Examining Configurations and Firm Performance in a Suboptimal Equifinality Context

Gresov and Drazin's (1997) suggestions regarding the study of equifinality are used to investigate the organizational configurations that exists within a suboptimal equifinality context. A suboptimal equifinality situation exists when organizations must satisfy multiple and conflicting functional demands with a restricted set of design options; these restrictions force all organizations to operate suboptimally. Gresov and Drazin (1997) speculate that in such a situation legitimacy claims are made about one function being more important than the other(s) so that an increased quantity of acceptable organizational forms are established. Additionally, they argue that a misfit penalty is likely to exist for organizations that deviate from the preferred configurational design. With data from the medical group industry, these speculations about suboptimal equifinality situations are tested using multivariate regression analyses. Findings show that the configuration type aligning with the preferred functional demand of quality performs relatively higher than those aligning with operational efficiency or attempting to meet both demands. Additionally, the greater the organization's deviation from that design, the lower the financial performance. In summary, this study demonstrates that it is useful to take a functional equivalence perspective when examining variance in firm performance that is caused by design differences. Such an approach allows a more complete understanding of the fit-performance relationship by explicitly considering three factors: (i) the number of and level of conflict(s) among functional demands placed on the organization, (ii) the structural design options available to the decision maker, and (iii) the trade-offs that exist.

[1]  Danny Miller,et al.  TOWARD A NEW CONTINGENCY APPROACH: THE SEARCH FOR ORGANIZATIONAL GESTALTS , 1981 .

[2]  Tom R. Burns,et al.  The Management of Innovation. , 1963 .

[3]  Joan C. Woodward.  Industrial Organization: Theory and Practice , 1966 .

[4]  P. Lawrence,et al.  Organization and Environment: Managing Differentiation and Integration , 1967 .

[5]  M. Porter,et al.  Redefining competition in health care. , 2004, Harvard business review.

[6]  W. Powell,et al.  The iron cage revisited institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields , 1983 .

[7]  Robert N. Stern,et al.  The External Control of Organizations: A Resource Dependence Perspective. , 1979 .

[8]  William H. Glick,et al.  Fit, Equifinality, and Organizational Effectiveness: A Test of Two Configurational Theories , 1993 .

[9]  Nobuaki Namiki,et al.  Export Strategy for Small Business , 1988 .

[10]  J. Kimberly.  Organizational size and the structuralist perspective: a review, critique, and proposal , 1976 .

[11]  Mason A. Carpenter,et al.  Perceived Managerial Discretion: A Study Of Cause And Effect , 1997 .

[12]  Jon M. Hawes,et al.  A taxonomy of competitive retailing strategies , 1984 .

[13]  Christopher L. Shook,et al.  Organizational Configurations And Performance: A Meta-Analysis , 1997 .

[14]  Børge Obel,et al.  Strategic Organizational Diagnosis and Design: The Dynamics of Fit , 2003 .

[15]  Donald C. Hambrick,et al.  Taxonomic Approaches to Studying Strategy: Some Conceptual and Methodological Issues , 1984 .

[16]  Gregory G. Dess,et al.  Porter's (1980) Generic Strategies as Determinants of Strategic Group Membership and Organizational Performance , 1984 .

[17]  John W. Meyer,et al.  Institutionalized Organizations: Formal Structure as Myth and Ceremony , 1977, American Journal of Sociology.

[18]  Theresa S. Cho,et al.  ISOMORPHISM IN REVERSE: INSTITUTIONAL THEORY AS AN EXPLANATION FOR RECENT INCREASES IN INTRAINDUSTRY HETEROGENEITY AND MANAGERIAL DISCRETION , 2004 .

[19]  P. Rich.  The Organizational Taxonomy: Definition and Design , 1992 .

[20]  D. Hambrick,et al.  Managerial discretion: A bridge between polar views of organizational outcomes. , 1987 .

[21]  Robert Waldersee,et al.  Espoused Values and Organizational Change Themes , 1995 .

[22]  C. C. Snow,et al.  Organizational Configurations and Performance: A Comparison of Theoretical Approaches , 1993 .

[23]  Robert E. Hoskisson,et al.  Strategic groups: Untested assertions and research proposals , 1990 .

[24]  Christopher G. Gresov.  Exploring fit and misfit with multiple contingencies. , 1989 .

[25]  Bruce R. Barringer,et al.  Walking a Tightrope: Creating Value Through Interorganizational Relationships , 2000 .

[26]  D. Schendel,et al.  An empirical analysis of strategy types , 1983 .

[27]  D. Hambrick.  On the staying power of defenders, analyzers, and prospectors , 2003 .

