This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Payne, G. T. Search for Related Content

Examining Configurations and Firm Performance in a Suboptimal Equifinality Context

Area of Management, Box 42101, Rawls College of Business, Texas Tech University, Lubbock, Texas 79409-2101
tyge.payne{at}ttu.edu

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.

Key Words: configurations; equifinality; fit; organization design; performance

This article has been cited by other articles:

				J. C. Short, G. T. Payne, and D. J. Ketchen Jr. Research on Organizational Configurations: Past Accomplishments and Future Challenges Journal of Management, December 1, 2008; 34(6): 1053 - 1079. [Abstract] [PDF]

				L. Perez-Nordtvedt, G. T. Payne, J. C. Short, and B. L. Kedia An Entrainment-Based Model of Temporal Organizational Fit, Misfit, and Performance Organization Science, September 1, 2008; 19(5): 785 - 801. [Abstract] [PDF]