Why, What, and How of Rigour and Relevance in Management Research

In his 1993 presidential address to the assembled faithful of the Academy of Management Don Hambrick posed the question, “What if the academy actually mattered” (1994:11). This rhetorical question set his esteemed colleagues, world leading management scholars, in the category of perhaps rigorous knowledge workers, but definitely not relevant to their community of practice. One might presume that when Hambrick, a giant of his era with a record of citations that is the envy of most scholars, and a field of work (upper echelons) that has been defined by his contribution for over 20 years, we would take note and act. Unfortunately three years later Richard Mowday (1997:341) found it necessary to return to the theme in his presidential address referring to what has ultimately become a perennial challenge of being both rigorous and relevant. In 2002 Jean Bartunek (2003:203) had a dream for the academy where we work to make a difference and speak to tensions involving theory and practice. In 2005 Denise Rousseau (2006) addressed the topic through the search for evidence based management to bridge the research-practice divide. We look forward with anticipation to the new challenges evoked in this years speech, but hardly expect an announcement that we have risen to the challenge. The European debate on the issue has had equal longevity and coverage, with the British Academy of Management leading a search in 1995 for the academic beast that could leap Pettigrew’s (2001) double hurdle. What emerged was a debate closely aligned with the call for a transition from Mode 1 to Mode 2 forms of enquiry (Gibbons et al., 1994; Nowotny et al., 2001) most notably characterised by Tranfield and Starkey (1998) who argued that management research must take account of the fields ontology as a discipline of practice which aligns it more with engineering than pure science and lends itself to Mode 2 collaborative enquiry. Despite diversions towards Mode 1.5 (Huff, 2000) recognising that Mode 1 and Mode 2 are not dichotic, the call for a move to Mode 2 was carried through to the influential Starkey-Madan report (2001), albeit with the caution that it was not Mode 2 at the expense of Mode 1. We were then offered the tantalising thought of moving to Mode 3 (Starkey, 2001)! Despite the attention brought to the issue by such eminent scholars the conversation has stubbornly remained in this conceptual phase. Perhaps because we are too wedded to our traditional approaches or perhaps we have not found the means of articulating the method needed to match our emerging theory. One attempt to move the theory towards a method of investigation is provided by McLean, MacIntosh and Grant (2002) with the first comprehensive articulation of the five key features of mode 2 enquiry in what they call their 5mode2 framework and it is from this point that we try to take up the challege to transcend Mode 1 in our teaching and research. Whether we have reached mode 1.5, Mode 2, Mode 3, Hodgkinson’s Pragmatic Science (2001:S42) or Pettigrew’s double hurdle (2001) is unclear. The intention of our paper is not to propose a neatly packaged Mode 1.75 approach or a lofty Mode 4, but rather it is to explore the struggle, reaffirm the need, and point to the opportunities. The paper is structured around three key issues. First, the question of why so little progress has been made in the intervening period? Second, we question what is considered to be managerially relevant research and who gets to decide together with the allied question of what we consider to be rigour and how this is evolving ? Third we discuss the challenges for the future. A later version of this paper was published in the Irish Journal of Management and the full text is available here http://eprints.maynoothuniversity.ie/7924

Spreading Leader Knowledge: Investigating a Participatory Mode of Knowledge Dissemination among Management Undergraduates

In this paper we discuss the need for a practitioner–academic partnership in disseminating leader knowledge among undergraduate management students, and find that in order to cultivate actionable skill development, business and academic communities should collaborate to offer a participatory approach to leadership education. The core objective is to discover sources of actionable knowledge and to decipher its optimum dissemination among management students, encompassing technical, conceptual and human kill development, through interaction with both theory and practice, in order to prepare students for active participation, and potential leadership, in the business environment. Based on a comprehensive literature review, we propose a participatory leader knowledge dissemination model, where business leaders can stimulate the academic environment, and leadership skill development can be promoted through practitioners’ active involvement in the education process. The article concludes with a perspective on the evolution of knowledge transfer among management students and the current trend towards dynamic collaboration between academics and corporate leaders

The management of technological innovation in the hotel industry: a critical literature review.