[28]  C. Fombrun,et al.  Macrocultures: Determinants and Consequences , 1994 .

[29]  Henry Mintzberg,et al.  The Structuring of Organizations , 1979 .

[30]  Gregory G. Dess,et al.  Industry Effects and Strategic Management Research , 1990 .

[31]  L. G. Hrebiniak,et al.  Organizational Adaptation: Strategic Choice and Environmental Determinism. , 1985 .

[32]  R. Zammuto.  ORGANIZATIONAL ADAPTATION: SOME IMPLICATIONS OF ORGANIZATIONAL ECOLOGY FOR STRATEGIC CHOICE[1] , 1988 .

[33]  Henry Mintzberg.  Strategy-Making in Three Modes , 1973 .

[34]  James B. Thomas,et al.  Interpreting Strategic Issues: Effects of Strategy and the Information-Processing Structure of Top Management Teams , 1990 .

[35]  Donald C. Hambrick,et al.  Operationalizing the Concept of Business-Level Strategy in Research , 1980 .

[36]  D. Hambrick,et al.  Speed, Stealth, and Selective Attack: How Small Firms Differ From Large Firms in Competitive Behavior , 1995 .

[37]  A. V. D. Ven,et al.  The Concept of Fit in Contingency Theory. , 1984 .

[38]  J. L. Naman,et al.  Entrepreneurship and the concept of fit: A model and empirical tests , 1993 .

[39]  John M. Planchon,et al.  An Examination of the Random versus Nonrandom Nature of Item Omissions , 1983 .

[40]  Robert Drazin,et al.  Equifinality: Functional Equivalence in Organization Design , 1997 .

[41]  D. Schendel,et al.  Heterogeneity within an Industry: Firm Conduct in the U.S. Brewing Industry, 1952-71 , 1977 .

[42]  P. Rajan Varadarajan,et al.  Strategic Interdependence in Organizations: Deconglomeration and Marketing Strategy , 2001 .

[43]  H. Thomas,et al.  Strategic Groups: Theory, Research and Taxonomy , 1986 .

[44]  David J. Miller,et al.  The structural and environmental correlates of business strategy , 1987 .

[45]  A. Tsui,et al.  Configurational Approaches to Organizational Analysis , 1993 .

[46]  Samuel L. Seaman,et al.  HIGH AND LOW LEVELS OF ORGANIZATIONAL ADAPTATION: AN EMPIRICAL ANALYSIS OF STRATEGY, STRUCTURE, AND PERFORMANCE , 1994 .

[47]  P. H. Friesen,et al.  Archetypes of Strategy Formulation , 1978 .

[48]  Julio C. Sanchez,et al.  The Long and Thorny Way to an Organizational Taxonomy , 1993 .

[49]  R. Burton,et al.  Strategic Organizational Diagnosis and Design , 1995 .

[50]  Abdul A. Rasheed,et al.  Configuration Research in Strategic Management: Key Issues and Suggestions , 1993 .

[51]  Børge Obel,et al.  Erratum: Return on Assets Loss from Situational and Contingency Misfits , 2002, Manag. Sci..

[52]  Shaker A. Zahra,et al.  Research Evidence On The Miles-Snow Typology , 1990 .

[53]  Karel Cool,et al.  Strategic Group Formation and Performance: The Case of the U.S. Pharmaceutical Industry, 1963-1982 , 1987 .

[54]  F. Barry Lawrence,et al.  Strategy-Performance Relationships in Service Firms: A Test for Equifinality , 2003 .

[55]  L. J. Bourgeois,et al.  Strategy and Environment: A Conceptual Integration , 1980 .

[56]  R E Miles,et al.  Organizational strategy, structure, and process. , 1978, Academy of management review. Academy of Management.

[57]  Robert P. Leone,et al.  A two-stage imputation procedure for item nonresponse in surveys , 1991 .

[58]  M BurtonRichard,et al.  Return on Assets Loss from Situational and Contingency Misfits , 2002 .

[59]  Eric Abrahamson,et al.  Assessing Managerial Discretion across Industries: A Multimethod Approach , 1995 .

[60]  Rajaram Veliyath,et al.  Gestalt Approaches to Assessing Strategic Coalignment: A Conceptual Integration1 , 1995 .

[61]  David J. Ketchen,et al.  THE APPLICATION OF CLUSTER ANALYSIS IN STRATEGIC MANAGEMENT RESEARCH: AN ANALYSIS AND CRITIQUE , 1996 .

[62]  D. Schendel,et al.  A Strategic Model of the U.S. Brewing Industry: 1952-1971 , 1978 .

[63]  A. V. D. Ven,et al.  Alternative forms of fit in contingency theory. , 1985 .