Following the Second Legacy of Aristotle: The Scholar-Practitioner as an Epistemic Technician

Abstract

In our Western scientific tradition, Aristotle's first legacy has conventionally been invoked to justify the separation of theory and practice. In contrast, we draw attention to a second, less recognized legacy of Aristotle, one where he argues for the integration of universals (theory), with the particulars (experience and practice) of a situation as the basis of true knowledge and understanding. Scholar-practitioners, we suggest, are the contemporary carriers of the Aristotelian second vision, who skillfully integrate theory, experience, and practice to create actionable scientific knowledge, or knowledge that advances the causes of both the organization and the larger scientific discourse. Our study of 11 scholar-practitioners and their efforts in organizational projects to generate actionable scientific knowledge suggests that they employ six strategies for interrelating theory and practice: framing, influencing and legitimizing, sensemaking, demonstrating, turns, and scaffolding. We discuss implications from our findings for the design of collaborative management systems that strive to produce knowledge outcomes with such dual relevance. C H A P T E RThe true "technê" [practice] implies not merely the possession of this or that ability, but also the "epistêmê" [theory] of why this particular "technê" works and yields the desired results. Aristotle (Metaphysics, 1961, p. 981b) 03- Shani-45330.qxd 7/23/2007 11:23 AM Page 49

Move Your Research From The Ivy Tower To The Board Room: A Primer On Action Research For Academics, Consultants, And Business Executives

“…If this sounds like a consultative process, that is not a coincidence. Action research from the organization's perspective often looks like consulting, albeit consulting that typically is more scientifically rigorous and objective than what is offered by consultants who are not research‐oriented (Tenkasi & Hay, ; Werr & Greiner, ). It is the researcher who takes the responsibility of ensuring that the process of working with the organization yields scientifically useful data, whether derived from interviews, case studies, surveys, archival data analysis, or some combination of these.…”

Continuously innovating the study of continuous innovation: from actionable knowledge to universal theory in continuous innovation research

“…The following sections outline how to assess and improve the relevance of CI research. Of course practitioner problems have to be framed by researchers into the literature (Tenkasi and Hay, 2008) -not only to produce both practically and theoretically relevant findings (Daft and Lewin, 2008), but also to select the best theoretical platform with the potential to realise subsequent theoretical and empirical outcomes (Tenkasi, 2011). In order to achieve utility, the literature suggests starting from, (Beer, 2011;Edmondson, 2011;Van de Ven, 2011) and being continuously versed in (Mohrman and Lawler, 2011b;Beer, 2011;Prahalad, 2011) real problems.…”

“…The ongoing discussion characterising this process could serve the mutual interests of both groups, thus making it easier to achieve relevance ( Van de Ven, 2007;Beer, 2011). Tenkasi and Hay (2008) recommend six complementary strategies to accompany these routes. As suggested in the literature (Hodgkinson and Rousseau, 2009;Rousseau and Boudreau, 2011;Mohrman and Lawler, 2011c), the results of a CI research process can be transferred into practice in the form of artefact-tools, frameworks, and decision aides.…”

“…Reframing an empirical element with the aim to make it more familiar, legitimate and palatable to an academic audience Source: Adapted from Tenkasi and Hay (2008) Validity refers to the reasonableness and the appropriateness of the approach adopted to address a research issue. According to Pasmore et al (2008b), collaboration is a vital step in avoiding over complications or oversimplifications of the solutions suggested by any given research.…”

“…According to Pasmore et al (2008b), collaboration is a vital step in avoiding over complications or oversimplifications of the solutions suggested by any given research. According to literature (Hughes et al, 2011;Gratton, 2011;Tenkasi and Hay, 2008;Van de Ven, 2007;Van de Ven and Poole, 2005), this kind of research has significant potential to address the research issues in an appropriate way. Moreover, the more practitioners participate not only in the definition of the research goals, but also in the selection of the methods used to conduct the research, the more easily the theoretical and empirical frameworks evolve consistently with the specific needs manifested within the broader research process.…”