It has often been argued by scholars adopting a practice approach that by focusing on “what people do in relation to strategy” their research would be particularly relevant to practitioners. In response to this assumption, this article draws on a Bourdieusian perspective to argue that most practice-based strategy scholars are unaware of their inevitably “scholastic view” which is the cause for the gap between strategy research and praxis. This unawareness leads to two related fallacies: epistemic doxa and scholastic ethnocentrism. In order to avoid these fallacies, strategy researchers need to develop a particular kind of reflexivity by engaging in what is known as “participant objectivation.” This enables the researcher to generate rigorous research that is conceptually relevant to practitioners—without dissolving the necessary differentiation between strategy research and praxis.
Astley, W.G., & Zammuto, R.F. ( 1992). Organization science, managers and language games. Organization Science, 3, 443-460.
2.
Augier, M., & March, J.G. ( 2007). The pursuit of relevance in management education. California Management Review, 49, 129-146.
3.
Baldrige, D., Floyd, S., & Markoczy, L. ( 2004). Are managers from mars and academics from venus? Toward an understanding of the relationship between academic quality and practical relevance. Strategic Management Journal, 25, 1063-1074.
4.
Barley, S.R., Meyer, G.W., Gordon, W., & Gash, D.C. ( 1988). Cultures of culture: Academics, practitioners and the pragmatics of normative control. Administrative Science Quarterly , 33, 24-60.
5.
Bettis, R.A. ( 1991). Strategic management and the straight-jacket: an editorial essay. Organization Science, 2, 315-320.
6.
Bourdieu, P. ( 1975). The specificity of the scientific field and the social conditions of the progress of reason. Social Science Information , 14, 19-47.
7.
Bourdieu, P. ( 1978). Sur l’objectivation participante. Reponses a quelques objections. Actes de la recherche en sciences socials, 20, 67-69.
8.
Bourdieu, P. ( 1984). Distinction. A social critique of the judgement of taste . Cambridge, Havard University Press .
9.
Bourdieu, P. ( 1988). Homo Academicus. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
10.
Bourdieu, P. ( 1990a). The logic of practice. Cambridge , England: Polity Press.
11.
Bourdieu, P. ( 1990b). The scholastic point of view. Cultural Anthropology, 4, 380-391.
12.
Bourdieu, P. ( 1990c). In other words. Essay towards a reflexive sociology . Cambridge, England: Polity Press .
13.
Bourdieu, P. ( 1996a). The rules of art: Genesis and of the literary field . Palo Alto, CA: Stanford University Press.
14.
Bourdieu, P. ( 1996b). Sur la television: Suivi de l’emprise du journalisme . liber éditions.
15.
Bourdieu, P. ( 1998a). Die scholastische Sicht. In P. Bourdieu (Ed.), Praktische Vernunft. Zur Theorie des Handelns (pp. 203-218). Frankfurt am Main, Germany: Edition Suhrkamp.
16.
Bourdieu, P. ( 1998b). Practical reason. Palo Alto, CA: Stanford University Press.
17.
Bourdieu, P. ( 2000). Pascalian meditations. Palo Alto, CA: Stanford University Press.
18.
Bourdieu, P. ( 2001). Meditationen. Zur Kritik der scholastischen Vernunft . Frankfurt am Main, Germany: Edition Suhrkamp.
19.
Bourdieu, P. ( 2002). Question de sociologie. Paris, France: Les editions de Minuit.
20.
Bourdieu, P. ( 2003). Participant objectivation. Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute, 9, 281-294.
21.
Bourdieu, P. ( 2004). Science of science and reflexivity. Cambridge, England: Polity Press.
22.
Bourdieu, P. ( 2005). The social structures of the economy. Cambridge, England: Polity Press.
23.
Bourdieu, P., & Wacquant, L.J.D. (1992). An invitation to reflexive sociology. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago press.
24.
Bouty, I., & Gomez, M.-L. ( 2007, August). Organization as practice portfolio: Towards a conceptual/ exploratory attempt. Paper presented at the 23rd European Group for Organizational Studies Conference, Vienna.
25.
Bower, J.L. ( 1982). Business policy in the 1980s. Academy of Management Review, 74, 630-638.
26.
Brown, J.S., & Duguid, P. ( 1991). Organizational learning and communities-of-practice: Toward a unified view of working, learning, and innovation. Organization Science, 2, 40-56.
27.
Buchanan, D. ( 1999). The logic of political action: An experiment with the epistempology of the particular. British Journal of Management , 10, 73-88.
28.
Buckley, M., Ferris, R., Bernardin, H., & Harvey, G. ( 1998). The disconnect between the science and practice of management . Business Horizon, 41, 31-38.
29.
Byrne, D. ( 2005). Social exclusion. Maidenhead, England: Open University Press.
30.
Cascio, W.F., & Aguinis, H. ( 2008). Research in industrial and organizational psychology from 1963 to 2007: Changes, choices and trends. Journal of Applied Psychology, 93, 1062-1089.
31.
Chia, R. ( 2004). Strategy-as-practice: Reflections on the research agenda . European Management Review, 1, 29-34.
32.
Chia, R., & Holt, R. ( 2006). Strategy as practical coping: A Heideggerian perspective . Organization Studies, 27, 635-655.
