Technological Forecasting & Social Change 211 (2025) 123907

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Technological Forecasting & Social Change

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/techfore

Configurational theory in business and management research: Status quo

and guidelines for the application of qualitative comparative
analysis (QCA)
Nadia Di Paola a , Simos Chari b, Federico Iannacci c , Sascha Kraus d,e,*
a
Department of Economics, Management, Institutions, University of Naples Federico II, Italy
b
Alliance Manchester Business School, University of Manchester, United Kingdom
c
Business School, University of Sussex, Brighton, United Kingdom
d
Faculty of Economics & Management, Free University of Bozen-Bolzano, Italy
e
Department of Business Management, University of Johannesburg, South Africa

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: Qualitative Comparative Analysis (QCA) has become a key method in Business and Management research,
Business sparking significant discussions about its use. While many studies have explored QCA’s application across
Management various research contexts, there has been limited focus on the critical link between its theoretical foundations
Configuration
and methodological applications. Our review of QCA literature in Business and Management research (n = 675
QCA
articles) reveals that many studies focus more on methodological aspects than configurational theorizing. Despite
Theory
Guidelines repeated calls for stronger theoretical integration, only a limited number of studies have successfully employed
QCA in a way that aligns theoretical principles with empirical investigation. Additionally, we found a pre­
dominant use of QCA in inductive research, though a surprising number of deductive studies misuse QCA for
hypothesis testing—despite its incompatibility with set-theoretic approaches. We clarify that QCA should not be
employed for hypothesis testing and emphasize its proper deductive use in evaluating theory through the
alignment of theoretical propositions and empirical findings. Furthermore, we provide guidelines for conducting
rigorous QCA and offer a research protocol to better align theoretical foundations with methodological appli­
cations. With this, the study contributes to the field by addressing gaps in how QCA is applied and enhancing its
use in configurational theorizing.

1. Introduction configurational phenomena, namely, the “traditional” and the “neo­

configurational” approach. Both schools have marked the proliferation
In recent years, there has been substantial growth in scholarly work of Qualitative Comparative Analysis (QCA) as an approach that revolves
in the social sciences that embraces configurational theorizing to explain around set-theoretic methods. The traditional school of thought con­
complex and intertwined phenomena. Scholars argue that traditional tends that empirical taxonomies and conceptual typologies are the main
symmetrical/correlation-based statistical methods (e.g. regression archetypes of configurational thinking (Miller, 2018). Whereas, the
analysis) tend to imply linear cause-effect relationships, thereby over­ neoconfigurational approach challenges the traditional approach by
looking the potential existence of multiple pathways to a given outcome showing that configurations are complex, interdependent systems
(Prentice, 2020; Woodside, 2018). By contrast, set-theoretic methods orchestrated together by central themes (Furnari et al., 2021).
adopt a nonlinear and asymmetric perspective that transcends linear The QCA approach has progressively solidified in the Business and
reasoning, offering diverse pathways that lead to the same outcome Management literature, capturing the attention of scholars exploring its
where the configurations producing the presence of the outcome are application in diverse subfields, such as marketing, finance, human re­
markedly different from those that lead to the absence of the outcome. sources, innovation, and entrepreneurship (Greckhamer et al., 2008;
Two schools of thought have evolved over the years explaining Kan et al., 2016; Kraus et al., 2018; Kumar et al., 2022; Nikou et al.,

* Corresponding author at: Department of Business Management, University of Johannesburg, South Africa.
E-mail addresses: [email protected] (N. Di Paola), [email protected] (S. Chari), [email protected] (F. Iannacci), [email protected]
(S. Kraus).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2024.123907
Received 27 March 2024; Received in revised form 2 October 2024; Accepted 18 November 2024
Available online 29 November 2024
0040-1625/© 2024 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Inc. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-
nc-nd/4.0/).
N. Di Paola et al. Technological Forecasting & Social Change 211 (2025) 123907

2022; Wagemann et al., 2016). QCA manifests itself in Business and events (Greckhamer et al., 2018). The conjunction principle posits that
Management research through contingency and configurational theories outcomes rarely have a single cause, but rather result from the combi­
despite its origins in other fields of study (Harms et al., 2009). In this nation and interaction of multiple interdependent conditions (Di Paola,
context, researchers have been employing QCA: a) inductively and 2021; Parente and Federo, 2019). Equifinality refers to the idea that more
deductively, b) as a standalone method or as part of a mixed-method than one combination of attributes can lead to the same outcome of
approach, and c) using different variants of QCA with varying sample interest (Misangyi et al., 2017). The asymmetry principle assumes non-
sizes. linear relationships among configurational attributes, which suggests
Notwithstanding the commonly accepted ability of the QCA that attributes found to be causally related in one configuration may be
approach to explain configurational phenomena and the plethora of unrelated or even inversely related to another (Meyer et al., 1993;
studies that have deployed QCA in Business and Management research, Ragin, 2008).
QCA applications appear to be predominantly driven by methodology Configurational theorizing provides a theoretical anchoring for QCA
rather than theory (Park et al., 2020). Additionally, existing QCA studies because of its focus on “causal recipes”, that is, specific combinations “of
have paid scant attention to existing guidelines for applying QCA in a causally relevant ingredients linked to an outcome” (Ragin, 2008, p. 9).
rigorous fashion (Furnari et al., 2021; Greckhamer et al., 2018). This can Configurational theorizing has evolved along two school of thought. The
be troublesome for a number of reasons. First, QCA is used by (quanti­ first wave (i.e., the “traditional school of thought”), spanning approxi­
tatively-minded) scholars as yet another quantitative technique where mately from 2008 to 2014, saw QCA researchers sparking important
conditions and outcomes are tantamount to predictor and criterion debates and revitalizing the configurational perspective in the man­
variables. Second, scholars lose focus of their cases using the parameters agement literature. The second wave, from 2014 to the present, wit­
of fit as the equivalent to the R2 (coverage score) and significance levels nessed the advocacy for a “neoconfigurational” perspective, drawing on
(consistency score). While there may be some substance to this argu­ set-theoretic logic, causal complexity, and counterfactual analysis
ment, it is important to stress that the acid test of a configurational study (Meuer and Fiss, 2020). Additional details can be found in Appendix A.
is “how well it resonates with case knowledge” (Ragin, 2008, p. 121).
Therefore, “returning to the cases” should be the central pivot and pillar 2.1. Traditional approach to configurational theorizing
of every configurational study (Oana et al., 2021; Rutten, 2022;
Schneider, 2024). Configurational theorizing has first received little attention (Furnari
Consequently, our study reviews the existing Business and Manage­ et al., 2021). This might depend on the propensity of theories to be
ment literature to: 1) examine the current state of research on configu­ molded by existing empirical tools and methodologies (Van Maanen
rational theorizing and QCA applications, 2) understand how scholars et al., 2007). The traditional approach to configurational theorizing has
apply configurational theorizing in QCA-based studies, and 3) provide applied correlation-based analytical tools. Specifically, work has
guidelines for conducting rigorous QCA in Business and Management implemented clustering techniques (e.g., Herhausen et al., 2022; Vesa­
research. We distinguish between applications of QCA in deductive and lainen and Kohtamäki, 2015), ideal profile deviation analysis (e.g.,
inductive studies. By drawing on an empirical example from the Busi­ Arunachalam et al., 2018; Moser and Korstjens, 2017), and analysis of
ness and Management research domain, we offer a protocol for the interaction effects (e.g., Homburg et al., 2002; Kwak et al., 2019) to
appropriate and rigorous application of QCA, with specific guidelines on establish and test the outcomes of configurations. Substantial conceptual
how to frame and perform the study and then interpreting and vali­ and methodological issues arose during the early empirical investigation
dating the results accordingly. The protocol is intended to support both of configurations (Miller, 2018), where the number of configurations
authors and reviewers in their work towards “good” QCA-based research increases exponentially when a large number of attributes participated
in Business and Management. in the phenomenon (Fiss, 2007).
Even though cluster analysis accommodates a large number of
2. Configurational theory as the foundation for QCA configurational variables, provides rich configurational descriptions and
allows the identification of multiple paths to an outcome (Frösén et al.,
Organizations and managers routinely face intricate challenges, 2013; Wilden et al., 2019), it does not reveal casual relations and how
necessitating to simultaneously consider multifaceted and complex configurational elements contribute to an outcome of interest (Nagy
phenomena (Harms et al., 2009). In addition, the inherent heterogeneity et al., 2019). Cluster analysis provides ad-hoc solutions that depend on
within organizations encourages researchers to explore subgroups and the selection of clustering method and clustering variables (Ketchen and
discern differences within them (Douglas et al., 2020). Thus, the Shook, 1996), are sensitive to outliers (Milligan and Cooper, 1987) and
application of configurational theory in Business and Management can be significantly distorted by the existence of spurious variables
research has proliferated in recent years (Meuer and Fiss, 2020). (Homburg et al., 2002). Additionally, cluster analysis may provide a
A configurational approach to theorizing is geared towards identi­ solution even if no meaningful clusters exist (Wiggins and Ruefli, 1995).
fying configurations between elements of interest; that is, groups of Regression analyses (e.g., interaction effects and deviation scores)
concurrent and interdependent factors forming patterns or gestalts are built on linear algebra and explain causal relationships as the
(Huang et al., 2024). Configurational theorizing is appropriate for covariation between independent and dependent variables (Misangyi
assessing sets of interrelated parameters, especially when linearity has et al., 2017). Regression-based models posit linearity—a positive
not been assumed and the associations between the parameters are more (negative) and significant relationship between predictor variable X and
reciprocal than unidirectional (Flynn et al., 2010). Configurational criterion Y indicates that a one-unit increase in the value of X, on its own
theory is anchored in the notion of causal complexity. The central notion and independent of any other variables, corresponds to an equal in­
of causal complexity posits that an outcome event rarely stems from a crease (decrease) in Y—between associations (Chari et al., 2016).
singular cause; rather, it may be the consequence of multiple causal Regression analyses also assume that associations between independent
factors working in unison (Ragin, 2008; Schneider and Wagemann, and dependent variables are symmetric—that is, low (high) degrees of
2012). Outcomes may arise from various combinations of causal factors, the independent variable X always correspond to low (high) degrees of
and the factors that contribute to the emergence of an outcome may not the dependent variable Y (Woodside, 2013). Finally, regression-based
necessarily offer insights into situations in which the outcome does not analyses rely on net-effect estimations—the effect size of each inde­
occur (Ragin, 1989). pendent variable on the dependent variable–after controlling for the
These considerations relate to the notions of conjunction, equifinality, impact of the other independent variables (Skarmeas et al., 2014).
and asymmetry—key principles of configurational theory—and make it However, net-effects may not adequately anticipate reality in complex
considerably more challenging for researchers to investigate real-world situations (Kumar et al., 2022) and cannot capture conjunction,

