The diversity of issues illuminated in this collection of six articles is just another reminder that we still have a long way to go in our endeavor to cross between the worlds of research and practice. Recognizing why the research–practice tension persists is critical, yet awareness without action will lead us to nowhere.
The Solution
To move us from the stage of knowing to the next level of doing calls for a carefully crafted action plan. This article synthesizes actionable strategies recommended by the issue contributors. It is hoped that multilevel stakeholders will be inspired to take some of the suggested actions to innovate their professional practices.
The Stakeholders
Multiple stakeholders will benefit from the knowledge created in this issue. They include academic researchers, practitioners, scholar–practitioners, organizations, and intermediaries who desire to make a meaningful impact on bridging the great divide between research and practice.
AvenierM.Parmentier CajaibaA. C. (2012). The dialogical model: Developing academic knowledge for and from practice. European Management Review, 9, 199-212. doi:10.1111/j.1740-4762.2012.01038.x
2.
BartunekJ. M.RynesS. L. (2014). Academics and practitioners are alike and unlike: The paradoxes of academic-practitioner relationships. Journal of Management, 40, 1181-1201. doi:10.1177/0149206314529160
3.
FinchamR.ClarkT. (2009). Introduction: Can we bridge the rigor–relevance gap?Journal of Management Studies, 46, 510-515.
4.
GrayD. E.IlesP.WatsonS. (2011). Spanning the HRD academic-practitioner divide: Bridging the gap through mode 2 research. Journal of European Industrial Training, 35, 247-263. doi:10.1108/03090591111120403
5.
GunasekaranS.KrishnadevarajanP.LawrenceF. B. (2017). Bridging the research-practice divide through the intermediary model. Advances in Developing Human Resources, 19(3) 314–330.
6.
HodgkinsonG. P.RousseauD. M. (2009). Bridging the research-relevance gap in management research: It’s already happening!Journal of Management Studies, 46, 534-546.
7.
HughesC.WangJ. (2015, June). Bridging the scholar-practitioner gap in Human Resource Development. Paper presented at the International Conference on Human Resource Development Research & Practice across Europe, Cork, Ireland.
8.
KieserA.LeinerL. (2009). Why the rigour–relevance gap in management research is unbridgeable. Journal of Management Studies, 46, 516-533.
9.
KnightsD.ScarbroughH. (2010). In search of relevance: Perspectives on the contribution of academic–practitioner networks. Organization Studies, 31, 1287-1309.
10.
LombardozziC.TylerJ. A. (2017). Through a kaleidoscope: Dimensions of scholarly practice. Advances in Developing Human Resources, 19(3) 247–261.
11.
LynhamS. A. (2002). The general method of theory-building research in applied disciplines. Advances in Developing Human Resources, 4, 221-241.
12.
McKeownG. (2014). Essentialism: The disciplined pursuit of less. New York, NY: Crown Business.
13.
MoatsJ. (2017). Planting seeds: Actively developing scholar-practitioners. Advances in Developing Human Resources, 19(3) 279–294.
14.
MoatsJ.McLeanG. N. (2009). Speaking our language: The essential role of scholar-practitioners in HRD. Advances in Developing Human Resources, 11, 507-522. doi:10.1177/1523422309337820
15.
Natt och DagK. (2017). A scholar-practitioners perspective on leadership development program in health care: Integrating connectivism theory. Advances in Developing Human Resources, 19(3) 295–313.
16.
NicoliniD. (2009). Practice as the site of knowing: Insights from the field of telemedicine. Organization Science, 22, 602-620.
17.
NormanD. A. (2010). The research-Practice Gap: The need for translational developers. Interactions, 17(4), 9-12.
18.
OrrK.BennettM. (2009). Reflexivity in the co-production of academic-practitioner research. Qualitative Research in Organizations and Management, 4(1), 85-102. doi:10.1108/17465640910951462
19.
PackardC. B. (2017). Next steps: Valuing, supporting, and promoting the intersection of HRD theory and practice. Advances in Developing Human Resources, 19(3) 262–278.
20.
RuonaW. E. A.GilleyJ. W. (2009). Practitioners in applied professions: A model applied to Human Resource Development. Advances in Developing Human Resources, 11, 438-453. doi:10.1177/1523422309344719
21.
ScheinE. H. (1969). Process consultation. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
22.
ShapiroD. L.KirkmanB. L.CourtneyH. G. (2007). Perceived causes and solutions of the translation problem in management research. Academy of Management Journal, 50, 249-266.
23.
ShortD. C.SherlockJ. J.SugrueB. (2004). Time to recognize and reward those who link research and practice. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 15, 259-262.
24.
ShortD. C.ShindellT. J. (2009). Defining HRD scholar practitioners. Advances in Developing Human Resources, 11, 472-485. doi:10.1177/1523422309342225
25.
StarkeyK.HatchuelA.TempestS. (2009). Management research and the new logics of discovery and engagement. Journal of Management Studies, 46, 547-558. doi:10.1111/j.1467-6486.2009.00833.x
26.
StewartJ. (2007). The future of HRD research: Strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, threats and actions. Human Resource Development International, 10, 93-97. doi:10.1080/13678860601170443
27.
SwansonR. (2007). Analysis for improving performance: Tools for diagnosing organizations and documenting workplace expertise. San Francisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler.
28.
TorracoR. J.YorksL. (2007). Do practitioners compromise scholarly standards? Do scholars comprehend the rigors of practice? Can a theory journal be a viable bridge across the chasm?Human Resource Development Review, 6, 3-6. doi:10.1177/1534484306297856
29.
TylerJ. A. (2009). Moving beyond scholar-practitioner binaries: Exploring the liminal possibilities of the borderlands. Advances in Developing Human Resources, 11, 523-535. doi:10.1177/1523422309343680
30.
TylerJ. A.LombardozziC. (2017). Ways of thinking, being, and doing: The scholar-practitioner mindset for successfully innovating HRD. Advances in Developing Human Resources, 19(3) 232–246.
31.
Van de VenA. H.JohnsonP. E. (2006). Knowledge for theory and practice. Academy of Management Review, 31, 802-821.
32.
WartzmanR. (2012). What would Drucker do now? Solutions to today’s toughest challenges from the father of modern management. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
33.
WassermanI. C.KramK. E. (2009). Enacting the scholar-practitioner role: An exploration of narratives. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 45, 12-38.
34.
WrenD. A.HalbeslebenJ. R. B.BuyckleyM. R. (2007). The theory-application balance in management pedagogy: A longitudinal update. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 6, 484-492.
