Gestionando el “Valle de la muerte” entre académicos y profesionales en el campo del managementuna evidencia empírica

  1. Jesús de Frutos Belizón 1
  2. Fernando Martín Alcázar 1
  3. Gonzalo Sánchez Gardey 1
  1. 1 Universidad de Cádiz
    info

    Universidad de Cádiz

    Cádiz, España

    ROR https://ror.org/04mxxkb11

Revista:
Management Letters / Cuadernos de Gestión

ISSN: 1131-6837

Año de publicación: 2019

Volumen: 19

Número: 1

Páginas: 87-118

Tipo: Artículo

DOI: 10.5295/CDG.170745JF DIALNET GOOGLE SCHOLAR lock_openAcceso abierto editor

Otras publicaciones en: Management Letters / Cuadernos de Gestión

Objetivos de desarrollo sostenible

Resumen

The knowledge generated by academics in the field of Management is often criticized because of its reduced relevance for professionals. In recent studies, researchers agree that there is an important gap between management research and practice. However, the literature in this topic does not represent a finely structured discourse, and for the most part, it is not based on empirical works. In this paper, we make a double contribution to this literature: 1) First, an extensive literature has been developed with the aim of analysing and providing different solutions that allow linking both communities. In order to offer a more systematic view of literature in this topic, we classify these works into three different currents according to the ideas in which they are held. 2) On the other hand, the review of the literature shows that there is a need to develop more empirical evidence to help identify different causes or determinants of the gap between both communities in our field. Therefore, we identify different causes that may cause a disconnection with professionals in our field, through empirical evidence obtained in interviews with 15 academics belonging to the discipline of Management. Finally, this work concludes with a discussion of the main findings derived from the qualitative analysis and different practical recommendations that could help close the gap.

€ Ver financiación

Información de financiación

Este trabajo se ha financiado por el Proyecto de Investigación ECO2014-56580-R (Ministerio de Economía y Competitividad-Programa de Investigación Fundamental No orientada), P12-SEJ-1810 (Consejería de Innovación, Ciencia y Empleo) y PR2016-018 (Proyectos Investigación Universidad de Cádiz-Modalidad Joven Investigador).

