and competitive differentiation in the tourism industry.

Tourism providers should invest in ambidextrous capacity-building programs for employees, focusing on both cognitive flexibility and behavioral competencies (Birkinshaw and Gupta, 2013). These programs should incorporate ambidextrous leadership training, particularly in behavioral switching strategies (O'Reilly and Tushman, 2013), and emphasize the strategic use of digital technologies to maximize stakeholder value.

In practice, tourism organizations can foster ambidexterity by developing digital platforms designed to facilitate both exploitation and exploration activities. For example, exploitation may involve leveraging customer data for personalization and upselling, while exploration could include integrating sentiment analysis from online reviews to uncover emerging guest preferences or using booking data to identify niche markets (Busulwa et al., 2022). These platforms should be embedded within a broader digital ecosystem to enable real-time, evidence-based decision-making that aligns operational efficiency with innovation. Small and family-run tourism businesses can adopt low-cost digital tools (e.g. cloud-based booking systems) and incremental innovation practices to achieve ambidexterity despite resource constraints.

By adopting ambidextrous management strategies, tourism businesses can balance cost-effective exploitation (e.g. streamlining operations and employee training) with creative exploration (e.g. virtual tours and collaborating with local artisans). This dual approach supports sustainable business practices and enhances resilience. For instance, a luxury resort in Bali successfully navigated post-COVID recovery by implementing ambidextrous strategies, not only surviving the downturn but also gaining a competitive edge (Permatasari and Mahyuni, 2022).

Several limitations should be acknowledged. Firstly, the methodology of the SLR inherently limits the scope of the study to existing literature, potentially overlooking emerging research or unpublished studies that could provide additional insights. The use of predefined keywords may have omitted relevant research that employs alternative terminology (e.g. “dual innovation” or “organizational flexibility”). Future reviews could employ broader search strategies and mixed-method approaches to mitigate keyword bias and capture emerging constructs. Additionally, the exclusion of industry reports and practitioner insights limits the practical applicability of findings. In the tourism industry, ambidextrous management strategies may vary significantly across business types and cultural contexts. This research may not fully capture this variation. Regional underrepresentation, particularly from Africa and Latin America, also constrains the generalizability of results. Consequently, the lack of non-Western studies and grey literature is a noted limitation. Given the global nature of tourism, future research should aim to incorporate diverse geographical contexts and longitudinal designs to better capture the dynamic nature of ambidextrous management in global tourism.

Finally, ambidextrous management is inherently contingent on time and technology. Time shapes demand–supply dynamics, while technology, spanning transportation, robotics, digital platforms, and AI, is increasingly central to tourism operations. Given the sector's cross-cultural nature and global reach, ambidexterity must be viewed not only as a strategic vision for operational excellence and risk mitigation, but also as a framework for innovation towards adopting digital technologies. These limitations underscore the need for empirical studies that integrate cross-cultural perspectives and explore how digital transformation mediates ambidextrous capabilities in diverse tourism contexts.

In terms of future research directions, based on the discussions from Table 4, this study develops a conceptual framework (see Figure 5) positioning ambidextrous management at the core of tourism research, reflecting its growing prominence in literature. Surrounding the construct of ambidexterity in tourism research are five emerging research priorities that also represent critical directions for future inquiry beyond organizational ambidexterity. Building on the conceptual framework (Figure 5), these priorities are discussed next, and they reflect the multidimensional nature of ambidexterity in tourism. They call for research that integrates micro-level behaviors, organizational structures, and technological enablers to advance theory and practice.

Despite the critical role of employee–customer interactions in tourism, research on individual ambidexterity remains limited (Pertusa-Ortega et al., 2021). Organizational-level analyses alone cannot fully capture the nuances of service touchpoints where ambidextrous capacity is enacted, such as by frontline staff or ambidextrous salespersons.

Employee perceptions are particularly salient in tourism, a sector heavily reliant on the capabilities and characteristics of service personnel (Bechthold et al., 2021). Frontline employees must simultaneously deliver high-quality service and adapt to evolving customer needs (Fan et al., 2022). There is a growing call to develop concurrent exploration and exploitation capabilities at the individual level (Pertusa-Ortega et al., 2021). Studies have shown that individual-level ambidextrous innovation positively influences organizational performance (Akbari et al., 2022), yet this domain remains under-theorized (Tuan, 2022). Advancing this line of inquiry will help address the gap in recognizing individual cognition and behavior in tourism ambidexterity (Birkinshaw and Gupta, 2013; O'Reilly and Tushman, 2013). Future research could explore cognitive mechanisms underpinning ambidextrous decision-making among frontline staff through experimental designs or mixed-method approaches.

