Exploring Fit and Misfit with Multiple Contingencies

The author wishes to acknowledge Andy Van de Ven for his contribution to this stream of research and his permission to use the data, and Bob Drazin, Nancy Fisher, Mike Tushman, Elaine Romanelli, Blair Sheppard, the anonymous reviewers of ASQ, and especially Gerald Salancik for their insightful comments and suggestions. Bob Drazin, in particular, provided both guidance and inspiration in his role as my dissertation advisor. Portions of an earlier draft of this paper appeared in the 1987 Academy of Management Proceedings. Support during the revision stage was provided by the Fuqua School Business Associates Fund. This paper proposes a multiple-contingencies theory that simultaneously examines the effects of task and dependence on unit design and efficiency. The theory explores and predicts the conditions under which work-unit designs fail to fit their contexts. Findings from studies of one contingency factor (e.g., uncertainty or dependence) have shown that poor performance by units is related to a lack of fit with theoretically prescribed patterns of design, but because such studies do not do justice to the complexities of design, it is difficult to predict misfit. The multiple-contingency approach proposed here specifically focuses on issues such as misfit, conflicting contingencies, and equifinality. The model is tested, using data from 529 work units in 60 employment-security offices. A key finding is that units facing conflicting contingencies are more prone to design misfit and lower performance.