Embracing Causal Complexity: The Emergence of a Neo-Configurational Perspective

Causal complexity has long been recognized as a ubiquitous feature underlying organizational phenomena, yet current theories and methodologies in management are for the most part not well suited to its direct study. The introduction of the Qualitative Comparative Analysis (QCA) configurational approach has led to a reinvigoration of configurational theory that embraces causal complexity explicitly. We argue that the burgeoning research using QCA represents more than a novel methodology; it constitutes the emergence of a neo-configurational perspective to the study of management and organizations that enables a fine-grained conceptualization and empirical investigation of causal complexity through the logic of set theory. In this article, we identify four foundational elements that characterize this emerging neoconfigurational perspective: 1) conceptualizing cases as set theoretic configurations; 2) calibrating cases’ memberships into sets; 3) viewing causality in terms of necessity and sufficiency relations between sets; and, 4) conducting counterfactual analysis of unobserved configurations. We then present a comprehensive review of the use of QCA in management studies that aims to capture the evolution of the neo-configurational perspective among management scholars. We close with a discussion of a research agenda that can further this neoconfigurational approach and thereby shift the attention of management research away from a focus on net effects and towards examining causal complexity

Capturing Causal Complexity: Heuristics for Configurational Theorizing

Management scholars study phenomena marked by complex interdependencies where multiple explanatory factors combine to bring about an outcome of interest. Yet, theorizing about causal complexity can prove challenging for the correlational theorizing that is predominant in the field of management, given its “net effects thinking” that emphasizes the unique contribution of individual explanatory factors. In contrast, configurational theories and thinking are well-suited to explaining causally complex phenomena. In this article, we seek to advance configurational theorizing by providing a model of the configurational theorizing process which consists of three iterative stages—scoping, linking and naming. In each stage, we develop and offer several heuristics aimed at stimulating configurational theorizing. That is, these theorizing heuristics are intended to help scholars discover configurations of explanatory factors, probe the connections among these factors, and articulate the orchestrating themes that underpin their coherence. We conclude with a discussion of how configurational theorizing advances theory development in the field of management and organizations, and beyond

Nokia Siemens Networks: Just Doing Business – or Supporting an Oppressive Regime?

censorship, complicity, human rights, corporate social responsibility, Nokia Siemens Networks,

Accurately predicting precise outcomes in business-to-business marketing

Copyright © 2018 by Emerald Publishing Limited. This chapter identifies research advances in theory and analytics that contribute successfully to the primary need to be filled to achieve scientific legitimacy: Configurations that include accurate explanation, description, and prediction-prediction here refers to predicting future outcomes and outcomes of cases in samples separate from the samples of cases used to construct models. The MAJOR PARADOX: Can the researcher construct models that achieve accurate prediction of outcomes for individual cases that also are generalizable across all the cases in the sample? This chapter presents a way forward for solving the major paradox. The solution here includes philosophical theoretical, and operational shifts away from variable-based modeling and null hypothesis statistical testing (NHST) to case-based modeling and somewhat precise outcome testing (SPOT). These shifts are now occurring in the scholarly business-to-business literature

Building generalizable case-based theory in human resources management

Copyright © 2018 by Emerald Publishing Limited. This study applies asymmetric rather than conventional symmetric analysis to advance theory in occupational psychology. The study applies systematic case-based analyses to model complex relations among conditions (i.e., configurations of high and low scores for variables) in terms of set memberships of managers. The study uses Boolean algebra to identify configurations (i.e. recipes) reflecting complex conditions sufficient for the occurrence of outcomes of interest (e.g., high versus low financial job stress, job strain, and job satisfaction). The study applies complexity theory tenets to offer a nuanced perspective concerning the occurrence of contrarian cases-for example, in identifying different cases (e.g., managers) with high membership scores in a variable (e.g., core self-evaluation) who have low job satisfaction scores and when different cases with low membership scores in the same variable have high job satisfaction. In a large-scale empirical study of managers (n 1/4 928) in four (contextual) segments of the farm industry in New Zealand, this study tests the fit and predictive validities of set membership configurations for simple and complex antecedent conditions that indicate high/low core self-evaluations, job stress, and high/low job satisfaction. The findings support the conclusion that complexity theory in combination with configural analysis offers useful insights for explaining nuances in the causes and outcomes to high stress as well as low stress among farm managers. Some findings support and some are contrary to symmetric relationship findings (i.e., highly significant correlations that support main effect hypotheses)

Four-corner outcomes in strategic management: Successful and unsuccessful paddling down versus upstream

Copyright © 2018 by Emerald Publishing Limited. This chapter elaborates on the usefulness of embracing complexity theory modeling outcomes rather than directionality, and modeling complex rather than simple outcomes in strategic management. Complexity theory includes the tenet that most antecedent conditions are neither sufficient nor necessary for the occurrence of a specific outcome. Identifying a firm by individual antecedents (i.e., noninnovative vs. highly innovative, small vs. large size in sales or number of employees, or serving local vs. international markets) provides shallow information in modeling specific outcomes (e.g., high sales growth or high profitability)-even if directional analyses (e.g., regression analysis, including structural equation modeling) indicate that the independent (main) effects of the individual antecedents relate to outcomes directionally-because firm (case) anomalies almost always occur to main effects. Examples: A number of highly innovative firms have low sales while others have high sales and a number of noninnovative firms have low sales while others have high sales. Breaking-away from the current dominant logic of directionality testing-null hypothesis significance testing (NHST)-to embrace somewhat precise outcome testing (SPOT) is necessary for extracting highly useful information about the causes of anomalies-associations opposite to expected and "statistically significant"main effects. The study of anomalies extends to identifying the occurrences of four-corner strategy outcomes: Firms doing well in favorable circumstances, firms doing badly in favorable circumstances, firms doing well in unfavorable circumstances, and firms doing badly in unfavorable circumstances. Models of four-corner strategy outcomes advance strategic management beyond the current dominant logic of directional modeling of single outcomes

Rationalizing ideologies, social identities and corruption among civil servants in Indonesia during the Suharto era

This study investigated how the social identities assumed by individuals as part of their professional roles influence the nature and use of a range of rationalizations for their corruption or the corrupt acts of others. Thirty senior Indonesian public servants were interviewed about the causes and factors that perpetuated corruption during the Suharto era, and how they rationalized corrupt behavior within the role of being a civil servant. Findings revealed that corruption was routine and embedded in the daily activities and administrative structures of Indonesian public servants. Rationalizing ideologies that supported corruption included a denial of responsibility, social weighting and an appeal to higher loyalties. Central to these rationalizations were explanations around the low levels of civil service salaries, poor accountability, and corrupt leadership at senior levels of the government. However, the expression of these rationalizations varied across three social or role identities of the Indonesian civil servant: the professional civil servant, the collegial civil servant, and the corrupt civil servant. The implications of these findings for interventions in organizations in developing countries are discussed