2
N. Di Paola et al. Technological Forecasting & Social Change 211 (2025) 123907

Fig. 1. Review protocol.

equifinality, or asymmetry (Parente and Federo, 2019). the QCA approach (Woodside, 2014). Configurations are viewed as
“multidimensional constellations” of outcome-relevant variables (Meyer
et al., 1993). Based on this line of reasoning, some implications follow:
2.2. Neo-configurational school of thought
First, the absence of a factor can be relevant in a configuration to better
understand the outcome (Misangyi et al., 2017); second, the study of
Qualitative Comparative Analysis (QCA; see e.g., Antonetti and
configurations that do not manifest empirically due to limited diversity
Manika, 2022; Salonen et al., 2021) was introduced, by the neo­
can also be entertained (Ragin, 2008).
configurational school of thought, as an alternative method for theo­
Configurational theorizing allows researchers to investigate the
rizing configurations and for addressing the key limitations of early
causal mechanisms behind an outcome and narrow the relevant attri­
configurational studies (Misangyi et al., 2017; Greckhamer et al., 2018).
bute combinations leading to that outcome. Accordingly, the configu­
Specifically, QCA was introduced to explain data inconsistencies
ration is the central unit of analysis. This is why the same condition may
(Furnari et al., 2021) and to be used as a theoretical lens to take a new
have varied impacts on the occurrence of the outcome depending on its
look at previously developed taxonomies and typologies (Fiss, 2011;
combination with other conditions (Iannacci and Kraus, 2022). In
Short et al., 2008).
addition, depending on how it interacts with other factors in the com­
QCA is a novel research approach that uses Boolean algebra and set
bination, a factor may also have opposite effects on the outcome when it
theory to identifying relevant configurations (Marx et al., 2014). Set
is included in alternative combinations.
theoretic methods are useful for understanding complex causal re­
Set-theoretic methods, such as QCA, view cases as set-theoretic
lationships and identifying the factors that drive the investigated phe­
configurations and rely on calibration procedures, necessity and suffi­
nomenon (Fiss et al., 2013).
ciency tests, and counterfactual analysis (Misangyi, 2016; Woodside,
Following the development of Mill’s idea of chemical causation, the
2014). On the methodological side, implementing QCA involves several
concept of “conjunctural causation” was derived from the investigation
key steps as outlined in the foundational literature (Aversa et al., 2015;
of the effects of interactions between factors (Marx et al., 2014). Rather
Greckhamer et al., 2018; Misangyi and Acharya, 2014; Misangyi et al.,
than focusing on the role of single conditions, by embracing configu­
2017; Siewert, 2024; Soda and Furnari, 2012). These steps include
rational theorizing and using QCA, researchers have examined how a set
identifying possibly relevant constructs, selecting cases that are theo­
of interrelated conditions works to produce the desired result (Kraus
retically relevant, performing the necessity/sufficiency tests and
et al., 2011; Rihoux and Ragin, 2008). QCA admits that different causal
choosing the appropriate solution, and interpret the outcomes with
conditions or their combinations can lead to the same outcome, which is
supplementary qualitative evidence (Bhattacharya, 2023; Glaesser,
characterized by equifinality (Ragin, 1987, 2000; Rihoux et al., 2013),
2023; Iannacci et al., 2023; Pagliarin et al., 2023). The theoretical
and it has good applicability to small sample sizes (Greckhamer et al.,
backbone of configurational studies using QCA as a set-theoretic
2013).
approach is essential for guiding research decisions throughout the
To obtain a comprehensive understanding of configurations, re­
process (Brush et al., 2024; Greener, 2024).
searchers must provide more than “a single causal model that best fits
the data” (Ragin, 2014: p. xxi), extending beyond the concept of a simple
linear relationship between a single cause and a corresponding effect
(Fiss et al., 2013; Misangyi et al., 2017). Configurational theory offers a
theoretical framework for understanding complex systems that matches

3
N. Di Paola et al. Technological Forecasting & Social Change 211 (2025) 123907

3. Methodology: reviewing the QCA-based business and methods (Berg-Schlosser et al., 2009; Schneider and Wagemann, 2010;
management literature Woiceshyn and Daellenbach, 2018). Kent (2005) positions QCA as
“midway between exploratory and hypothesis-testing research” (p.
The aim of the section is to reconstruct the state of the Business and 226), used both deductively and inductively. Deductive QCA often starts
Management literature that uses QCA, to understand the most wide­ with statements derived from an existing theory, evaluating rather than
spread practices of implementation of the methodology and analysis of generating a new theory (Thomann and Maggetti, 2020). In general,
results. critics contend that deductive research, despite its focus on methodo­
QCA has progressively captured the attention of Business and Man­ logical rigor, frequently overlooks compelling research questions, dis­
agement scholars for various reasons. QCA accommodates complexity, regards outliers, and fails to identify counterintuitive theoretical
allows for case analysis, has the ability to explore under-researched or mechanisms, thereby sacrificing the potential offered by the configu­
under-theorized areas and, being context-sensitive, can be used in both rational approach (Faems, 2020). Conversely, inductive QCA begins
large-N and small-N studies (Thomann, 2020). with data analysis, generating new insights for further theoretical
To present the current state of research on QCA in Business and development (Berg-Schlosser et al., 2009). For instance, Campbell et al.
Management, we conducted a review of all scientific articles from the (2016) use an inductive theory-building process to develop a middle-
Web of Science (WoS) database published up to the end of 2022. We range theory of investors’ reactions to acquisition announcements. In
used the review protocols employed by Kumar et al. (2022) and Sauer contrast, Fiss (2011) employs a deductive approach to analyze high-tech
and Seuring (2023), encompassing a series of steps for assembling and manufacturing firms to develop a theoretical perspective on causal
organizing the literature search and review (see Fig. 1). ‘core’ and ‘periphery’ based on configurational relationships.1
The initial phase involved identifying pertinent keywords related to Our review of Business and Management research reveals a clear
our research topic and defining the scope of the review in terms of the preference for inductive approaches in QCA-based studies, demon­
source quality, search mechanisms, and timeframe. In the subsequent strating that the configurational approach is predominantly employed to
phase, the inclusion and exclusion criteria were established. Our search develop new propositions. Only 23 % of the studies utilized deductive
criteria focused on the “topic” field, which encompassed the article’s reasoning. However, a closer examination of the use of QCA in deductive
title, abstract, and keywords, utilizing the search terms “Qualitative studies uncovered some unexpected findings. Notably, we found that 37
Comparative Analysis” or “QCA”. Journal articles were specifically % of QCA-based deductive studies are framed as hypothesis-testing
chosen as document and source type, and only articles written in English research and often use related terminology, explicitly articulating hy­
were considered (Kraus et al., 2022). A total of 1352 articles were potheses rather than propositions. This reflects a misapplication of
retrieved from the initial search. To further refine article selection, configurational theorizing, as the existing literature clearly argues that
article from non-core Business and Management journals (such as Ac­ QCA is not compatible with hypothesis testing due to fundamental dif­
counting, Economics, Finance etc.) have been excluded based on the ferences between hypothesis testing and set-theoretic methods. In
respective Association of Business Schools (ABS) ranking categories. contrast, the correct deductive application of QCA would involve eval­
Following Kraus et al. (2020), we applied a “quality threshold” of the uating theory by analyzing the alignment between theoretical proposi­
journal sources and included only journals with an ABS score of “3” or tions and empirical results, expressed through Boolean algebra
above. Among the journals that are most frequently present in our (Schneider and Wagemann, 2012).
dataset are the Journal of Business Research, Technological Forecasting and Nevertheless, recent applications of fuzzy-set QCA (fsQCA), such as
Social Change, Psychology & Marketing, Industrial Marketing Management, Ong and Johnson (2023), encompass both deductive and inductive ap­
International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, Public proaches. They examined the configurations of demands and resources,
Management Review, and International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behavior theorizing in a deductive fashion, and inductively developing proposi­
& Research. tions. This challenges traditional variable-centered approaches, high­
A comprehensive and relevant corpus comprising 802 documents lighting the value of QCA in capturing distinct configurations that lead
was gathered for subsequent analysis. The suitability of each identified to similar outcomes.
article was evaluated based on its title, abstract, and keywords, using
two primary criteria for inclusion, namely empirical studies and the 4.2. Theoretical framework
utilization of QCA. Non-empirical and methodological studies were
excluded from further analysis. Two experienced researchers indepen­ In 56 % of the reviewed articles, theoretical frameworks are devel­
dently reviewed all 802 articles, with the average interrater agreement oped by referencing specific theories. The most recurring theories in
score surpassing the recommended threshold of 0.80. All discrepancies QCA studies are Institutional Theory, the Resource-Based View (RBV), the
were resolved through discussion. After this initial screening, 127 pub­ Theory of Planned Behavior, Social Exchange Theory, and Agency Theory.
lications were removed, consisting of 104 studies that did not employ For instance, Beynon et al. (2021) explore how different combinations of
QCA and 23 methodological or review articles. This left 675 articles for a institutional conditions (in terms of regulatory, normative and cultural-
more in-depth investigation. cognitive aspects) affect business exit rates across countries. They use
All 675 articles were analyzed and coded, following a protocol the configurational approach to analyze a sample of 54 countries and
developed for coding key elements. The coding process was informed by find that different combinations of institutional factors have diverse
previous review studies (e.g., Morgan et al., 2019) and resulted in the effects on business exit rates, thus contributing to institutional theory
identification of five criteria, as follows: approach to research (inductive literature as well. Further, Huang et al. (2016) adopt the relational view
or deductive), theoretical frameworks/background (e.g., configura­ of the RBV theory of the firm to explain the effects of innovation,
tional theory), use of QCA as either a standalone method (single method) technology creation, quality management, and information manage­
or in conjunction with another methodology (mixed methods), type of ment capability on performance. They use QCA to show the impact that
QCA employed (e.g., crisp- or fuzzy-set), and the size of the datasets different combinations of resources may have on the outcome.
used. However, our findings reveal that studies using QCA do not always
use configurational theorizing as a theoretical background properly.
4. Review of the business and management literature on QCA Sixty-eight percent of the analyzed publications reference

4.1. Approach to research

1 Core conditions belong to both parsimonious and intermediate solutions whereas peripheral

QCA fits multiple research approaches being inherently multi- conditions belong to the intermediate solution only.

