The concept of fit in organizational research

This paper focuses on the concept of fit as a topic of research. The concept of fit has been viewed as an internal consistency among key strategic decisions or the alignment between strategic choices and critical contingencies with the environment (external), organization (internal), or both (external and internal). A number of research perspectives or approaches related to fit are presented. Research design problems are discussed: definition of terms, theoretical issues, and empirical issues. Emphasis is on how key variables or dimensions of fit are defined and measured in research. A six-celled matrix is proposed as a conceptual scheme to distinguish different perspectives of fit and to portray congruence relationships more accurately. The matrix includes three common dimensions: strategy, organization, and environment. The matrix also suggests two levels of strategy—corporate or business—and three domains of fit—external, internal, or integrated. These suggest different research perspectives for the study of fit. Examples from the literature are provided to illustrate and support this conceptual scheme. Finally, implications for management and further study are outlined.

[1]  N. Venkatraman.  Performance Implications Of Strategic Coalignment: A Methodological Perspective , 1990 .

[2]  A. Satterfield,et al.  TREATMENT , 1924, California and western medicine.

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

[4]  Jay R. Galbraith,et al.  Strategy implementation : the role of structure and process , 1978 .

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

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

[7]  Danny Miller,et al.  Momentum and Revolution in Organizational Adaptation , 1980 .

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

[9]  David J. Miller,et al.  Stale in the Saddle: CEO Tenure and the Match Between Organization and Environment , 1991 .

[10]  D. Otley,et al.  The design of organizations , 1990 .

[11]  R. E. Miles,et al.  Fit, Failure and the Hall of Fame , 1984 .

[12]  David J. Miller,et al.  Configurations of strategy and structure: Towards a synthesis , 1986 .

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

[14]  T. C. Powell.  Organizational alignment as competitive advantage , 1992 .

[15]  David A. Nadler,et al.  A model for diagnosing organizational behavior , 1980 .

[16]  Robert T. Hamilton,et al.  THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN STRATEGY‐STRUCTURE FIT AND FINANCIAL PERFORMANCE IN NEW ZEALAND: EVIDENCE OF GENERALITY AND VALIDITY WITH ENHANCED CONTROLS* , 1992 .

[17]  Danny Miller,et al.  Structural Change and Performance: Quantum Versus Piecemeal-Incremental Approaches , 1982 .

[18]  P. H. Friesen,et al.  Strategy‐making and environment: The third link , 1983 .

[19]  J. Child.  Organizational Structure, Environment and Performance: The Role of Strategic Choice , 1972 .

[20]  M. Porter.  The Contributions of Industrial Organization To Strategic Management , 1981 .

[21]  Alfred D. Chandler.  Strategy and Structure: Chapters in the History of the Industrial Enterprise , 1962 .

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

[23]  Anil K. Gupta,et al.  Business Unit Strategy, Managerial Characteristics, and Business Unit Effectiveness at Strategy Implementation , 1984 .

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

[25]  C. F. Phillips.  Industrial Market Structure and Economic Performance , 1971 .

[26]  N. Chorn.  The “Alignment” Theory: Creating Strategic Fit , 1991 .

[27]  L. Donaldson.  STRATEGY AND STRUCTURAL ADJUSTMENT TO REGAIN FIT AND PERFORMANCE: IN DEFENCE OF CONTINGENCY THEORY , 1987 .

[28]  V. Govindarajan.  A Contingency Approach to Strategy Implementation at the Business-Unit Level: Integrating Administrative Mechanisms with Strategy , 1988 .

[29]  V. Govindarajan.  Implementing competitive strategies at the business unit level: Implications of matching managers to strategies , 1989 .

[30]  L. Finch,et al.  Choice and determinism: A test of Hrebiniak and Joyce's framework on strategy‐environment fit , 1989 .

[31]  R. Rumelt.  Strategy, structure, and economic performance , 1974 .

[32]  L. Fry,et al.  Congruence, Contingency, and Theory Building , 1987 .