Search results

The purpose of this paper is to reconceptualize the theory-practice gap in educational leadership, not as a deficit, but as a necessity for legitimacy within institutional contexts.

This paper draws on institutional theory to reframe the theory-practice gap, which is often seen as a deficit of leaders or preparation programs.

Three vignettes illustrate how aspiring and current educational leaders engage with theory and practice within specific contexts and in relation to specific aspects of leadership. Importantly, the vignettes show that when school leaders decouple theory from practice, they may be doing so to function as legitimate providers of K-12 educational leadership.

The theory-practice gap, while often perceived as something negative, can have certain benefits within particular contexts. Scholars interested in the interconnections of theory and practice would benefit from considering why and how school leaders engage theory and practice.

Implications for leadership preparation programs highlight developing more complex views of the challenges that leaders face in tightly coupling theory and practice. To support future and current leaders, leadership preparation programs need to ensure that their students understand their institutional contexts and the reasons that leaders may decouple theory from action in various ways.

Instead of viewing the theory/practice gap as a deficit, this paper argues for a new way to consider why school leaders and leadership candidates may engage with theory and practice in different ways.

The purpose of this paper is to investigate a case of collective sensemaking about the project success of the multifunctional amphitheater of Quebec (Canada).

For this explorative and qualitative research, the authors started from the post-mortem document and complemented their comprehension with six semi-structured interviews with the main project actors and other public documents regarding this project.

According to the respondents, the main success factors of this project can be attributed to: a clear governance structure; proven project management and construction methods; the use of emerging collaborative practices in construction (such as building information modeling (BIM) and lean construction); an adapted policy for procurement; as well as a code of values and ethics shared by all stakeholders.

The sensemaking perspective has been scarcely mobilized in project management studies, emerging from a constructivist view of reality and being sensitive about material-discursive practices. This exploratory study explores a case of collective sensemaking of a major project success and suggests avenues for major and megaprojects research. Lessons learned and implications for practice are also outlined. The conclusion allows a synthesis and an opening to consider how practitioners and researchers can build on this (and other successful) case(s) for future projects and research.

This paper aims to present evidence for regarding reflexive practice as the crux of patient safety in tertiary hospitals. Reflexive practice buttresses safety because it is the precondition for flexible systematization – that is, the process that involves frontline clinicians in designing, redesigning and flexibly enacting care processes.

The paper presents an account of a collaborative video‐ethnographic project with a multi‐disciplinary team in an acute spinal unit. Video‐ethnography was combined with video‐reflexivity to provide practitioners with the opportunity to become involved in data interpretation and solution generation.

The study reveals that an outsider analysts/catalyst (or clinalyst) is critical to engaging frontline practitioners in reflexivity. The clinalyst is able to elicit insights and perspectives that assist practitioners in revisiting and revising their processes and practices, principally because video‐based reflexivity connects “what we do” directly to “who we are”.

Because complexity will be an indelible part of health care work, health care organizations should invest in developing “reflexive space” where learning about complexity becomes possible. Instead of continuing to invest in research efforts seeking to derive and test staff compliance with guidelines and protocols, and training centred on simulation, these organization must begin to engage with the lived complexity of clinical work in order to skill up incoming clinicians.

Enhancing clinical practitioners' capability to confront complexity in their practices is currently not a standard component of clinical training or work‐based learning. Video‐reflexive ethnography in tertiary health care is unique in involving clinicians in “making sense” of and deriving solutions from lived complexity.

The purpose of this paper is to propose reflexivity as a means to managing diversity practice in organizations. Reflexivity enables taken for granted assumptions about identities, roles, perspectives, language, meanings and understandings between managers and employees to be explored and redefined in ways that matter to the people in the workplace. It provides insights and examples from a practitioner perspective while engaged in designing and implementing a managing diversity initiative. In addition, it positions the development of relationships between managers and employees as a key ingredient in managing diversity.

