IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hal/journl/hal-01991313.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Collaborating across the researcher-practitioner divide: introducing John Dewey's democratic experimentalism

Author

Listed:
  • Linh-Chi Vo

    (Métis Lab EM Normandie - EM Normandie - École de Management de Normandie)

  • Mihaela Kelemen

    (Keele University [Keele])

Abstract

An analysis of bridging the gap between researchers and practitioners shows that democratic experimentalism offers a much needed platform for a collaborative relationship between academics and practitioners that leads to knowledge that is rigorous and relevant to practice.

Suggested Citation

  • Linh-Chi Vo & Mihaela Kelemen, 2017. "Collaborating across the researcher-practitioner divide: introducing John Dewey's democratic experimentalism," Post-Print hal-01991313, HAL.
    • Handle: RePEc:hal:journl:hal-01991313
    DOI: 10.1108/JOCM-03-2016-0054
    Note: View the original document on HAL open archive server: https://normandie-univ.hal.science/hal-01991313
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://normandie-univ.hal.science/hal-01991313/document
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1108/JOCM-03-2016-0054?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Alfred Kieser & Lars Leiner, 2009. "Why the Rigour–Relevance Gap in Management Research Is Unbridgeable," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 46(3), pages 516-533, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Nicholas J. Rowland & Matthew J. Spaniol, 2022. "The strategic conversation, 25 years later: A retrospective review of Kees van der Heijden's Scenarios: The Art of Strategic Conversation," Futures & Foresight Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 4(1), March.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Gupta, Nitish & Park, Hyunkyu & Phaal, Rob, 2022. "The portfolio planning, implementing, and governing process: An inductive approach," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 180(C).
    2. Timothy Clark & Mike Wright, 2009. "So, Farewell Then . . . Reflections on Editing the Journal of Management Studies," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 46(1), pages 1-9, January.
    3. 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.
    4. Thomaz Wood & Edvalter Becker Holz & Renato Souza, 2023. "When Rigor Meets Relevance: the Development of Hybrid Actionable Knowledge Production Systems," Systemic Practice and Action Research, Springer, vol. 36(1), pages 1-29, February.
    5. Roth, Steffen & Schwede, Peter & Valentinov, Vladislav & Pérez-Valls, Miguel & Kaivo-oja, Jari, 2020. "Harnessing big data for a multifunctional theory of the firm," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 38(1), pages 54-61.
    6. Corinne Bendersky & Kathleen L. McGinn, 2010. "Perspective---Open to Negotiation: Phenomenological Assumptions and Knowledge Dissemination," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 21(3), pages 781-797, June.
    7. Gerard P. Hodgkinson & Denise M. Rousseau, 2009. "Bridging the Rigour–Relevance Gap in Management Research: It's Already Happening!," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 46(3), pages 534-546, May.
    8. Trautrims, Alexander & MacCarthy, Bart L. & Okade, Chetan, 2017. "Building an innovation-based supplier portfolio: The use of patent analysis in strategic supplier selection in the automotive sector," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 194(C), pages 228-236.
    9. Ryan Krause & Michael C. Withers, 2022. "Propulsions Toward What Capes? Testing Normative Theory Through a Panorama of Consequences," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 181(2), pages 317-333, November.
    10. M.-J. Avenier & J. Bartunek, 2010. "Bridging a supposedly unbridgeable gap: elaborating scientific knowledge from and for practice," Post-Print halshs-00526745, HAL.
    11. Boiral, Olivier & Heras-Saizarbitoria, Iñaki, 2016. "La investigación en dirección y gestión de empresas: ¿una actividad relevante y fundamentada en la realidad?," Revista de Dirección y Administración de Empresas, Universidad del País Vasco - Escuela Universitaria de Estudios Empresariales de San Sebastián.
    12. Malida Mooken & Roger Sugden, 2014. "The Capabilities of Academics and Academic Poverty," Kyklos, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 67(4), pages 588-614, November.
    13. Peter J Jordan & Ashlea C Troth, 2020. "Common method bias in applied settings: The dilemma of researching in organizations," Australian Journal of Management, Australian School of Business, vol. 45(1), pages 3-14, February.
    14. Rasche, Andreas & Seidl, David, 2020. "A Luhmannian perspective on strategy: Strategy as paradox and meta-communication," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 73(C).
    15. Elise Marcandella, 2020. "Retour réflexif d’un chercheur en sciences de gestion sur sa légitimité à investiguer le terrain de l’insertion," Post-Print hal-02872684, HAL.
    16. Pär Mårtensson & Uno Fors & Emelie Fröberg & Udo Zander & Gunnar H Nilsson, 2019. "Quality of Research Practice – An interdisciplinary face validity evaluation of a quality model," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(2), pages 1-19, February.
    17. Arjen van Witteloostuijn & Nele Cannaerts & Wim Coreynen & Zainab Noor el Hejazi & Joeri van Hugten & Ellen Loots & Hendrik Slabbinck & Johanna Vanderstraeten, 2020. "Co-Creative Action Research Experiments—A Careful Method for Causal Inference and Societal Impact," Social Sciences, MDPI, vol. 9(10), pages 1-28, September.
    18. Jacques-Bernard Gauthier & Lavagnon Ika, 2022. "The rigor-relevance gap in Project Management research: It's time to stop the lament and think and act reflexively," Working Papers hal-03563085, HAL.
    19. Irwin, Richard L. & Ryan, Timothy D., 2013. "Get real: Using engagement with practice to advance theory transfer and production," Sport Management Review, Elsevier, vol. 16(1), pages 12-16.
    20. Tanya Bondarouk & Chris Brewster, 2016. "Conceptualising the Future of HRM and Technology Research," John H Dunning Centre for International Business Discussion Papers jhd-dp2016-06, Henley Business School, University of Reading.

    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:hal:journl:hal-01991313. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: CCSD (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/ .

    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.