Organizational ambidexterity depends not only on whether exploration and exploitation coexist, but also on how people move between the behaviors through which those orientations are enacted. Existing research has clarified structural, contextual, temporal, and cognitive foundations of ambidexterity, yet the transition between exploration-dominant and exploitation-dominant action remains insufficiently specified at the behavioral level. This Original Propositional Model Article introduces behavioral switching as a proposed within-person transition in dominant enacted orientation. The article distinguishes switching from static balance, simultaneous blending, task interruption, role transition, and cognitive flexibility. It proposes that a switching episode begins with recognition of a switch demand and develops through disengagement from the current mode, attention reallocation, role and identity reconciliation, and target-mode enactment. The model further treats switch appropriateness, latency, completeness, and recovery cost as proposed dimensions of switch quality. Organizational climate, authority, formalization, resources, workload, and coordination are positioned as conditional influences rather than universal enablers. The principal implication is that organizational ambidexterity cannot be explained adequately by aggregate behavioral scores alone; the temporal process and conditions of behavioral transition also require examination. The model remains conceptually plausible rather than empirically validated. Testing requires episode-sensitive, intensive longitudinal, multimethod, and multilevel research capable of separating behavioral switching from stable traits, job design, assigned task variety, simultaneous behavior, and organizational reallocation. The contribution is a falsifiable behavioral microfoundation that connects individual transition processes with higher-level ambidexterity without assuming automatic aggregation or uniformly beneficial consequences.
