Os equilíbrios assimétricos da ambidestria: um estudo de caso no P&D de uma indústria de refratários

Abstract

The ability to articulate exploration (the search for new opportunities and knowledge) and exploitation (the refinement and efficiency of what already exists) in an integrated manner—known as organizational ambidexterity—is the focus of this research. The study analyzes the dynamic interplay between these two logics within the Research and Development (P&D) practices of RHI Magnesita in Latin America (LATAM), a global leader in refractory solutions. Operating in a traditional industry characterized by low technological intensity, high technical complexity, and strong risk aversion, the organization provides a privileged context for understanding how the tensions between innovation and efficiency are expressed and managed in everyday practice. The research adopts a qualitative and exploratory approach, conducted through a single case study. A total of 29 professionals from different areas and hierarchical levels were interviewed, and the data were complemented by document analysis and field observations. The analysis followed the principles of Grounded Theory, applying the Data Structure model proposed by Gioia, Corley, and Hamilton (2012), which enables the construction of theoretical interpretations based on participants’ perceptions, combining methodological rigor with interpretive sensitivity. The findings indicate that ambidexterity at RHI Magnesita LATAM’s P&D manifests as a contextual and asymmetric dynamic, in which exploitation has become the dominant logic while exploration survives in marginal spaces, sustained by individual efforts and informal relationships. This asymmetry results from external pressures, organizational structures, and daily practices that privilege predictability and short-term delivery, reducing the space available for experimentation and long-term initiatives. The market, conservative and driven by reliability, reinforces the emphasis on efficiency and tends to legitimize measurable outcomes, whereas exploratory initiatives emerge contingently, often as responses to local opportunities. Internally, governance and control practices ensure traceability and discipline but, at the same time, limit the flexibility required for innovation. On the human and cultural level, exploration takes on the character of a creative act of resistance, sustained by the personal motivation of researchers and technicians who, despite intense operational demands, find ways to propose and test new ideas. Cognitive overload and the lack of protected time hinder the consolidation of these efforts, keeping learning alive but fragmented and dependent on individual memory. The ambidexterity observed is therefore reactive rather than intentional: it ensures excellence in current performance but weakens the organization’s capacity for long-term renewal. It is concluded that RHI Magnesita LATAM’s P&D demonstrates a contextual and asymmetric form of ambidexterity, sustained more by human action than by institutional mechanisms. This configuration, while effective in ensuring efficiency and reliability, requires greater intentionality to balance stability and transformation. Accordingly, it is recommended that the organization strengthen practices that protect resources for exploration, revise performance metrics, and institutionalize collective learning processes, thereby transforming individual effort into sustainable and strategically oriented organizational capability.