TY  - JOUR
AB  - Purpose– Given marketing's fundamentally applied nature, to compare the relative impacts in the academy of work published by three groups – practitioners, practitioner‐academic alliances, and academics.Design/methodology/approach – Social Sciences Citation Index data were used to estimate the influence of 438 articles published by practitioners, practitioner‐academic alliances, and academics in five marketing journals over the period 1970‐2000.Findings – Citations for academic research were more than twice as high as those for practitioners. Conversely, citations for practitioner‐academic research rival those of the academics, and sometimes exceed them.Research limitations/implications – Only considered US marketing journals.Practical implications – Despite some excellent citation evidence for practitioner‐academic work, additional cooperative efforts must be pursued to ensure the relevance of academic marketing research to practitioner needs.Originality/value – This is the only study to “objectively” address the impact of practitioner, practitioner‐academic alliance, and academic research in the academy.
VL  - 30
IS  - 1
SN  - 0140-9174
DO  - 10.1108/01409170710724278
UR  - https://doi.org/10.1108/01409170710724278
AU  - Hubbard Raymond
AU  - Norman Andrew T.
PY  - 2007
Y1  - 2007/01/01
TI  - What impact has practitioner research had in the marketing academy?
T2  - Management Research News
PB  - Emerald Group Publishing Limited
SP  - 25
EP  - 33
Y2  - 2024/05/12
ER  -