The article contributes to a better understanding of the relation between organization theory and managerial practice, by providing a systematic review of the theory-practice debate and proposing a new integrative position called entanglement. A careful analysis of the debate highlights a dichotomist pattern (science versus commonsense, rigor versus relevance and cognition versus action) that propels a circling debate. To reconcile dichotomies, we propose an entanglement position that re-conceptualizes relations between academics and practitioners as loops of trans-epistemic boundary work. We identify three loops that explain how and why academics and practitioners alternate between science and commonsense (legitimation), translate standards of rigor into multiple systems of relevance (mobilization), and form common action-cognition meshes (enactment). We show that not all loops require the same relational effort, which explains some of the contrasting findings in the theory-practice debate. We try to advance the debate by proposing new research directions for each loop.

Are academics and practitioners that different after all? An entanglement perspective for the theory-practice debate in management / Ungureanu, P; Bertolotti, F. - (2018). ((Intervento presentato al convegno Euram 2018 Research in Action tenutosi a Reykjavik nel 19-22 June.

Are academics and practitioners that different after all? An entanglement perspective for the theory-practice debate in management

Ungureanu, P
;
Bertolotti, F
2018

Abstract

The article contributes to a better understanding of the relation between organization theory and managerial practice, by providing a systematic review of the theory-practice debate and proposing a new integrative position called entanglement. A careful analysis of the debate highlights a dichotomist pattern (science versus commonsense, rigor versus relevance and cognition versus action) that propels a circling debate. To reconcile dichotomies, we propose an entanglement position that re-conceptualizes relations between academics and practitioners as loops of trans-epistemic boundary work. We identify three loops that explain how and why academics and practitioners alternate between science and commonsense (legitimation), translate standards of rigor into multiple systems of relevance (mobilization), and form common action-cognition meshes (enactment). We show that not all loops require the same relational effort, which explains some of the contrasting findings in the theory-practice debate. We try to advance the debate by proposing new research directions for each loop.
Euram 2018 Research in Action
Reykjavik
19-22 June
Ungureanu, P; Bertolotti, F
Are academics and practitioners that different after all? An entanglement perspective for the theory-practice debate in management / Ungureanu, P; Bertolotti, F. - (2018). ((Intervento presentato al convegno Euram 2018 Research in Action tenutosi a Reykjavik nel 19-22 June.
File in questo prodotto:
File Dimensione Formato  
Manuscript per IRIS.pdf

non disponibili

Tipologia: Post-print dell'autore (bozza post referaggio)
Dimensione 529.65 kB
Formato Adobe PDF
529.65 kB Adobe PDF   Visualizza/Apri   Richiedi una copia
Pubblicazioni consigliate

Caricamento pubblicazioni consigliate

Licenza Creative Commons
I metadati presenti in IRIS UNIMORE sono rilasciati con licenza Creative Commons CC0 1.0 Universal, mentre i file delle pubblicazioni sono rilasciati con licenza Attribuzione 4.0 Internazionale (CC BY 4.0), salvo diversa indicazione.
In caso di violazione di copyright, contattare Supporto Iris

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11380/1169616
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus ND
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? ND
social impact