Whether firms can survive a major crisis is an important question for both researchers and practitioners. Ambidexterity is frequently proposed as a sound strategy to achieve best performance when firms exist in turbulent environments; however, it is unclear whether this effect is sustained in a crisis, especially an internal one. Applying configuration and dynamic capability theories, this study extends the literature and examines this question by investigating how exploitation, exploration, and ambidexterity affect firms’ survival rates after major crises. This study is based on collected annual reports of and financial data on 367 firms that encountered a major crisis over a 21-year period (2000–2020) to provide empirical evidence. We employed a decision-tree analysis method based on text mining. The results show that during a crisis, firms adopting an exploitation strategy have a higher likelihood of survival than those adopting exploration and ambidexterity. Meanwhile, in the high-tech industry, adopting an ambidexterity or an exploitation strategy is better than adopting an exploration strategy. Theoretical and practical implications are provided.

企业能否在重大危机中生存下来，对于研究人员和从业者来说都是一个重要问题。当企业处于动荡的环境中时，双元性经常被认为是实现最佳绩效的合理策略。然而，尚不清楚这种效应在危机中是否会持续，特别是在内部危机中。本研究应用配置和动态能力理论，扩展了文献，并通过调查剥削、探索和双元性如何影响重大危机后企业的生存率来研究这个问题。本研究基于收集的 367 家在 21 年期间（2000 年至 2020 年）遭遇重大危机的企业的年度报告和财务数据，提供经验证据。我们采用了基于文本挖掘的决策树分析方法。结果表明，在危机期间，采用开发策略的企业比采用探索和双元策略的企业更有可能生存。同时，在高新技术产业中，采取双元或开发战略比采取探索战略要好。提供了理论和实践意义。