SATM 6.2.2.9 Methodology

Donaldson (1996, The normal science of structural contingency theory, in: Handbook of Organizational Studies, S.R. Clegg, C. Hardy and W.R. Nord, eds., Sage, London.), the leading contemporary advocate of the approach, regards the paradigm of contingency theory as providing a basis for research "leading to the construction of a scientific body of knowledge". The theory underpinning the approach is sociological functionalism: Just as biological functionalism explains the way the organs of the human body are structured so as to contribute to human well-being, so sociological functionalism explains social structures by their functions. That is their contributions to the well-being of society.

An organization is viewed by contingency theory as a center of mutual influence and interaction between four subsystems (goal, human, technical and managerial), the variables of size and structure, and the environment in which the organization is located.

Contingency theory postulates that the effective performance of an organization is contingent upon the subsystems of the organization being designed in accordance with each other and the demands of the environment with which they interact.

Attention has to be paid to getting an organizational structure appropriate to the demands of the subsystems and the environment. These ideas are represented in Figure 6.2.

Figure 6.2. The contingency theory perspective

A business education based on contingency theory would allow managers to recognize system imperatives and adjust their organization structures rapidly to "fit" with strategic contingencies. This would ensure optimum performance.

 (Jackson, Michael C. (2000) Systems Approaches to Management, Kluwer Academic / Plenum Publishers. P115.)