4
N. Di Paola et al. Technological Forecasting & Social Change 211 (2025) 123907

configurational theory at least once in the text.2 Nevertheless, only 10 % Table 1

of the papers elucidate their theoretical foundations, and a mere 5 % Overview of the use of QCA in Business and Management Research.
fully include configurational reasoning by addressing all sections, Criteria Findings
including the literature review and discussion, from a configurational
Approach to • 23 % employed deductive reasoning.
standpoint. These data indicate a substantial application of QCA in a research • 77 % utilized an inductive research approach.
non-theoretical manner. • 56 % of the articles utilized at least one theory.
• Institutional theory (6 %), resource-based view (4 %), the­
ory of planned behavior (3 %), social exchange theory (3
4.3. Type of QCA
%), and agency theory (2 %) were major theoretical
Theoretical
frameworks.
Predominantly, in the Business and Management literature, scholars framework
• 10 % of the articles provide details about the theoretical
use fuzzy-set Qualitative Comparative Analysis (fsQCA), and only a foundations of configurational theory.
handful of studies use other variations such as Crisp-set Qualitative • 5 % of the articles fully integrate configurational reasoning
by discussing all sections in a configurational perspective.
Comparative Analysis (csQCA), multi-value Qualitative Comparative
• 96 % utilized fuzzy-set Qualitative Comparative Analysis
Analysis (mvQCA), or two-step QCA. (fsQCA).
Crisp sets are defined by their dichotomous nature and ability to • 3 % employed crisp-set Qualitative Comparative Analysis
grasp differences in kind. Thanks to this approach, scholars can deter­ Type of QCA (csQCA).
Few papers used alternative typologies, including multi-
mine whether an observation is fully in a set or fully out of it. For •
value Qualitative Comparative Analysis (mvQCA) and two-
instance, Hemonnet-Goujot et al. (2019) use crisp-set to explore the step QCA.
drivers of New Product Development (NPD) success in the relationship • 73 % of the overall dataset utilized QCA as a stand-alone
between marketing and external design. Differently than csQCA, fsQCA method.
enables researchers to evaluate set membership not only in kind but also • 27 % applied a mixed-method approach, combining QCA
with other methodologies.
in degree (Meuer and Fiss, 2020), thus allowing for partial membership
Research • Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) and Partial Least
in sets (Rihoux and Lobe, 2009). Most articles use fsQCA in the Business methodology Squares (PLS) were the most prevalent quantitative methods
and Management literature. which have been applied together with QCA, accounting for
Two-step QCA addresses the complexity of social phenomena by 26 % and 14 %, respectively.
The case study approach was the most common qualitative
dividing the analysis into two phases. In the first step, it identifies the •
method, comprising 4 %.
necessary remote conditions for the outcome, thus pinpointing essential • Mean sample size was 772, significantly larger than the
factors for further sufficiency analysis including the proximate condi­ median sample size of 165.
tions, performed in the second step (Schneider, 2019). For instance, Dataset size • A subset of 36 studies reported dataset sizes >1000.
Leischnig and Kasper-Brauer (2016) use a two-step QCA to study the • The smallest dataset size was 6, and the largest was
123,931.
effect of industry and firm-specific factors on firm profitability. mvQCA
is a variant designed to handle complex sets of data that are not strictly
binary, allowing for multiple values for each condition rather than just organizational variables, such as openness to change and knowledge
two (presence or absence) (Pappas and Woodside, 2021). It is not widely sharing, contribute to the emergence of collaborative networks among
used in research and a live debate is open about it (Thiem, 2013). small Italian municipalities for sharing welfare services.
However, some studies adopt it, such as Liu et al. (2021) who use
mvQCA to understand the factors influencing inter-governmental 4.5. Dataset size
collaboration in China.
QCA was originally developed for small-N contexts, but its applica­
4.4. Research methodology applied in QCA studies tion has since expanded to large-N cases as well. Although both ap­
proaches share common theoretical assumptions, there are distinctions
According to our results, Business and Management research that have been acknowledged in the literature. In small-N QCA, the
frequently uses QCA as a stand-alone method. Some articles incorporate emphasis is on thoroughly examining the causal connections in a limited
QCA within a mixed-method approach, which involves combining both number of cases, whereas in large-N studies, the number of cases enables
qualitative and quantitative methodologies. The integration of mixed the identification of more widespread patterns (Greckhamer et al.,
methods in QCA research can enhance the validity and explanatory 2013).
power of the findings, and combining different methods can leverage the Small-N and large-N QCA are appropriate for both theory evaluation
strengths of both qualitative and quantitative approaches (Misangyi and theory development. However, some researchers contend that for
et al., 2017). In our review of Business and Management research, the the purpose of conducting exploratory research, it is particularly ad­
methodologies most frequently used in conjunction with QCA are vantageous to have the opportunity to delve deeply into cases, which is
Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) and Partial Least Squares (PLS). For especially the case in small-N studies (Pappas and Woodside, 2021). On
example, Abou-Foul et al. (2023) examine the impact of artificial in­ the other hand, large-N studies may be more suitable for evaluating
telligence capabilities on servitization, emphasizing the moderating role theoretical propositions (Greckhamer et al., 2013).
of absorptive capacity from a dynamic capabilities perspective. The Our analysis indicates a significant diversity in the dataset sizes
study utilizes SEM and fsQCA to analyze data from 185 manufacturing employed in Business and Management research. For instance,
firms. The findings suggest that AI capabilities positively influence ser­ Hemonnet-Goujot et al. (2019) conducted 18 face-to-face semi-struc­
vitization, and this relationship is strengthened by absorptive capacity. tured interviews to investigate nine fragrance and cosmetics brands in
Employing QCA alongside additional qualitative or quantitative the French luxury market. In contrast, Lopez et al. (2022) utilize the
techniques can potentially enable triangulation, thereby yielding a more Spanish Technological Innovation Panel survey and analyze data from
comprehensive understanding of the phenomenon (Anton et al., 2022). 7683 companies to examine the intricate relationship between innova­
For instance, Bonomi et al. (2020) incorporate QCA with content anal­ tion and export entry using csQCA. Additionally, Zheng et al. (2016)
ysis of recorded interviews to investigate which combinations of analyzed data from 123,931 virtual players to explore how role variety
and ability disparity impact virtual group performance using fsQCA and
regression analysis.
2 The search string used to explore the full text - including references - is: “configuration* theory*”

OR “configuration* approach”

5
N. Di Paola et al. Technological Forecasting & Social Change 211 (2025) 123907

Table 2
Indicative Studies of Heterogeneity in the QCA-based Business and Management Literature.
Reference Aim of the study Approach Theoretical Type Research Use of HPa testing Dataset size
to research framework of methodology structure/wording
QCA

286. Howell, T., Bingham, C., &

Hendricks, B. (2022). Going
The study examines why and
alone or together? A Mixed methods
how solo founders can be as Configurational
configurational analysis of Inductive fsQCA (case study and No 70
successful as their peers in theory
solo founding vs. cofounding. QCA)
cofounded ventures.
Organization Science, 33(6),
2421–2450.
317. Jacobs and Cambré
No hypotheses,
(2020). Designers’ road (s) to The research explores how Theory of
but propositions
success: Balancing independent designers can ambidexterity,
Inductive fsQCA Single method presented before 48
exploration and exploitation. integrate artistic and economic Upper echelon
the empirical
Journal of Business Research, elements to achieve success. theory
analysis
115, 241–249.
319. Jenson, I., Doyle, R., &
Miles, M. P. (2020). An The study investigates the
Mixed methods
entrepreneurial marketing interrelationships and network
(statistical
process perspective of the role linkages between innovation Innovation system
Inductive fsQCA inference, network No 239
of intermediaries in system actors to understand theory
analysis, and fuzzy-
producing innovation how these contribute to
set qualitative)
outcomes. Journal of Business innovation performance.
Research, 112, 291–299
335. Kapsali, M., Roehrich, J.
K., & Akhtar, P. (2019). The study examines
Effective contracting for high combinations of contract clauses 45 projects,
operational performance in to determine which Hybridb Contracting theory fsQCA Single method Yes 98
projects. International journal combinations correlate with interviews
of operations & production high operational performance.
management, 39(2), 294–325.
420. Malik, M., & Orr, S.
(2022). A configurational The aim of the research is to
Socio-technical
examination of agile explore the interactions Mixed methods
systems theory,
development as a between the components of Deductive fsQCA (Contrarian case Yes 202
configurational
sociotechnical system. agile development and their analysis and QCA)
theory
Industrial Marketing impact on work outcomes.
Management, 104, 325–339.
a
HP stands for hypothesis testing.
b
The authors define the study as “mid-way between a purely deductive variable-oriented and purely inductive case-based study” (p. 9).

4.6. Conclusion – Heterogeneity in QCA applications with Kumar et al. (2022) who state that QCA is more suitable for
developing propositions than for hypothesis-testing. The heterogeneity
Our review concludes that the existing body of knowledge in the in the implementation of configurational reasoning and QCA in Business
Business and Management studies that uses QCA is remarkably hetero­ and Management research needs a protocol for the effective application
geneous. Table 1 summarizes the findings for each research criterion. of QCA. Accordingly, utilizing the research of Yu and Huarng (2023), we
QCA can be employed with both inductive and deductive ap­ offer guidelines for researchers on the deductive or inductive application
proaches, as well as with very different dataset sizes. Our review in­ of QCA in Business and Management research.
dicates that several studies are largely atheoretical, lacking any
theoretical framework, while the theory-based studies exhibit consid­
erable variation in the theories employed. The most utilized focal the­ 5.1. How to apply QCA in deductive research design
ories include institutional theory, the resource-based view, and the
theory of planned behavior. Furthermore, the review reveals that several A deductive approach should be used to evaluate theoretical prop­
studies utilize configurational theorizing; yet, significant variations arise ositions coming from existing theories in a mature research domain
in its application and whether it effectively influences the various where “prior theories with relatively clear predictions” exist (Park et al.,
components of the studies. The data reveal that a limited number of 2020, p. 1500). QCA in a deductive research design should be performed
studies have appropriately employed it in either a deductive or inductive in four steps: 1) formulating causal recipes in terms of Boolean propo­
approach. In Table 2, we present five indicative examples of this type of sitions, 2) performing an empirical analysis using QCA, 3) interpreting
heterogeneity which covers all the criteria. The level of heterogeneity empirical findings, and 4) validating causal recipes by means of in­
allows us to set the stage for our prescriptive guidelines for a “good” tersections between theoretical propositions and empirical findings.
QCA. In their paper, Yu and Huarng (2023) aimed to investigate the causal
relationships (or solutions) in the Global Innovation Index (GII) internal
5. Towards a protocol for a “good” QCA: an illustrative structure. The GII was launched in 2007 to identify the metrics and
empirical study methods that capture a holistic picture of innovation (Cornell Univer­
sity, INSEAD and WIPO, 2021). Cornell University, the INSEAD Business
Business and Management research in general has shown a prefer­ School and the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO)
ence for deductive approaches (Denzin, 2018), but, according to our launched the GII to evaluate the level of innovation performance in
review, QCA in Business and Management research contributes to national innovation systems and to support the development of policies
rebalancing this trend towards an inductive approach, which is in line and practices accordingly. Over the years, researchers tested the validity
and reliability of the GII by producing five input enablers (i.e.,

