Many authors in the fields of strategic management, organizational design and behavior have suggested that long-term organization performance depends on the organization’s ability to exploit current capabilities and explore new opportunities (March, 1991; Raisch et al., 2009). Organizational ambidexterity refers to ‘an organization’s ability to be aligned and efficient in its management of today’s business demands while simultaneously being adaptive to changes in the environment’ (Raisch & Birkinshaw, 2008). Various conceptualizations of ambidexterity have pointed at the tension between exploitation and exploration. March (1991) refers to exploration as activities like ‘search, variation, risk taking, experimentation, play, flexibility, discovery, innovation’ while exploitation refers to activities like ‘refinement, choice, production, efficiency, selection, implementation, execution’. The academic field of ambidexterity has received considerable attention in the last two decades with established forms of Structural (Tushman & O’Reilly, 1996), Contextual (Gibson and Birkinshaw, 2004) and Temporal/Punctuated Equilibrium (Tushman & Romanelli, 1985), which focus on the separation between exploration and exploitation across structures, context and time respectively. Organizational ambidexterity literature has seen impressive growth and a wide variety of applications in various fields such as technological innovation and product design (Gupta, Smith and Shalley, 2006; Andriopoulos and Lewis, 2010) using mostly the firm/business unit (Gibson & Birkinshaw, 2004) as the level of analysis. However, there is an increasing corpus of papers that explore ambidexterity at the individuals/teams level of analysis (Kauppila & Tempelaar, 2016; Mom, Van Den Bosch, & Volberda, 2007). Many authors have asked for more consolidation as well as clarity on the boundaries and scope of ambidexterity. However, these scholars have also pointed at the lack of multi-level works in ambidexterity leading to the absence of an overarching theory of the field (Simsek, 2009; Birkinshaw and Gupta, 2013). Birkinshaw & Gupta (2013) suggest the field could either lead to focus or decline in the coming years. Other scholars in the field of ambidexterity have pointed at unexplored areas of research like the interaction of leadership (O’Reilly and Tushman, 2013) and business model innovation (Markides, 2013) with ambidexterity in organizations.