The concept of fit in contingency theory has been modeled in ways that made it less conducive to detection. Each model of fit postulates a specific relationship between the structural, contingency, and outcome variables. Operationalization is then derived from this relationship. Conversely, a polynomial regression model would allow for a more generalized notion of fit while capturing the same forms of fit implied by existing models in a simpler, general, robust, and less constrained way.
Aiken, L. S., & West, S. G. (1991). Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interactions. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
2.
Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 1173-1182.
3.
Burns, T., & Stalker, G. (1961). The management of innovation. New York: Oxford University Press.
4.
Damanpour, F. (1991). Organizational innovation: A meta-analysis of effect of determinants and moderators. Academy of Management Journal, 34, 555-590.
5.
Delery, J. E., & Doty, D. H. (1996). Modes of theorizing in strategic human resource management: Tests of universalistic, contingency, and configurational predictions. Academy of Management Journal, 39, 802-835.
6.
Dewar, R. D., & Werbel, J. (1979). Universalistic and contingency predictions of employee satisfaction and conflict. Administrative Science Quarterly, 24, 426-448.
7.
Donaldson, L. (1994). Contingency theory. Aldershot, UK: Dartmouth.
8.
Doty, D. H., Glick, W. H., & Huber, G. P. (1993). Fit, equifinality, and organizational effectiveness: A test of two configurational theories. Academy of Management Journal, 36, 1196-1250.
9.
Drazin, R., & Van de Ven, A. H. (1985). Alternative forms of fit in contingency theory. Administrative Science Quarterly, 30, 514-539.
10.
Edwards, J. R. (1993). Problems with the use of profile similarity indices in the study of congruence in organization research. Personnel Psychology, 46, 641-665.
11.
Edwards, J. R. (1994). The study of congruence in organization behavior research: Critique and a proposed alternative. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 58, 51-100.
12.
Edwards, J. R. (1996). An examination of competing versions of person-environment fit approach to stress. Academy of Management Journal, 39, 292-339.
13.
Edwards, J. R., & Parry, M. E. (1993). On the use of polynomial regression equations as an alternative to difference scores in organizational research. Academy of Management Journal, 36, 1577-1613.
14.
Edwards, J. R., & Van Harrison, R. (1993). Job demands and worker health: Three-dimensional reexamination of the relationship between person-environment fit and strain. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78, 628-648.
15.
Fox, J. (1997). Applied regression analysis, linear models, and related methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
16.
Fry, L. W. (1982). Technology-structure research: Three critical issues. Academy of Management Journal, 25, 532-552.
17.
Galunic, D. C., & Eisenhardt, K. M. (1994). Renewing the strategy-structure-performance paradigm. In B. M. Staw & L. L. Cummings (Eds.), Research in organizational behavior (pp. 215-255). Greenwich, CT: JAI.
18.
Jaccard, J., Turrisi, R., & Wan, C. K. (1990). Interaction effects in multiple regression. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
19.
James, L. R., & Jones, A. P. (1976). Organizational structure: A review of structural dimensions and their conceptual relationships with individual attitudes and behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 16, 74-113.
20.
Lawrence, P. R. (1993). The contingency approach to organizational design. In R. T. Golembiewski (Ed.), Handbook of organizational design (pp. 9-18). New York: Marcel Dekker.
21.
McClelland, G. H., & Judd, C. M. (1993). Statistical difficulties of determining interactions and moderator effects. Psychological Bulletin, 114, 376-390.
22.
Meyer, M. W., & Zucker, L. G. (1989). Permanently failing organizations. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
23.
Miner, J. B. (1982). Theories of organizational structure and process. Chicago: Dryden Press.
24.
Miner, J. B. (1984). The validity and usefulness of theories in an emerging organizational science. Academy of Management Review, 9, 296-306.
25.
Pennings, J. M. (1992). Structural contingency theory: A reappraisal. In B. M. Staw & L. L. Cummings (Eds.), Research in organization behavior (pp. 267-309). Greenwich, CT: JAI.
26.
Scott, W. R. (1998). Organizations: Rational, natural, and open systems (4th ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
27.
Smith, T. W., Kalleberg, A. L., & Marsden, P. V. (2004). National Organizations Survey (NOS), 2002. Ann Arbor, MI: Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research.
28.
Van de Ven, A. H., & Drazin, R. (1985). The concept of fit in contingency theory. In L. L. Cummings & B. M. Staw (Eds.), Research in organization theory (pp. 333-365). Greenwich, CT: JAI.