This paper takes the form of a critical review of literature on technological innovation in the hotel industry. It aims to develop fuller understanding of the nature of the managerial capabilities which underpin effective implementation and development of technological innovation in the industry context. The review undertaken has been informed by key national and international tourism and enterprise development strategy documents (The Bacon Report, 2009; The National Development Plan, 2007; Failte Ireland, 2005; Tourism Policy Review Group, 2003). Collectively, these reports show that existing CRM capability knowledge is substantially inadequate, leading to a negative impact on business performance and a short-fall in the availability of appropriately crafted solutions to meet the industry’s future challenges. This study’s focus is on the customer-relating capability of key stakeholders which has been identified in the literature as a key business success driver (Day, 2003)

Driving under the influence of an intoxicant in Ireland.

The number of specimens analysed by the MBRS has been increasing for both alcohol and drugs. Blood and urine specimens are analysed for the concentration of alcohol using Headspace Gas Chromatography. Specimens testing positive were forwarded to the State Laboratory for confirmatory analysis by either GC/MS or LC/MS. In 2000, 93 per cent of blood specimens, 91 per cent of urine specimens and 82 per cent of breath specimens were over the limit. In the same year, 57 per cent of blood specimens, 66 per cent of urine specimens and 33 per cent of breath specimens were over twice the limit. Of the 78 specimens tested for the presence of a drug or drugs, 37 were blood specimens and 41 urine specimens. Of these, 34 blood specimens and 37 urine specimens were found to be positive, while seven specimens were negative for the drug or drug classes tested (three blood and four urine specimens). There were 23 specimens found positive for one drug class and 48 for more than one drug.The number of requests for the presence of drugs in RTA blood and urine specimens is increasing annually and the high percentage of positives found in the specimens tested indicates the need for such analyses. The results showed excellent agreement for drug detection in the blood specimens analysed by the different methods, except for the cannabinoids. The number of specimens in this study is small and care must be exercised in interpreting the results

CREATING SUPERIOR COMPETITIVE ADVANTAGES FOR THE SMALL TOURISM FIRM THROUGH CAPITALISING ON THE FIRM-LEVEL DYNAMIC CAPABILITY OF INNOVATIVENESS

Extending the dynamic-capability perspective into the study of firm-level innovativeness, this paper proposes a conceptual model that explains how small tourism firms can increase competitiveness through capitalising upon the firm-level dynamic capability of innovativeness. While prior strategic management literature has extensively studied the positive effects of dynamic capabilities on firm performance and competitiveness (e.g., Eisenhardt and Martin, 2000), very little significant research of this kind has been specifically conducted in the small tourism firm and innovativeness context. This is primarily because tourism firms are generally considered to be less innovative. Although this mindset is changing (Hjalager, 2002), academic research in this area still remains underdeveloped. Drawing from prior relevant work in the strategic Management, innovation, tourism, marketing, and organisational behaviour literatures over the past 50 years, the paper addresses this knowledge gap. It offers a detailed insight into the logic and theoretical underpinnings (dynamic capability) of firm-level innovativeness; and illuminates its role in securing superior competitive advantages for small tourism firms. This paper significantly contributes towards understanding how the small tourism firm can utilise its innovative capability to confer superior competitive advantages. Keywords: Dynamic-capabilities, innovativeness, firm performance, competitiveness, small tourism firm, conceptual model

DOES SUSTAINABLE COMPETITIVE ADVANTAGE EXIST? AND, IF SO, HOW CAN IT BE ACHIEVED?

Strategists and economists have spent years studying firms and organisations that have been successful. The questions that arose back then remain unanswered today. Why are some organisations more successful than others? What is different about these successful firms? How did they achieve this competitive advantage (CA)? And is it sustainable? Many theories have been put forward in an effort to solve this matter, but not one particular theory has been acknowledged as the means of gaining this competitive advantage (Cockburn, Henderson and Stern, 2000). Strategy within the 1980s mainly focused on the management of external factors as the source of competitive advantage (Porter, 1985). In the context of tourism, this is even more apparent. Many authors within the tourism literature have researched competitiveness in relation to the external environment (Yasin, Alavi, Sobral, Lisboa, 2003; Go, Pine and Yu, 1994). However, in the early nineties there was a significant shift in focus when strategists began to recognise that CA came from resources within the firm (Mahoney and Pandian, 1992; Barney, 1991; Grant, 1991). Policy makers have recognised the significant role that the Irish tourism sector plays within the Irish economy as well as its lack of competitiveness, hence they are eager to instil competitiveness in Irish tourism organisations (Dept of Arts, Sports and Tourism, 2010; Tourism Renewal Group, 2009). However, the dynamic nature of the tourism industry has made competition difficult to sustain. The problem with Sustainable Competitive Advantage (SCA) is that nobody really knows how to achieve it or whether it can even exist (Useem, 2000). There has been significant debate about this issue in strategic literature for quite some time and is still ongoing today (Fiol, 2001; Coyne, 1986). This paper will look comprehensively at whether it is possible for a tourism organisation to attain a competitive advantage. If it is possible, then how can the tourism organisation‟s internal resources be utilised to gain this level of competitiveness. Furthermore, this paper will discuss whether tourist practitioners can transform this advantage into a sustainable competitive advantage

