Practitioners are curious people but have become increasingly estranged from investigation and the research process. A false divide has developed wherein knowledge gained from practice is considered by some as inferior to knowledge constructed by academics. The concept of phronesis, as practical wisdom, can provide a link to give a legitimacy to practice research. One difference between academic research and practice research is in the collaborative relationship between practitioner and researcher, a true engagement with equal partners. The academic can be seen as a practice research enabler who facilitates the knowledge which practitioners develop in a localized setting and situates it in a broader theoretical perspective. As a research enabler, a researcher brings academic expertise to supplement the practice expertise of the practitioner to develop new knowledge. In a series of examples, and using a critical discourse analysis approach, the author critically assesses his own practice to identify an unsuccessful, a partially successful and a successful example of being a practice research enabler.
CohenMZKahnDLSteevesRH (2000) Hermeneutic Phenomenological Research: A Practical Guide for Nurse Researchers, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
4.
CrottyM (2009) The Foundations of Social Research, London: Sage Publications.
5.
DenzinNKLincolnYS (2005) Introduction: The discipline and practice of qualitative research. In: DenzinNKLincolnYS (eds) The Sage Handbook of Qualitative Research, 3rd ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, pp. 1–32.
6.
EllettF (2012) Practical rationality and a recovery of Aristotle’s “phronesis” for the professions. In: KinsellaEPitmanA (eds) Phronesis as Professional Knowledge: Practical Wisdom in the Professions, Rotterdam: Sense Publishers, pp. 12–33.
7.
FlyvbjergB (2001) Making Social Science Matter: Why Social Inquiry Fails and How It Can Succeed Again, Sampson S (transl), Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
8.
FlyvbjergBLandmanTSchramS (2012) Introduction: New directions in social science. In: FlyvbjergBLandmanTSchramS (eds) Real Social Science: Applied Phronesis, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 1–12.
9.
FoucheC (2015) Practice Research Partnerships in Social Work: Making a Difference, Bristol: Policy Press.
10.
Fournier M (2013) Emile Durkheim: A Biography, Macey D (transl). Cambridge: Polity Press.
11.
HeatonJDayJBrittenN (2016) Collaborative research and the co-production of knowledge for practice: An illustrative study. Implementation Science11: 1–10.
12.
International Association for Public Participation, IAP2 (2017) IAP2 Public Participation Spectrum. Available at: www.iap2.org.au (accessed 23 March 2017).
13.
Karvinen-NiinikoskiS (2012) Research orientation and expertise in social work: Challenges for social work education. In: MarthinsenEJulkunenI (eds) Practice Research in Nordic Social Work: Knowledge Production In Transition, London: Whiting & Birch, pp. 27–42.
14.
KearnsHGardinerM (2013) Time for Research: Time Management for Academics, Researchers and Research Students, Adelaide: Thinkwell Press.
15.
KinsellaEPitmanA (2012) Engaging phronesis in professional practice and education. In: KinsellaEPitmanA (eds) Phronesis as Professional Knowledge: Practical Wisdom in the Professions, Rotterdam: Sense Publishers, pp. 1–11.
16.
LahkaniS (1992) Early clinical pathologists: Edward Jenner (1749–1823). Journal of Clinical Pathology45(9): 756–758.
17.
LawrenceRJ (2016) Professional Social Work in Australia, Canberra: Australian National University Press.
18.
Loehr NM (2016) At home in the market: Risk, acculturation and sector integration in the private rental tenancies of humanitarian migrants. PhD Thesis, Flinders University, Adelaide.
19.
MarthinsenE (2012) Social work practice and social science history. In: MarthinsenEJulkunenI (eds) Practice Research in Nordic Social Work: Knowledge Production in Transition, London: Whiting & Birch, pp. 1–26.
20.
MatthewsBRossL (2010) Research Methods: A Practical Guide for the Social Sciences, Essex: Pearson Education.
OstromE (1996) Crossing the great divide: Coproduction, synergy, and development. World Development24(6): 1073–1087.
23.
PophamAE (1994) The Drawings of Leonardo da Vinci, 2nd ed. London: Pimlico.
24.
RasmussenT (2012) Knowledge production and social work: Forming knowledge production. In: MarthinsenEJulkunenI (eds) Practice Research in Nordic Social Work: Knowledge Production in Transition, London: Whiting & Birch, pp. 43–65.
25.
RunesD (1942) Dictionary of Philosophy, 4th ed. New York: Philosophical Library.
26.
Salisbury Statement (2011) The Salisbury Statement. Social Work and Society9(1): 4–9.
27.
SandersPWilkinsP (2010) First Steps in Practitioner Research: A Guide to Understanding and Doing Research in Counselling and Health and Social Care, Ross-on-Wye, Herefordshire: PCCS Books.
28.
ShawILuntN (2011) Navigating practitioner research. British Journal of Social Work41: 1548–1565.
29.
UggerhojL (2012) Theorizing practice research in social work. In: MarthinsenEJulkunenI (eds) Practice Research in Nordic Social Work: Knowledge Production in Transition, London: Whiting & Birch, pp. 67–94.
30.
Van de VenAHJohnsonPE (2006) Knowledge for theory and practice. Academy of Management Review31: 802–821.
