Ambidexterity in government: The influence of different types of legitimacy on innovation

Using a comparative case study of four independent infrastructure agencies in Australia, this article explores how governments can use structural ambidexterity to innovate. Independent agencies can serve as exploration units, but their innovation needs to be integrated into the rest of government. Instead of relying on an executive team to do it, independent agencies can take on this role, but they need to become legitimate to several government actors to influence government processes. Legitimacy can come from regulations, practical value, moral values or cognitive frames. Relying on regulations solely reduces influence; but relying on cognitive legitimacy leads to losing ones ability to radically innovate. We conclude that leading both exploration and integration relies on the exploration unit employees' practical and moral legitimacy to several actors, and their ability to maintain cognitive distance from other governmental units. However, we caution that such a balance is hard to sustain over the long run, leading many innovative agencies to appeal to cognitive legitimacy and revert to incremental innovation over time.