- The Contingency Theory Of Organizations Donaldson Pdf Free Download
- The Contingency Theory Of Organizations Donaldson Pdf Free Printable
- The Contingency Theory Of Organizations Donaldson Pdf Free Online
- The Contingency Theory Of Organizations Donaldson Pdf Free Pdf
- The Contingency Theory Of Organizations Donaldson Pdf Free
- Design that often conflict with contingency theory. Build-ing on Donaldson’s (2008b) notion that organizations need to maximize both internal organizational effective-ness and external legitimacy support, our study analyzes fit implications for performance across both contingency theory and institutional theory.
- The Contingency Theory Of Organizations Donaldson Pdf. The Contingency Theory of Organizations. Contingency Theory Contingency theory. CT of leadership: In CT of leadership, the success of the leader is a. Studying Organizations: Theory and Method. Contingency theory, 1995. Contingency theories dominate scholarly studies of.
Contingency theory gives insight into why organizations behave the way they do. Learn the definition and significance of this theory, as well as the independent and dependent variables that affect.
This site is sponsored by the University of Colorado
Contingency theory
Acronym
N/A
Alternate name(s)
N/A
Main dependent construct(s)/factor(s)
Efficiency, organizational performance
Main independent construct(s)/factor(s)
Strategy, technology, task, organizational size, structure, and culture
Concise description of theory
There are many forms of contingency theory. In a general sense, contingency theories are a class of behavioral theory that contend that there is no one best way of organizing / leading and that an organizational / leadership style that is effective in some situations may not be successful in others (Fiedler, 1964). In other words: The optimal organization / leadership style is contingent upon various internal and external constraints.
Four important ideas of Contingency Theory are:1. There is no universal or one best way to manage 2. The design of an organization and its subsystems must 'fit' with the environment 3. Effective organizations not only have a proper 'fit' with the environment but also between its subsystems4. The needs of an organization are better satisfied when it is properly designed and the management style is appropriate both to the tasks undertaken and the nature of the work group.
There are also contingency theories that relate to decision making (Vroom and Yetton, 1973). According to these models, the effectiveness of a decision procedure depends upon a number of aspects of the situation: the importance of the decision quality and acceptance; the amount of relevant information possessed by the leader and subordinates; the likelihood that subordinates will accept an autocratic decision or cooperate in trying to make a good decision if allowed to participate; the amount of disagreement among subordinates with respect to their preferred alternatives.
It is worth noting that since the mid 1980s contingency theory has been fairly dead within the originating field of organization theory. Apart from Lex Donaldson, professor at Australian Graduate School of Management, and a few other people, nobody within the field attempt to contribute to a further development of contingency theory, foremost because of what can be perceived as the lacking explanatory power of the theory.
Sources: http://www.valuebasedmanagement.net/methods_contingency_theory.html and http://www.tcw.utwente.nl/theorieenoverzicht/Theory%20clusters/Organizational%20Communication/Contingency_Theories.doc/
Diagram/schematic of theory
Source: Weill, Peter; Olson, Marorethe H. (1989). An Assessment of the Contingency Theory of Management Information Systems. Journal of Management Information Systems, 6(1), 63.
Originating author(s)
Fred Fiedler (contingency theory of leadership)
Seminal articles
Burns, T., Stalker, G.M. (1961). The Management of Innovation. London: Tavistock.
Fiedler, F. E. (1964). A Contingency Model of Leadership Effectiveness. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology (Vol.1). 149-190. New York: Academic Press.
Kast, F., Rosenzweig, J. (1973). Contingency Views of Organization and Management. Chicago: Science Research Associates.
Lawrence, P. R., Lorsch, J. W. (1967) . Organization and Environment. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Otley, D. T. 1980. The contingency theory of management accounting: Achievement and prognosis. Accounting, Organizations and Society 5(4): 413-428.
Vroom, V.H. and Yetton, P.W. (1973). Leadership and decision-making. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press
Originating area
Organization theory, psychology, strategy
The Contingency Theory Of Organizations Donaldson Pdf Free Download
Level of analysis
Firm, individual
IS articles that use the theory
Heeks, Richard (2002) Information Systems and Developing Countries: Failure, Success and Local Improvisations, The Information Society, 18:2, pp. 101-112.
