IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/jomstd/v32y1995i5p575-594.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Relevance of Strategy Research: Practitioner and Academic Viewpoints

Author

Listed:
  • C. Gopinath
  • Richard C. Hoffman

Abstract

It is important for strategy research to have practical relevance given its professional orientation. the differing perspectives of academics and managers and the rapid development of the field of strategic management suggests a need to address the field's future direction. In this paper, a practitioners' agenda for the field is developed based on a survey of chief executive officers (CEOs) of major US corporations. A comparison of this agenda with one generated by academics highlights the differences between the two constituencies concerning issues of relevance for the future. Compared to academics, CEOs emphasize operating issues; disagree on the priority of strategic issues; and are generally unfamiliar with research‐based journals. the two agendas should be viewed as complementary. Some implications for the field are discussed and suggestions made for dealing with the issue of relevance in future research and communicating the results to managers.

Suggested Citation

  • C. Gopinath & Richard C. Hoffman, 1995. "The Relevance of Strategy Research: Practitioner and Academic Viewpoints," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 32(5), pages 575-594, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:jomstd:v:32:y:1995:i:5:p:575-594
    DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-6486.1995.tb00789.x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6486.1995.tb00789.x
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/j.1467-6486.1995.tb00789.x?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Bullinger, Bernadette & Kieser, Alfred & Schiller-Merkens, Simone, 2015. "Coping with institutional complexity: Responses of management scholars to competing logics in the field of management studies," Scandinavian Journal of Management, Elsevier, vol. 31(3), pages 437-450.
    2. Splitter, Violetta, 2019. "Balancing continuity and novelty: The practical relevance of management research from the practitioners' perspective," SocArXiv v4su8, Center for Open Science.
    3. Brock, David M., 2005. "Multinational acquisition integration: the role of national culture in creating synergies," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 14(3), pages 269-288, June.
    4. Wei Shi & Guoli Chen & Boshuo Li, 2023. "Problem Solving or Responsibility Avoidance? The Role of CEO Internal Attribution Tendency in Shaping Corporate Downsizing in Response to Performance Shortfalls," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 60(5), pages 1273-1301, July.
    5. Ghosh, Suvankar & Troutt, Marvin D. & Thornton, John H. & Felix Offodile, O., 2010. "An empirical method for assessing the research relevance gap," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 201(3), pages 942-948, March.
    6. Delke, Vincent & Schiele, Holger & Buchholz, Wolfgang & Kelly, Stephen, 2023. "Implementing Industry 4.0 technologies: Future roles in purchasing and supply management," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 196(C).
    7. Eden, Colin & Ackermann, Fran, 2018. "Theory into practice, practice to theory: Action research in method development," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 271(3), pages 1145-1155.
    8. Breunig, Karl Joachim & Christoffersen, Line, 2016. "If x then why? Comparative analysis using critical incidents technique," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 69(11), pages 5141-5146.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:jomstd:v:32:y:1995:i:5:p:575-594. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=0022-2380 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.