This study analyzed the theoretical limitations in the approaches of existing research on MIS implementation management and proposed a contingency approach through the typology of MIS implementation management strategies as a more rational approach for MIS implementation management research. Specifically, strategic items in MIS implementation management were systematically identified and classified into two fundamental dimensions: the technical problem emphasis dimension and the organizational problem emphasis dimension. Based on these two dimensions, MIS implementation management strategies were typified into four strategic groups: the "ad hoc" strategy, the "technology-oriented" strategy, the "organization-oriented" strategy, and the "sociotechnical systems" strategy. Furthermore, five variables related to MIS implementation environmental characteristics—organizational size, degree of MIS functional decentralization, MIS development task capability level, user computing capability level, and top management support level—along with five variables related to MIS implementation target task characteristics—project size, degree of unstructuredness, interdependency, organizational hierarchical level, and system innovativeness—were established as contingency variables. A contingency model was constructed regarding the relationship between MIS implementation management strategy types and MIS implementation outcomes, and ten hypotheses were derived. To test the hypotheses, a field survey was conducted on 109 application systems across 14 types of business areas in 57 firms from 13 industries in Korea. The results showed that for six contingency variables—degree of MIS functional decentralization, user computing capability level, top management support level, degree of task unstructuredness, system innovativeness, and project size—the contingency relationship between MIS implementation management strategy selection and MIS implementation outcomes was significantly supported in the same direction as the hypotheses. However, for the remaining four contingency variables—organizational size, MIS development task capability, interdependency, and organizational hierarchical level—the results either were not significantly supported or showed results in the opposite direction of the hypotheses.