A General Framework for Estimating Multidimensional Contingency Fit

Published Online:https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1090.0464

References

  • Athey S., Stern S. An empirical framework for testing theories about complementarity in organizational design. (1998) . NBER Working Paper 6600, National Bureau of Economic Research, Cambridge, MACrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Barney J. B. Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. J. Management (1991) 17:99–120CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Boone C., De Brabander B., van Witteloostuijn A. CEO locus of control and small firm performance: An integrative framework and empirical test. J. Management Stud. (1996) 33:667–699CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Boone C., van Olffen W., van Witteloostuijn A., De Brabander B. The genesis of top management team diversity: Selective turnover among top management teams in Dutch newspaper publishing, 1970–94. Acad. Management J. (2004) 47:633–656CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Burton R. M., Lauridsen J., Obel B. Return on assets loss from situational and contingency misfits. Management Sci. (2002) 48:1461–1485LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Burton R. M., Lauridsen J., Obel B. Erratum: Return on assets loss from situational and contingency misfits. Management Sci. (2003) 49:1119LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Cappelli P., Neumark D. Do “high-performance” work practices improve establishment-level outcomes? Indust. Labor Relations Rev. (2001) 54:737–775CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Casetti E., Jones J. P., Casetti E. The dual expansion method: An application for evaluating the effects of population growth on development. Applications of the Expansion Method (1992) (Routledge, New York) 8–31Google Scholar
  • Cassiman B., Veugelers R. In search of complementarity in innovation strategy: Internal R&D and external knowledge acquisition. Management Sci. (2006) 52:68–82LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Child J. Organizational structure, environment and performance: The role of strategic choice. Sociology (1972) 6:1–22CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Christensen L. R., Jorgensen D. W., Lau L. J. Transcendental logarithmic production frontiers. Rev. Econom. Statist. (1973) 55:28–45CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Christensen L. R., Jorgensen D. W., Lau L. J. Transcendental logarithmic utility functions. Amer. Econom. Rev. (1975) 65:367–383Google Scholar
  • Derksen S., Keselman H. J. Backward, forward and stepwise automated subset selection algorithms: Frequency of obtaining authentic and noise variables. British J. Math. Statist. Psych. (1992) 45:265–282CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Dierickx I., Cool K. Assets stock accumulation and sustainability of competitive advantage. Management Sci. (1989) 35:1504–1511LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Donaldson L., Sanchez R., Heene A. Organizational structures for competence-based management. Theory Development for Competence-Based Management, Advances in Applied Business Strategy (2000) 6a(JAI Press, Stanford, CA) 31–56Google Scholar
  • Donaldson L.The Contingency Theory of Organizations (2001) (Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA) CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Doty D. H., Glick W. H., Huber G. P. Fit, equifinality, and organizational effectiveness: A test of two configurational theories. Acad. Management J. (1993) 36:1196–1250CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Drazin R., Van de Ven A. H. Alternative forms of fit in contingency theory. Admin. Sci. Quart. (1985) 30:514–539CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Fiss P. C. A set-theoretic approach to organizational configurations. Acad. Management Rev. (2007) 32:1180–1198CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Garg V. K., Walters B. A., Priem R. L. Chief executive scanning emphases, environmental dynamism, and manufacturing firm performance. Strategic Management J. (2003) 24:725–744CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Greene W.Econometric Analysis (2003) 5th ed.(Prentice-Hall, New York) Google Scholar
  • Gujarati D.Basic Econometrics (1995) (McGraw-Hill, New York) Google Scholar
  • Hyatt T. A., Prawitt D. F. Does congruence between audit structure and auditors' locus of control affect job performance? Accounting Rev. (2001) 76:263–274CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Luo Y., Park S. H. Strategic alignment and performance of market-seeking MNCs in China. Strategic Management J. (2001) 22:141–155CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Miles R. E., Snow C. C.Organizational Strategy, Structure and Process (1978) (McGraw-Hill, New York) Google Scholar
  • Milgrom P., Roberts J. Complementarities and fit: Strategy, structure, and organizational change in manufacturing. J. Accounting Econom. (1995) 19:179–208CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Mohnen P., Röller L.-H. Complementarities in innovation policy. Eur. Econom. Rev. (2005) 49:1431–1450CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Perez-Nordtvedt L., Payne G. T., Short J. C., Kedia B. L. An entrainment-based model of temporal organizational fit, misfit, and performance. Organ. Sci. (2008) 19:785–801LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Porter M. E.Competitive Strategy: Techniques for Analyzing Industries and Competitors (1980) (Free Press, New York) Google Scholar
  • Porter M. E., Siggelkow N. Contextuality within activity systems and sustainability of competitive advantage. Acad. Management Perspective (2008) 22(May):34–56CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Rivkin J. W. Imitation of complex strategies. Management Sci. (2000) 46:824–844LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Skaggs B. C., Ross Huffman T. A customer interaction approach to strategy and production complexity in service firms. Acad. Management J. (2003) 46:775–786CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Venkatraman N. The concept of fit in strategy research: Toward verbal and statistical correspondence. Acad. Management Rev. (1989) 14:423–444CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Vorhies D. W., Morgan N. A. A configuration theory assessment of marketing organization fit with business strategy and its relationship with marketing performance. J. Marketing (2003) 67:100–115CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Wright P. M., Snell S. A. Toward a unifying framework for exploring fit and flexibility in strategic human resource management. Acad. Management Rev. (1998) 23:756–772CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Zajac E. J., Kraatz M. S., Bresser R. K. F. Modeling the dynamics of strategic fit: A normative approach to strategic change. Strategic Management J. (2000) 21:429–453CrossrefGoogle Scholar
INFORMS site uses cookies to store information on your computer. Some are essential to make our site work; Others help us improve the user experience. By using this site, you consent to the placement of these cookies. Please read our Privacy Statement to learn more.