Financiadores

Referencias bibliográficas

  • Abrahamson, E., 2009. Necessary conditions for the study of fads and fashions in science. Scandinavian Journal of Management, 25 (2), 235-239.
  • Agarwal, R., & Hoetker, G., 2007. A Faustian bargain? The growth of management and its relationship with related disciplines. Academy of Management Journal, 50 (6), 13041322.
  • Armstrong, M. 2006. A handbook of human resource management practice. London: Kogan Page Publishers.
  • Appelbaum, E., Bailey, T., Berg, P., & Kalleberg, A., 2000. Manufacturing competitive advantage: The effects of high performance work systems on plant performance and company outcomes. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
  • Artés, J., Pedraja-Chaparro, F., & del Mar Salinas-Jiménez, M. 2017. Research performance and teaching quality in the Spanish higher education system: Evidence from a medium-sized university. Research Policy, 46 (1), 19-29.
  • Banks, G., Pollack, J., Bochantin, J., Kirkman, B., Whelpley, C., & O’Boyle, E. 2016. Management’s science-practice gap: a grand challenge for all stakeholders. Academy of Management Journal, 59 (6), 2205-2231.
  • Bansal, P., Bertels, S., Ewart, T., MacConnachie, P., & O’Brien, J., 2012. Bridging the research–practice gap. Academy of Management Perspectives, 26 (1), 73–92.
  • Barley, S. R. 2016. 60th anniversary essay: Ruminations on how we became a mystery house and how we might get out. Administrative Science Quarterly, 61 (1), 1-8.
  • Bartunek, J. M., & Rynes, S. L., 2014. Academics and practitioners are alike and unlike: The paradoxes of academic–practitioner relationships. Journal of Management, 40 (5), 1181–1201.
  • Bartunek, J. M., 2011. What has happened to mode 2? British Journal of Management, 22 (3), 555–558.
  • Bartunek, J. M., & Rynes, S. L., 2010. The construction and contributions of “implications for practice”: What’s in them and what might they offer? Academy of Management Learning and Education, 9 (1), 100–117.
  • Bartunek, J. M., 2007. Academic-practitioner collaboration need not require joint or relevant research: Toward a relational scholarship of integration. Academy of Management Journal, 50 (6), 1323–1333.
  • Baum, J. A. 2012. The Skewed Few: Does “Skew” Signal Quality Among Journals, Articles, and Academics?. Journal of Management Inquiry, 21 (3), 349-354.
  • Bennis, W. G., & O’Toole, J., 2005. How business schools lost their way. Harvard Business Review, 83 (5), 96–104.
  • Beyer, J. M., & Trice, H. M., 1982. The utilization process: A conceptual frame work and synthesis of empirical findings. Administrative Science Quarterly, 27 (4), 591–622.
  • Broadbent, J. & Unerman, J., 2011. “Developing the relevance of the accounting academy: the importance of drawing from the diversity of research approaches”, Meditari Accountancy Research, 19 (1), 7-21.
  • Bryman, A., 1988. Doing Research in Organizations. London: Routledge.
  • Buckley, M. R., Ferris, G. R., Bernardin, H. J., & Harvey, M. G., 1998. The disconnect between the science and practice of management. Business Horizons, 41 (2), 31–38.
  • Bullinger, B., Kieser, A., & Schiller-Merkens, S. 2015. Coping with institutional complexity: Responses of management scholars to competing logics in the field of management studies. Scandinavian Journal of Management, 31 (3), 437-450.
  • Butler, D., 2008. Crossing the valley of death. Nature, 453 (7197), 840-842.
  • Butler, L. 2003. Explaining Australia’s increased share of ISI publications—the effects of a funding formula based on publication counts. Research Policy, 32 (1), 143-155.
  • Cohen, D. J., 2007. The very separate worlds of academic and practitioner publications in human resource management: Reasons for the divide and concrete solutions for bridging the gap. Academy of Management Journal, 50 (5), 1013-1019.
  • Corley, K. G., & Gioia, D. A., 2011. Building theory about theory building: What constitutes a theoretical contribution? Academy of Management Review, 36 (1), 12-32.
  • Daft, R. L., & Lewin, A. Y., 2008. Rigor and relevance in organization studies: Idea migration and academic journal evolution. Organization Science, 19 (1), 177-183.
  • Davis, G. F. 2015. Editorial essay: what is organizational research for?. Administrative Science Quarterly, 60 (2), 179-188.
  • Deadrick, D. L., & Gibson, P. A., 2007. An examination of the research–practice gap in HR: Comparing topics of interest to HR academics and HR professionals. Human Resource Management Review, 17 (2), 131-139.
  • Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M., 2000. The «What» and « Why » of Goal Pursuits: Human Needs and the Self-Determination of Behavior. Psychological Inquiry, 11 (4), 227-268.
  • DeNisi, A. S., Wilson, M. S., & Biteman, J. 2014. Research and practice in HRM: A historical perspective. Human Resource Management Review, 24 (3), 219-231.
  • Derrick, G. E., & Pavone, V. 2013. Democratising research evaluation: Achieving greater public engagement with bibliometrics-informed peer review. Science and Public Policy, 40 (5), 563-575.
  • Duberley, J., Cohen, L., & Mallon, M., 2006. Constructing scientific careers: Change, continuity and context. Organization Studies, 27 (8), 1131-1151.
  • Dunbar, R. L. M., & Bresser, R. F., 2014. Knowledge generation and governance in management research. Journal of Business Economics, 84 (1), 129–144.
