Balancing explorative and exploitative innovation ambidextrously has emerged as one of theforemost questions in technological innovation research. The ability to jointly pursue bothexploratory and exploitative technological innovation is crucial to sustained performance. Priorstudies have emphasized that structural attributes and environmental uncertainty are essentialto simultaneously pursuing exploration and exploitation in technological innovation. However,differentiated exploratory and exploitative activities need to be coordinated, integrated indynamically competitive environments for ambidexterity in technological innovation. Based onthis idea, we delineate dynamic capabilities which acts as coordination mechanisms and examinehow they moderate the relationship between structural attributes, dynamically competitiveenvironments and ambidexterity in technological innovation. To that end, this research focuses on three types of coordination mechanisms in facilitatingthe processing of disparate demands essential to attaining ambidexterity: top managementteam (TMT) behavioral integration, connectedness and absorptive capacity. This study developeda research model and hypothesis to explain the relationship among dynamic capabilities acquiredby coordination mechanisms, structural attributes, environmental uncertainty and ambidexterityin technological innovation. Main empirical findings are as follow. First, TMT behavioral integration has moderatingeffect on relationship between structural differentiation and ambidexterity in technologicalinnovation. Second, positive moderating effect of decentralization on ambidexterity in technological innovation operates through connectedness. Third, absorptive capacity exhibits two significantmoderating effects; it shows a positive moderating effect on the relationship between environmentaldynamism and ambidextrous technological innovation, and it shows a negative one on therelationship between environmental competitiveness and ambidextrous technological innovation. Through this empirical assessment, we contribute to a better understanding of how firms cancope with contradictorily pressures for exploratory and exploitative innovations and howorganizations may effectively pursue exploration and exploitation simultaneously to achieveambidexterity in technological innovation.