Firms often need to adapt to new contextual conditions, given that shifts in their environment tend to erode the value of their current knowledge and practices. Recent literature emphasizes both the need for firms to change and adapt, as well as the inherent risks in these efforts. In this paper we test the consequences of firms’ different strategic reactions in turbulent contexts. Specifically, we examine two alternative hypotheses: (a) merely adapting to environmental changes, and (b) pioneering explorative solutions. By modeling exogenous changes in the competitive environment as shifts in the institutional context, and by empirically examining the technological developments and performance of racing teams in the Formula One industry, we find that mere adaptation can lead to superior outcomes than pioneering explorative solutions. We discuss implications for theory and practice.