  • Espeland, W. N., & Sauder, M. 2007. Rankings and reactivity: How public measures recreate social worlds. American journal of sociology, 113 (1), 1-40.
  • Flickinger, M., Tuschke, A., Gruber-Muecke, T., & Fiedler, M. 2014. In search of rigor, relevance and legitimacy: What drives the impact of publications? Journal of Business Economics, 84 (1), 99-128.
  • Fochler, M., Felt, U., & Müller, R. 2016. Unsustainable growth, hyper-competition, and worth in life science research: Narrowing evaluative repertoires in doctoral and postdoctoral scientists’ work and lives. Minerva, 54 (2), 175-200.
  • George, G., Howard-Grenville, J., Joshi, A., & Tihanyi, L. 2016. Understanding and tackling societal grand challenges through management research. Academy of Management Journal, 59 (6), 1880-1895.
  • Gibbons, M., Limoges, C., Nowotny, H., Schwartzman, S., Scott, P., & Trow, M., 1994. The new production of knowledge: The dynamics of science and research in contemporary societies. London: Sage.
  • Gordon, R. A., & Howell, J. E., 1959. Higher education for business. The Journal of Business Education, 35 (3), 115–117.
  • Gulati, R., 2007. Tent poles, tribalism, and boundary spanning: The rigor-relevance debate in management research. Academy of Management Journal, 50 (4), 775– 782.
  • Hammarfelt, B. 2017. Recognition and reward in the academy: Valuing publication oeuvres in biomedicine, economics and history. Aslib Journal of Information Management, 69 (5), 607-623.
  • Hammarfelt, B., & De Rijcke, S. 2015. Accountability in context: Effects of research evaluation systems on publication practices, disciplinary norms, and individual working routines in the faculty of Arts at Uppsala University. Research Evaluation, 24 (1), 6377.
  • Hangel, N. & Schmidt-Pfister, D. 2017. Why do you publish? On the tensions between generating scientific knowledge and publication pressure. Aslib Journal of Information Management, 69 (5), 529-544.
  • Hayes, R. H., & Abernathy, W. J., 1980. Management minus invention. The New York Times, 20, D2.
  • Hicks, D., Wouters, P., Waltman, L., De Rijcke, S., & Rafols, I. 2015. The Leiden Manifesto for research metrics. Nature, 520 (7548), 429.
  • Hodgkinson, G. P., & Starkey, K., 2011. Not simply returning to the same answer over and over again: Reframing relevance. British Journal of Management, 22 (3), 355-369.
  • Holub, H. W., Tappeiner, G., & Eberharter, V., 1991. The Iron Law of Important Articles. Southern Economic Journal, 58 (2), 317-328.
  • Huff, A. S., 2000. Changes in organizational knowledge production. Academy of Management Review, 25 (2), 288-293.
  • Huff, A. S., & Huff, J. O., 2001. Re-focusing the business school agenda. British Journal of Management, 12(S1), S49–S54.
  • Jarzabkowski, P., Mohrman, S. A., & Scherer, A. G., 2010. Organization studies as applied science: The generation and use of academic knowledge about organizations introduction to the special issue. Organization Studies, 31 (9-10), 1189-1207.
  • Kelemen, M., & Bansal, P., 2002. The conventions of management research and their relevance to management practice. British Journal of Management, 13 (2), 97–108.
  • Khurana, R., 2007. From higher aims to hired hands: The social transformation of American business schools and the unfulfilled promise of management as a profession. Oxford: Princeton University Press.
  • Kieser, A., & Leiner, L., 2009. Why the rigour-relevance gap in management research is unbridgeable. Journal of Management Studies, 46 (3), 516–533.
  • Kieser, A., & Leiner, L., 2012. Collaborate with practitioners: But beware of collaborative research. Journal of Management Inquiry, 21 (1), 14-28.
  • Kieser, A., Nicolai, A., & Seidl, D., 2015. The practical relevance of management research: Turning the debate on relevance into a rigorous scientific research program. The Academy of Management Annals, 9 (1), 143-233.
  • Locke, E., 2011. Handbook of principles of organizational behavior: Indispensable knowledge for evidence-based management. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons.
  • Luhmann, N., 2005. Communication barriers in management consulting. In D. Seidl & K. H. Becker (Eds.), Niklas Luhmann and Organization Studies, 215-247. Copenhagen (Denmark): Liber & Copenhagen Business School Press.
  • Mcculloch, S. 2017. Hobson’s choice: the effects of research evaluation on academics’ writing practices in England. Aslib Journal of Information Management, 69 (5), 503-515.
  • Markoulli, M., Lee, C. I., Byington, E., & Felps, W. A. 2017. Mapping Human Resource Management: Reviewing the field and charting future directions. Human Resource Management Review, 27 (3), 367-396.
  • Merton, R. K., 1957. Priorities in scientific discovery: a chapter in the sociology of science. American sociological review, 22 (6), 635-659.
  • Merton, R. K., 1973. The sociology of science: Theoretical and empirical investigations. Chicago: University of Chicago press.
  • Mohrman, S., Pasmore, W., Shani, A. B., Stymne, B., & Adler, N., 2008. Toward building a collaborative research community. Los Angeles: CA: Sage.
  • Mulligan, A., & Mabe, M., 2011. The effect of the internet on researcher motivations, behaviour and attitudes. Journal of Documentation, 67 (2), 290-311.
  • Nicolai, A., & Seidl, D., 2010. That’s relevant! Different forms of practical relevance in management science. Organization Studies, 31 (9-10), 1257-1285.
