Rigour, Relevance and Reward: Introducing the Knowledge Translation Value‐chain

Abstract

This paper recognizes the substantive contributions made within the British Journal of Management to conducting research relevant to management at the level of individual studies. We aim to reorient the debate to take account of a researcher's contribution to practice over time and, by so doing, to indicate the range of ways knowledge can be translated and (through engagement with users and policymakers) modified, embedded and otherwise found useful. To achieve this, we conceptualize management scholarship as a knowledge translation value-chain. We propose that, to maximize relevance, knowledge must be reconfigured in multiple contexts, of which management research provides but one. The paper concludes with observations on the additional skills that researchers might need to make use of opportunities for engagement right across the knowledge translation value-chain.

Relevant knowledge and recipient ownership: Chinese MNCS’ knowledge transfer in Africa

“…The adaptations of providers' knowledge achieved through recipient ownership are consistent with existing definitions of knowledge transformation, translation and codification (Nonaka & Tageuchi, 1995;Thorpe et al, 2011;Kotlarsky et al, 2014). But they highlight the greater importance, in the emerging market context, of recipients' participation in the transfer.…”

“…These re-appraisals have turned attention to the dynamics of interaction between home-based institutions and host country context. Interaction between provider and recipient enables them to "transform" knowledge so that recipients find it useful and are motivated to acquire it (Nonaka & Tageuchi, 1995;Zahra & George 2002); "translate" specialist knowledge into non-specialist terms accessible to those with a smaller or different knowledge base (Thorpe et al, 2011); "codify" knowledge so that recipients understand its formal basis and can still apply and re-transmit it in the absence of the provider (Kotlarsky et al, 2014); or re-assessment by providers when preparing knowledge for transfer (Baert, 2005).…”

Being careful what we wish for? Challenges and opportunities afforded through engagement with business and management research

“…As Bartunek (2007Bartunek ( , p. 1328) has pointed out: "engaged scholarship is still limited, because it involves practitioners on academic terms". Institutional heterogeneity has of course been widened through more programmatic and focused research funding, research capacity building initiatives and pressures to demonstrate "impact" in management research (Thorpe et al 2011). However, there is arguably no less importance attached to being able to meet the requirements of objectivity associated with what is taken for granted as "good science" (Ziman 1996) and this still sits uneasily with the reflexivity and dialogue that is meant to infuse research with relevance (Beech et al 2010).…”

First and Second Drafts of History: The Case of Trump, Foucault and Pre-Modern Governance

“…Many scholars care about the disconnect between management research and management (Antonacopoulou, 2009;Learmonth, Lockett, & Dowd, 2012;Mirvis, 2014;Thorpe, Eden, Bessant, & Ellwood, 2011). In response, journal editors are changing their practices.…”