Advertisement

Editorial Introduction: The Requisite Bridge from Theory to Practice

  • Alkis ThrassouEmail author
  • Demetris Vrontis
  • Yaakov Weber
  • S. M. Riad Shams
  • Evangelos Tsoukatos
Chapter
Part of the Palgrave Studies in Cross-disciplinary Business Research, In Association with EuroMed Academy of Business book series (PSCDBRAEAB)

Abstract

This chapter philosophically identifies a widening of the gap between theory and practice across the spectrum of business research, and highlights the imperative of scholarly works to bridge this gap in a temporally ‘synchronous’ fashion, as opposed to the more ‘cyclical’ one diachronically adopted. The chapter is positioned against an incessantly shape-shifting global business environment, in which mainstream, time-honoured strategies are becoming increasingly irrelevant and incapable of dealing with new realities. It proposes that, while scholars and practitioners appear fully aware of these changes and are decisively geared towards successfully, albeit erratically, adapting to these, they also appear to have missed a critical factor of success underlying this process: namely, the rate of change of the business world measured against the rate of interrelationship between theory and practice. The authors specifically pose that the lack of congruence and the temporal relation of theory and practice in business, which constitute a diachronic inherent weakness of the field, are quietly and elusively becoming the Achilles’ heel of contemporary scholarly business research and, by extension, of business in general. They thus suggest a composed and equalised approach to theorisation of practice and, reversely, a practicability of theory that signifies a potential new approach to scientific works.

References

  1. Argyris, C. (2000). The Relevance of Actionable Knowledge for Breaking the Code. In M. Beer & N. Nohria (Eds.), Breaking the Code of Change. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.Google Scholar
  2. Brannick, T., & Coghlan, D. (2006). To Know and to Do: Academics’ and practitioners’ Approaches to Management Research. Irish Journal of Management, 26(2), 1.Google Scholar
  3. Brennan, R. (2004). Should We Worry About an Academic-Practitioner Divide in Marketing? Marketing Intelligence & Planning, 22(5).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bresciani, S., Thrassou, A., & Vrontis, D. (2013). Change Through Innovation in Family Businesses: Evidence from an Italian Sample. World Review of Entrepreneurship, Management and Sustainable Development, 9(2), 195–215. (ISSN: 1746-0573 Inderscience).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Campanella, F., Del Giudice, M., Thrassou, A., & Vrontis, D. (2016). Ambidextrous Organizations in the Banking Sector: An Empirical Verification on Banks’ Performance and Conceptual Development. International Journal of Human Resource Management.  https://doi.org/10.1080/09585192.2016.1239122
  6. Chebbi, H., Yahiaoui, D., Thrassou, A., & Vrontis, D. (2013). The Exploration Activity’s Added Value into the Innovation Process. Global Business and Economics Review, 15(2/3), 265–278. (ISSN: 1097-4954, Inderscience).  https://doi.org/10.1504/GBER.2013.053073CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Craig, R. T. (1996). Practical Theory: A Reply to Sandelands. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, 26(1), 65–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Dutton, J. M., & Starbuck, W. H. (1963). On Managers and Theories. Management International, 6, 1–11.Google Scholar
  9. Glaser, B. G., Strauss, A. L., & Strutzel, E. (1968). The Discovery of Grounded Theory; Strategies for Qualitative Research. Nursing Research, 17(4), 364.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Katsikeas, C. S., Matthew, M. J., & Hulbert, J. M. (2004). In Search of Relevance and Rigour for Research in Marketing. Marketing Intelligence & Planning, 22(5), 568–578.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Kilduff, M., & Mehra, A. (1997). Postmodernism and Organizational Research. Academy of Management Review, 22(2), 453–481.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Kumar, V. (2017). Integrating Theory and Practice in Marketing. Journal of Marketing, 81(2), 1–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Leonidou, E., Christofi, M., Vrontis, D., & Thrassou, A. (2018). An Integrative Framework of Stakeholder Engagement for Innovation Management and Entrepreneurship Development. Journal of Business Research.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2018.11.054
  14. Lewin, K. (1943). Psychology and the Process of Group Living. The Journal of Social Psychology, 17(1), 113–131.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. McKenzie, C. J., Wright, S., Ball, D. F., & Baron, P. J. (2002). The Publications of Marketing Faculty–Who Are we Really Talking to? European Journal of Marketing, 36(11/12), 1196–1208.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Roethlisberger, F. J. (1977). The Elusive Phenomena. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  17. Sandelands, L. E. (1990). What Is So Practical About Theory? Lewin Revisited. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, 20, 235–362.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Thomas, K. W., & Tymon, W. G., Jr. (1982). Necessary Properties of Relevant Research: Lessons from Recent Criticisms of the Organizational Sciences. Academy of Management Review, 7(3), 345–352.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Thrassou, A. (2007). Doing Business in the Industrialised Countries, Chapter 13. In M. Katsioloudes & S. Hadjidakis (Eds.), International Business – A Global Perspective (pp. 439–483). Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann. isbn:978-0-7506-7983-1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Thrassou, A., Vrontis, D., Chebbi, H., & Yahiaoui, D. (2012). A Preliminary Strategic Marketing Framework for New Product Development. Journal of Transnational Management, 17(1), 21–44. (ISSN: 1547-5778 – Routledge, Taylor and Francis).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Varadarajan, P. R. (2003). Musings on Relevance and Rigor of Scholarly Research in Marketing. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 31(4), 368–376.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Vrontis, D., Thrassou, A., Chebbi, H., & Yahiaoui, D. (2012). Transcending Innovativeness Towards Strategic Reflexivity. Qualitative Market Research: An International Journal, 15(4), 420–437.  https://doi.org/10.1108/13522751211257097CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Vrontis, D., Thrassou, A., Santoro, G., & Papa, A. (2017). Ambidexterity, External Knowledge and Performance in Knowledge-Intensive Firms. Journal of Technology Transfer, 42(2), 374–388.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10961-016-9502-7CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Alkis Thrassou
    • 1
    Email author
  • Demetris Vrontis
    • 1
  • Yaakov Weber
    • 2
  • S. M. Riad Shams
    • 3
  • Evangelos Tsoukatos
    • 4
  1. 1.Department of MarketingUniversity of NicosiaNicosiaCyprus
  2. 2.School of Business AdministrationCollege of ManagementRishon LezionIsrael
  3. 3.Newcastle Business SchoolNorthumbria UniversityNewcastle Upon TyneUK
  4. 4.Department of Accounting and FinanceHellenic Mediterranean UniversityHeraklion, CreteGreece

Personalised recommendations