6
N. Di Paola et al. Technological Forecasting & Social Change 211 (2025) 123907

Institutions, Human Capital & Research, Infrastructure, Market So­ role of Market Sophistication” in the GII (Huarng and Yu, 2022, p. 6).
phistication and Business Sophistication) and two outputs (i.e., Knowl­ In the third step, scholars review the different configurations that fall
edge & Technology Outputs and Creative Outputs). Compared with under the chosen type of solution (e.g., intermediate). The explanatory
other innovation indices, the GII has several distinctive aspects overlap is verified by identifying the cases associated with each
(Erzurumlu et al., 2022). For example, it encompasses a large number of configuration to understand how many cases are common among the
countries and factors for innovation-enabling inputs and outputs, it configurations. Combinatorial logic can be verified by comparing con­
measures both R&D activities and creative outputs, it uses mainly hard figurations in the search for relationships between conditions. For
data, and it captures the notion of innovation efficacy in a systemic example, the configuration leading to Knowledge and Technology
fashion (Wang et al., 2021). Accordingly, the GII has the potential to Output (fsKTO) has three core elements, namely, Institutions (fsIs),
switch policy interventions from input-output approaches to more sys­ Human Capital (fsHCR) and Market Sophistication (fsMS) that encap­
temic approaches where causes and effects can combine in different and sulate which elements are important for the outcome of interest (i.e., the
sometimes contradictory ways to produce a high GII. Hence, the aim of factorial logic).3 Furthermore, both core (fsIs, fsHCR, fsMS) and pe­
Yu and Huarng’s (2023) study was to identify combinations (or con­ ripheral elements (fsIr, fsBS) complement each other to arrive at fsKTO
figurations) of innovation inputs that produce both high Knowledge & and this configuration uniquely covers these cases: Australia, Austria,
Technology Outputs and Creative Outputs. Armed with an in-depth re­ Belgium, Canada, Chile, China, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia,
view of the relevant literature, Yu and Huarng (2023) formulated two Finland, France, Germany, Hong Kong, Iceland, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Japan,
theoretical propositions a priori: Korea, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malaysia, Netherlands, New Zea­
land, Norway, Portugal, Singapore, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, United Arab
Proposition 1. (P1): Institutions, Human Capital and Research,
Emirates, United Kingdom, USA, thus showing a high degree of explana­
Infrastructure, Market Sophistication, and Business Sophistication
tory power (as its raw and unique coverage is 0.66).
positively affect Knowledge and Technology Outputs.
Compared with the configuration for fsKTO, the configuration for
Proposition 2. (P2): Institutions, Human Capital and Research, Creative Output (fsCO) has only two core elements (fsIs and fsHCR), thus
Infrastructure, Market Sophistication, and Business Sophistication highlighting a more parsimonious factorial logic. Nevertheless, these
positively affect Creative Outputs. core elements complement the other two elements (i.e., fsIr and fsBS) on
a par with the configuration for fsKTO. Considering that the fsCO
Accordingly, in the first step, scholars should frame their theoretical
configuration is more parsimonious than the fsKTO configuration, the
propositions using Boolean algebra, as follows:
fsCO configuration has a higher explanatory power (raw and unique
Proposition 1 (P1): fsIs * fsHCR* fsIr * fsMS * fsBS →.fsKTO
coverage is 0.72) and captures a larger number of cases in a unique
Where: “*” stands for logical AND; “→ “stands for the logical implication sign (“is
sufficient for”); fs = fuzzy set; Is = Institutions; HCR = Human Capital & Research;
fashion (i.e., Brunei, Darussalam, Bulgaria, Costa Rica, Croatia, Greece,
Ir = Infrastructure; MS = Market Sophistication; BS = Business Sophistication; KTO Hungary, Malta, Poland, Serbia, Slovakia, Slovenia, Australia, Austria,
= Knowledge & Technology Outputs Belgium, Canada, Chile, China, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark,
Proposition 2 (P2): fsIs * fsHCR* fsIr * fsMS * fsBS → fsCO Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Hong Kong, Iceland, Ireland, Israel,
Where: “*” stands for logical AND; “→ “stands for the logical implication sign (“is
Italy, Japan, Korea, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malaysia,
sufficient for”); fs = fuzzy set; Is = Institutions; HCR = Human Capital & Research;
Ir = Infrastructure; MS = Market Sophistication; BS = Business Sophistication; CO Netherlands, NewZealand, Norway, Portugal, Singapore, Spain, Swe­
= Creative Outputs den, Switzerland, United Arab Emirates, United Kingdom, United States
of America).
Finally, in the fourth step, scholars validate their causal recipes
In the second step, scholars perform the QCA analysis. Considering through intersections between theoretical propositions and empirical
that we are using Yu and Huarng’s (2023) example for illustrative findings. Using the example reported above, the intersection between
purposes, we will only conduct an fsQCA analysis of their most recent the theoretical propositions (P1, P2) and empirical findings (E1, E2) can
dataset (i.e., the 2020 dataset) using 0.80 for consistency (and PRI) be outlined as follows:
thresholds and two cases for the frequency threshold (cf. Yu and Huarng,
Expression1: fsIs*fsHCR*fsIr*fsMS*fsBS**fsIs*fsHCR*fsIr*fsMS*fsBS
2023, p. 3). Our fsQCA analysis produced the following empirical Intersection1: fsBS*fsHCR*fsIr*fsIs*fsMS
findings. Expression2: fsIs*fsHCR*fsIr*fsMS*fsBS**fsIs*fsHCR*fsIr*fsBS
Intersection2: fsBS*fsHCR*fsIr*fsIs*fsMS
E1: fsIs*fsHCR*fsIr*fsMS*fsBS → fsKTO
E2: fsIs*fsHCR*fsIr*fsBS → fsCO

Accordingly, both intersections produce similar results. This, in turn,

It is worth stressing that, when conducting deductive QCA, one means that when using QCA deductively, both theoretical propositions
should set out “directional expectations”, i.e., clearly justified theoret­ are fully supported by empirical findings. Proposition 2 (P2) is fully
ical arguments whereby “a single condition is expected to contribute to supported because P2 is a subset of empirical findings (E2).4
the occurrence of the outcome when it is present rather than absent (or
vice versa)” (Schneider and Wagemann, 2012, p. 325). “However, 5.2. How to apply QCA in inductive research design
identifying core versus peripheral elements may not always be theo­
retically justifiable and thus is not a necessary step for articulating Whereas the deductive use of QCA starts with carefully-crafted
causal recipes deductively” (Park et al., 2020, p. 1501; footnote 6). theoretical propositions, the inductive use of QCA is more exploratory
Furthermore, the empirical findings reported above mirror Yu and in nature and, therefore, is more suitable for novel research domains
Huarng’s (2023, p. 4) empirical findings, namely that the solution with
Market Sophistication produces Knowledge & Technology Outputs,
whereas the solution without Market Sophistication produces Creative 3 Please recall that “the factorial logic describes which elements are important for the outcome of

Outputs. Put differently, Market Sophistication works alongside the interest to occur and why [sic] On the other hand, the combinatorial logic explains how the different

other inputs (i.e., Institutions, Human Capital & Research, Infrastructure elements of the configuration relate to one another to produce the outcome in an analytical way” (Park

et al., 2020, p. 1498).

and Business Sophistication) to produce Knowledge & Technology 4 Note that to enhance the reliability of fsQCA results, one can run several robustness tests by
Outputs, whereas it can be either present or absent in the configuration
changing both consistency and frequency thresholds and, subsequently, checking that the new results
that produces Creative Outputs, thus corroborating calls for further are a subset of the original results. For an overview of the robustness test protocol, please see Oana
studies that “probe into the detail and the possible reasons to analyze the et al. (2021, p.144-158).

7
N. Di Paola et al. Technological Forecasting & Social Change 211 (2025) 123907

Fig. 2. Enhanced XY Plot for knowledge and technology output.

Fig. 3. Enhanced XY Plot for creative output.

that lack pre-existing theories.5 In this case, the inductive use of QCA much as possible about this novel domain and develop a set of constructs
aims to build or develop new theoretical propositions in a bottom-up based on their substantive knowledge of this new research domain. For
fashion, based on empirical findings from the QCA. The inductive pro­ example, assuming that the GII charts a novel phenomenon with no or
cess consists of four analytical steps: 1) understanding the phenomenon few a priori theories, Yu and Huarng (2023) could have selected a set of
of interest, 2) performing an empirical analysis using QCA, 3) inter­ variables based on existing reports published by the World Intellectual
preting the empirical findings, and 4) performing a within-case analysis. Property Organization (WIPO) among others. Having read the various
Accordingly, in the inductive use of QCA, the first step is to under­ expert reports, they should have chosen five innovation inputs (Is, HCR,
stand the phenomenon of interest. Hence, researchers should learn as Ir, MS, BS) as antecedents for the two innovation outputs (i.e., KTO and
CO).
In the second step, Yu and Huarng (2023) conduct an empirical
analysis based on QCA. Their empirical analysis produces two separate
5 For a recent application of fsQCA in an inductive fashion, please see: Huang et al. (2024).

