Response - Van de Ven and Johnson's engaged scholarship: Nice try, but...

• 成果类型: Editorial Material
• 署名作者: McKelvey, Bill
• 署名单位: University of California System; University of California Los Angeles
• 刊物名称: ACADEMY OF MANAGEMENT REVIEW
• ISSN/ISSBN: 0363-7425
• DOI: 10.5465/AMR.2006.22527451
• 发表日期: 2006
• 页码: 822-829
• 关键词: management; Divide; work

摘要

Practitioners find little value in academic research. Some see it as a knowledge flow problem: others see practitioner and academic knowledge as unrelated. Van de Ven and Johnson propose a pluralistic collective of researchers and practitioners using engaged scholarship and intellectual arbitrage to create practitioner-meaningful research. It's a nice dream, but not a solution; bias, disciplines, and particularism remain. Neither discipline-centric nor practitioner-driven research offers a solution. Earthquake science offers a better model for business school research.