Lansley, P (1985) Putting organizational research into practice. Construction Management and Economics, 3(1), pp. 1-14. ISSN 01446193
Abstract
The need for more effective approaches for turning the outcomes of research into effective information and tools for managers is widely accepted, but the problems of bridging the research-practice gap are quite considerable. This paper considers briefly, one example of where traditional dissemination methods have failed to provide managers with sufficient confidence to act, and where consultancy approaches have not reached a sufficiently wide number of potential users. The approach to bridging the gap presented in this paper draws on a wide range of training and organizational development methodologies. The key ingredient is a highly flexible computer modelling system which recreates the world of the manager and allows him to manage his business into the medium term future. Some of the issues faced in developing this approach, the end product known as the AROUSAL system, and some of the surprises which have followed, are also reviewed.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | case studies; consultancy; dissemination; management development; organization; research; simulation |
| Index terms: | computer modelling, case study, manager, consultancy, dissemination, methodology, organizational development |
| Subjects: | modelling and simulation, business, organization, data collection methods, practitioner, research methods, knowledge translation |
| Topics: | Roles and Professions, Research Practice, Organizational Design, Digital Applications |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PTEA |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here