Organizational Ambidexterity and Open Innovation: A Case Analysis of Michelin

The tire industry, as a long-established and mature sector, is undergoing a profound transformation driven by electrification, smart manufacturing, and sustainability. In this context, efficiency-oriented strategies and incremental improvements can no longer ensure long-term competitiveness. Using Michelin as a case study, this paper examines how open innovation operates as an organizational mechanism for fostering ambidexterity by balancing exploitation with the development of exploration capabilities. The findings reveal that Michelin integrates external knowledge through inbound, outbound, and coupled open innovation, while employing structural and domain separation to absorb, recombine, and institutionalize exploratory initiatives within core operations. This dual approach enables the firm to preserve efficiency advantages while cultivating adaptive capacity under technological and regulatory uncertainty. The study extends theories of open innovation and organizational ambidexterity to a mature manufacturing context and highlights the organizational conditions under which openness supports, rather than undermines, strategic renewal. It also offers practical implications for incumbent firms pursuing strategic transformation under uncertain technological and policy environments.

• Publication year

  2026

• Venue

  Administrative Sciences

• Publication date

  2026-02-27

• Fields of study

  Not labeled

• Identifiers
  DOI 10.3390/admsci16030110
• External record

  Open on Semantic Scholar

• Source metadata

  Semantic Scholar

• No claims are published for this paper.

• No concepts are published for this paper.

• Exploring Smart Tires as a Tool to Assist Safe Driving and Monitor Tire–Road Friction

  2022cited by this paper
• Open innovation and its effects on economic and sustainability innovation performance

  2019cited by this paper
• Strategic Management of Open Innovation: A Dynamic Capabilities Perspective

  2019cited by this paper
• Dynamic Balancing of Exploration and Exploitation: The Contingent Benefits of Ambidexterity

  2018cited by this paper
• Value Creation and Value Capture in Open Innovation

  2018cited by this paper
• Ecosystem as Structure

  2017cited by this paper
• Open innovation: Are inbound and outbound knowledge flows really complementary?

  2016cited by this paper
• Open innovation actions and innovation performance

  2015cited by this paper
• Ambidexterity Under Scrutiny: Exploration and Exploitation Via Internal Organization, Alliances, and Acquisitions

  2014cited by this paper
• Lock-in and path dependence: an evolutionary approach to eco-innovations

  2014cited by this paper
• Seeking Qualitative Rigor in Inductive Research

  2013cited by this paper
• Exploration and Exploitation Within and Across Organizations

  2010cited by this paper
• Building theories from case study research

  2009cited by this paper
• Organizational Learning

  2008cited by this paper
• Qualitative Case Study Methodology: Study Design and Implementation for Novice Researchers

  2008cited by this paper
• Explicating Dynamic Capabilities: The Nature and Microfoundations of (Sustainable) Enterprise Performance

  2007cited by this paper
• Balancing Exploration and Exploitation in Alliance Formation

  2006cited by this paper
• Rethinking and reinventing Michael Porter's five forces model

  2006cited by this paper
• Beyond High Tech: Early Adopters of Open Innovation in Other Industries

  2006cited by this paper
• Ambidextrous Organizations: Managing Evolutionary and Revolutionary Change

  1996cited by this paper
• The myopia of learning

  1993cited by this paper
• Exploration and exploitation in organizational learning

  1991cited by this paper
• ABSORPTIVE CAPACITY: A NEW PERSPECTIVE ON LEARNING AND INNOVATION

  1990cited by this paper
• Multisite Qualitative Policy Research: Optimizing Description and Generalizability

  1983cited by this paper

• No citing papers are available for this paper.