Family firms exhibit distinct approaches to ambidexterity compared to non-family enterprises, particularly in tourism (Weismeier-Sammer, 2014). Diverse operational models and innovation strategies yield varied outcomes, offering rich qualitative insights (Roed, 2016). The prioritization of non-economic goals adds complexity to understanding ambidextrous behavior in family-run businesses.

Implementing ambidextrous structures can help mitigate volatility and enhance resilience in family firms, especially during external shocks such as the COVID-19 pandemic (Schindler, 2023). Strategic ambidextrous thinking also supports long-term survival by aligning values across family and non-family employees (Hauck and Prügl, 2015). Future research should explore how ambidextrous management may emerge organically in family tourism businesses and contribute to their sustained success.

Knowledge ambidexterity mediates the relationship between bonding and bridging social capital and innovation performance, making it essential for both incremental and radical innovation in tourism (Serrano-Bedia and Pérez-Pérez, 2021). Trust and ambidexterity have also been linked to enhanced organizational agility (Khairy et al., 2023).

Tourism businesses with strong internal and external networks can develop ambidextrous strategies by combining exploration of new knowledge with exploitation of existing relational capital (Elche et al., 2021). Further research is needed to extend knowledge management principles and examine how they underpin ambidextrous strategies in tourism.

Digital technologies significantly influence tourist decision-making and destination selection (Tiwari et al., 2022). While incremental digital strategies may help address over-tourism, they must be complemented by radical technological innovations to align with ambidextrous management principles (Séraphin, 2022).

Technology-driven ambidextrous strategies, such as smart systems for monitoring tourist flows and analytics for crowd management, can mitigate the negative impacts of excessive tourism (Shukla and Shamurailatpam, 2022). However, a balanced approach is needed to address both the benefits and unintended consequences of digital transformation in tourism.

Emerging tools such as Big Data and search engine analytics have demonstrated potential in enhancing organizational ambidexterity (Busulwa et al., 2022). This research proposes a shift from viewing digital technologies as supportive tools to conceptualizing Digital Ambidexterity as a core capability. Future studies should explore platform-based models that enable simultaneous exploration and exploitation in tourism strategy. Studies should investigate how AI-driven personalization and blockchain-based trust systems (De Alwis et al., 2025) can simultaneously support exploration and exploitation in tourism services.

Ambidextrous management strategies in tourism must account for multi-dimensional service interactions, including value co-creation for novel, utilitarian, and experiential innovations (Tsai, 2017). While organizational ambidexterity is often framed as a balance between competence exploitation and exploration, this binary may not fully capture the complexity of service-based sectors (Atuahene-Gima, 2005; Hansen, 1999).

In tourism, exploitation of existing competencies may be more critical than in product innovation sectors due to the sector's reliance on service touchpoints (Elche et al., 2021). For example, Gardiner (2021) highlights experience innovation in the Gold Coast, Australia, where exploitative and exploratory learning were used to enhance and diversify visitor experiences. Other studies have applied frameworks such as the principles of responsible management education (PRME) to support ambidextrous strategies (Séraphin et al., 2021) and suggested that balanced ambidexterity may be more suitable than combined ambidexterity for new tourism ventures (Fu et al., 2020).

Building on the conceptual framework (Figure 5), future research could explore how tourism businesses integrate exploration (e.g. digital innovation) and exploitation (e.g. service operational excellence), conduct longitudinal case studies on post-crisis ambidextrous recovery, analyze cultural and structural variations in implementation (e.g. corporate vs. family-run businesses), and investigate the role of emerging technologies such as AI and blockchain in enabling ambidextrous tourism management. Collectively, these directions highlight the need for interdisciplinary approaches combining strategic management, technology adoption, and behavioral science to fully operationalize ambidextrous management in tourism.

The author(s) gratefully acknowledge the financial support for this research provided by the WTO Chairs Programme - Nepal, an initiative of the World Trade Organization (WTO), dedicated to advancing knowledge in international trade.

The supplementary material for this article can be found online.