Using Qualitative Comparative Analysis in Strategic Management Research: An Examination of Combinations of Industry, Corporate, and Business-Unit Effects
Abstract
The authors present qualitative comparative analysis (QCA) as a viable method for strategic management research. Specifically, they demonstrate its ability to examine the potential interdependence and complexity among effects through a study of how industry, corporate, and business-unit attributes combine in determining business-unit performance. They present in an accessible manner the consecutive phases of the QCA approach by analyzing a sample of 2,841 cases of business-unit performance, and they examine the insights that the QCA analysis provides for this particular stream of literature. The authors conclude with a discussion of the benefits and limitations QCA poses for strategic management research more generally, including major contingencies under which QCA or linear methods may be more appropriate for strategy research.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Greckhamer et al.'s study of how industry, corporate, and business-unit attributes combine to produce both superior and inferior performance illustrated QCA's potential to examine all three aspects of causal complexity and to explore the inherent limited diversity of organizational phenomena.
“Their study of how industry, corporate, and businessunit attributes combine to produce both superior and inferior performance illustrated QCA's potential to examine all three aspects of causal complexity (conjunction, equifinality, and asymmetry) and to explore the inherent limited diversity of organizational phenomena.”
From Embracing Causal Complexity: The Emergence of a Neo-Configurational Perspective (2017) · cites this paper as Greckhamer et al., 2008
One of the seven recipes of industry, corporate, and business-unit attributes found by Greckhamer et al. (2008) to produce high business-unit performance in the manufacturing sector involved large business-units in munificent industries.
“For example, one of the seven recipes of industry, corporate, and business-unit attributes found by Greckhamer et al. (2008) to produce high business-unit performance in the manufacturing sector involved large business-units in munificent industries.”
From Embracing Causal Complexity: The Emergence of a Neo-Configurational Perspective (2017) · cites this paper as Greckhamer et al., 2008
Greckhamer et al. (2008) aimed to advance the use of QCA in strategic management research.
“Greckhamer et al. (2008) aimed to advance the use of QCA in strategic management research.”
From Embracing Causal Complexity: The Emergence of a Neo-Configurational Perspective (2017) · cites this paper as Greckhamer et al., 2008
Another recipe among the seven configurations found by Greckhamer et al. (2008) was that high performance in the manufacturing sector resulted when business units were part of highly diversified corporations and operated in munificent industries.
“For example, another recipe among the seven configurations found by Greckhamer et al. (2008) was that high performance in the manufacturing sector resulted when business units were part of highly diversified corporations and operated in munificent industries-i.e., business-unit success came through either large size and high industry munificence or”
From Embracing Causal Complexity: The Emergence of a Neo-Configurational Perspective (2017) · cites this paper as Greckhamer et al., 2008
A third recipe among Greckhamer et al.'s (2008) findings for high performance in manufacturing involved business units that were not large and part of highly diversified corporations and that competed in industries that were not highly competitive and not highly dynamic.
“Continuing the previous example, a third recipe among Greckhamer et al.'s (2008) findings for high performance in manufacturing involved business units that were not large and part of highly diversified corporations and that competed in industries that were not highly competitive and not highly dynamic.”
From Embracing Causal Complexity: The Emergence of a Neo-Configurational Perspective (2017) · cites this paper as Greckhamer et al., 2008
Researchers frequently used QCA in an inductive theory elaboration effort to re-evaluate theoretical domains in a configurational manner.
“First, researchers frequently used QCA in an inductive theory elaboration effort to re-evaluate theoretical domains in a configurational manner: for example, in the domains of acquisitions (Campbell et al., 2015), of business- and corporate-level strategies (Greckhamer et al., 2008), of corporate governance (Misangyi & Acharya, 2014), of decoupling (Crilly et al., 2012), and of innovation (Meu”
From Embracing Causal Complexity: The Emergence of a Neo-Configurational Perspective (2017) · cites this paper as Greckhamer et al., 2008
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Building Better Causal Theories: A Fuzzy Set Approach to Typologies in Organization Research
Fiss, P. C. (2011) · Academy of Management Journal · doi:10.5465/amj.2011.60263120 · Cited by 5,930 · see citing works
A set-theoretic approach to organizational configurations
Fiss, P. C. (2007) · Academy of Management Review · doi:10.5465/amr.2007.26586092 · Cited by 2,225 · see citing works
Embracing Causal Complexity: The Emergence of a Neo-Configurational Perspective
Misangyi, V. F., Greckhamer, T., Furnari, S., Fiss, P. C., Crilly, D., & Aguilera, R. (2017) · Journal of Management · doi:10.1177/0149206316679252 · Cited by 1,099 · see citing works
Self-citationChapter 3 The Two QCAs: From a Small-N to a Large-N Set Theoretic Approach
Greckhamer, T., Misangyi, V. F., & Fiss, P. C. (2013) · Research in the Sociology of Organizations · doi:10.1108/s0733-558x(2013)0000038007 · Cited by 435 · see citing works
Self-citationMikalef, P., & Krogstie, J. (2020) · European Journal of Information Systems · doi:10.1080/0960085x.2020.1740618 · Cited by 331 · see citing works
Leadership Styles: A Comprehensive Assessment and Way Forward
Fischer, T., & Sitkin, S. B. (2023) · Academy of Management Annals · doi:10.5465/annals.2020.0340 · Cited by 303 · see citing works
- Authors
- Greckhamer, T., Misangyi, V. F., Elms, H., & Lacey, R.
- Affiliations
- Louisiana State University (US)
- University of Delaware (US)
- American University (US)
- University of California, Davis (US)
- Corresponding author
- Greckhamer, Thomas
- Venue
- Organizational Research Methods
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2007-11-28
- Volume
- 11
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 695-726
- ISSN
- 1094-4281 (ISSN-L)
- 1552-7425
- OpenAlex
- W1987139177
- Cited by
- 399
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 26 · 2025: 17 · 2024: 29 · 2023: 32 · 2022: 26 · 2021: 27 · 2020: 34 · 2019: 28 · 2018: 29 · 2017: 29 · 2016: 32 · 2015: 21 · 2014: 16 · 2013: 23 · 2012: 11
- FWCI
- 11.25
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Organizational Research Methods (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Qualitative Comparative Analysis Research
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Information Systems and Management › Business and Management Studies
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Strategy and Management › Strategic Planning and Analysis
- Keywords
- qualitative comparative analysis, strategic management research, business unit performance, firm characteristics, contingency theory, nonlinear effects
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review