Premium
On the Social Construction of Relevance: A Rejoinder
Author(s) -
Kieser Alfred,
Leiner Lars
Publication year - 2011
Publication title -
journal of management studies
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 4.398
H-Index - 184
eISSN - 1467-6486
pISSN - 0022-2380
DOI - 10.1111/j.1467-6486.2009.00886.x
Subject(s) - rigour , relevance (law) , ranking (information retrieval) , publishing , sociology , counterpoint , engineering ethics , journal ranking , point (geometry) , process (computing) , epistemology , political science , computer science , law , engineering , philosophy , pedagogy , citation , geometry , mathematics , machine learning , operating system
This rejoinder ties in with a Point–Counterpoint debate on the rigour–relevance gap which was published in the May 2009 issue of JMS . Responding to our critics we advance four arguments: (1) Only practitioners, not management scholars, can ultimately assess relevance of research by applying solutions derived from research results. (2) Collaborative management research whose output, in the publishing process, has to pass reviews in which criteria of rigour dominate does not necessarily generate research of higher relevance. (3) The ‘body of scientific evidence’ which our critics refer to contains an abundance of contradicting findings and recommendations and is therefore not of much help for practitioners. (4) Since the academic management journals and the ranking systems are controlling management research, a change towards epistemologies that foster relevance of research, as envisaged by our critics, is not very likely.