Andres, Hayward P.; Zmud, Robert W. (2001/2002). A Contingency Approach to Software Project Coordination. Journal of Management Information Systems, 18(3), 41-71.
Andrew D. Luzi; Kenneth D. MacKenzie (1982). An Experimental Study of Performance Information Systems. Management Science (pre-1986), 28(3), 243-259.
Arinzn, Bay. (1991). A Contingency Model of DSS Development Methodology. Journal of Management Information Systems, 8(1), 149-166.
Barki, Henri; Rivard, Suzanne; Talbot, Jean (2001). An Integrative Contingency Model of Software Project Risk Management. Journal of Management Information Systems, 17(4), 37-69.
Becerra-Fernandez, Irma; Sabherwal, Rajiv. (2001). Organization Knowledge Management: A Contingency Perspective. Journal of Management Information Systems, 18(1), 23-55.
Belanger, France, Collins, Rosann Webb, Cheney, Paul H. (2001). Technology Requirements and Work Group Communication for Telecommuters. Information Systems Research, 12(2), 155-176.
Blanton, J Ellis, Watson, Hugh J, Moody, Janette (1992). Hofmann monty 1100 manual. Toward a better understanding of information technology organization: A comparative case study. MIS Quarterly, 16(4), 531-555.
Brown, Carol V.; Bostrom, Robert P. (1994). Organization designs for the management of end-user computing: Reexamining the contingencies. Journal of Management Information Systems, 10(4), 183-211.
Chang, Ruey-Dang, Chang, Yeun-Wen, Paper, David (2003). The effect of task uncertainty, decentralization and AIS characteristics on the performance of AIS: an empirical case in Taiwan. Information & Management, 40(7), 691-713.
Cheon, Myun J.; Grover, Varun; Teng, James T.C. (1995). Theoretical perspectives on the outsourcing of information systems. Journal of Information Technology, 10(4), 209-219.
Chin, Wynne W.; Marcolin, Barbara L.; Newsted, Peter R. (2003). A Partial Least Squares Latent Variable Modeling Approach for Measuring Interaction Effects: Results from a Monte Carlo Simulation Study and an Electronic-Mail Emotion/Adoption Study. Information Systems Research, 14(2), 189-217.
Croteau, Anne-Marie, Raymond, Louis (2004). Performance outcomes of strategic and IT competencies alignment. Journal of Information Technology, 19(3), 178-190.
Danziger, James N. (1979). Technology and Productivity: A Contingency Analysis of Computers in Local Government. Administration & Society, 11(2), 144-171.
Devaraj, Sarv, Kohli, Rajiv (2000). Information technology payoff in the health-care industry: A longitudinal study. Journal of Management Information Systems, 16(4), 41-67.
Edström, Anders (1977). User Influence and the Success of MIS Projects: A Contingency Approach. Human Relations, 30(7), 589-607.
Fiedler, Kirk Dean, Grover, Varun, Teng, James T C. (1996). An empirically derived taxonomy of information technology structure and its relationship to organizational structure. Journal of Management Information Systems, 13(1), 9-34.
Franz, Charles R. (1985). User Leadership in the Systems Development Life Cycle: A Contingency Model. Journal of Management Information Systems, 2 (2), 5.
Galegher, Jolene; Kraut, Robert E. (1994). Computer-mediated Communication for Intellectual Teamwork: An Experiment in Group Writing. Information Systems Research, 5(2),110-138.
Giaglis, George M.; Klein, Stefan; O'Keefe, Robert M. (2002). The role of intermediaries in electronic marketplaces: developing a contingency model. Information Systems Journal, 12(3), 231-246.
Ginberg, Michael J. (1980). An Organizational Contingencies View of Accounting and Information Systems Implementation. Accounting, Organizations & Society, 5(4), 369-382.
Goodhue, Dale L., Quillard, Judith A.,Rockart, John F. (1988). Managing The Data Resource: A Contingency Perspective. MIS Quarterly, 12(3), 372-382.
Gordon, Lawrence A., Miller, Danny.A (1976). Contingency Framework for the Design of Accounting Information Systems. Accounting, Organizations & Society, 1(1), 59-70.
