*3.4. Hypothesis*

Based on preceded literature, this research paper is going a step further by inferring that within, a bridging SC strategy, can emerge groups that are often presented as heterogeneous. But when combined, the result is an Ambidextrous Recovery Strategy (ARS), which is a source of greater experience and benefits for all stakeholders involved within the cluster. More specifically, this research paper is arguing that by developing the lottery Mission Patrimoine, the French government has the opportunity to initiate a bridging SC strategy. On the one hand, associating local stakeholders, namely the local government and the local population; and on the other hand, visitors or tourists. This segmentation could also be depicted as providers of an experience (local populations and government) and recipients of a service (visitors or tourists). Or even as individuals (locals and tourists) vs government body (FdJ). The trinity locals, FdJ and visitors is made of partners belonging to different spheres, and therefore perfectly fits the characteristics of bridging SC defined by Putnam (2000 cited in [20]). In a nutshell, this study moves from the hypothesis that the different spheres generated within the bridging SC strategy of Mission Patrimoine are complementary rather than opposed dimensions. From this complementarity can emerge the topic of Ambidextrous Recovery Strategy (ARS). Figure 2 summaries the hypothesis and the related process.

**Figure 2.** Ambidextrous Recovery Strategy (ARS).

### **4. Methodology**

In this paper, the French Lottery Mission Patrimoine is used as an exploratory case study. A single case exploratory study "focus on one individual, business or organisation to develop research questions and objectives" ([24], p. 43). The case study which "has become increasingly associated with an in-depth exploration of a particular context ( ... ) in order to explain how and why about a phenomenon, ( ... ) it is literally an example of something, a unit of analysis" ([11], p. 16–18), and has subsequently been used to test the hypothesis indicated in Section 3.4. Indeed, 'there is no reason why case studies, in particular multiple cases, should not be used to test a hypothesis' ([11]: 18). Thus, to address the research question regarding the benefits and limitations of Mission Patrimoine, key stakeholders were interviewed (semi-directive interviews). To some extent, this approach could be assimilated to the Delphi method, in other words, it was implemented on "the construction of a panel of expert and collecting and interpreting experts responses" ([11], p. 43). The interviewees were told that: the results of the study would be used for research purpose; that their answers would be kept anonymous; and finally that they could withdraw from the study at any time. The following paragraph provides an overview of the panel interviewed.


## **5. Results**
