Introduction

Relevance problem or managerial relevance of scholarly research has been an issue of discussion for a long time.  Practitioners and academic researchers have for a long time been sailing in different wavelengths. The question of how academic theory influences industry practice is an issue that requires extensive research to solve the relevance problem. This article intends to answer the relevance problem and applicability of academic research to practitioners. The report acknowledges that there is a gap between academics and business realities. To understand this concept, the author has decided to carry out an empirical research on the academic relevance of knowledge management (KM) – Intellectual Capital (IC) in educational output.

Summary

To solve the problem, the author decides to define the problem and identify the underlying causes of relevance problem. The relevance problem has been viewed as a difference ion culture between academics and practitioners. It is assumed to take different forms such as; knowledge transfer problem, linking process among scholars, knowledge transfer problem and theory practice linkage issue (Booker, Bontis & Serenko, 2008). It is imperative noting that none of these perspectives is accepted as the acceptable standard. The research intends to uncover how KM/IC generates prescriptions, makes recommendations, offers solutions and develops principles applicable tom KM/IC professionals.

The research process involved developing a theoretical framework that would help explicate the problem. This framework would then be empirically tested through a survey of KM/IC by qualitative methods. To determine the relevance problem, the research developed 12 semi-structured interviews with KM/IC practitioners in both private and public sector in Canadian and US organizations. The interview was carried out for three months where there were eight face to face interviews, three phone interviews, and one electronic conversation.

The selection process of the interviewees involved the use of employee directory using the job title ‘’knowledge’’. The process also involved the use of Google in the selection process was also evident. The research process also involved a direct approach to K/IC managers to determine the sample size. It is also paramount understanding that snowballing sampling was intensively employed in the research process. The research team also accepted recommendations from the employees on preferable interviewees. The interviewees were each interviewed for one hour, and a 60% response rate was recorded.

Research questions or the interview questions were developed from a literature review. These questions were later reviewed by KM/IC experts to ensure that the desired results of the research are achieved (Booker, Bontis & Serenko, 2008). During the formulation of the interview questions, the objective of uncovering the relevance problem was the guiding principle. The KM/IC experts were instrumental in modification of interview questions to suit the goals of the research. Some research questions were later e-mailed to interviewees for better coverage of the phenomenon. Data collected in the research process is analyzed through Nvivo and other qualitative analysis prior to interpretation and analysis process.

As earlier stated in the summary, the goal of the research was to clarify the problem of academic relevance in KM/IC. The framework helped in describing how the academic output is generated.   The framework also outlines what the practitioners need and expects from the academic research. For instance, practitioners’ primary objective is seeking a competitive advantage through increased productivity. Practitioners expect academic research to produce directly useful knowledge to help increased competitiveness. It is, however, worth understanding that this is not always the case. To solve this problem, the framework tries to outline the barriers to effective dissemination of useful information to practitioners.

The author acknowledges that passing of information from the academics to KM/IC professionals is through academic publications. However, the language used, and size of these publications is the primary barrier to the applicability of the scientific information. Use of jargons and complicated language proves difficult to managers. The managers are also very busy and lack time to read the lengthy publications. It is also worth understanding that some decisions are a matter of urgency and managers may not have time to consult academic publications on the recommended solutions (Booker, Bontis & Serenko, 2008). The information is also at times inaccessible since managers fail to distinguish which publications are related to their course. In essence,   communication is the main barrier to effective dissemination of academic knowledge to practitioners.  Practitioners find academic language exclusive, dense, obtuse and inaccessible.

Timeliness also affects relevance substantially. Time factor greatly influences technological and behavioral factors. Organizational history and culture also affect the research process. In most cases, KM/IC practitioners find it difficult to change organizational management practices. The research recommends the use of simple language, making knowledge accessible and use of specific translations to solve the relevance problem. Researchers should not only be motivated by the academic recognition but must also be wary of the contribution of their academic works to industry professionals.

