Forces for and forces against Vagaries of - and capacity building for - practice relevant research

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

    1 Citation (Scopus)

    Abstract

    Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to explore some of the forces which militate against building capacity for research in business and management that satisfies the double-hurdle criteria of academic rigour and relevance to practice, despite strong pressures in favour of it. Design/methodology/approach - The paper is a reflective piece based on a small number of interviews with researchers, and a variety of initiatives and events in the business and management environment. Findings - Forces for practice relevant research include rhetorical statements from high-profile academics, government, the research councils, and many business and management researchers. Forces against it relate principally to editorial and reviewer processes relating to journal publication and grant awards. Modes of academically rigorous, practice relevant research actually carried out are highly varied - some variations are discussed - but these are not widely understood by funding councils, editors, reviewers, or even by researchers working in different modes of such research. Originality/value - The principal point of this paper is a call for capacity building to develop in the community an understanding of the nature of rigour in different modes of practice relevant and cumulative research. This contrasts with, but is in addition to, more traditional calls for effort to be applied to the further development and promulgation of practice relevant research approaches themselves.
    LanguageEnglish
    Pages694-700
    Number of pages6
    JournalJournal of Management Development
    Volume28
    Issue number8
    DOIs
    Publication statusPublished - 2009

    Fingerprint

    Capacity Building
    Capacity building
    Reviewers
    Reflective
    Originality
    Rhetoric
    Funding
    Methodology
    Government
    Design methodology
    Double-hurdle

    Keywords

    • management research
    • research methods

    Cite this

    @article{4529c2d34e1c47fa9d12b7fa153bddf5,
    title = "Forces for and forces against Vagaries of - and capacity building for - practice relevant research",
    abstract = "Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to explore some of the forces which militate against building capacity for research in business and management that satisfies the double-hurdle criteria of academic rigour and relevance to practice, despite strong pressures in favour of it. Design/methodology/approach - The paper is a reflective piece based on a small number of interviews with researchers, and a variety of initiatives and events in the business and management environment. Findings - Forces for practice relevant research include rhetorical statements from high-profile academics, government, the research councils, and many business and management researchers. Forces against it relate principally to editorial and reviewer processes relating to journal publication and grant awards. Modes of academically rigorous, practice relevant research actually carried out are highly varied - some variations are discussed - but these are not widely understood by funding councils, editors, reviewers, or even by researchers working in different modes of such research. Originality/value - The principal point of this paper is a call for capacity building to develop in the community an understanding of the nature of rigour in different modes of practice relevant and cumulative research. This contrasts with, but is in addition to, more traditional calls for effort to be applied to the further development and promulgation of practice relevant research approaches themselves.",
    keywords = "management research, research methods",
    author = "Chris Huxham",
    year = "2009",
    doi = "10.1108/02621710910985469",
    language = "English",
    volume = "28",
    pages = "694--700",
    journal = "Journal of Management Development",
    issn = "0262-1711",
    publisher = "Emerald Publishing Limited",
    number = "8",

    }

    TY - JOUR

    T1 - Forces for and forces against Vagaries of - and capacity building for - practice relevant research

    AU - Huxham, Chris

    PY - 2009

    Y1 - 2009

    N2 - Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to explore some of the forces which militate against building capacity for research in business and management that satisfies the double-hurdle criteria of academic rigour and relevance to practice, despite strong pressures in favour of it. Design/methodology/approach - The paper is a reflective piece based on a small number of interviews with researchers, and a variety of initiatives and events in the business and management environment. Findings - Forces for practice relevant research include rhetorical statements from high-profile academics, government, the research councils, and many business and management researchers. Forces against it relate principally to editorial and reviewer processes relating to journal publication and grant awards. Modes of academically rigorous, practice relevant research actually carried out are highly varied - some variations are discussed - but these are not widely understood by funding councils, editors, reviewers, or even by researchers working in different modes of such research. Originality/value - The principal point of this paper is a call for capacity building to develop in the community an understanding of the nature of rigour in different modes of practice relevant and cumulative research. This contrasts with, but is in addition to, more traditional calls for effort to be applied to the further development and promulgation of practice relevant research approaches themselves.

    AB - Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to explore some of the forces which militate against building capacity for research in business and management that satisfies the double-hurdle criteria of academic rigour and relevance to practice, despite strong pressures in favour of it. Design/methodology/approach - The paper is a reflective piece based on a small number of interviews with researchers, and a variety of initiatives and events in the business and management environment. Findings - Forces for practice relevant research include rhetorical statements from high-profile academics, government, the research councils, and many business and management researchers. Forces against it relate principally to editorial and reviewer processes relating to journal publication and grant awards. Modes of academically rigorous, practice relevant research actually carried out are highly varied - some variations are discussed - but these are not widely understood by funding councils, editors, reviewers, or even by researchers working in different modes of such research. Originality/value - The principal point of this paper is a call for capacity building to develop in the community an understanding of the nature of rigour in different modes of practice relevant and cumulative research. This contrasts with, but is in addition to, more traditional calls for effort to be applied to the further development and promulgation of practice relevant research approaches themselves.

    KW - management research

    KW - research methods

    UR - http://www.emeraldinsight.com/Insight/viewPDF.jsp?contentType=Article&Filename=html/Output/Published/EmeraldFullTextArticle/Pdf/0260280804.pdf

    UR - http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/02621710910985469

    U2 - 10.1108/02621710910985469

    DO - 10.1108/02621710910985469

    M3 - Article

    VL - 28

    SP - 694

    EP - 700

    JO - Journal of Management Development

    T2 - Journal of Management Development

    JF - Journal of Management Development

    SN - 0262-1711

    IS - 8

    ER -