英语论文网

lthough the researchers have adopted a positivist perspective, it is difficult to generalize their findings as a result of the sample selection which may not depict the likely pattern in similar situations. If the results of the study were not intended for generalization, then a case study research design would have been a more suitable approach to conducting the study.
A case study would have given the researchers the opportunity to have an in-depth understanding of how these contingencies combine into a state of 'fit' in actual circumstances to drive performance. This research design would have enabled the researchers to inductively infer what situational factors impact on organizational performance and to what extent, instead of having to test priori hypotheses. Adopting a case study design would also have enabled the researchers gain an understanding into what internal factors besides the external factors studied that affect performance in organizations (Helliar et al, 2002).
Given the second of objective of the paper to contribute to theory building, a case study design would have enhanced the achievement of this objective by building theories rather than the testing of hypotheses. Studies adopting the dynamic contingency model suggest firms in the same industry are not exactly exposed to the same situational factors at the same rate and in the same manner. It also asserts that these factors influence but do not determine the functionality of the organization (Mintzberg, 1985).
A case study design to this kind of study would have enabled an understanding of how these contingencies influence organizational choices of strategy and other policy decisions which impact on a particular firm; further studies comparing the effect of a particular factor on different firm would then give credence to the effect of that factor on organizations if a consistent result is found. For instance Hellier et al. (2002) adopting a longitudinal case study design were able to gain understanding into factors that persistently affect organizational strategic choices and others whose impact may be for a while. These kind of study would have enabled the researchers to come to the understanding of other variables besides the ones anticipated by them which influence performance in organizations.

Concluding comments 结论意见

The researchers set themselves the task of developing a model that measures the contingency fit between variables that impact on organizations. They were also keen at contributing to theory building. Although their work has enhanced understanding on the measurement of contingency fit as intended, they failed to show how these variables interact to drive performance which is needed for practice.
Their findings give credibility to the contingency theory which is grounded on the notion that there is no universally optimal system that fits into any organizational setting, but rather, various situational factors impact on the design and strategies of organizations (Ittner and Larcker, 2001; Abdel-Kader and Luther, 2008). Thus suggesting that adequate considerations should be given to these factors if an organization is to meet its objective(s) (Gerdin and Greve, 2004; Cadez and Guilding, 2008).
The researchers have however given readers the impression that there are only two strategic choices from which a company must choose one. This supposition has been refuted by oth