Article thumbnail


By M.-J. Avenier and J. Bartunek


This article aims at advancing the still on-going conversations about the so-called research/practice gap. Some academics argue that it is not possible to develop knowledge that is both academically valuable and helpful for practice, while others hold the opposite view, justifying it on the basis of works published in top tier journals. The paper argues that the main reason scholars hold such contradictory views on this topic central to management science is the lack of explicitness of a number of founding assumptions which underlie their discourses, in particular the lack of explicitness of the epistemological framework in which the parties' arguments are anchored. The paper presents methodological guidelines for elaborating scientific knowledge both from and for practice, and illustrates how to use these guidelines on examples from a published longitudinal research project. In order to avoid the lack of explicitness pitfall, the paper specifies scientific and epistemological frameworks in which the knowledge elaborated in this methodological approach, when properly justified, can be considered as legitimate scientific knowledge.collaborative research ; constructivist epistemological paradigm ; sciences of the artificial ; organizational design science; rigor; actionability

OAI identifier:

Suggested articles


  1. (2007). Academic-practitioner collaboration need not require joint or relevant research: towards a relational scholarship of integration”.
  2. (2001). Across the great divide: Knowledge creation and transfer between practitioners and academics”.
  3. (2006). Action and interactive research - Beyond theory and practice.
  4. (2006). Actionable strategy knowledge: A practice perspective”.
  5. (2005). Affect and creativity at work”.
  6. (1960). An introduction to cybernetics.
  7. (1986). Appreciative inquiry: Toward a methodology for understanding and enhancing organizational innovation. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation: Case
  8. (2008). Author’s response”.
  9. (2009). Bridging the Rigour–Relevance Gap in Management Research: It’s Already Happening!”
  10. (1998). Competing paradigms in qualitative research”.
  11. (2007). Composing qualitative research (2 nd Ed.). Thousand Oaks:
  12. (1997). Constructing opportunities for contribution: Structuring intertextual coherence and “problematizing” in oganizationaltudies”.
  13. (1988). Descriptive
  14. (2008). Developing design propositions through research synthesis”.
  15. (1985). Doing research that is useful for theory and practice.
  16. (2000). Dynamics and dilemmas of women leading women”.
  17. (1990). Empirical research methods and the interpretive turn.
  18. (2009). Enabling evidence-based management: What can researchers do to help practitioners help their organizations? Unpublished working paper,
  19. (2007). Engaged scholarship: A guide for organizational and social research”.
  20. (2008). Evidence in management and organizational science : Assembling the field’s full weight of scientific knowledge through synthesis”.
  21. (1993). Exploring corporate strategy (3rd revised ed.).
  22. (2001). Facing the future: The nature and purpose of management research reassessed”.
  23. (1989). Fourth generation evaluation. London Sage.
  24. (2007). Front and back stages of the diminished routinization of innovations: What innovation research makes public and organizational research finds behind the scenes”.
  25. (2003). Grounded theory: Objectivist and constructivist methods”.
  26. (2007). Having relevance and impact. The benefits of integrating the perspectives of design science and organizational development”.
  27. (2005). How business schools lost their way”.
  28. (1983). How organization development can develop organizational theory”.
  29. (2008). Introduction to the special issue organization studies as a science for design: Creating collaborative artifacts and research”.
  30. (2006). Is there such a thing as evidence-based management?”
  31. (2006). Judging quality. Evaluative criteria and epistemic communities”.
  32. (1993). Knowledge for action, a guide to overcoming barriers to organizational change. San Franciso:
  33. (2006). Knowledge for theory and practice”.
  34. (1999). L'intelligence de la complexité.
  35. (2007). L’engagement revisité à l’aide du concept du “soi”. Expérience d’une entreprise familiale de la grande distribution. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation:
  36. (1977). La méthode. 1 nature de la nature.
  37. (1980). La méthode. 2 la vie de la vie.
  38. (1990). La modélisation des systèmes complexes.
  39. (2001). Le constructivisme, tome 1: Les enracinements.
  40. (2002). Le constructivisme, tome 2: Epistémologie de l'interdisciplinarité.
  41. (1995). Les pistémologies constructivistes.
  42. (1983). Local knowledge. Further essays in interpretive anthropology. New York: Basic Books. h a l s h s -0 , v e r s i o n -O c t
  43. (2007). Making knowledge contextually relevant: The challenge of connecting academic research with practice”. Paper presented at The Third Organization Studies Summer Workshop,
  44. (1988). Management education and development: Drift or thrust into the 21 st century?
  45. (2004). Management research based on the paradigm of the design sciences: The quest for field-tested and grounded technological rules”.
  46. (1957). Models of man.
  47. (2003). Organizational and Educational Change: The life and role of a change agent group. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
  48. (2007). Practical methods for extracting Explicit Design Rules Grounded in the Experience of Organizational Managers.”
  49. (1988). Précis de systémique ago-antagoniste.
  50. (2001). Realism and constructivism in strategy research: A critical realist response to Mir and Watson”.
  51. (1997). Reatistic evaluation.
  52. (2002). Refracting reflection: Views from the inside”.
  53. (2007). Repères pour la transformation d’expérience en science avec conscience”.
  54. (1999). Replication and theory development in organizational science: A critical realist perspective”.
  55. (1997). Research utilization – Bridging a cultural gap between two communities”.
  56. (1991). Sensemaking and sensegiving in strategic change initiation”.
  57. (1999). Sensemaking, sensegiving, and leadership in strategic organizational development”. In
  58. (1992). Social cognition in organizational change: an insider/outsider approach”.
  59. (1957). Social theory and social structure.
  60. (2007). Strategic management as an applied science, but not as we (academics) know it”. Paper presented at The Third Organization Studies Summer Workshop,
  61. (1978). Strategy formulation: Analytical concepts. Saint Paul:
  62. (2007). Tent poles, tribalism, and boundary spanning: The rigor-relevance debate in management research”.
  63. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory.
  64. (1968). The logic of scientific discovery.
  65. (2001). The radical constructivist view of science”.
  66. (1983). The reflective practitioner.
  67. (1979). The social psychology of organizing (2nd ed.).
  68. (1984). The systems approach (2nd revised ed.).
  69. (2006). The validity of action research - validity in action research”.
  70. (2005). Thirty years radical constructivism”.
  71. (2003). Three responses to the methodological challenges of studying strategizing”.
  72. (2007). Toward More User-Centric OD: Lessons From the Field of Experience-BasedDesign and a Case Study”.
  73. (2003). Towards a methodology for developing evidence-informed management knowledge by means of systematic review”.
  74. (2001). Towards a radical constructivist understanding of science”. Foundations of Science, special issue on impact of radical constructivism on science,
  75. (2007). Using a design approach to assist large-scale organizational change: "10 high impact changes" to improve the national health service in England”.
  76. (2007). What a design approach offers to organization development”.
  77. (2009). Why the rigour-relevance gap in management research is unbridgeable”.
  78. (1980). Work redesign.

To submit an update or takedown request for this paper, please submit an Update/Correction/Removal Request.