This paper is based on a post hoc qualitative reflexive study of a managing diversity project undertaken by the author as a diversity practitioner.

The study suggested that reflexivity can allow both managers and employees to critically examine the conventional ways in which diversity and differences are understood, as this awareness can enable more relational approaches to diversity to be developed.

Because of the chosen qualitative research approach, the specific findings cannot be generalized; rather, an example of the potential of reflexivity as practice in organizations is proffered and insights are offered to enable further academic enquiry and practical considerations.

Reflexivity stimulates both independent and shared action-learning sense-making processes which support equal participation. This challenges and expands the diversity agendas prevalent in the applied field of managing diversity. For example, by positioning organizational diversity as an inter-subjective and contextual process, meaningful dialogue between employees and managers becomes possible. Moreover, as reflexivity allows for a range of narrative accounts to emerge from such embedded activities, this approach can serve as a model for similar dialogical processes to occur within the wider organization. In addition, this paper provides insight into how reflexivity as practice for both practitioners and researchers can offer a means for more collaborative relationships to develop at the practitioner/researcher nexus.

The paper endeavors to make a contribution to both the academic and the practitioner managing diversity fields by demonstrating that reflexive practice can add significant value to managing diversity processes in organizations and research.

The purpose of this paper is to offer a reflexive account of the co‐production of a qualitative research project with the aim of illuminating the relationships between research participants.

The paper draws upon personal experience of designing and conducting a research project into management learning, run jointly between an academic and a senior practitioner. The methodological issues involved and the reflexive dynamics of how the work of research collaboration is accomplished are considered.

Engaging with radical reflexivity helps to produce insights about the co‐production process.

This paper contributes to the field of reflexivity and is innovative in its context of academic‐practitioner research.

This chapter considers the values and challenges of a highly embedded participant ethnographic methodology that has evolved over the last four years in the course of two formal ethnographic studies in higher education. The method has been developed by a practitioner-researcher in tandem with the learning design of a new programme. As such, the roots of the method lie very much within the paradigms of heuristics and action research but lend themselves equally well to more formal, extended ethnographic work. The nature of this method raises several interesting, messy and difficult issues that are further explored. The first is the nature of practitioner research and the purpose of participant ethnography in this context. What does it mean for the teacher to concurrently and contemporaneously inhabit the role of researcher? This leads neatly into an exploration of the attendant ethical considerations. Issues of power and positionality must be tackled, and the ability of the researcher to engage in fully reflexive practice and research is key to unpacking this. Who or what is being observed, and from what perspective? Whose experience is really being interrogated – that of the teacher or the student? Finally, as this method has evolved from, and shares much in common with, action research, consideration will be given to the nexus of action research, observation and formal ethnography – both in terms of the participation and contributions of the teacher-researcher to the process and the students, who in effect become auto-action researchers, investigating themselves as learners and their experiences with their peers.

The aim of the study is to deepen the knowledge about municipalities' risk communication for preparedness. This objective was pursued by analyzing how risk communication functions were organized in municipalities and by scrutinizing tensions in risk communication management.

The study relies on 19 qualitative, semi-structured interviews with communication practitioners in Swedish municipalities. The sample was purposive and included Swedish municipalities varying in number of inhabitants, geographical location, degree of urbanization, size and risk profile.

Risk communication is seen as a sub-field of crisis communication in municipalities' communication management. The task of initiating risk communication activities and campaigns is frequently assigned to the municipalities' safety units or emergency coordinators and is normally not part of communication practitioners' duties. Municipal communication practitioners often face challenges in trying to demonstrate the significance of the practitioners' role in risk communication and other risk-related activities within the municipality. The practitioners' work is characterized by four categories of tensions that are identified as follows: constitutional/legal, organizational, cultural and technological.

The identified tensions in risk communication are important for reflexive practitioners to consider, and the paper suggests three steps that municipal communication managers can take to handle them.