8
N. Di Paola et al. Technological Forecasting & Social Change 211 (2025) 123907

Table 3 typical ones, so as to be able to understand if there are possible condi­

Guidelines for applying QCA in Business and Management research. tions omitted in the analysis (Schneider and Rohlfing, 2016; Di Paola
Deductive research and Russo Spena, 2019). While the comparison between typical and
deviant consistency (in kind) cases located, respectively, at the top-right
Analytical steps Guidelines
and bottom-right hand corner of the X, Y plot enables the identification
1) Formulating causal recipes in a) Scholars frame their theoretical of omitted conditions, QCA scholars should compare typical cases (in the
terms of Boolean propositions propositions using Boolean algebra
b) Scholars perform QCA analysis
top-right corner of the X, Y plot) with individually-irrelevant cases (in
2) Performing an empirical c) In performing QCA analysis, scholars set out the bottom-left corner of the X, Y plot) to get to the bottom of the causal
analysis using QCA “directional expectations” in coherence with mechanisms and, therefore, pinpoint the causal properties of these
their theoretical expectations mechanisms (cf. Oana et al., 2021; p. 186). The results of our illustrative
d) Scholars check explanatory overlap and
example are reported below for the Knowledge and Technology Output
deepen combinatorial logic to understand how
different elements of the configuration relate configuration and the Creative Output configuration respectively (see
to one another (e.g., complementarity, Figs. 2 and 3 respectively.
3) Interpreting empirical findings substitutability, etc.)
e) Scholars deepen factorial logic to
5.3. A protocol for a “good” QCA in business and management research
understand which elements are important for
the outcome of interest to occur and why (i.e.,
core vs. periphery) Starting from the contribution of Park et al. (2020) and integrating a
4) Validating the causal recipes in
e) Scholars validate their causal recipes by case-based perspective, we use Yu and Huarng’s (2023) example, which
means of intersections between theoretical leverages a publicly-available dataset from the Global Innovation Index,
terms of Boolean propositions
propositions and empirical findings
to provide guidelines on applying QCA in deductive and inductive
Inductive research
Analytical steps Guidelines Business and Management research (see Table 3). Their purpose is to
a) Scholars learn as much as possible about the enhance the integration of configurational theorizing into the empirical
1) Understanding the phenomenon
novel domain advancement of QCA-based Business and Management research.
b) Scholars come up with a set of constructs
of interest In deductive QCA, it is essential to intersect the causal recipes
based on their substantive knowledge of this
new research domain
derived from theory, and articulated using Boolean algebra, with the
2) Performing an empirical empirical findings of QCA to identify the subset of causal combinations
c) Scholars perform a QCA analysis
analysis using QCA that were both theorized and found. If there is a perfect match, the
d) Scholars interpret the empirical findings theory can be fully supported because the intersection between theo­
e) In the interpretation, they develop new
3) Interpreting the empirical retical propositions and empirical findings describes “the part of the
theoretical propositions
findings
f) Scholars run a new round of QCA based on theory that is supported by empirical evidence” (Schneider and Wage­
their substantive knowledge mann, 2012: p. 298). In inductive QCA instead, the aim of the study is
g) Scholars select the cases to deepen their either to develop descriptive inferences with the goal of identifying
4) Performing a within-case findings
omitted conditions from the QCA solution “derived via the logical
analysis h) Scholars perform a within-case analysis for
grasping causal relationships
minimization of a truth table” (Schneider, 2024, p. 11) or to probe the
causal properties of the model to unravel the causal mechanisms that
link causal conditions and outcomes.
configurations of antecedent conditions that lead to the outcome:
E1: fsIs*fsHCR*fsIr*fsMS*fsBS → fsKTO 6. Concluding remarks
E2: fsIs*fsHCR*fsIr*fsBS → fsCO
Configurational theorizing offers a non-linear and multidimensional
lens to systematically investigate causal links. Due to the intricate
In the third step, Yu and Huarng (2023) interpret their empirical
theoretical and configurational challenges in Business and Management
findings to develop new theoretical propositions. For example, they
research, where multiple approaches are crucial, research incorporating
could craft the following propositions (Ps).
configurational theorizing and applied QCA has increased exponentially
Proposition 3. (P3): Institutions, Human Capital & Research, Infra­ (Park et al., 2020). Applications of configurational theorizing can be
structure and Business Sophistication are Insufficient, but Necessary observed in a variety of areas such as e.g. organizational governance and
parts of more complex recipes that are Unnecessary but Sufficient culture (e.g., Vorhies and Morgan, 2003); management control (e.g.,
(INUS) for both Knowledge & Technology Outputs and Creative Frösén et al., 2016); retailing (e.g., Hui et al., 2009); business-to-
Outputs. business and supply chain (e.g., Biemans et al., 2010; Kabadayi et al.,
2007); innovation (e.g., Ganter and Hecker, 2014); customer service (e.
Proposition 4. (P4): Whereas Market Sophistication is an INUS con­
g., Skålén et al., 2015); or strategic planning (e.g., Claycomb et al.,
dition for Knowledge & Technology Outputs, it is an irrelevant (or
2000).
“don’t care”) condition for Creative Outputs.
Despite the growing adoption of QCA, its implementation in Business
This new set of propositions should subsequently be evaluated and Management studies often leans more towards emphasizing
empirically in a new round of (abductive) QCA based on the substantive methods than towards configurational theory. Despite continuous calls
knowledge that achieving Knowledge & Technology Outputs may be for configurational theorizing (Greckhamer et al., 2018; Misangyi et al.,
more demanding than achieving Creative Outputs because Knowledge & 2017; Furnari et al., 2021; Park et al., 2020), a restricted percentage of
Technology Outputs are linked with more sophisticated market condi­ Business and Management studies have successfully utilized QCA by
tions (e.g., ease of getting credit, higher degree of investments in tech­ clarifying and integrating its principles within both the theoretical
nology projects, etc.). framework and empirical investigation. Accordingly, only a handful of
The fourth step consists of performing a within-case analysis. It is papers have appropriately employed QCA either in a deductive or
based on the idea that an in-depth analysis of individual cases offers the inductive fashion. Not only have deductive studies failed to create in­
possibility of verifying the presence and functioning of causal links be­ tersections between Boolean expressions describing theory and empir­
tween relevant conditions and outcomes. The selection of cases to be ical findings, but also few inductive studies have returned to the cases to
investigated can be done by including deviant cases in addition to identify omitted conditions or get to the bottom of causal mechanisms.
This study provides recommendations for using QCA in Business and

9
N. Di Paola et al. Technological Forecasting & Social Change 211 (2025) 123907

Management research. The results showcase the potential of employing relationships between a set of causal conditions and the outcome
QCA deductively for theory evaluation and inductively for theory (Skarmeas et al., 2014).6
development. A deductive approach is suitable for evaluating theoret­ Regression-based analyses (e.g., interaction effect analysis) rely on
ical propositions, whereas an inductive approach is suitable for devel­ net-effect estimations. A net-effect estimation calculates the effect size of
oping a new theory in situations where predicting configurations a priori each independent variable with reference to the dependent variable,
is challenging (Park et al., 2020). The implications for theory and after controlling for the impact of other independent variables (Liu et al.,
research are relevant. First, this study underscores the suitability of QCA 2017). Thus, multicollinearity or high correlations between the pre­
as a research method for examining configurational theorizing in Busi­ dictors can affect the net-effect findings (Chari et al., 2016). Further­
ness and Management. Its advantages lie in addressing the intricate more, net-effect estimations do not always reflect all aspects of reality; in
characteristics of theoretical and configurational diversity, which any given dataset, some cases may not always support an exclusive
necessitate multidimensional approaches. Second, it identifies and positive or negative relationship between the predictor and outcome
quantifies the present mismatch between theoretical frameworks and variables (Skarmeas et al., 2014). Thus, estimations based on net-effects
research procedures in Business and Management using QCA, empha­ may be misleading and not fully trusted.
sizing the importance of basing future studies on the theoretical foun­ By contrast, QCA does not aim to identify which predictor variable
dations of configurational theorizing and incorporating it in the has the highest explanatory power, as it presupposes that the outcome of
empirical study. The crucial components include sets, calibration, interest derives from the interdependence of multiple conditions
qualitative outcomes, created populations, set relations, and causal (Parente and Federo, 2019). QCA views phenomena as gestalts of
recipes (Ragin, 2014). Third, considering the distinct roles of deductive interconnected elements and interprets the findings in a holistic and
and inductive approaches in explaining Business and Management integrated manner (Ragin, 2008). QCA identifies “commonalities across
phenomena, it is essential to formulate research aims and follow pre­ cases in the form of consistent subset relations between the theoretically
scribed guidelines (see Table 3). relevant attributes and outcomes of interest” (Misangyi et al., 2017, p.
Despite the potential of these prescriptive guidelines to inform both 10). Thus, instead of relying on net-effect estimations, QCA identifies
QCA authors and reviewers alike, it is worth stressing that these necessary (i.e., conditions that produce the outcome, but by themselves
guidelines underestimate the role of time and temporality in Business may not be enough) and sufficient (i.e., conditions that always lead to
and Management research. Accordingly, refining these guidelines to the outcome) relations between sets (Ragin, 2000, 2008).
account for the temporal dimension is an important direction for future Except for the interaction effects analysis, all other established
research (for early attempts, please see Du et al., 2024; Pagliarin and correlation-based methods (i.e., cluster and profile deviation analyses)
Gerrits, 2020; Rupietta and Meuer, 2024). Nevertheless, the guidelines can address the key principle of equifinality. In regression models, the
presented in this paper offer an opportunity for academics to bridge the predictor variables are treated as competing in explaining variance in
gap between configurational theory and methods in QCA studies, the outcome; thus, they cannot demonstrate how different predictors
thereby increasing the influence of configurational theorizing in the can cooperate or combine to create high degrees of outcome (Fiss,
field. For example, these guidelines enable QCA scholars to handle large 2007). Unlike regression-based models, QCA highlights how causes are
sample sizes, to perform theoretical exploration of causal relationships combined with the outcome. QCA interprets the effect of an individual
and to pinpoint the properties of causal mechanisms linking the initial predictor by considering the presence and/or absence of other pre­
conditions with the outcome of interest. Researchers are encouraged to dictors, thus leading to a better understanding of the effect of the vari­
draw inspiration from these guidelines to enhance the application of able in “context” (Liu et al., 2017). QCA provides multiple solution
configurational theory in Business and Management studies. pathways that lead to the same outcome, and by illustrating combina­
tory conditions and examining the effects of combinations, QCA pro­
CRediT authorship contribution statement vides a more nuanced coverage of reality and further insights than single
net-effect estimations (Skarmeas et al., 2014). In addition, QCA enables
Nadia Di Paola: Writing – review & editing, Writing – original draft, researchers to evaluate configurations of conditions in terms of com­
Formal analysis, Data curation, Conceptualization. Simos Chari: plementary or substitutive relationships (El Sawy et al., 2010; Park et al.,
Writing – review & editing, Writing – original draft, Validation, Soft­ 2020). Drawing on theoretical or substantive knowledge, researchers
ware, Methodology, Formal analysis. Federico Iannacci: Writing – re­ can identify multiple configurations (or combinations) of conditions
view & editing, Writing – original draft, Visualization, Validation, where some conditions may complement each other by being jointly
Methodology, Conceptualization. Sascha Kraus: Writing – review & present (e.g., A*B) and yet other conditions may substitute for each
editing, Writing – original draft, Supervision, Methodology, other (e.g., conditions C+~D in the Boolean expression A*B*(C+~D)
Conceptualization. where A, B, C, and ~D are conditions, * indicates logical AND, + in­
dicates logical OR, and ~indicates logical NOT).
Appendix A. Traditional versus neo-configurational school of Regarding asymmetry, none of the correlation-based methods can
thought accommodate the causal asymmetry assumption between variables
(Frösén et al., 2016). Every regression-based technique makes the
When comparing the traditional (i.e., correlation-based approached) simplifying assumption of symmetry. Regression-based models are
with the “neoconfigurational” QCA school of thought, four criteria may geared towards understanding the problem from the perspective of
be analyzed: (1) the capacity to disentangle the individual impact of variance theories, in which a predictor variable is posited to be both
each configurational parameter on the outcome of interest, (2) the necessary and sufficient for the outcome (Liu et al., 2017). However, in
ability to explain complex interactions among the characteristics of the reality, the relationship between an outcome and its predictors is often
configuration, (3) conformity to the principle of equifinality, and (4) not symmetric. In an asymmetric relationship, X may be either a
competence to model causal asymmetry between variables. necessary or sufficient condition for Y (Fiss, 2007). In regression-based
Analytical approaches such as clustering and profile deviation ana­ analyses, a non-significant relationship is interpreted as a confirma­
lyses have limited abilities to provide insights into the causal nature of a tion that there is no effect whatsoever; it rejects the existence of linear
configuration – that is, they are not well equipped to disentangle the relationships between certain predictors and the outcome. However,
individual effects of configurations and identify which of the individual
configurational characteristics lead to higher levels of the outcome (Fiss,
2011). Analytical methods, such as interaction effects, are less adept to 6 As scholars note (e.g., Vis, 2012), interpreting more than two-way interactions can be very

