Text

A Sticky, leveraging, and scalable strategy for high-quality connections between organizational practice and science

---

As Rynes, Giluk, and Brown make all too clear in their "separate worlds" study, there is a gap between research and practice. Factoring in the other commentaries accompanying that study, readers must wonder whether "gap" is a tad understated. Since there is almost no evidence-informed management or management-informed evidence, more accurate terms are probably "chasm" and "fault line." Chasm captures the vast distance in perspectives, interests, incentives, and priorities between organizational scientists and practitioners. Practitioners want their questions answered (now). The best evidence does not necessarily provide answers, and academics prefer to ask their own questions (in their own time). Fault line conveys the divisive tensions often moving proactive and science in opposing directions. Consider, for instance, that mergers and acquisitions may be good for Wall Street and CEOs, but research indicates that they are not so great for many companies. Clearly, there's a general absence of healthy connections between organizational science and practice.Printed journal

---

Ketersediaan

Call Number	Location	Available
	PSB lt.dasar - Pascasarjana	1

Penerbit	Academy of Management.,
Edisi	-
Subjek	Research Management styles Evidence Collaboration
ISBN/ISSN	14273
Klasifikasi	-
Deskripsi Fisik	-
Info Detail Spesifik	-
Other Version/Related	Tidak tersedia versi lain
Lampiran Berkas	Tidak Ada Data