| Summary: | Objective - Leadership has evolved (Cogliser & Brigham 2004) and has become more dynamic than ever before (McClean et. al. 2019). Prior research has shown that ambidexterity generates persistent and conflicting demands within an organization (Koryak et. al. 2018), while others have been successful (Diaz- Fernandez, Pasamar-Reyes & Valle-Cabrera, 2017). This paper highlights the strengths and challenges of two popular leadership styles in Indonesia, namely: transactional leadership and transformational leadership using two concepts of ambidextirity, exploitation and exploration. Ambidextirity is believed to be the answer to recent market shifts and can also help organisations to solve future problems. However, there is not a clear theory to determine when, where, and how to use ambidexterity. Methodology/Technique - This study uses a systematic literature review (Okoli et. al., 2014, Okoli & John, 2015), 5 in-depth interviews, a case study and reports from Ministry of Commerce to provide a solid theory of ambidexterity. The writer concludes that having ambidextrous skills in leadership is mandatory for the manufacturing industry and will guarantee future success (Tushman & O'Reilly, 2012). Finding - There are some barriers in implementing ambidextrous capabilities in leadership, namely cognitive conflicts, inertia, and confusion pressure on when and how to balance both transactional leadership and transformational leadership. The writer suggests that high transactional leadership and high transformational leadership will increase firm performance. Novelty – This paper has several limitations such as the unavailability of data on ambidextrous leadership in Indonesia, the limited scope as this research is conducted in manufacturing industries which might have different results in other industries, and the relatively short period of data collection. Future studies should address these limitations. Type of Paper - Review. Ambidextrous Leadership; Ambidextrous Organisations; Transformational; ...
|
|---|