capture and justify complex (e.g., higher-order) interdependent challenging.

10
N. Di Paola et al. Technological Forecasting & Social Change 211 (2025) 123907

Table A Aversa, P., Furnari, S., Haefliger, S., 2015. Business model configurations and
Differences between the Traditional and the Neo-Configurational Schools of performance: A qualitative comparative analysis in Formula One racing, 2005–2013.
Ind. Corp. Chang. 24 (3), 655–676.
Thought. Berg-Schlosser, D., De Meur, G., Rihoux, B., Ragin, C.C., 2009. Qualitative comparative
Correlation-based Set-theoretic analysis (QCA) as an approach. Configurational comparative methods: qualitative
configurational configurational comparative analysis (QCA) and related techniques. Techniques 1, 18.
methods methods Beynon, M., Battisti, M., Jones, P., Pickernell, D., 2021. How institutions matter in the
context of business exit: a country comparison using GEM data and fsQCA. Br. J.
Capacity to disentangle the Manag. 32 (3), 832–851.
individual impact of each Bhattacharya, P., 2023. How to build and analyze a panel data QCA model? A
Yes No methodological demonstration of Garcia-Castro and Arino’s panel data QCA model.
configurational parameter on
the outcome of interest Methodol. Innov. 16 (3), 265–275.
Ability to explain complex Biemans, W.G., Brenčič, M.M., Malshe, A., 2010. Marketing–sales interface
Yes, but only limited configurations in B2B firms. Ind. Mark. Manag. 39 (2), 183–194.
interactions among the Yes, and beyond two-
to two-way Bonomi, S., Sarti, D., Torre, T., 2020. Creating a collaborative network for welfare
characteristics of the way interaction effects
interaction services in public sector. A knowledge-based perspective. J. Bus. Res. 112, 440–449.
configuration
Brush, G.J., Guo, X., Hunting, A., Frethey-Bentham, C., 2024. Using qualitative
Conformity to the principle of comparative analysis to identify complex solutions and optimal combinations of
No Yes
equifinality conditions influencing COVID vaccine acceptance: a primer for QCA. J. Macromark.
Competence to model causal 44 (2), 276–306.
No Yes
asymmetry between variables Campbell, J.T., Sirmon, D.G., Schijven, M., 2016. Fuzzy logic and the market: a
configurational approach to investor perceptions of acquisition announcements.
Acad. Manage. J. 59 (1), 163–187.
Chari, S., Tarkiainen, A., Salojärvi, H., 2016. Alternative pathways to utilizing customer
from a causal asymmetry perspective, predictors reported with no sig­ knowledge: a fuzzy-set qualitative comparative analysis. J. Bus. Res. 69 (11),
nificant relationships in the regression models may be deemed relevant 5494–5499.
conditions by QCA in different solution pathways, thus highlighting that Claycomb, C., Germain, R., Dröge, C., 2000. The effects of formal strategic marketing
planning on the industrial firm’s configuration, structure, exchange patterns, and
specific predictors can be either necessary or sufficient for the outcome performance. Ind. Mark. Manag. 29 (3), 219–234.
variable. Cornell University, INSEAD and WIPO, 2021. The Global Innovation Index 2021:
Finally, regression-based models posit linearity (Chari et al., 2016). Tracking Innovation Through the COVID-19 Crisis. Ithaca, Fontainebleau, and
Geneva.
However, scholars (e.g., Armstrong, 2012) have demonstrated that most Denzin, N.K., 2018. The qualitative manifesto: A call to arms. Routledge.
observed relationships are non-linear. Ragin (2008) argued that high Di Paola, N., 2021. Pathways to academic entrepreneurship: the determinants of female
degrees of the dependent variable may also occur when the independent scholars’ entrepreneurial intentions. J. Technol. Transf. 46 (5), 1417–1441.
Di Paola, N., Russo Spena, T., 2019. What drives biopharmaceutical firms’ exploratory
variables display low values. Nevertheless, the QCA findings indicate openness? A comparative process tracing approach to the analysis of R&D
that high degrees of the outcome of interest may occur when predictors microfoundations. J. Bus. Res. 97, 94–103.
display both high and low values. Thus, the QCA findings highlight how Douglas, E.J., Shepherd, D.A., Prentice, C., 2020. Using fuzzy-set qualitative comparative
analysis for a finer-grained understanding of entrepreneurship. J. Bus. Ventur. 35
configurational parameters can be causal in one solution pathway and (1), 105970.
unrelated or even inversely related in another. Du, Y., Liu, Q., Kim, P.H., Li, J., 2024. Riding the waves of change: using qualitative
Correlation-based methods rely heavily on regression analyses, comparative analysis to analyze complex growth patterns in entrepreneurship.
Entrep. Theory Pract. https://doi.org/10.1177/10422587241249330.
which are not designed to model combinatorial complexities (Frösén
El Sawy, O.A., Malhotra, A., Park, Y., Pavlou, P.A., 2010. Research
et al., 2016). Such analyses involve additive, unifinal, and symmetrical commentary—seeking the configurations of digital ecodynamics: it takes three to
effects (Grandori and Furnari, 2013). In contrast, QCA is uniquely tango. Inf. Syst. Res. 21 (4), 835–848.
capable of conceptualizing, analyzing, and explaining configurational Erzurumlu, S.S., Erzurumlu, Y.O., Yoon, Y., 2022. National innovation systems and
dynamic impact of institutional structures on national innovation capability: a
phenomena and outcomes, as it models causal complexity (Thiem et al., configurational approach with the OKID method. Technovation 114, 102552.
2016). Specifically, QCA (1) provides a detailed analysis of how alter­ Faems, D., 2020. Moving forward quantitative research on innovation management: a
native conditions of causes combine and contribute to the outcome of call for an inductive turn on using and presenting quantitative research. R&D Manag.
50 (3), 352–363.
interest (conjunctural assumption), (2) specifies whether more than one Fiss, P.C., 2007. A set-theoretic approach to organizational configurations. Acad.
configuration of attributes can generate the same outcome (equifin­ Manage. Rev. 32 (4), 1180–1198.
ality), (3) determines whether the presence and/or absence of specific Fiss, P.C., 2011. Building better causal theories: a fuzzy set approach to typologies in
organization research. Acad. Manage. J. 54 (2), 393–420.
attributes may be connected with the outcome, thus modeling asym­ Fiss, P.C., Marx, A., Cambré, B., 2013. Configurational theory and methods in
metric relationships, (4) assesses the relative empirical importance of organizational research. Res. Sociol. Organ. 1–22. Retrieved from. https://doi.
each configuration to the outcome, and (5) distinguishes between core org/10.1108/s0733-558x(2013)0000038005.
Flynn, B.B., Huo, B., Zhao, X., 2010. The impact of supply chain integration on
and peripheral conditions that can enhance understanding of cause­ performance: a contingency and configuration approach. J. Oper. Manag. 28 (1),
–effect associations (Misangyi et al., 2017). The main differences be­ 58–71.
tween the two schools of thought are summarized in Table A. Frösén, J., Tikkanen, H., Jaakkola, M., Vassinen, A., 2013. Marketing performance
assessment systems and the business context. Eur. J. Mark. 47 (5/6), 715–737.
Frösén, J., Luoma, J., Jaakkola, M., Tikkanen, H., Aspara, J., 2016. What counts versus
Data availability what can be counted: the complex interplay of market orientation and marketing
performance measurement. J. Mark. 80 (3), 60–78.
The authors do not have permission to share data. Furnari, S., Crilly, D., Misangyi, V.F., Greckhamer, T., Fiss, P.C., Aguilera, R.V., 2021.
Capturing causal complexity: heuristics for configurational theorizing. Acad.
Manage. Rev. 46 (4), 778–799. Retrieved from. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.20
References 19.0298.
Ganter, A., Hecker, A., 2014. Configurational paths to organizational innovation:
Abou-Foul, M., Ruiz-Alba, J.L., López-Tenorio, P.J., 2023. The impact of artificial qualitative comparative analyses of antecedents and contingencies. J. Bus. Res. 67
intelligence capabilities on servitization: the moderating role of absorptive capacity- (6), 1285–1292.
a dynamic capabilities perspective. J. Bus. Res. 157, 113609. Glaesser, J., 2023. Limited diversity and QCA solution types: assumptions and their
Anton, E., Oesterreich, T.D., Teuteberg, F., 2022. The property of being causal–the consequences. Qual. Quant. 57 (4), 3485–3497.
conduct of qualitative comparative analysis in information systems research. Inf. Grandori, A., Furnari, S., 2013. Configurational analysis and organization design:
Manag. 59 (3), 103619. towards a theory of structural heterogeneity. In: Fiss, P.C., Cambré, B., Marx, A.
Antonetti, P., Manika, D., 2022. Modeling multiple forms of consumer animosity through (Eds.), Configurational Theory and Methods in Organizational Research. Emerald
fuzzy-set qualitative comparative analysis. Eur. J. Mark. 56 (1), 113–132. Group Publishing, Bingley.
Armstrong, J., 2012. Illusions in regression analysis. Int. J. Forecast. 28 (3), 689–694. Greckhamer, T., Misangyi, V.F., Elms, H., Lacey, R., 2008. Using qualitative comparative
Arunachalam, S., Ramaswami, S.N., Herrmann, P., Walker, D., 2018. Innovation analysis in strategic management research: an examination of combinations of
pathway to profitability: the role of entrepreneurial orientation and marketing industry, corporate, and business-unit effects. Organ. Res. Methods 11 (4), 695–726.
capabilities. J. Acad. Mark. Sci. 46, 744–766.

