“How” Narratology Narrows the Organizational Theory–Practice Gap

Abstract

In this conceptual piece, we take a narrative approach to explicating the gap between organizational theory and practice. The narrative pentad (what, why, how, who, and when/where) represents six narrative questions metaphorically mapped to the five fingers of the hand. The narrative pentad has successfully served both narrative scholars and practitioners, and we believe that the narrative pentad holds similar promise as a theoretical framework for HRD scholars and practitioners. At the finger tips, spaces between fingers represent gaps between questions. In the organizational domain, the theory–practice gap is attributable primarily to a scholarly focus on the universal and abstract what and why questions (story in narrative terms) and a practitioner focus on the particular or embodied how question (discourse in narrative terms). Framed as similarities, we propose that all HRD questions are interrelated at the palm of the hand. In narrative terms, effective organizational theory must include both story and discourse, thereby addressing all questions. This article emphasizes the how question—important to practitioners—but often marginalized by postpositive organizational scholars. We propose the how question represents aesthetic knowledge, and this form of knowledge should be central to organizational theory. We explore related ontological and epistemological considerations. Three recognized causes of the theory–practice gap are examined in light of a narrative approach to organizational theory: (a) the knowledge divide (divergence of emphasis on forms of knowledge between scholars and practitioners); (b) the knowledge transfer problem (lack of information sharing between scholars and practitioners); (c) and the knowledge production problem (associated with an absence of collaboration between scholars and practitioners).

Keeping it real with Bruce Springsteen

“…By adopting the macromarketing perspective, we identify how Springsteen’s use of narratology leads to his existential authenticity, which helps explain his longevity and economic success. It is through a narratological framework, that our data will show how Springsteen maintains a latent story structure where discursive elements map to story elements (Glibkowski et al , 2014). Although narratology and story have a variety of meanings, and they are often used interchangeably (Shankar et al , 2001), we show the relationships of the concepts in a different but relational light.…”

Supervisor-Provided Resources

“…More practically, supervisors can more appropriately gauge when (and why) to use certain resources to motivate employee action. Additionally, addressing the "how-question" (Glibkowski et al, 2014), the three resources (social, task, and money) provide operational standards of actions to be performed. Finally, it has been suggested that the value employees place on different types of resources may be shifting.…”

“…Beyond the theoretical contributions of import to scholars, this scale development is also important to practitioners. First, theory is important to practitioners addressing the "what-question" (associated with defining concepts) and the "why-question" (associated with the causal ordering of concepts; Glibkowski, McGinnis, Gillespie, & Schommer, 2014). For example, from a practical perspective, understanding explicitly which resources cause desired outcomes, such as performance, extra-role behavior, and commitment, is useful.…”

“…With this knowledge in-hand, managers can understand which resource-levers to employ. Additionally, from a practical perspective, theoretical concepts are important to addressing the “how-question” most valued by practitioners (Glibkowski et al, 2014). Each resource type becomes an operational criterion against which actions are judged by participants in a process called determinability —meaning an assessment regarding the extent to which an action maps onto a desired concept (Glibkowski et al, 2014).…”

“…Additionally, from a practical perspective, theoretical concepts are important to addressing the “how-question” most valued by practitioners (Glibkowski et al, 2014). Each resource type becomes an operational criterion against which actions are judged by participants in a process called determinability —meaning an assessment regarding the extent to which an action maps onto a desired concept (Glibkowski et al, 2014). Thus, a fine-grained understanding of resources helps practitioners understand and identify actions that are tangible manifestations of resource concepts in the workplace.…”