Knowledge for Theory and Practice

Abstract

We examine three related ways in which the gap between theory and practice has been framed. One approach views it as a knowledge transfer problem, a second argues that theory and practice represent distinct kinds of knowledge, and a third incorporates a strategy of arbitrage-leading to the view that the gap is a knowledge production problem. We propose a method of engaged scholarship for addressing the knowledge production problem, arguing that engaged scholarship not only enhances the relevance of research for practice but also contributes significantly to advancing research knowledge in a given domain.

A study of indicators of willingness in the knowledge transfer process

“…For example, Cook and Brown (1999) argue that the individual locus of knowledge has been too influential and is dangerous to an integrated approach. This argument is itself contested by Van de Ven and Johnson (2006) who, in the context of knowledge transfer point out the role of individual differences and gaps in knowledge are sources of new knowledge creation. In asserting the primacy of the individual we are not denying the social constructivist argument that knowledge is a social phenomenon that is different from the aggregation of individuals (Nahapiet & Ghoshal 1998:246).…”

Exploring knowledge exchange: A useful framework for practice and policy

“…As such, the gap between research and practice is perhaps better conceptualised as being largely a knowledge exchange problem rather than an implementation or knowledge production problem (Van de Ven and Johnson 2006).…”

Engaging the scholar: Three types of academic consulting and their impact on universities and industry

“…While in some quarters debates are raging about the possibility of 'engaged scholarship' (Van De Ven and Johnson, 2006), the relevance of academic knowledge has long been established in many areas of economic activity. Much research has focused on technology transfer and academic entrepreneurship (Shane, 2004).…”