11
N. Di Paola et al. Technological Forecasting & Social Change 211 (2025) 123907

Greckhamer, T., Misangyi, V.F., Fiss, P.C., 2013. The two QCAs: from a small-N to a Meuer, J., Fiss, P.C., 2020. Qualitative comparative analysis in business and management
large-N set theoretic approach. In: Configurational Theory and Methods in research. In: Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Business and Management.
Organizational Research, vol. 38. Emerald Group Publishing Limited, pp. 49–75. Meyer, A.D., Tsui, A.S., Hinings, C.R., 1993. Configurational approaches to
Greckhamer, T., Furnari, S., Fiss, P.C., Aguilera, R.V., 2018. Studying configurations with organizational analysis. Acad. Manage. J. 36 (6), 1175–1195.
qualitative comparative analysis: best practices in strategy and organization Miller, D., 2018. Challenging trends in configuration research: Where are the
research. Strateg. Organ. 16 (4), 482–495. configurations? Strateg. Organ. 16 (4), 453–469. Retrieved from. https://doi.org/1
Greener, I., 2024. Tolerance in QCA: moving debates on design, calibration, analysis, and 0.1177/1476127017729315.
interpretation in QCA forward in macrocomparative research. Int. J. Soc. Res. Milligan, G.W., Cooper, M.C., 1987. Methodology review: clustering methods. Appl.
Methodol. 27 (2), 189–201. Psychol. Measur. 11 (4), 329–354.
Harms, R., Kraus, S., Schwarz, E., 2009. The suitability of the configuration approach in Misangyi, 2016. Embracing Causal Complexity: The Emergence of a Neo-Configurational
entrepreneurship research. Entrep. Reg. Dev. 21 (1), 25–49. Perspective. Retrieved from. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206316679252.
Hemonnet-Goujot, A., Manceau, D., Abecassis-Moedas, C., 2019. Drivers and pathways of Misangyi, V.F., Acharya, A.G., 2014. Substitutes or complements? A configurational
NPD success in the marketing–external design relationship. J. Prod. Innov. Manag. examination of corporate governance mechanisms. Acad. Manage. J. 57 (6),
36 (2), 196–223. 1681–1705.
Herhausen, D., Ivens, B., Spencer, R., Weibel, M., 2022. Key account management Misangyi, V.F., Greckhamer, T., Furnari, S., Fiss, P.C., Crilly, D., Aguilera, R., 2017.
configurations and their effectiveness: a quasi-replication and extension. Ind. Mark. Embracing causal complexity: the emergence of a neo-configurational perspective.
Manag. 101, 98–112. J. Manag. 43 (1), 255–282.
Homburg, C., Workman Jr., J.P., Jensen, O., 2002. A configurational perspective on key Morgan, N.A., Whitler, K.A., Feng, H., Chari, S., 2019. Research in marketing strategy.
account management. J. Mark. 66 (2), 38–60. J. Acad. Mark. Sci. 47, 4–29.
Howell, T., Bingham, C., Hendricks, B., 2022. Going alone or together? A configurational Moser, A., Korstjens, I., 2017. Series: practical guidance to qualitative research. Part 1:
analysis of solo founding vs. cofounding. Organ. Sci. 33 (6), 2421–2450. introduction. Eur. J. Gen. Pract. 23 (1), 271–273.
Huang, K.E., Wu, J.H., Lu, S.Y., Lin, Y.C., 2016. Innovation and technology creation Nagy, G., Jaakkola, M., Koporcic, N., 2019. Complementarity versus substitutability of
effects on organizational performance. J. Bus. Res. 69 (6), 2187–2192. dynamic and operational capabilities in B2B firms: a configurational approach. Ind.
Huang, S., Burton-Jones, A., Xu, D., 2024. A configurational theory of digital disruption. Mark. Manag. 83, 42–58.
Inf. Syst. J. https://doi.org/10.1111/isj.12510. Nikou, S., Mezei, J., Liguori, E.W., El Tarabishy, A., 2022. FsQCA in entrepreneurship
Huarng, K.H., Yu, T.H.K., 2022. Analysis of global innovation index by structural research: opportunities and best practices. J. Small Bus. Manag. 1–18.
qualitative association. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change 182, 121850. Oana, I.E., Schneider, C.Q., Thomann, E., 2021. Qualitative Comparative Analysis Using
Hui, S.K., Bradlow, E.T., Fader, P.S., 2009. Testing behavioral hypotheses using an R: A Beginner’s Guide. Cambridge University Press.
integrated model of grocery store shopping path and purchase behavior. J. Consum. Ong, W.J., Johnson, M.D., 2023. Toward a configural theory of job demands and
Res. 36 (3), 478–493. resources. Acad. Manage. J. 66 (1), 195–221.
Iannacci, F., Kraus, S., 2022. Configurational theory: A review. In: Papagiannidis, S. Pagliarin, S., Gerrits, L., 2020. Trajectory-based qualitative comparative analysis:
(Ed.), TheoryHub Book. http://open.ncl.ac.uk. accounting for case-based time dynamics. Methodol. Innov. 13 (3),
Iannacci, F., Fearon, C., Kawalek, P., Simeonova, B., 2023. Aligning the qualitative 2059799120959170.
comparative analysis (QCA) counterfactual approach with the practice of Pagliarin, S., La Mendola, S., Vis, B., 2023. The “qualitative” in qualitative comparative
retroduction: some preliminary insights. Inf. Syst. J. 33 (3), 467–485. analysis (QCA): research moves, case-intimacy and face-to-face interviews. Qual.
Jacobs, S., Cambré, B., 2020. Designers’ road (s) to success: balancing exploration and Quant. 57 (1), 489–507.
exploitation. J. Bus. Res. 115, 241–249. Pappas, I.O., Woodside, A.G., 2021. Fuzzy-set qualitative comparative analysis (fsQCA):
Jenson, I., Doyle, R., Miles, M.P., 2020. An entrepreneurial marketing process guidelines for research practice in information systems and marketing. Int. J. Inf.
perspective of the role of intermediaries in producing innovation outcomes. J. Bus. Manag. 58, 102310.
Res. 112, 291–299. Parente, T.C., Federo, R., 2019. Qualitative comparative analysis: justifying a neo-
Kabadayi, S., Eyuboglu, N., Thomas, G.P., 2007. The performance implications of configurational approach in management research. RAUSP Manag. J. 54, 399–412.
designing multiple channels to fit with strategy and environment. J. Mark. 71 (4), Park, Y., Fiss, P.C., El Sawy, O.A., 2020. Theorizing the multiplicity of digital
195–211. phenomena: the ecology of configurations, causal recipes, and guidelines for
Kan, A.K.S., Adegbite, E., El Omari, S., Abdellatif, M., 2016. On the use of qualitative applying QCA. Manag. Inf. Syst. Q. 44, 1493–1520.
comparative analysis in management. J. Bus. Res. 69 (4), 1458–1463. Prentice, C., 2020. Testing complexity theory in service research. J. Serv. Mark. 34 (2),
Kapsali, M., Roehrich, J.K., Akhtar, P., 2019. Effective contracting for high operational 149–162.
performance in projects. Int. J. Oper. Prod. Manag. 39 (2), 294–325. Ragin, C., 1989. The logic of the comparative method and the algebra of logic. J. Quant.
Kent, R.A., 2005. Cases as configurations: using combinatorial and fuzzy logic to analyse Anthropol. 1 (4), 373–398.
marketing data. Int. J. Mark. Res. 47 (2), 205–228. Ragin, C.C., 1987. The Comparative Method: Moving Beyond Qualitative and
Ketchen, D.J., Shook, C.L., 1996. The application of cluster analysis in strategic Quantitative Strategies. University of California Press. https://www.jstor.org/
management research: an analysis and critique. Strateg. Manag. J. 17 (6), 441–458. stable/10.1525/j.ctt1pnx57.
Kraus, S., Kauranen, I., Reschke, C.H., 2011. Identification of domains for a new Ragin, C.C., 2000. Fuzzy-Set Social Science. University of Chicago Press.
conceptual model of strategic entrepreneurship using the configuration approach. Ragin, C.C., 2008. Redesigning Social Inquiry: Fuzzy Sets and beyond, Vol. 240.
Manag. Res. Rev. 34 (1), 58–74. University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
Kraus, S., Ribeiro-Soriano, D., Schüssler, M., 2018. Fuzzy-set qualitative comparative Ragin, C.C., 2014. The Comparative Method: Moving beyond Qualitative and
analysis (fsQCA) in entrepreneurship and innovation research–the rise of a method. Quantitative Strategies. Univ of California Press.
Int. Entrep. Manag. J. 14, 15–33. Rihoux, B., Lobe, B., 2009. The case for qualitative comparative analysis (QCA): adding
Kraus, S., Breier, M., Dasí-Rodríguez, S., 2020. The art of crafting a systematic literature leverage for thick cross-case comparison. In: The Sage Handbook of Case-Based
review in entrepreneurship research. Int. Entrep. Manag. J. 16, 1023–1042. Methods, pp. 222–242.
Kraus, S., Breier, M., Lim, W.M., Dabić, M., Kumar, S., Kanbach, D., Mukherjee, D., Rihoux, B., Ragin, C.C., 2008. Configurational Comparative Methods: Qualitative
Corvello, V., Piñeiro-Chousa, J., Liguori, E., Palacios-Marqués, D., Schiavone, F., Comparative Analysis (QCA) and Related Techniques. Sage Publications.
Ferraris, A., Fernandes, C., Ferreira, J.J., 2022. Literature reviews as independent Rihoux, B., Álamos-Concha, P., Bol, D., Marx, A., Rezsöhazy, I., 2013. From niche to
studies: guidelines for academic practice. Rev. Manag. Sci. 16 (8), 2577–2595. mainstream method? A comprehensive mapping of QCA applications in journal
Kumar, S., Sahoo, S., Lim, W.M., Kraus, S., Bamel, U., 2022. Fuzzy-set qualitative articles from 1984 to 2011. Polit. Res. Q. 66 (1), 175–184.
comparative analysis (fsQCA) in business and management research: a contemporary Rupietta, C., Meuer, J., 2024. Comparative Configurational Process Analysis: A New Set-
overview. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change 178, 121599. Theoretic Technique for Longitudinal Case Analysis. Organ. Res. Methods 1–28.
Kwak, H., Anderson, R.E., Leigh, T.W., Bonifield, S.D., 2019. Impact of salesperson Rutten, R., 2022. Applying and assessing large-N QCA: causality and robustness from a
macro-adaptive selling strategy on job performance and satisfaction. J. Bus. Res. 94, critical realist perspective. Sociol. Methods Res. 51 (3), 1211–1243.
42–55. Salonen, A., Zimmer, M., Keränen, J., 2021. Theory development in servitization through
Leischnig, A., Kasper-Brauer, K., 2016. How to sell in diverse markets? A two-level the application of fsQCA and experiments. Int. J. Oper. Prod. Manag. 41 (5),
approach to industry factors and selling factors for explaining firm profitability. 746–769.
J. Bus. Res. 69 (4), 1307–1313. Sauer, P.C., Seuring, S., 2023. How to conduct systematic literature reviews in
Liu, Y., Mezei, J., Kostakos, V., Li, H., 2017. Applying configurational analysis to IS management research: a guide in 6 steps and 14 decisions. Rev. Manag. Sci. 17,
behavioural research: a methodological alternative for modelling combinatorial 1899–1933.
complexities. Inf. Syst. J. 27 (1), 59–89. Schneider, C.Q., 2019. Two-step QCA revisited: the necessity of context conditions. Qual.
Liu, Y., Wu, J., Yi, H., Wen, J., 2021. Under what conditions do governments Quant. 53, 1109–1126.
collaborate? A qualitative comparative analysis of air pollution control in China. Schneider, C.Q., 2024. Set-Theoretic Multi-Method Research: A Guide to Combining QCA
Public Manag. Rev. 23 (11), 1664–1682. and Case Studies. Cambridge University Press.
Lopez, C., Haddoud, M.Y., Kasturiratne, D., 2022. Revisiting the innovation–export entry Schneider, C.Q., Rohlfing, I., 2016. Case studies nested in fuzzy-set QCA on sufficiency.
link through a configuration approach. J. Bus. Res. 149, 927–937. Sociol. Methods Res. 45 (3), 526–568.
Malik, M., Orr, S., 2022. A configurational examination of agile development as a Schneider, C.Q., Wagemann, C., 2010. Standards of good practice in qualitative
sociotechnical system. Ind. Mark. Manag. 104, 325–339. comparative analysis (QCA) and fuzzy sets. Comp. Sociol. 9, 397–418.
Marx, A., Rihoux, B., Ragin, C., 2014. The origins, development, and application of Schneider, C.Q., Wagemann, C., 2012. Set-Theoretic Methods for the Social Sciences: A
qualitative comparative analysis: the first 25 years. Eur. Polit. Sci. Rev. 6 (1), Guide to Qualitative Comparative Analysis. Cambridge University Press.
115–142.

