___

• Adler, Paul ve Bryan Borys (1996), “Two Types Of Bureaucracy: Enabling And Coercive”, Administrative Science Quarterly, 61-89.
• Child, John (1984), Organization. New York: Harper & Row.
• Daft, Richard. ve Becker, Selwyn.W. (1978), The Innovative Organization. New York: Elsevier.
• Donaldson, Lex (1996), The Normal Science of Structural Contingency Theory. S. Clegg, C. Hardy ve W Nord Handbook of Organization Studies, London: Sage, 57-76.
• Donaldson, Lex (2001), The Contingency Theory of Organizations, Thousand Oaks:Sage.
• Doty, D Harold, Glick, William H ve Huber, George P. (1993), “Fit, Equifinality, and Organizational Effectiveness: A Test of Two Configurational Theories”, Academy of Management Journal, 36(6), 1196-1250.
• Drago, A. William (1998), “Structure as a Predictor of Strategic Planning Use”, Journal of Applied Business Research, 14(1), 125-137.
• Drazin, Robert ve Van de Hen, Andrew (1985), “Alternative Foms of Fit in Contingency Theory”. Administrative Science Quarterly, 30, 514-539.
• Ferguson, D. Tamela. ve Ketchen David.J. (1999), “Organizational Configurations and Performance: The Role of Statistical Power in Extant Research”, Strategic Management Journal, 20(4), 385-402.
• Forte, M., Hoffman, J.J., Lamont, B. ve Brockmann, E.N. (2000), “Organizational Form and Environment: An Analysis of Between-Form and Within-Form Responses to Environmental Change”, Strategic Management Journal, 21, 753-773.
• Frederickson, W. James (1986), “The Strategic Decision Process and Organizational Structure”, Academy of Management Review, 11(2), 280-297
• Govindarajan, Vijay (1988), “A Contingency Approach to Strategy Implementation at the Business- Unit Level: Integrating Administrative Mechanisms With Strategy”, Academy of Management Journal, 31(4), 828-853.
• Hage, Jerald. ve Aiken, Michael (1970), Social Change in Complex Organizations. New York: Random House.
• Hambrick, Donald (1983), “Some Tests of the Effectiveness and Functional Attributes of Miles And Snow’s Strategic Types”, Academy of Management Journal, 56(1), 5-26.
• Hamilton, Gary G. ve Biggart, N. Woolsey (1988), Market, Culture and Authority: A Comparative Analysis of Management and Organization in the Far East. American Journal of Sociology, 94 Ek: 52-94.
• Lee, Jonh ve Miller, Danny (1996), “Strategy, Environment and Performance in Two Technological Contexts: Contingency in Korea”, Organization Studies, 17(5), 729-750.
• Maurice, Marc (1976), “Introduction: Theoretical and Ideological Aspects of the Universalistic Approach To The Study ff Organization”, International Studies of Management & Organization, 6 (3): 3-10.
• Miller, Danny (1988), “Relating Porter's Business Strategies to Environment and Structure: Analysis and Performance Implications”, Academy of Management Journal, 31(2), 280-308.
• Miller, Danny (1981), “Toward a New Contingency Approach: The Search for Organization Gestalts”, Journal of Management Studies, 18(1), 1-26.
• Miller, Danny (1986), “Configurations of Strategy and Structure: Towards a Synthesis”, Strategic Management Journal, 7, 233-249.
• Miller, Danny (1987), “Strategy Making and Structure: Analysis and Implications for Performance”, Academy of Management Journal, 30(1), 7-32.
• Miller, Danny (1987), “The Genesis of Configuration”, Academy of Management Review, 12(4), 686-701.
• Miller, Danny (1992), “Environmental Fit Versus Internal Fit”, Organization Science, 3(2), 159-178.
• Miller, Danny (1996). “Configurations revisited. Strategic Management Journal, 17(7), 505-512.
• Miller, Danny ve Whitney, John O. (1999), “Beyond Strategy: Configuration as a Pillar of Competitive Advantage”, Business Horizons, 42 (3), 5-19.
• Mintzberg, Henry (1979), The Structure of Organizations, Englewood Cliffs (NJ), Prenctice-Hall.
• Mintzberg, Henry ve Lampel, Joseph. (1999), “Reflecting on The Strategy Process”, Sloan Management Review, 40(3), 21-30.
• Mintzberg, Henry., Lampel, J. ve Quinn, J., Ghoshal, Sumantra (2003), The Strategy Process: Concepts, Contexts, Cases, Prentice Hall, U.K.
• Orru, Marco., Biggart, N.W. ve Hamilton,G.G. (1991), Organizational Isomorphism in East Asia.
• The New Institutionalism in Organizational Analysis, Chicago, CH: The University of Chicago Press 361-389.
• Pfeffer, J. (1997), The New Directions for Organization Theory: Problems and Prospects, NewYork: Oxford University Press.
• Russell, Robert D. ve Russell, Craig J. (1992), “An Examination of the Effects of Organizational Norms, Organizational Structure, and Environmental Uncertainty on Entrepreneurial Strategy”, Journal of Management, 18(4), 639-656.
• Schoonhoven, Claudia. B. (1981), “Problems With Contingency Theory: Testing Assumptions Hidden Within The Language Of Contingency Theory”, Administrative Science Quarterly, 26, 349-377.
• Slevin, P. Dennis ve Covin G. Jeffrey (1997), “Strategy Formation Patterns, Performance, and the Significance of Context”, Journal of Management, 23(2), 189-200.
• Venkatmaran, N. ve Camillus, John C. (1984), “Exploring the Concept of “Fit” in Strategic Management”, Academy of Management Review, 9(3), 513-525.
• Venkatraman, N. (1989), “The Concept of Fit in Strtaegy Research: Toward Verbal and Statistical Correspondence”, Academy of Management Review, 14(3), 423-444.
• Whitley, Richard (1992), Societies, firms and markets: The social structuring of business systems. European Business Systems, Sage Publications, 5-45.
• Whitley, Richard (1994), “Dominant Forms of Economic Organizations in Market Economies”, Organization Studies, 15(2), 153-182
• Whitley, Richard (1999), Divergent Capitalisms: The Social Structuring and Change of Business Systems. New York: Oxford University Press.