Alternative Forms of Fit in Contingency Theory

TLDR

Support for this research was provided in part by the Wisconsin Job Service Division of the Department of Industry, Labor and Human Relations, the California Employment Department, and by the Program on Organizational Effectiveness of the Office of Naval Research under the contract number NOOO1 4-S4-K-001 6. This paper examines the selection, interaction, and systems approaches to fit in structural contingency theory. These are empirically examined as related to a task‑contingency theory of work‑unit design in 629 employment security units in California and Wisconsin. Evidence was found to support the selection and systems approaches in these data but not the interaction approach, and the generalizability of these findings is discussed in terms of using alternative approaches to fit to explain context‑structure‑performance relationships in contingency theory.

Abstract

Support for this research was provided in part by the Wisconsin Job Service Division of the Department of Industry, Labor and Human Relations, the California Employment Department, and by the Program on Organizational Effectiveness of the Office of Naval Research under the contract number NOOO1 4-S4-K-001 6. This paper examines the selection, interaction, and systems approaches to fit in structural contingency theory. These are empirically examined as related to a taskcontingency theory of work-unit design in 629 employment security units in California and Wisconsin. Evidence was found to support the selection and systems approaches in these data but not the interaction approach. The generalizability of these findings is discussed in terms of using alternative approaches to fit to explain context-structureperformance relationships in contingency theory.