Corporate entrepreneurship is deemed essential to uncover opportunities that shape the future
strategic path and adapt the firm to environmental change (e.g., Covin and Miles, 1999; Wolcott
and Lippitz, 2007). At the same time, rational central processes are important to execute strategic
actions in a coordinated manner (e.g., Baum and Wally, 2003; Brews and Hunt, 1999; Goll and
Rasheed, 1997). That is, the organization’s adaptive responses and dynamic capabilities are
embedded in integrative structures that accommodate dispersed business initiatives. The dual
concerns for integration and entrepreneurial behavior are reflected in the conjoint need for
effective routines and exploratory search in adaptive systems (e.g., Pfeifer and Bongard, 2007;
Sutton and Barto, 1998). It has also been expressed as a need to balance exploitation and
exploration (March, 2001) and configure ambidextrous organizational forms (e.g., O’Reilly and
Tushman, 2008; Tushman and O’Reilly, 2004). In strategy research, optimization and rejuvenation
perspectives have variously been described as intended and emergent strategies (Mintzberg,
1978; Mintzberg and Waters, 1985), top‐down and bottom‐up strategies (Nonaka, 1987), induced
and autonomous strategy processes (Burgelman, 2005; Burgelman and Grove, 1996, 2007), central
planning and decentralized initiatives (Andersen, 2000, 2004, Andersen and Nielsen, 2009).
Burgelman and Grove (2007) outline such a combined strategy process and observe how central
direction and dispersed exploration can change over time influenced by strategic leadership