12
N. Di Paola et al. Technological Forecasting & Social Change 211 (2025) 123907

Short, J.C., Payne, G.T., Ketchen Jr., D.J., 2008. Research on organizational Woodside, A.G., 2018. How to move away from using symmetric tests, net effects, and p
configurations: past accomplishments and future challenges. J. Manag. 34 (6), < 0.05: Overcoming barriers to good science practices. J. Contemp. Mark. Sci. 1 (1),
1053–1079. 176–187.
Siewert, M.B., 2024. Teaching qualitative comparative analysis. In: Handbook of Yu, T.H.K., Huarng, K.H., 2023. Configural analysis of GII’s internal structure. J. Bus.
Teaching Public Policy. Edward Elgar Publishing, pp. 217–231. Res. 154. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2022.113323.
Skålén, P., Gummerus, J., von Koskull, C., Magnusson, P.R., 2015. Exploring value Zheng, S., Zeng, X., Zhang, C., 2016. The effects of role variety and ability disparity on
propositions and service innovation: a service-dominant logic study. J. Acad. Mark. virtual group performance. J. Bus. Res. 69 (9), 3468–3477.
Sci. 43 (2), 137–158.
Skarmeas, D., Leonidou, C.N., Saridakis, C., 2014. Examining the role of CSR skepticism
Nadia Di Paola is currently serving as an Associate Professor of Economics and Business
using fuzzy-set qualitative comparative analysis. J. Bus. Res. 67 (9), 1796–1805.
Management at the Department of Economics, Management, Institutions (DEMI) of the
Soda, G., Furnari, S., 2012. Exploring the topology of the plausible: Fs/QCA
University of Naples “Federico II”. She has authored and co-authored peer-reviewed
counterfactual analysis and the plausible fit of unobserved organizational
research articles and book chapters and published several books in the fields of Business,
configurations. Strateg. Organ. 10 (3), 285–296.
Technology and Supply Chain Management, and Entrepreneurship. She serves as Editorial
Thiem, A., 2013. Clearly crisp, and not fuzzy: a reassessment of the (putative) pitfalls of
Board member of international scientific journals. She held visiting research fellow posi­
multi-value QCA. Field Methods 25 (2), 197–207.
tions in Cambridge Centre for Social Innovation at the Cambridge Judge Business School
Thiem, A., Baumgartner, M., Bol, D., 2016. Still lost in translation! A correction of three
(CJBS), the Dublin Institute of Technology, and the Frankfurt School of Finance and
misunderstandings between configurational comparativists and regressional
Management.
analysts. Comp. Pol. Stud. 49 (6), 742–774.
Thomann, E., 2020. Qualitative comparative analysis for comparative policy analysis. In:
Handbook of Research Methods and Applications in Comparative Policy Analysis. Simos Chari is a Senior Lecturer in Marketing Management & Strategy at Alliance Man­
Edward Elgar Publishing, pp. 254–276. chester Business School. Dr. Simos Chari joined the academic staff at Manchester Business
Thomann, E., Maggetti, M., 2020. Designing research with qualitative comparative School in September 2017 after having previously worked at Leeds University Business
analysis (QCA): approaches, challenges, and tools. Sociol. Methods Res. 49 (2), School. Dr. Chari holds a BSc in Economics Science, an MSc in International Marketing
356–386. Management, and a PhD in Strategic Marketing. Prior to his current position, Dr. Chari has
Van Maanen, J., Sørensen, J.B., Mitchell, T.R., 2007. The interplay between theory and worked in the industry as Marketing Executive. Dr. Chari’s primary research interests
method. Acad. Manage. Rev. 32 (4), 1145–1154. revolve around strategic marketing issues (i.e., marketing strategy making processes,
Vesalainen, J., Kohtamäki, M., 2015. Toward a typological view of buyer–supplier managerial decision making, intended and realized marketing strategies and strategic
relationships: challenging the unidimensional relationship continuum. Ind. Mark. change). Dr. Chari’s research has been accepted for publication in renowned academic
Manag. 49, 105–115. journals such as British Journal of Management, Journal of World Business, Journal of
Vis, B., 2012. The comparative advantages of fsQCA and regression analysis for Business Ethics, Journal of Business Research, Industrial Marketing Management, among
moderately large-N analyses. Sociol. Methods Res. 41 (1), 168–198. others. Dr. Chari’s work is also regularly presented at leading academic conferences across
Vorhies, D.W., Morgan, N.A., 2003. A configuration theory assessment of marketing the world.
organization fit with business strategy and its relationship with marketing
performance. J. Mark. 67 (1), 100–115.
Federico Iannacci is a Senior Lecturer (Management) at the University of Sussex Business
Wagemann, C., Buche, J., Siewert, M.B., 2016. QCA and business research: work in
School and serves as the Senior Editor for the esteemed Information Systems Journal. With
progress or a consolidated agenda? J. Bus. Res. 69 (7), 2531–2540.
a PhD in Information Systems from the London School of Economics, Federico’s academic
Wang, X., Wang, Z., Jiang, Z., 2021. Configurational differences of national innovation
expertise is well-established. He has previously held positions such as Visiting Fellow at
capability: a fuzzy set qualitative comparative analysis approach. Tech. Anal. Strat.
the University of Kent and Deputy Director of the BSc in Business & Management. Fed­
Manag. 33 (6), 599–611.
erico’s research interests encompass e-Government, Social Media, Organizational Rou­
Wiggins, R.R., Ruefli, T.W., 1995. Necessary conditions for the predictive validity of
tines, and Information Systems Strategy, with a particular focus on Qualitative
strategic groups: analysis without reliance on clustering techniques. Acad. Manage.
Comparative Analysis (QCA). His innovative methodologies address contemporary chal­
J. 38 (6), 1635–1656.
lenges in digital society, making significant contributions to academic discourse and
Wilden, R., Gudergan, S., Akaka, M.A., Averdung, A., Teichert, T., 2019. The role of
research.
cocreation and dynamic capabilities in service provision and performance: a
configurational study. Ind. Mark. Manag. 78, 43–57.
Woiceshyn, J., Daellenbach, U., 2018. Evaluating inductive vs deductive research in Sascha Kraus is Full Professor of Management at the Free University of Bozen-Bolzano,
management studies. Qual. Res. Organ. Manag. 13, 183–195. Italy, and Distinguished Visiting Professor (SARChI Entrepreneurship Education) at the
Woodside, A.G., 2013. Moving beyond multiple regression analysis to algorithms: calling University of Johannesburg, South Africa. He holds a doctorate in Social and Economic
for adoption of a paradigm shift from symmetric to asymmetric thinking in data Sciences from Klagenfurt University, Austria, a Ph.D. in Industrial Engineering and Man­
analysis and crafting theory. J. Bus. Res. 66 (4), 463–472. agement from Helsinki University of Technology and a Habilitation (Venia Docendi) from
Woodside, A.G., 2014. Embrace•perform•model: complexity theory, contrarian case Lappeenranta University of Technology, both in Finland. Before, he held Full Professor
analysis, and multiple realities. J. Bus. Res. 67 (12), 2495–2503. Retrieved from. positions at Utrecht University, The Netherlands, the University of Liechtenstein, École
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2014.07.006. Supérieure du Commerce Extérieur Paris, France, and Durham University, United
Kingdom, as well as Visiting Professor positions at Copenhagen Business School, Denmark,
and at the University of St. Gallen, Switzerland.

13