Related Theories

Core frameworks

Theory	Source	Role in this study
Technology–Organization–Environment	Tornatzky & Fleischer (1990)	The foundational frame, reinterpreted here in nonlinear form rather than replaced
Person–Environment Fit	Edwards (1994); Edwards & Cable (2009)	Supplies the congruence logic and the polynomial operationalization
Sociotechnical Systems	Trist & Bamforth (1951)	Grounds the claim that technical and social subsystems must be jointly optimized
Configurational Equifinality	Ragin (2008)	Justifies treating multiple routes to the same outcome as substantive rather than noise

Supporting extensions

Theory	Source	Role
Liability of Smallness	Aldrich & Auster (1986)	Explains attenuation at the small-firm end of the size distribution
Optimal Distinctiveness	Brewer (1991)	Motivates an interior optimum rather than a monotonic size effect
AMO framework	Appelbaum et al. (2000)	Decomposes training effectiveness into ability, motivation, and opportunity
Absorptive Capacity	Cohen & Levinthal (1990)	Prior-knowledge constraint on assimilating new technology
Organizational Inertia	Hannan & Freeman (1984)	Structural resistance at the larger-firm end
Training Transfer	Baldwin & Ford (1988)	Alternative framing of the outcome as transfer rather than adoption
Dynamic Capabilities	Teece, Pisano & Shuen (1997)	Organizational-level alternative to be engaged, not assumed away

Methodological canon

Contribution	Source
Second-order response surface	Box & Wilson (1951)
Response surface analysis for congruence	Edwards & Parry (1993); Edwards (2002)
RSA reporting standards	Shanock et al. (2010)
Common-method variance standards	Podsakoff, MacKenzie, Lee & Podsakoff (2003)
Unmeasured latent method factor	Williams, Hartman & Cavazotte (2010)
fsQCA standards	Schneider & Wagemann (2012); Greckhamer et al. (2018)
Digital transformation definition	Vial (2019)