Authors: Anton Kriz; Christopher Nailer; Karen Jansen
Management researchers and management practitioners increasingly talk past each other. As a result, both research and practice are poorer than they could be and social stakeholders wonder whether they are getting value. This paper applies a stakeholder perspective to explore how and why the interests of the parties have diverged so starkly and presents six case studies of programs and strategies where the differences are attempting to be bridged. Part of the problem lies in the fact that each party judges the others according to a basis of valuation that misses their central interests. Managers in the world of practice decide and act under time pressure and in the face of uncertainty, where ‘good-enough’, ‘now’, and ‘correct it later’ are often sufficient. Management academics are required to start from well-formed questions, to develop logically coherent arguments and to support these with valid evidence. Meantime society – public and private funders – are seeking outcomes from limited financial resources and want clearer justifications for their investment. Current conditions suggest that the dissonance between the different cycle-times of research and practice are not sustainable. A potential solution lies in interactive management education that builds on and supports industry networks of management practitioners. This paper presents six case studies of alternative sites and models of management education that bridge the research-practice divide and generate new knowledge and propagate it rapidly through practice.
Journal: ( – )
Web Address:
Publish Year: 2018
Conference: Marseille, France (2018)