The study contributes with novel knowledge about municipal communication management in a context of risk communication. The study challenges the existing and dominant risk communication research and offers a more contextual and reflexive understanding of actual risk communication processes in municipalities.

This article aims at reframing organizational change from a processual perspective to transcend the polarized tensions between planned and emergent approaches to change and to better align with the lived reality of practitioners. It informs the field of learning and development with fresh insights on how to broaden sensemaking repertoires of managers and employees in realizing organizational change.

To understand how change agents conceptualize organizational change at a conceptual level, this article relies on Heidegger’s three modes of being-in-the-world to identify three dominant conceptualizations of organizational change and subsequently theorizes on corresponding phenomenological qualities of sensemaking.

This article develops a theoretical scaffolding that posits the emergence of organizational change as dialectic process of three different conceptualizations of change, i.e. wayfinding logic, managerialistic logic and reflexive logic, that translate into three different phenomenological qualities of sensemaking, i.e. absorbed sensemaking, detached sensemaking and mindful sensemaking, respectively.

A processual reframing of organizational change informs learning and development scholars and practitioners in at least three ways: raising awareness of and probing underlying managerial assumptions of what change is and how change should be managed, training managers and employees to deal with sensemaking processes to effectively realize organizational change, and actively assist in developing a broader sensemaking repertoire to deal with the equivocality associated organizational change.

This processual reframing contributes to the sensemaking literature on organizational change by reframing change as a dialectic process of different underlying assumptions of change agents, and different qualities of sensemaking of change. It pinpoints to concrete actions that learning and development professionals can initiate to contribute to more effective change management practices.

The paper seeks to support a better understanding of the types (or processes) of reflexivity which may be involved in the practice of organizational research, and the implications of reflexive practice for organizational researchers.

A characterization of reflexivity as a process is developed from extant research, in four steps. First, the principal dimensions of reflexivity – reflection and recursion – are identified and delineated. Second, recursion is shown to have two modes, active and passive. Third, reflection is shown to have both closed, self‐guided and open, relational modes. Fourth, through integrating the detailed characterizations of each of the dimensions, different types of reflexivity are identified and defined.

The paper shows how different types of reflexivity may be experienced sequentially, as a progressive process, by organizational researchers. Implications for research practice are derived from a consideration of this process.

The paper develops a novel conceptualization of reflexivity as a process with individual and relational aspects. This conceptualization supports important insights for the conduct and legitimation of reflexive research.

This paper aims to explore the challenges and opportunities for expediting critical reflection in management education and development to highlight particularly how critical reflection has been facilitated within the context of a professionally focused doctoral programme.

The paper draws on empirical research conducted for a broader project, focusing here on two awaydays for DBA supervisors (n=25 in 2005 and n=16 in 2006) and a UFHRD workshop in 2007 (n=12) for members involved and/or interested in doctoral programmes in HRD, where the empirical research findings were presented and discussed. The paper presents selected findings from the perspective of staff through their own critical reflections, drawing on the data from the two awaydays and the UFHRD workshop. Detailed handwritten notes were taken and transcribed, in addition to flipchart material provided by the participants. These qualitative data are analysed using thematic analysis. The quotations presented are as accurate as possible (verbatim) and any ambiguous notes have been deliberately excluded.

Emerging findings include the need to clarify the concept for both staff and students, and embed critical reflection from the beginning of the programme and throughout written assignments. Insights into how staff perceive critical reflection within a DBA programme are offered, including how staff might assume (incorrectly) that advanced practitioners arrive with a high level of maturity to engage in critical reflection, and yet advanced practitioners “worry” about critique and perceive it as negative and/or failure.

It is acknowledged that the subjective experience of student participants is not central to this discussion, and, whilst a limitation of this paper, this presents an avenue for further research.

The paper presents a critical and reflexive account from a facilitator's perspective and offers practical suggestions for incorporating critical reflection within a DBA programme.

Given the dearth of literature of facilitating critical reflection in the context of professionally focused doctoral programmes, this paper makes a small and initial contribution to this field.