Why should we bother? What are configurations for?

The main thrust of the essays by Greckhamer et al., Täuscher, and Miller is about methodologies for studying configurations, such as qualitative comparative analysis, clustering, and systems dynamics. My aim is to ask why we should be interested in configurations at all. I consider three approaches to configurational analysis: first, configurations as a basic building block in a systematic theory of organizational structure and systems; second, configurations as a generic classification tool, emphasizing that all theory should be looking for enduring patterning in elements of all kinds associated with different organizational issues and different levels of analysis; third, the use of a configurational approach to consider the properties of individual cases. I also have some observations about the future of configurational analysis.