Hardgrave, Bill C.; Wilson, Rick L. (1999). Toward a Contingency Model for Selecting an Information System Prototyping Strategy. Journal of Management Information Systems, 16(2), 113-136.
Huber, George (1982). Organizational Information Systems: Determinants of Their Performance and Behavior. Management Science, 28(2), 138-155.
Jae-Nam Lee; Miranda, Shaila M.; Yong-Mi Kim (2004). IT Outsourcing Strategies: Universalistic, Contingency, and Configurational Explanations of Success. Information Systems Research, 15(2), 110-131.
Khazanchi, Deepak. (2005). Information Technology (IT) Appropriateness: The Contingency Theory of 'Fit' and IT Implementation in Small and Medium Enterprises. Journal of Computer Information Systems, 45(3), 88-95.
Kyu Kim, K.; Umanath, Narayan S. (1992/1993). Structure and Perceived Effectiveness of Software Development Subunits: A Task Contingency Analysis. Journal of Management Information Systems, 9(3), 157-181.
Lai, V.S. (1999). A Contingency Examination of CASE-task Fit on Software Developer's Performance. European Journal of Information Systems, 8(1), 27-49.
Lee, Choong C., Grover, Varun (1999/2000). Exploring mediation between environmental and structural attributes: The penetration of communication technologies in manufacturing organizations. Journal of Management Information Systems, 16(3),187-217.
Lin, Winston T.; Shao, Benjamin B.M.(2000). The relationship between user participation and system success: a simultaneous contingency approach. Information & Management, 37(6), 283-295.
Markus, M. Lynne; Bjørn-Andersen, Niels. (1987). Power Over Users: Its Exercise by System Professionals. Communications of the ACM, 30(6), 498-504.
McKeen, James D. Guimaraes, Tor, Wetherbe, James C. (1994). The relationship between user participation and user satisfaction: an investigation of four contingency factors. MIS Quarterly, 18(4), 427-451.
McKeen, James D., Guimaraes, Tor (1997). Successful strategies for user participation in systems development. Journal of Management Information Systems, 14(2), 133-150.
Nidumolu, Sarma R. (1996). A Comparison of the Structural Contingency and Risk-based Perspectives on Coordination in Software-development Projects. Journal of Management Information Systems, 13(2), 77-113.
Panagiotis Kanellis, Ray J Paul (2005). User Behaving Badly: Phenomena and Paradoxes from an Investigation into Information Systems Misfit. Journal of Organizational and End User Computing17(2), 64-91.
Pinsonneault, Alain; Heppel, Nelson. (1997/1998). Anonymity in Group Support Systems Research: A New Conceptualization, Measure, and Contingency Framework. Journal of Management Information Systems, 14(3), 89-108.
Premkumar, G, King, William R. (1992). An empirical assessment of information systems planning and the role of information systems in organizations. Journal of Management Information Systems, 9(2), 99-125.
Ratbe, Dina, King,William R., Kim, Young-Gul (1999/2000). The fit between project characteristics and application development methodologies: A contingency approach. The Journal of Computer Information Systems, 40(2), 26-33.
Raymond, Louis (1990). Organizational Context and Information Systems Success: A Contingency Approach. Journal of Management Information Systems, 6(4), 5-20.
Sabherwal, Rajiv; King, William R.(1992). Decision Processes for Developing Strategic Applications of Information Systems: A Contingency Approach. Decision Sciences, 23(4), 917-943.
Schonberger, Richard J. (1980). MIS Design: A Contingency Approach. MIS Quarterly, 4(1), 13-20.
Seliem, Ahmed A.M.; Ashour, Ahmed S.; Khalil, Omar E.M.; Millar, Stephen J. (2003). The Relationship of Some Organizational Factors to Information Systems Effectiveness: A Contingency Analysis of Egyptian Data. Journal of Global Information Management, 11(1), 40-71.
Sugumaran, Vijayan, Arogyaswamy, Bernard (2003-2004). Measuring IT Performance: 'Contingency' Variables and Value Modes. Journal of Computer Information Systems, 44(2), 79-86.