29.
Venkatraman, N. (1989). The concept of fit in strategy research: Toward verbal and statistical correspondence. Academy of Management Review, 14, 423-444.
30.
Aiken, M., & Hage, J. (1968). Organizational interdependence and intraorganizational structure. American Sociological Review, 33, 912-930.
31.
Argote, L. (1982). Input uncertainty and organizational coordination in hospital emergency units. Administrative Science Quarterly, 27, 420-434.
32.
Caruana, A., Morris, M. H., & Vella, A. J. (1998). The effect of centralization and formalization on entrepreneurship in export firms. Journal of Small Business Management, 36, 16-29.
33.
Cohn, S. F., & Turyn, R. M. (1980). The structure of the firm and the adoption of process innovation. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 27, 98-102.
34.
Fredrickson, J. W., & Mitchell, T. R. (1984). Strategic decision process: Comprehensiveness and performance in an industry with an unstable environment. Academy of Management Journal, 27, 399-423.
35.
Fry, L. W., & Slocum, J. W., Jr. (1984). Technology, structure, and workgroup effectiveness: A test of a contingency model. Academy of Management Journal, 27, 221-246.
36.
Galbraith, C. S., & Merrill, G. B. (1991). The effects of compensation program and structure on SBU competitive strategy: A study of technology-intensive firms. Strategic Management Journal, 12, 353-370.
37.
Ghoshal, S., & Nohria, N. (1989). Internal differentiation within multinational corporations. Strategic Management Journal, 10, 323-337.
38.
Hetherington, R. W. (1991). The effects of formalization on departments of a multihospital system. Journal of Management Studies, 28, 103-141.
39.
Hull, F., & Hage, J. (1982). Organizing for innovation: Beyond Burns and Stalker's organic type. Sociology, 16, 546-577.
40.
Huselid, M. A. (1995). The impact of human resource management practices on turnover, productivity, and corporate financial performance. Academy of Management Journal, 38, 635-672.
41.
Jarley, P., Fiorito, J., & Delaney, J. T. (1997). A structural contingency approach to bureaucracy and democracy in the U.S. national unions. Academy of Management Journal, 40, 831-861.
42.
Khurana, A. (1999). Managing complex production processes. Sloan Management Review, 40, 85-97.
43.
Kim, L. (1980). Organization innovation and structure. Journal of Business Research, 8, 225-245.
44.
Koberg, C. S., Uhlenbruck, N., & Sarason, Y. (1996). Facilitators of organizational innovation: The role of lifecycle stage. Journal of Business Venturing, 11, 133-149.
45.
Lee, J., & Kim, S.-H. (1992). The relationship between procedural formalization in MIS development and MIS success: A contingent analysis. Information & Management, 22, 89-111.
46.
Liker, J. K., Collins, P. D., & Hull, F. (1999). Flexibility and standardization: Test of a contingency model of product design-manufacturing integration. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 16, 248-267.
47.
Lysonski, S., & Pecotich, A. (1992). Strategic marketing planning, environmental uncertainty and performance. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 9, 247-255.
48.
Miller, D. (1987). Strategy making and structure: Analysis and implications for performance. Academy of Management Journal, 30, 7-32.
49.
Miller, D., Droge, C., & Toulouse, J.-M. (1988). Strategic process and content as mediators between organizational context and structure. Academy of Management Journal, 31, 544-569.
50.
Morse, E. V. (1977). The effects of formalization organizational adoption behavior. Organization and Administrative Sciences, 8, 107-122.
51.
Papadakis, V. M., Lioukas, S., & Chambers, D. (1998). Strategic decision-making processes: The role of management and context. Strategic Management Journal, 19, 115-147.
52.
Reimann, B. C. (1980). Organization structure and technology in manufacturing: System versus work flow level perspectives. Academy of Management Journal, 23, 61-76.
53.
Schoonhoven, C. B. (1981). Problems with contingency theory: Testing assumptions hidden within the language of contingency “theory.” Administrative Science Quarterly, 26, 349-377.
54.
Sciulli, L. M. (1998). How organizational structure influences success in various types of innovation. Journal of Retail Banking Services, 20, 13-18.
55.
Tannenbaum, S. I., & Dupuree-Burino, L. M. (1994). The relationship between organizational and environmental factors and the use of innovative human resource practices. Group and Organization Management, 19, 171-202.
56.
Zmud, R. W. (1982). Diffusion of modern software practices: Influence of centralization and formalization. Management Science, 28, 1421-1431.
