...
  • 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>Journal of Management Inquiry >Collaborate With Practitioners: But Beware of Collaborative Research
【24h】

Collaborate With Practitioners: But Beware of Collaborative Research

机译：与从业者合作：但要提防合作研究

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

Collaborative research is seen as a promising approach for bridging the rigor-relevance gap. In this essay, the authors criticize that the proponents of this approach tend to downplay communication difficulties between practitioners and researchers. The authors apply psycholinguistic concepts of layperson-expert communication and system theory to demonstrate that it is extremely difficult to integrate knowledge that has been generated in the different contexts of science and practice. The authors argue that collaborative approaches like action research, consulting, or executive training are more effective than collaborative research in ridging the rigor-relevance gap. A critical review of reports on collaborative research projects discloses some evidence in support of their assumptions. We conclude by encouraging researchers and practitioners to inspire each other through different forms of collaboration. However, we argue that attempts to turn managers into coresearchers with the special responsibility for making sure that rigor is complemented by relevance are overvalued in the academic discourse.
机译：协作研究被认为是弥合严格性-相关性鸿沟的一种有前途的方法。在本文中，作者批评这种方法的拥护者倾向于轻视从业者和研究人员之间的沟通困难。作者运用非专业人士交流和系统理论的心理语言学概念来证明，要整合在科学和实践的不同背景下产生的知识是极其困难的。作者认为，行动方法，咨询或执行人员培训等协作方法在消除严格相关性方面比协作研究更有效。对协作研究项目的报告进行的严格审查揭示了一些支持其假设的证据。最后，我们鼓励研究人员和实践人员通过不同形式的合作互相启发。但是，我们认为，在学术话语中高估了将管理者转变为对确保严格性与相关性负有特殊责任的核心搜索者的尝试。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号