Teo, Thompson S.H. (2003). A contingency perspective on Internet adoption and competitive advantage. European Journal of Information Systems, 12(2), 78-92.
Umanath, Narayan S. (2003). The concept of contingency beyond “It depends”: illustrations from IS research stream. Information & Management, 40(6), 551-562.
Venkatraman, N. (1985/1986).Research on MIS Planning: Some Guidelines from Strategic Planning Research. Journal of Management Information Systems, 2(3), 65-77.
Weill, Peter; Olson, Marorethe H. (1989). An Assessment of the Contingency Theory of Management Information Systems. Journal of Management Information Systems, 6(1), 59-85.
Wetherbe, Jim C.; Whitehead, Canton J. (1977). A Contingency View of Managing the Data Processing Organization. MIS Quarterly, Mar77, Vol. 1 Issue 1, p19, 7p
Zhu, Zhichang (2002). Evaluating contingency approaches to information systems design. International Journal of Information Management, 22(5), 343-356.
Zmud, R. W. 1982. Diffusion of modern software practices: Influence of centralization and formalization. Management Science (28): 1421-1431.
Links from this theory to other theories
N/A
External links
Qs1 user manual. http://www.valuebasedmanagement.net/methods_contingency_theory.html, management summary of contingency theory
http://changingminds.org/disciplines/leadership/theories/contingency_theory.htm, brief summary of contingency theory
http://www.stfrancis.edu/ba/ghkickul/stuwebs/btopics/works/fied.htm, website focused on Fiedler's contingency theory of leadership
The Contingency Theory Of Organizations Donaldson Pdf Free Printable
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fiedler_contingency_model, another description of Fiedler's contingency theory of leadership
http://www.12manage.com/methods_contingency_theory.html, provides definitions of didefinitions of types of contingency theory (organization, leadership, decision making)
http://www.geocities.com/kstability/learning/management/contingency.html, description of contingency theory.
http://www.tcw.utwente.nl/theorieenoverzicht/Theory%20clusters/Organizational%20Communication/Contingency_Theories.doc/, contingency theory summary from Twente
The Contingency Theory Of Organizations Donaldson Pdf Free Online
Original Contributor(s)
Mike Wade and Sally Tomasevic
Please feel free to make modifications to this site. In order to do so, you must register.
Return to Theories Used in IS Research
Please feel free to make modifications to this site. In order to do so, you must register.
Return to Theories Used in IS Research
The Contingency Theory Of Organizations Donaldson Pdf Free Pdf
Retrieved from 'https://is.theorizeit.org/w/index.php?title=Contingency_theory&oldid=744'
The Contingency Theory Of Organizations Donaldson Pdf Free
- Blau, P.M., and Schoenherr, P. A., 1971, The Structure of Organizations, Basic Books, New York.Google Scholar
- Burns, T., and Stalker, G. M., 1961, The Management of Innovation, Tavistock, London.Google Scholar
- Chandler, A.D. Jr., 1962, Strategy and Structure: chapters in the history of the American industrial enterprise, M.I.T. Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
- Caufield, C.C., 1989, An Integrative Research Review of the Relationship Between Technology and Structure: A Meta-Analytic Synthesis. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Iowa: Iowa City, Iowa.Google Scholar
- Child, J., 1975, Managerial and organizational factors associated with company performance, Part 2: A contingency analysis. Journal of Management Studies, 12: 12–27.Google Scholar
- DiMaggio, P.J., and Powell, W.W., 1983, The iron cage revisited: institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organization fields, American Sociological Review, 48:147–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- DiMaggio, P.J., and Powell, W.W., Introduction. In Powell, Walter W. and DiMaggio, Paul, eds. 1991. The New Institutionalism in Organizational Analysis, University of Chicago Press, Chicago.Google Scholar
- Donaldson, L., 1987, Strategy and structural adjustment to regain fit and performance: In defence of contingency theory, Journal of Management Studies 24(1): 1–24.Google Scholar
- Donaldson, L., 1995a (editor) Contingency Theory. Volume 9 in History of Management Thought Series, Dartmouth Publishing Company.Google Scholar
- Donaldson, L., 1995b American Anti-Management Theories of Organization: A Critique of Paradigm Proliferation, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