The article concludes by highlighting the implications offered by the research process. For example, the study finds that there exists a large gap between KM/IC theory and practice. Although the practitioners scholarly body of knowledge as useful, the information is not disseminated in a form directly suitable for practitioners consumption. The author suggests different ways in which the academic information can be more helpful to KM/IC practitioners. For instance, the paper suggests adoption of indirect knowledge distribution channels that may have a significant role in information dissemination (Booker, Bontis & Serenko, 2008). Organizations may organize training and workshops where critical knowledge in KM/IC practice may be informally disseminated to the practitioners.

The research process is also greatly concerned with the knowledge markets where practitioners are expected to get such information. Academic information is mostly available in books, peer-reviewed journals, periodicals and other publications. Researchers must ensure that these intermediaries between them and the practitioners are in readily consumable form. The author emphasizes the importance of journal branding and positioning to enable easier access and understanding of essential academic information. It is also imperative to put in place practical implementation steps and impact measurement approaches that facilitate the transfer of knowledge from researchers to practitioners.

Critique

The article has put efforts in addressing the relevance problem. It is, however, essential noting that some critical issues have been overlooked in the research process. For instance, the article fails to define clearly the relevance problem between the academics and the practitioners. The authors acknowledge the existence of different meanings such as paradigm clash and theory-practice linkage but fail to offer a standardized meaning. Failing to define clearly the problem and the cause of the problem is a major hindrance to the effective research process.

The selection process of the sample size used in the interview process also leaves a great room for error. Researchers in the research process have opted to use the snowballing sampling method to determine the people to interview. Although it is a suitable method depending on the nature of the study, the researcher fails to explain how to employ effectively the method and avoid its shortcomings (Booker, Bontis & Serenko, 2008). For instance, the framework fails to define how to establish the choice of initial costs which is critical for objective results. The initial choice lays the foundation upon which the research process will be effectively concluded. Recommended interviewees may also be unwilling or give false information that may lead to biased results.

On this note, the use of Google in the selection process does not guarantee effectiveness in the research process. It is imperative to understand that the use of Google may be compromised and thus leading unreliable and invalid results. An efficient research process must try to find out the authenticity of the people involved in the interview process, and Google cannot be a useful tool for this process. The choice of interview questions is also another issue of concern in this research process. Authors of this research process have acknowledged that interview questions were developed from a literature review on the topical issues. It is however of paramount importance to understand that there is limited literature review on the subject matter. It is on this premise that one can easily conclude that the interview questions developed may not conclusively offer the solution to the problem.

Application

The findings and the results of the research process are much applicable in a hypothetical business entity. For instance, most organizational managers have an obligation of ensuring competitive edge over the competitors. This competitive advantage is generated from scholarly works that give insights on effective running of a business entity (Booker, Bontis & Serenko, 2008). In an organization, practitioners will always strive to gather reliable information from scholarly sources that will help improve efficiency and productivity within the organization.

It is also worth understanding that although business managers value academic information in the management process, it is at times very difficult to apply such information. Changing organization’s history and culture is at times very difficult in an organizational set up. In most cases, managers and knowledge management practitioners tend to use the culture of the organization in dealing with issues within the organization. The urgency of some managerial decisions also hinders the application of academic knowledge in the decision-making process.

Areas of further research

Although the research has to some extent attempted to reveal the relevance problem, there is still need for further research. Knowledge management and intellectual capital are a broad topic that entails critical aspects that require special attention. This research paper concentrates on the issue of the relevance of academic research. It, however, fails to address the issue of knowledge distribution channels and processes. Academic knowledge may not be of any importance to the industry if we fail to address the issue of information distribution to the intended users.

It is imperative noting that academicians will not change their style of writing bearing in mind that they must be in agreement with the acceptable academic standards.   Scientific studies will always be detailed to encourage future inquiries. Besides this, it is also worth realizing that although scholarly knowledge is very useful in the industry, it is not always readily available in the usable form. It is, therefore, paramount to explore on information distribution first rather than questioning the relevance of such information. It is, therefore, essential that further research to extensively cover distribution channels and process of theory to be used in practice.

References

Booker, L., Bontis, N., & Serenko, A. (2008). The relevance of knowledge management and intellectual capital Research. Knowl. Process Mgmt., 15(4), 235-246. doi:10.1002/kpm.314

 
Do you need an Original High Quality Academic Custom Essay?