FRAMEWORK FOR ENHANCING COMPETITIVENESS IN CULTURE AND HERITAGE ORGANISATIONS IN THE IRISH TOURISM INDUSTRY

The culture and heritage sector of the tourism industry has become a major economic sector of enterprise and of wealth creation (Failte Ireland, 2009a). However, as the National Development Plan (2007-2013) notes, the landscape is changing and the tourism industry is at a significant turning point in its evolution due to the economic downturn. Creating a stronger competitive capacity within Irish tourism companies is a challenging issue (National Development Plan, 2007-2013) and a core focus of this research. This research will particularly focus on cultural and heritage organisations where the industry is predominantly made up of micro and small to medium sized organisations. Given these organisation‟s are small they have limited resource pools. However, as outlined in the „New Horizons for Irish Tourism‟ report (Failte Ireland, 2009b), the cultural and heritage sector has „core assets‟ which if leveraged and deployed to maximum capacity, it could result in a competitive advantage. Strategic management theory has largely and traditionally focused on the external environment in which a firm can achieve competitive advantage (Bounfour, 2003). Increasingly literature has redirected its focus towards the more controllable internal resources within the firm (Barney, 1991). Indeed, an increasing amount of literature has recognised that if small cultural and tourism organisations can strategically utilise their limited resources to maximum capacity, competitiveness should increase (Sundbo et al. 2006). Drawing on the resource based (Barney, 1991) and dynamic capabilities views of the firm (Teece et al., 1997), this paper will make a unique contribution to a very significant gap in the capabilities and business strategy literature by analysing how tourism organisations are utilising and maximising their intangible resource stocks as a means of gaining competitive advantage. Due to the scarcity of research and interest in this area, it is perceived that our ongoing study will contribute substantially to academic knowledge and practice and should highlight key areas warranting investigation going forward

A Capability Based Framework for Tourism Innovativeness

Drawing on the strategic management, innovation, tourism, marketing, and organisational behaviour literatures over the past 50 years, we propose a resource-based (Barney 1991) and dynamic-capability (Wernerfelt 1984; Teece et al. 1997; Eisenhardt & Martin 2000) research approach to theoretically explore how small tourism firms can manage and reconfigure their existing pool of resources through their innovative capabilities to deal with the turbulent environment in which they are embedded. This paper conceptually examines and schematically models the impact of the dynamic capability-generating capacity of firm-level innovativeness on sustainable competitive advantage in small tourism firms. Keywords: Dynamic-capabilities perspective, resource-based view, firm-level innovativeness, firm performance, competitiveness, small tourism firm, conceptual model

DYNAMIC KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT CAPABILITY FOR THE SMALL TOURISM FIRM

Strategic management theory has largely and traditionally focused on the external environment in which a firm can achieve competitive advantage (Bounfour, 2003). Increasingly literature has redirected their focus towards the more controllable internal resources within the firm (Barney, 1991). An increasing amount of literature has recognised that the potential for competitive advantage arises from Intellectual Capital (IC) in the form of human, social and structural resources (Teece, 1998). Previous IC literature has tended to focus mostly on the measurement of individual components of IC and IC components collectively (Mayo, 2000; Tsai and Ghoshal, 1998; Stewart, 1997). Essentially IC amalgamates to a firm’s knowledge assets. Although it makes sense to redirect IC theory towards Knowledge Management (KM) thinking, it has traditionally remained as two distinct areas (Bounfour, 2003). The scant literature that does link KM with IC has been produced purely on a theoretical basis (Moustaghfir, 2008) and the tendency has been to focus on larger firms with case studies and little research has taken place in the tourism industry (Engstrom et al, 2003; Roos and Roos, 1997b) or SME sector. Key authors in the area are calling for the integration of academics and management practitioners to form a practice based model (Grant, 1997). This article therefore seeks to create this link between IC and KM in the Irish tourism sector, by identifying the IC resources of importance, and leveraging these resources through knowledge management capability. Further this paper identifies and distinguishes between the cognitive based aspects of knowledge management and the action based area of organisational learning that will enhance the tourism firm’s competitive advantage