AbstractThe incompatibility between diverse responsible principles of science and technology (S&T) and multi‐stakeholders' heterogeneous value assessments underscores the importance of coordinating normative principles of responsible research and innovation (RRI). In this context, this study adopts an ambidexterity lens to address this issue, conceptualizing two constructs—“generalized responsibility” and “specialized responsibility” of S&T (GRST and SRST)—to illustrate the trade‐offs. It explores the antecedents of GRST and SRST from an agency perspective. Drawing from a dataset of 19,707 poll responses, the study employs a fractional logit regression model to examine the relationships between three types of agency (iterational agency, strategic agency, and ethical agency) and GRST and SRST. The results reveal a positive relationship between iterational agency and SRST, and between strategic agency and GRST, as well as U‐shaped effects of iterational agency on GRST, strategic agency on SRST, and ethical agency on both GRST and SRST. Moreover, ethical agency is found to be more important for SRST than for GRST. The study offers theoretical and policy implications for a critical discussion about responsible innovation.