Co‐producing management knowledge

Abstract

The division between academic knowledge and its relevance for practice is an enduring problem across many fields. Nowhere is this division more pronounced, and resolution of its negative features more required, than in academic management research and its relationship to management practice, for the advent of the knowledge revolution requires that organizations capitalize on all available assets including knowledge assets when improving performance either by increasing efficiencies or ensuring mission delivery in the medium term. How companies might achieve this has become a key question. This paper reports the "co-production" model of knowledge creation and transfer through a novel case of this in practice. It outlines how academics and managers can work together using a "systematic review" of the science base to synthesize management knowledge and ensure its transfer. In doing so it offers management academics and practitioners a new model for the production and application of knowledge.

Creating University Spin‐Offs: A Science‐Based Design Perspective*

“…Research-based principles were derived by means of a systematic literature review that draws on a qualitative meta-synthesis approach (Denyer and Tranfield, 2006;Tranfield, Denyer, Marcos and Burr, 2004;Tranfield, Denyer and Smart, 2003). The domain of this review was defined in terms of all research in the area of university spinoffs.…”

Relationally Reflexive Practice

“…Relationally reflexive practice can be methodologically innovative because it can mean researching-with rather than researching-about practitioners and their contexts (e.g., Kempster & Stewart 2010;Marcos and Denyer 2012) and leads to theory-building as a process of co-production (Tranfield et al 2004).…”

Supplier integration for new product developments : antecedents for supplier integration in modular product designs

“…This dissertation intends to provide a great level of applicability and practicality. We therefore combined the input of industrial and academic stakeholders (Hatchuel, 2001;Schiele & Krummaker, 2010;Starkey & Madan, 2001;Tranfield, Denyer, Marcos, & Burr, 2004;Vermeulen, 2007) during the development of our conceptual model at the beginning (Forza, 2002;Sekaran;Wacker, 1998). Accordingly, all survey instruments of this dissertation were established and pretested with experts from practice and from academia.…”

“…Accordingly, we combined the input of industrial and academic stakeholders (Hatchuel, 2001;Schiele & Krummaker, 2010;Starkey & Madan, 2001;Tranfield et al, 2004;Vermeulen, 2007) during the development of our conceptual model at the beginning of this project (Forza, 2002;Sekaran;Wacker, 1998). The aim was to test previously defined aspects in a new context and empirically verify them (Filippini, 1997;Forza, 2002;M.…”