Scholarly Impact: A Pluralistic Conceptualisation.

Aguinis, H, Shapiro, D, Antonacopoulou, E ORCID: 0000-0002-0872-7883 and Cummings, T (2014) Scholarly Impact: A Pluralistic Conceptualisation. Academy of Management Learning and Education, 13 (4). pp. 623-639.

This is the latest version of this item.

Text
Aguinis et al - AMLE accepted paper.doc - Author Accepted Manuscript
Download (194kB)

Official URL: https://journals.aom.org/doi/10.5465/amle.2014.012...

Abstract

We critically assess a common approach to scholarly impact that relies almost exclusively on a single stakeholder (i.e., other academics). We argue that this approach is narrow and insufficient, and thereby threatens the credibility and long-term sustainability of the management research community. We offer a solution in the form of a broader and novel conceptual and measurement framework of scholarly impact: a pluralist perspective. It proposes actions that depart from the current win–lose and zero-sum views that lead to false trade-offs such as research versus practice, rigor versus relevance, and research versus service. Our proposed pluralist conceptualization can be instrumental in enabling business schools and other academic units to clarify their strategic direction in terms of which stakeholders they are trying to affect and why, the way future scholars are trained, and the design and implementation of faculty performance management systems. We argue that the adoption of a pluralist conceptualization of scholarly impact can increase motivation for engaged scholarship and design-science research that is more conducive to actionable knowledge as opposed to exclusive career-focused advances, enhance the relevance and value of our scholarship, and thereby help to narrow the much-lamented chasm between research and practice.

Item Type:	Article
Subjects:	?? H1 ??
Depositing User:	Symplectic Admin
Date Deposited:	19 Oct 2018 09:59
Last Modified:	19 Jan 2023 06:56
DOI:	10.5465/amle.2014.0121
Related URLs:	Publisher
URI:	https://livrepository.liverpool.ac.uk/id/eprint/3009317