{"title":"研究-实践差距作为语用知识边界","authors":"Samuel Makin","doi":"10.1016/j.infoandorg.2020.100334","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Existing discourse on the research-practice gap underplays the role of practitioners and assumes that the existence of the gap is due primarily to deficiencies in theory. This conceptual paper problematizes this assumption and explores in practice why practitioners have not been able to harness and apply insights from organisation theory (OT) and information systems (IS) research . Drawing on the concept of knowledge boundaries, several key arguments are made. Firstly, a pragmatic knowledge boundary divides academics and practitioners. Secondly, the novelty of OT and IS research at this knowledge boundary hinders practitioners' ability to constructively assess it, which results in contradictions and discourages its application in practice. Finally, when academics and practitioners collaborate to promote deeper engagement, and when effective boundary-spanning objects are used, there are signs that the research-practice gap can be overcome. These arguments are illustrated through a case-study of employees in a medium-sized IT consulting company.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":47253,"journal":{"name":"Information and Organization","volume":"31 2","pages":"Article 100334"},"PeriodicalIF":5.7000,"publicationDate":"2021-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/j.infoandorg.2020.100334","citationCount":"10","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The research-practice gap as a pragmatic knowledge boundary\",\"authors\":\"Samuel Makin\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.infoandorg.2020.100334\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>Existing discourse on the research-practice gap underplays the role of practitioners and assumes that the existence of the gap is due primarily to deficiencies in theory. This conceptual paper problematizes this assumption and explores in practice why practitioners have not been able to harness and apply insights from organisation theory (OT) and information systems (IS) research . Drawing on the concept of knowledge boundaries, several key arguments are made. Firstly, a pragmatic knowledge boundary divides academics and practitioners. Secondly, the novelty of OT and IS research at this knowledge boundary hinders practitioners' ability to constructively assess it, which results in contradictions and discourages its application in practice. Finally, when academics and practitioners collaborate to promote deeper engagement, and when effective boundary-spanning objects are used, there are signs that the research-practice gap can be overcome. These arguments are illustrated through a case-study of employees in a medium-sized IT consulting company.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47253,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Information and Organization\",\"volume\":\"31 2\",\"pages\":\"Article 100334\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":5.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/j.infoandorg.2020.100334\",\"citationCount\":\"10\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Information and Organization\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"91\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1471772720300580\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"管理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Information and Organization","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1471772720300580","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
The research-practice gap as a pragmatic knowledge boundary
Existing discourse on the research-practice gap underplays the role of practitioners and assumes that the existence of the gap is due primarily to deficiencies in theory. This conceptual paper problematizes this assumption and explores in practice why practitioners have not been able to harness and apply insights from organisation theory (OT) and information systems (IS) research . Drawing on the concept of knowledge boundaries, several key arguments are made. Firstly, a pragmatic knowledge boundary divides academics and practitioners. Secondly, the novelty of OT and IS research at this knowledge boundary hinders practitioners' ability to constructively assess it, which results in contradictions and discourages its application in practice. Finally, when academics and practitioners collaborate to promote deeper engagement, and when effective boundary-spanning objects are used, there are signs that the research-practice gap can be overcome. These arguments are illustrated through a case-study of employees in a medium-sized IT consulting company.
期刊介绍:
Advances in information and communication technologies are associated with a wide and increasing range of social consequences, which are experienced by individuals, work groups, organizations, interorganizational networks, and societies at large. Information technologies are implicated in all industries and in public as well as private enterprises. Understanding the relationships between information technologies and social organization is an increasingly important and urgent social and scholarly concern in many disciplinary fields.Information and Organization seeks to publish original scholarly articles on the relationships between information technologies and social organization. It seeks a scholarly understanding that is based on empirical research and relevant theory.