This increasing breadth of research on strategic alliances and their role in ambidexterity leads to a growing diversity in theoretical perspectives, with researchers using perspectives with contradictory assumptions and findings. For instance, some studies apply the micro-foundations perspective or dynamic capability theory to explain how strategic alliances are formed to promote ambidexterity (Heracleous et al., 2017; Seepana et al., 2020), whereas others adopt a relational view or transaction cost perspective to relate strategic alliances with ambidexterity (Cofré-Bravo et al., 2019; Yang et al., 2014). This causes theoretical tensions associated with the partial use of findings, which impedes cumulative knowledge-building within this important domain of research. Furthermore, this has also led to a serious problem of emphasizing what is already known instead of adding novel insights to the current body of knowledge (Rabetino et al., 2021).