The DOI matches its OpenAlex record; 7 of the 7 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Across the Great Divide: Knowledge Creation and Transfer Between Practitioners and Academics
Abstract
Observers have long noted a considerable gap between organizational research findings and management practices. Although volumes have been written about the probable causes and consequences of this gap, surprisingly little empirical evidence exists concerning the various viewpoints. The articles in this forum provide data on the role of academic-practitioner relationships in both generating and disseminating knowledge across boundaries. The contributions of each article are summarized in light of recent theories of knowledge creation, and suggestions are made for increasing the value and relevance of future research to both academics and practitioners.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Firm Resources and Sustained Competitive Advantage
Barney, J. (1991) · Journal of Management · doi:10.1177/014920639101700108 · Cited by 48,334
A Dynamic Theory of Organizational Knowledge Creation
Nonaka, I. (1994) · Organization Science · doi:10.1287/orsc.5.1.14 · Cited by 17,809
The System of Professions: An Essay on the Division of Expert Labor
Abbott, A. (1988) · doi:10.7208/chicago/9780226189666.001.0001 · Cited by 7,733
Action Research and Minority Problems
Lewin, K. (1946) · Journal of Social Issues · doi:10.1111/j.1540-4560.1946.tb02295.x · Cited by 6,554
Accelerating Adaptive Processes: Product Innovation in the Global Computer Industry
Eisenhardt, K. M., & Tabrizi, B. N. (1995) · Administrative Science Quarterly · doi:10.2307/2393701 · Cited by 2,426
Fads, fashions, and folderol in psychology
Dunnette, M. D. (1966) · American Psychologist · doi:10.1037/h0023535 · Cited by 176
Spencer, J. W. (2001) · Academy of Management Journal · doi:10.2307/3069465 · Cited by 98
Cited by
STUDYING ORGANIZATIONAL CHANGE AND DEVELOPMENT: CHALLENGES FOR FUTURE RESEARCH.
Pettigrew, A. M., Woodman, R. W., & Cameron, K. S. (2001) · Academy of Management Journal · doi:10.2307/3069411 · Cited by 1,582
Developing design propositions through research synthesis
Denyer, D., Tranfield, D., & van Aken, J. E. (2008) · Organization Studies · doi:10.1177/0170840607088020 · Cited by 1,057
EDITOR'S COMMENTS: CONSTRUCT CLARITY IN THEORIES OF MANAGEMENT AND ORGANIZATION.
Suddaby, R. (2010) · Academy of Management Review · doi:10.5465/amr.2010.51141319 · Cited by 984
Landers, R. N., & Behrend, T. S. (2015) · Industrial and Organizational Psychology · doi:10.1017/iop.2015.13 · Cited by 714
The Lean Startup Framework: Closing the Academic–Practitioner Divide
Shepherd, D. A., & Gruber, M. (2021) · Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice · doi:10.1177/1042258719899415 · Cited by 459
Metadata
- Authors
- Rynes, S. L., Bartunek, J. M., & Daft, R. L.
- Venue
- Academy of Management Journal
- Publisher
- Academy of Management
- Published
- 2001-04-01
- Volume
- 44
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 340-355
- ISSN
- 0001-4273 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2055041279
- Cited by
- 925
- References
- 7
- FWCI
- 78.57
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Across the Great Divide: Knowledge Creation and Transfer Between Practitioners and Academics. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.5465/3069460
- The paper
- Rynes, S. L., Bartunek, J. M., & Daft, R. L. (2001). Across the Great Divide: Knowledge Creation and Transfer Between Practitioners and Academics. Academy of Management Journal. https://doi.org/10.5465/3069460
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.