Search results

The purpose of this study was to suggest pragmatic ways of dealing with the business-to-business (B2B) theory/practice gap.

Reflecting on experience both as a researcher and practitioner.

B2B marketing is characterized by complexity. There is no straight way to harmonize the relationship between its theory and practice but there are ways to make the two benefit from each other. A dilemma is that academics and practitioners are rewarded for different types of achievements.

Scholars can be made aware of the need for close involvement through action research and case theory to secure access to high-quality data in a complex B2B reality, and to their mission to contribute better real world based theory.

The article can make practitioners aware of the value of grand theory to improve the pragmatic use of mid-range theory as it materializes in models, checklists and heuristics.

The simultaneous emphasis on explicit and tacit knowledge in both theory generation and practice, and a framework of theory generation that sorts out substantive, mid-range and grand theory relationships.

This study aims to investigate marketing managers’ views on the existence and nature of the academic–practitioner gap in the branding domain.

Using a purposive sampling method, the researchers conduct semi-structured qualitative interviews with 20 experienced marketing managers from a wide range of industries and organisations, whose roles are focussed on the planning, implementation and management of broad marketing and branding strategies.

Branding practitioners have little or no contact with academics and their theories-in-use with regard to brand management suggest they do not consider academic research relevant to their work.

The process of describing and explaining the gap provides valuable insights into bridging the gap; it provides actionable branding strategies that include raising awareness, building relationships, improving the benefits offer and communicating more effectively.

This research has practical implications for branding academics. The interviewed practitioners confirm the gap, viewing it as academics’ (not practitioners’) problem and responsibility. They characterise it as a branding problem that academics can overcome using branding strategies, to establish themselves as credible sources of branding expertise for practitioners. Key areas for increasing collaboration stem from practitioners’ desire for independent, credible, ethical and timely third-party advice on branding issues; relevant, timely and shorter professional branding education across their organisations; and closer connections with universities to identify new branding talent and ideas.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this paper is the first to empirically examine and recommend solutions to the academic-practitioner gap in the branding domain by studying marketing professionals with branding responsibilities, using in-depth interviews.

The purpose of this paper is to contribute to the elevation of the business-to-business (B2B) marketing field at the business school level.

The study follows a Delphi method. The authors conducted two rounds of discovery to answer: why do you think universities do not highly appreciate publications in Industrial Marketing Management, Journal of Business and Industrial Marketing or Journal of Business-to-Business Marketing? What would you suggest for improving the impact of such journals not only in the USA but around the world?

Through the analysis of the coding transcript, four categories were found to elevate the B2B marketing field at the business school level: B2B as uncommon ground, B2B researcher practices, marketing science underpinnings and B2B marketing journals management.

The value of current research is based on its explorative nature and application of grounded theory to provide a framework to analyze how to elevate the B2B marketing field at the business school level.

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.

This paper aims to investigate the feasibility of a systematic Lean Six Sigma (LSS) education through the curriculum of business schools to respond to the existing gap between the graduate’s expectation of employability and skill requirements by the small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs).

A UK business school has been used as a case study to conduct extensive module and programme review followed by a semi-structured interview with potentially suitable core and programme-specific module tutors and comparative analysis.

The result revealed a high potential of the existing modules in the business schools equivalent to the private sector training providers to increase the level of LSS problem-solving knowledge and skill for all graduates and improve their employability and productivity for the SMEs.

The result of this study highlights the role of LSS to reduce the knowledge and skill gap between the business schools as the source of the explicit knowledge, graduates as the knowledge and skill bearer and SMEs as the knowledge and skill users.

The academic–practitioner gap has been a widely discussed and well-established issue. Despite numerous studies conducted in this area, empirical evidence reveals that the gap is widening and also emphasizes the exigency to bridge this gap. Hence, the purpose of this study is to propose an acceptable solution that will fill this lacuna.

The study adopts the qualitative research methodology and was based on the system theory (ST) and the institutional theory (IT). Interviews, based on a semi-structured questionnaire, were conducted, focusing on three categories, namely individuals with solely academic experience, individuals with both academic and industrial exposure and business leaders. The unit of analysis was the individual.

The study, which unearthed some rich and challenging evidence from the respondents, reveals that gaining industrial exposure and working on continuous professional development are vital for academics to narrow or even close this gap. In addition, serving as apex members at board level or in professional bodies, serving global organizations as lead consultants and working on research collaborations are other important dimensions for academics.

This study introduces an emerging model named the “Pentagon Model” and develops a corporate index (C-index) for academics to earn, similar to the h-index. The study also explains the operationalization of the C-index based on the proposed algorithm. Hence, it is the envisaged that this study will change the landscape of the academic sphere in practical terms.

This study was carried out with the sole intention of bridging the gap between academics and practitioners. The proposed model and the index, which were developed by the author purely based on the outcome of this study, pave the way for many future research studies, not only to further improve the C-index but also to minimize disparities in transdisciplinary work between academics and practitioners.

The purpose of this paper is to provide an overview and evaluation of the “theory/practice” gap in business and management research as it has been developed in relation to US and European business and management schools.

The paper combines theoretical and institutional analysis to construct a framework for analyzing the “theory/practice” gap and its wider implications.

The paper suggests that a “dialogical” rather than “linear” model of knowledge production and dissemination is the most analytically and practically useful way of approaching the “theory/practice” gap in business and management research.

The paper reviews and updates the “theory/practice” gap in business and management research and offers a more nuanced and realistic appreciation of how it might be resolved.

The theory–practice relation in professional programs like teacher education should be a fruitful challenge that inspires students to learn through reflecting on practical experiences with theoretically based concepts. However, instead of being a learning-promoting challenge it often is a problem that causes students to consider leaving teacher education.

Universities and colleges have developed different strategies to make the theory–practice relationship easier for students to handle. One of these strategies is to introduce a third learning space between theory at college and practicum experiences. A Danish university college developed a so-called Teaching Lab to establish a laboratory-like relationship between theory at college and practices in schools. Observations and interviews showed that the college managed to realize its goal and bridge the gap between theory and practice.

The purpose of this paper is to theorize the theory-practice gap and to provide examples of how it currently expresses itself and how it might be addressed to better integrate between the worlds of thought and praxis.

Two empirical examples exemplify how the theory-practice gap is an institutionally embodied social reality. Cultural-historical activity theory is described as a means for theorizing the inevitable gap. An example from the airline industry shows how the gap may be dealt with in, and integrated into, practice.

Cultural-historical activity theory suggests different forms of consciousness to exist in different activity systems because of the different object/motives in the world in which we think and the practical world in which we live. A brief case study of the efforts of one airline to integrate reflection on practice (i.e. theory) into their on-the-job training shows how the world in which pilots think about what they do is made part of the world in which pilots live.

First, in some cases, such as teacher education, institutional arrangements can be made to situate education/training in the workplace. Second, even in the training systems with high fidelity, high validity (transferability) cannot be guaranteed.

The approach proposed provides a theory not only for understanding the theory-practice gap but also the gap that exists even between very high-fidelity (“photo-realistic”) training situations and the real-world praxis full of surprises.

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.