In their article, The Disconnect Between Management Science and Practice, the authors discuss the great chasm between knowledge and application. Researchers can spend years, some even a lifetime, carefully examining, analyzing, and conjecturing patterns of behavior; they are correct in their conclusions most of the time. People in the business world are desperately looking for ways to improve behavior in the workplace; however, they avoid answers from the very people who can help them. This article presents a number of reasons why this phenomenon occurs.
Arguments and explanations
Professionals from the business world do not dispute the validity of scientific results presented by researchers; And it’s not because business people aren’t smart enough to understand the intricacies of statistics, research, and application. The point being made here is that, for all their brilliance, many researchers fail to communicate their findings in such a way that the general population can assimilate thoughts into action.
Another reason why professionals may mistrust research results is that most believe that research is conducted under a conflict of interest. For example, a company often pays a research lab to run a survey to prove its point…in other words, it looks for certain results.
Academic researchers are also believed to be out of touch with the “real” business world or not committed to solving real problems no matter how much they are published or made headlines (in other words, ulterior motives).
Academics tend to isolate themselves from business: they don’t communicate well with the average working manager. Although their findings could be very helpful in improving workplace behavior (productivity, absenteeism, turnover, etc.), they are not written in a way that is easy to understand or appealing to those who need the answers. More often than not, research findings are buried in psychological jargon that does not interest working managers or contribute to the time constraints they experience. If the information were presented in a clear and concise manner, perhaps the use of bulleted items to point out steps that can be taken immediately would ease the burden of reading and applying the findings.
In addition, the academic’s goals are different from those of “non-academic colleagues.” Non-academics want logical, sound, and pragmatic information. Researchers seek academically oriented, data-backed, and theoretical information that does not necessarily contribute to real-world applications.
integration solutions
The authors then proceed to suggest solutions that could restore the relationship between the business and research worlds and reintegrate the disciplines.
Business-university partnerships: pair business executives with researchers to help develop effective surveys that cover current business concerns or issues.
Information accessibility: Research results need to be written and presented in a more inclusive way, removing jargon and subcultural language that creates barriers.
Entrepreneurial Experience for Teachers: Use of sabbaticals or summer vacations to carry out internships in a business environment.
Corporate Sabbaticals:The opposite of the suggestion above… corporate executives using sabbaticals to intern as teachers (to educate teachers on what’s currently going on in corporate culture).
Overall, the authors suggest that the two worlds (business and academia) need to intertwine more effectively to provide purpose and meaning to each other.