Bibliography+-+Fit

(back to Fit)
= = =Core readings=

Internal fit

 * 1) Chandler, A. D., Jr. 1962. S**trategy and Structure: Chapters in the History of Industrial Enterprise**. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. (esp. Chapters 1, 2, 6, 7)
 * 2) Miller, D. 1996. Configurations revisited. **S****trategic Management Journal**, 17: 505-512.

New approaches to internal fit

 * 1) Milgrom, P. R. & Roberts, J. 1995. Complementarities and fit: Strategy, structure, and organizational change in manufacturing. **Journal of Accounting and Economics**, 19: 179-208.
 * 2) *Rivkin, J. W. 2000. Imitation of complex strategies. **Management Science**, 46: 824-844.
 * 3) *Siggelkow, N. 2002. Evolution toward fit. **Administrative Science Quarterly**, 47: 125-159.

External fit

 * 1) Lawrence, P. R. & Lorsch, J. W. 1967. **Organization and Environment**. Boston: Harvard Business School Press. (esp. Chapters 1, 4, 6, 8)
 * 2) Van de Ven, A. H. & Drazin, R. 1985. The concept of fit in contingency theory. **Research in Organizational Behavior**, 7: 333-365.

=Supplementary readings=

Conceptual background pieces

 * 1) Miller, D. & Friesen, P. H. 1984. **Organizations: A Quantum View**. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
 * 2) *Siggelkow, N. 2001. Change in the presence of fit: The rise, the fall, and the renaissance of Liz Claiborne. **Academy of Management Journal**, 44: 838-857.
 * 3) Michael E. Porter and Nicolaj Siggelkow. 2008. “Contextual Interactions within Activity Systems and Sustainability of Competitive Advantage.” **Academy of Management Perspectives**, 22 (2), pp. 34-56.

Empirical tests of external fit

 * 1) Drazin, R. & Van de Ven, A. H. 1985. Alternative forms of fit in contingency theory. **Administrative Science Quarterly**, 30: 514-539.
 * 2) Gresov, C. 1989. Exploring fit and misfit with multiple contingencies. **Administrative Science Quarterly**, 34: 431-453.
 * 3) //Conceptual work on complementarities://
 * 4) Milgrom, P. R. & Roberts, J. 1990. The economics of modern manufacturing: Technology, strategy, and organization. **American Economic Review**, 80: 511-528.

Empirical work on complementarities

 * 1) Athey, S. & Stern, S. 1998. **An empirical framework for testing theories about complementarity in organizational design**. NBER Working Paper #6600, Cambridge, MA.
 * 2) Ichniowski, C., Shaw, K., & Prennushi, G. 1997. The effects of human resource management practices on productivity: A study of steel finishing lines. **American Economic Review**, 87: 291-313.
 * 3) Cassiman, B. & Veugelers, R. 2006. In search of complementarity in innovation strategy: Internal R&D and external knowledge acquisition. **Management Science**, 52: 68-82.
 * 4) //Simulation work on interdependencies://
 * 5) Levinthal, D. 1997. Adaptation on rugged landscapes. **Management Science**, 43, 934-950.
 * 6) Siggelkow, N. & Rivkin, J. W. 2005. Speed and search: Designing organizations for turbulence and complexity. **Organization Science**, 16: 101-122.


 * An asterisk denotes a reading that emerged, at least in part, from an author’s dissertation research.