The last chapter demonstrated that there is a discrepancy between the actual operations of the Japanese development administration and the approach that fits the environment. The evidence presented suggests that the first working hypothesis, which was based on contingency theory, is not valid. This chapter elaborates the theoretical reasons for that. In order to do this, the question of which problems are related to the use of contingency theory is posed. Is the theory based on assumptions that do not hold for our case? If so, how can the hypothesis be reformulated to reflect the evidence presented by empirical cases in development administration?