Cookies

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. By continuing to browse this repository, you give consent for essential cookies to be used. You can read more about our Privacy and Cookie Policy.


Durham Research Online
You are in:

Response : Van de Ven and Johnson's “engaged scholarship” : nice try, but…

McKelvey, B. (2006) 'Response : Van de Ven and Johnson's “engaged scholarship” : nice try, but….', Academy of management review., 31 (4). pp. 822-829.

Abstract

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 Venand 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.

Item Type:Article
Full text:(VoR) Version of Record
Available under License - Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial No Derivatives.
Download PDF
(81Kb)
Status:Peer-reviewed
Publisher Web site:https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2006.22527451
Record Created:27 Aug 2008
Last Modified:01 Dec 2017 15:03

Social bookmarking: del.icio.usConnoteaBibSonomyCiteULikeFacebookTwitterExport: EndNote, Zotero | BibTex
Look up in GoogleScholar | Find in a UK Library