Search results

The aim of the paper is to address the widening theory-praxis gap in marketing. The authors propose that one viable solution to this challenge is involving practitioners in research processes as active, reflective and empowered participants. Most extant discussions addressing the inclusion of managers as partners in theorizing restrain themselves to an “if” question, arguing whether or not it is possible to create sufficiently rigorous knowledge in collaboration with practitioners. This leaves the “how” question unanswered, i.e. how should such gap-bridging research be conducted in practice.

Based on a literature review of collaborative theorizing processes, the authors develop a conceptual framework highlighting the main research design decisions when theorizing with managers. The use of the framework is illustrated with four research program examples.

Most accounts of theorizing with managers use – explicitly or implicitly – abduction as the main mode of inference. In addition to this philosophical commonality, our literature review identified 12 themes that should be considered when designing collaborative research processes. The four illustrative examples indicate that theorizing with managers is an effective way of producing and socializing both academically sound and managerially relevant knowledge. On the other hand, collaborative theorizing processes are time-consuming and studies using abductive reasoning may be more challenging to publish in top-tier journals.

This paper makes two contributions. First, the authors go beyond the extensive academic literature which provides a plethora of explanations and ideas for potential remedies for bridging the theory-praxis gap by offering a detailed description how one particular solution, theorizing with managers, unfolds in practice. Second, the authors ground collaborative theorizing processes in the philosophy of science and put abduction forward as a common nominator for such studies.

The three authors of this paper are intrigued by ideas and how they are created. The purpose of this paper is to explore idea creation and work by means of remote collaborative autoethnography.

During the COVID-19 lockdown in 2020, the authors sent texts to each other, followed up on each other's thoughts and discussed them in online meetings. They shared, analyzed and eventually theorized their lived experiences in order to understand creating ideas as social and cultural experience.

The authors develop the notions of “shelter” and “crutch” to make sense of the complexity of creating ideas together; theorize how emotions and identities are entangled in idea work; and discuss how time, space and power relations condition it.

The authors contribute to understanding idea work in a remote collaborative autoethnography by highlighting its emotional, identity-related and power-laden nature.

For service research to develop as an applied social science there is the need to refresh the process of theorizing so it focuses not only on increasing new academic knowledge but also on knowledge that is managerially relevant. This paper aims to provide guidelines to achieve this.

A theorizing process that integrates general theoretic perspectives and contextual research to develop midrange theory is developed. The process is based on the philosophical foundations of pragmatism and abductive reasoning, which has the origins in the 1950s when the management sciences were being established.

A recent research stream that develops midrange theory about customer and actor engagement is used to illustrate the theorizing process.

Practicing managers, customers and other stakeholders in a service system use theory, so there is a need to focus on how theory is used in specific service contexts and how this research leads to academic knowledge that is managerially relevant. Thus, as applied social science, service research needs to explicitly focus on bridging the theory–praxis gap with midrange theory by incorporating a general theoretic perspective and contextual research.

The contribution comes from providing a broader framework to guide the theorizing process that integrates general theoretic perspectives and applied research to develop midrange theory. While general theories operate at the most abstract level of conceptualization, midrange theories are context-specific and applied theory (theories-in-use) is embedded in empirical research.

The purpose of this paper is to refine an agenda concerning the theory–praxis gap to develop a foundation for a research tradition.

The paper synthesizes and builds on the suggestions in commentary articles by Kohli (2017), Leeflang (2017) and Möller (2017).

The authors develop a research agenda consisting of the following issues: the need for a systemic view of business practice; the need for innovative and meaningful theoretical understanding; the need to identify conditions and approaches for collaborative theorizing; to further define and instruct the abductive approach; and to explore pragmatic realism to ensure both practical outcomes and truthful theories.

These five issues are a step towards developing a theory–praxis research tradition.

The purpose of this paper is to explore enhancing theory development in service research and provide an overview of the five essays on theorizing initiated by the International Network for Service Research workshop, held at Karlstad, Sweden in September 2014.

A collaborative theorizing process which was initiated at the Karlstad, Sweden workshop.

Six (five from the event and the introduction) original and provocative essays that explore different aspects of theorizing in service research.

Exploring how a collaborative approach to research can be used.

The purpose of this paper is to address studies of New Public Governance (NPG) as a post-New Public Management (NPM) tendency. Although NPG is considered a contrast to NPM and its market incentives, it argues that the practices emerging in tensions of NPM and NPG discourses indicate not a clear-cut shift away from NPM, but rather changes that combine competition with collaboration and trust.

It offers a discourse approach to advance the theorizing and empirical unfolding of the tensions of contradicting, yet co-existing discourses of NPM and NPG and their effects in practice. Drawing on a case study from the Danish daycare sector, it investigates local collaborative governance initiatives that develop new quality-management methods.

The study elucidates how NPM and NPG discourses collide in local practices of public sector management within daycare. It shows that the discursive tensions between such value-laden practices indicate a changing marketization associated with collaboration and trust, yet also competition.

To research it becomes critical to advance theoretical and empirical knowledge on the constitutive effects of such complex discursive tensions in public organizations.

To practice it becomes necessary to acknowledge and handle co-existing, yet contradicting management discourses, and not mistake their opposing values as necessarily distinct, but rather as entangled in practice.

The paper contributes with original findings that shed new light on colliding management discourses in practices and their effects within the public sector area of daycare.

The purpose of this paper is to reflect on Nenonen et al.’s paper on theorizing with managers. This paper discusses differences between marketing science and marketing practice and gives suggestions to reduce the theory–praxis gap. It gives examples of quantitative studies that have been performed with practioners and use the choices proposed by Nenonen et al. to draw conclusions.

This paper is based on personal experience of the author, which is supported by a substantial number of empirical studies.

Cooperation with marketing managers/decision-makers is most successful when the initiator is the practitioner. Public policy and litigation are the most promising areas for cooperation. It is difficult to publish the outcomes of these “joint” studies in top journals.

This study extends and continues the results of the study by Nenonen et al.

This chapter informs current research and practice in organization development and change (ODC) with an actionable knowledge of the social science philosophies. It adds value to the scholarship of ODC by charting the progression of philosophies of social science, by showing how researchers in ODC structure their inquiry based on the inherent philosophical dimensions, and by offering useful and actionable knowledge for research and practice. The aim of the chapter is to reflect on the practice of ODC as a social science and to consolidate its social science philosophies so to provide solid philosophical and methodological foundations for the field.

This paper aims to study the formation and preservation of behavioral integration (BI) in the top management team (TMT) of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints from 1844 to the present.

An analytically structured history approach within a case exemplar framework is adopted. Theoretical insights are extrapolated from the case study to form a process model of BI formation and preservation in TMTs.

The findings reveal that three factors primarily influence BI creation (induction, education and cementation) and that BI is preserved via an iterative process that is driven by CEO conservatorship, intentional mentoring and social modeling.

This study investigates an unexplored area in upper echelons theory: the process by which BI is formed and preserved in TMTs and presents a process model of BI formation and preservation that shifts attention in the literature from analyses of the effect of BI on various organizational outcomes to how it can be formed in the first place and then preserved.

The purpose of this paper is to reflect and comment upon Nenonen et al.’s paper on theorizing with managers.

The paper is a personal comment and reflection.

The author finds much to support in Nenonen et al.’s work, although also some areas where future work could build on it further.

This commentary extends Nenonen et al.’s work.