- Donaldson, L., 1996 For Positivist Organization Theory: Proving the Hard Core, Sage, London.Google Scholar
- Donaldson, L., 2001, The Contingency Theory of Organizations, Sage, Thousand Oaks.Google Scholar
- Eccles, R.G., and Nohria N., 1992, Beyond the Hype: Rediscovering the Essence of Management, Harvard Business School Press, Boston.Google Scholar
- Edwards, J.R. and 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: 1577–613.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Fligstein, N., 1985, The spread of the multidivisional form among large firms, 1919–1979,. American Sociological Review, 50: 377–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Galunic, D.C., and Eisenhardt, K.M., 1994, Renewing the strategy-structure-performance paradigm, in: Research in Organizational Behavior, Vol. 16, L.L. Cummings and B.M. Staw, Greenwich, CT: JAI Press, pp. 215–55.Google Scholar
- Hamilton, R.T., and Shergill, G.S., 1992, The relationship between strategy-structure fit and financial performance in New Zealand: Evidence of generality and validity with enhanced controls. Journal of Management Studies, 29: 95–113.Google Scholar
- Hunter, J.E., and Schmidt F.L., 2004, Methods of Meta-Analysis: Correcting Error and Bias in Research Findings, 2nd ed., Thousand Oaks, Sage.Google Scholar
- Johns, G., 1981, Difference score measures of organizational behavior variables: A critique, Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 27:443–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Keller, R.T., 1994, Technology-information processing fit and the performance of R&D project groups: A test of contingency theory, Academy of Management Journal, 37:167–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Kraatz, M.S., and Zajac E.J., 1992, Invisible Hand or Iron Cage? Market and Institutional Influence on Organizational Change.Google Scholar
- Meilich, O., 2003, Bivariate models of fit in contingency theory: Critique and a polynomial regression alternative, Paper to Academy of Management, Seattle.Google Scholar
- Merton, R.K., 1968, Social Theory and Social Structure, The Free Press, New York.Google Scholar
- Meyer, J.W., Scott, W.R., Strang, D., and Creighton, A.L., 1988, Bureaucratization without Centralization: Changes in the Organizational System of U.S. Public Education, 1940–80, in: Institutional Patterns and Organizations: Culture and Environment, Lynne G. Zucker, Ballinger, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
- Miller, D., 1986, Configurations of strategy and structure: Towards a synthesis. StrategicManagement Journal, 7: 233–49.Google Scholar
- Mintzberg, H., 1973, The Nature of Managerial Work, Harper and Row, New York.Google Scholar
- Palmer, I., and Dunford, R., 2002, Out with the old and in with the new? The relationship Between traditional and new organizational practices, International Journal of Organizational Analysis, 10: 209–225.Google Scholar
- Parsons, T., 1961, Suggestions for a sociological approach to the theory of organizations, in: Complex Organizations: A Sociological Reader, Holt, Rinehart, and Winston, Amitai Etzioni, New York, pp. 32–47Google Scholar
- Pfeffer, J., 1982, Organizations and Organization Theory, Pitman, Marshfield.Google Scholar
- Priem, R.L., and Rosenstein, J., 2000, Is organization theory obvious to practitioners? A test of one established theory, Organization Science, 11: 509–524.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Rogers, M., 2005, Contingent Corporate Governance: A Challenge to the Theories of Universal Board Structure. PhD Thesis, Australian Graduate School of Management, Universities of New South Wales and Sydney, Sydney.Google Scholar
- Scott, W. R., 1995, Institutions and Organizations, Sage, Thousand Oaks.Google Scholar
- Van de Ven, A.H., and Robert D., 1985, The concept of fit in contingency theory, in: Research in Organizational Behaviour, 7, Edited by B.M. Staw and L. L. Cummings, JAI Press, Greenwich, pp. 333–65.Google Scholar
- Whittington, R., Mayer M., and Curto F., 1999, Chandlerism in post-war Europe: Strategic and structural change in France, Germany and the UK, 1950–1993, Industrial and Corporate Change, 8: 519–550.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Woodward, J., 1965, Industrial Organization: Theory and Practice, Oxford University Press, London.Google Scholar