Why, What, and How of Rigour and Relevance in Management Research

摘要: In his 1993 presidential address to the assembled faithful of Academy Management Don Hambrick posed question, “What if academy actually mattered” (1994:11). This rhetorical question set esteemed colleagues, world leading management scholars, in category perhaps rigorous knowledge workers, but definitely not relevant their community practice. One might presume that when Hambrick, a giant era with record citations is envy most and field work (upper echelons) has been defined by contribution for over 20 years, we would take note act. Unfortunately three years later Richard Mowday (1997:341) found it necessary return theme referring what ultimately become perennial challenge being both relevant. 2002 Jean Bartunek (2003:203) had dream where make difference speak tensions involving theory 2005 Denise Rousseau (2006) addressed topic through search evidence based bridge research-practice divide. We look forward anticipation new challenges evoked this speech, hardly expect an announcement have risen challenge. The European debate on issue equal longevity coverage, British 1995 academic beast could leap Pettigrew’s (2001) double hurdle. What emerged was closely aligned call transition from Mode 1 2 forms enquiry (Gibbons et al., 1994; Nowotny 2001) notably characterised Tranfield Starkey (1998) who argued research must account fields ontology as discipline practice which aligns more engineering than pure science lends itself collaborative enquiry. Despite diversions towards 1.5 (Huff, 2000) recognising are dichotic, move carried influential Starkey-Madan report (2001), albeit caution at expense 1. were then offered tantalising thought moving 3 (Starkey, 2001)! Despite attention brought such eminent scholars conversation stubbornly remained conceptual phase. Perhaps because too wedded our traditional approaches or means articulating method needed match emerging theory. attempt investigation provided McLean, MacIntosh Grant (2002) first comprehensive articulation five key features mode they 5mode2 framework point try up challege transcend teaching research. Whether reached 1.5, 2, 3, Hodgkinson’s Pragmatic Science (2001:S42) hurdle unclear. The intention paper propose neatly packaged 1.75 approach lofty 4, rather explore struggle, reaffirm need, opportunities. The structured around issues. First, why so little progress made intervening period? Second, considered be managerially gets decide together allied consider rigour how evolving ? Third discuss future. A version published Irish Journal full text available here http://eprints.maynoothuniversity.ie/7924/