  • Olsen, T. B., Kyvik, S., & Hovdhaugen, E., 2005. The Promotion to Full Professor – Through Competition or by Individual Competence? Tertiary Education and Management, 11 (4), 299-316.
  • Øvretveit, J., 2008. Writing a scientific publication for a management journal. Journal of health organization and management, 22 (2), 189-206.
  • Pettigrew, A. M. 2001. Management research after modernism. British Journal of Management, 12 (S1), S61-S70.
  • Pfeffer, J. 2007. A modest proposal: How we might change the process and product of managerial research. Academy of Management Journal, 50 (6), 1334-1345.
  • Pierson, F. C., 1959. The education of American businessmen: A study of University College programs in business administration. New York: McGraw-Hill.
  • Quan, W., Chen, B., & Shu, F. 2017. Publish or impoverish: An investigation of the monetary reward system of science in China (1999-2016). Aslib Journal of Information Management, 69 (5), 486-502.
  • Rousseau, D. M., 2006. 2005 presidential address: Is there such a thing as “evidencebased management”? Academy of Management Review, 31 (2), 256–269.
  • Rousseau, D. M., Manning, J., & Denyer, D. 2008. Evidence in management and organizational science: Assembling the field’s full weight of scientific knowledge through syntheses, Academy of Management Annals, 2 (1), 475–515.
  • Rousseau, D. M., & Boudreau, J. W., 2011. Sticky findings: Research evidence practitioners find useful. In S. A. Mohrman & E. E. Lawler (Eds.), Useful research: Advancing theory and practice, 351-368. San Francisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler.
  • Rynes, S. L., Colbert, A. E., & Brown, K. G. 2002. HR professionals’ beliefs about effective human resource practices: Correspondence between research and practice. Human Resource Management, 41 (2), 149–174.
  • Sanders, K., van Riemsdijk, M., & Groen, B. 2008. The gap between research and practice: a replication study on the HR professionals’ beliefs about effective human resource practices. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 19 (10), 1976–1988.
  • Seeber, M., Cattaneo, M., Meoli, M., & Malighetti, P. In press. Self-citations as strategic response to the use of metrics for career decisions. Research Policy.
  • Seidl, D., 2007. General strategy concepts and the ecology of strategy discourses: Asystemic-discursive perspective. Organization Studies, 28 (2), 197–218.
  • Seidl, D., 2005. Organisational identity and self-transformation: An autopoietic perspective. Aldershot, UK: Ashgate.
  • Shapiro, D. L., Kirkman, B. L., & Courtney, H. G., 2007. Perceived causes and solutions of the translation problem in management research. Academy of Management Journal, 50 (2), 249–266.
  • Shani, A. B., & Coghlan, D., 2014. Collaborate with practitioners: an alternative perspective a rejoinder to Kieser and Leiner (2012). Journal of Management Inquiry, 23 (4), 433–437.
  • Shibayama, S., & Baba, Y., 2015. Impact-oriented science policies and scientific publication practices: The case of life sciences in Japan. Research Policy, 44 (4), 936-950.
  • Sousa, C. A. A., & Hendriks, P. H. J., 2008. Connecting Knowledge to Management: The Case of Academic Research. Organization, 15 (6), 811-830.
  • Strauss, A. L. & Corbin, J., 1998. Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory, 2nd edn. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
  • Tenhiälä, A., Giluk, T. L., Kepes, S., Simón, C., Oh, I. S., & Kim, S., 2016. The ResearchPractice gap in human resource management: A Cross-Cultural study. Human Resource Management, 55 (2), 179-200.
  • Tranfield, D., & Starkey, K., 1998. The nature, social organization and promotion of management research: Towards policy. British Journal of Management, 9 (4), 341–353.
  • Tsui, A., 2016. Reflections on the so-called value-free ideal: A call for responsible science in the business schools. Cross Cultural & Strategic Management, 23 (1), 4-28.
  • Tucker, B. P. & Lowe, A.D., 2014. “Practitioners are from Mars; academics are from Venus? An empirical investigation of the research-practice gap in management accounting”, Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 27 (3), 394-425.
  • Van Aken, J. E., 2004. Management research based on the paradigm of the design sciences: The quest for field-tested and grounded technological rules. Journal of Management Studies, 41 (2), 219–246.
  • Van de Ven, A. H., 2011. “Reflections on research for theory and practice: From an engaged scholarship perspective” In S. A. Mohrman & E. E. Lawler (Eds.), Useful Research: Advancing Theory and Practice. San Francisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler, 387–406.
  • Van de Ven, A. H., & Johnson, P. E., 2006. Knowledge for theory and practice. Academy of Management Review, 31 (4), 802–821.
  • Vermeulen, F., 2005. On rigor and relevance: Fostering dialectic progress in management research. Academy of Management Journal, 48 (6), 978–982.
  • Vosburgh, R. M., In press. Closing the academic-practitioner gap: Research must answer the “SO WHAT” question. Human Resource Management Review.
  • Walsh, J., Tushman, M., Kimberly, J., Starbuck, B., & Ashford, S., 2007. On the relationship between research and practice: Debate and reflections. Journal of Management Inquiry, 16 (2), 128–154.
  • Zollo, M., & Winter, S. G., 2002. Deliberate learning and the evolution of dynamic capabilities. Organization Science, 13 (3), 339-351.
Fuente de los datos: Dialnet