33.
Chia, R., & Holt, R. ( 2009). Strategy without design. The silent efficacy of indirect action. Cambridge, England: University Press.
34.
Chia, R., & MacKay, B. (2007). Post-processual challenges for the emerging strategy-as-practice perspective: Discovering strategy in the logic of practice. Human Relations, 60, 217-242.
35.
Cicourel, A.V. ( 1993). Aspects of structural and processual theories of knowledge . In C. Calhoun, E. LiPuma, & M. Postone (Eds.), Bourdieu: Critical perspectives (pp. 89-115). Oxford, England: Basil Blackwell.
36.
Cohen, D. ( 2007). The very separate worlds of academic and practitioner publications in human resource management: Reasons for the divide and concrete solutions for bridging the gap. Academy of Management Journal , 50, 1013-1019.
37.
Cook, S., & Brown, J. ( 1999). Bridging epistemologies: The generative dance between organizational knowledge and organizational knowing. Organization Science, 10, 381-400.
38.
Deetz, S. ( 1996). Describing differences in approaches to organization science: Rethinking Burrell and Morgan and their legacy. Organization Science, 7, 191-207.
39.
Everett, J. ( 2002). Organizational research and the praxeology of Pierre Bourdieu. Organizational Research Methods, 5, 56-80.
40.
Everett, J., & Jamal, T. ( 2001, July). Multistakeholder collaboration as pedagogic practice and symbolic marketplace. Paper presented at the European Group of Organization Studies Colloquium, Lyon , France.
41.
Gherardi, S. ( 2006). Organizational knowledge: The texture of workplace learning . Oxford, England: Blackwell.
42.
Gibbons, M., Limoges, H., Nowotny, H., Schwartzman, S., Scott, P., & Trow, M. ( 1994). The new production of knowledge: The dynamics of science and research in contemporary societies. London, England: Sage.
43.
Golsorkhi, D., Leca, B., Lounsbury, M., & Ramirez, C. ( 2009). Analysing, accounting for an unmasking domination: On our role as scholars of practice, practitioners of social science and public intellectuals. Organization, 16, 779-797.
44.
Golsorkhi, D., Rouleau, L., Seidl, D., & Vaara, E. ( 2010). Introduction: What is strategy-as-practice? D. Golsorkhi, L. Rouleau , D. Seidl, & E. Vaara (Eds.), Cambridge handbook of strategy as practice (pp. 1-20). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
45.
Gomez, M.L. ( 2010). A Bourdesian perspective on strategy-as-practice. In D. Golsorkhi, L. Rouleau, D. Seidl, & E. Vaara (Eds.), Cambridge handbook of strategy as practice (pp. 141-155). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
46.
Gopinath, C., & Hoffman, R.C. ( 1995). The relevance of strategy research: Practitioner and academic viewpoints. Journal of Management Studies, 32, 575-594.
47.
Grand, S., Rüegg-Stürm, J., & von Arx, W. ( 2010). Constructivist epistemologies in strategy as practice research. In D. Golsorkhi, L. Rouleau, D. Seidl , & E. Vaara (Eds.), Cambridge handbook of strategy as practice (pp. 63-78). Cambridge , England: Cambridge University Press.
48.
Hafsi, T., & Thomas, H. ( 2005). The field of strategy In search of a walking stick. European Management Journal, 23, 507-519.
49.
Hambrick, D.C. ( 2005). What if the academy actually mattered? Academy of Management Review, 19, 11-16.
50.
Huff, A., & Huff, J. ( 2001). Refocusing the business school agenda. British Journal of Management, 12, 49-54.
51.
Jarzabkowski, P. ( 2004). Strategy as practice: Recursiveness, adaptation and practices-in-use . Organization Studies, 25, 529-560.
52.
Jarzabkowski, P., Balogun, J., & Seidl, D. ( 2007). Strategizing: The challenge of a practice perspective . Human Relations, 60, 5-27.
53.
Jarzabkowski, P., & Kaplan, S. ( 2008). Using strategy tools in practice ( AIM Working Paper No. 047).
54.
Jarzabkowski, P., Mohrman S.A., & Scherer, A.G. ( 2010). Organization studies as applied science: The generation and use of academic knowledge about organizations. Organization Studies, 31, 1189-1207.
55.
Jarzabkowski, P., & Whittington, R. (2008). A strategy-as-practice approach to strategy research and education. Journal of Management Inquiry, 17, 282-286.
56.
Jarzabkowski, P., & Wilson, D. ( 2006). Actionable strategy knowledge: A practice perspective . European Management Journal, 12, 41-48.
57.
Johnson, G., Melin, L., & Whittington, R. (2003). Micro strategy and strategizing: Towards an activity-based view. Journal of Management Studies , 40, 3-22.
58.
Johnson, G., Langley, A., Melin, L., & Whittington, R. (2007). Strategy as practice: Research directions and resources. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
59.
Johnson, G., Balogun, J., & Beech, N. ( 2010). Researching strategists and their identity in practice: Building close-with relationships. In D. Golsorkhi , L. Rouleau, D. Seidl, & E. Vaara (Eds.), Cambridge handbook of strategy as practice (pp. 243-257). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
60.
Kieser, A., & Leiner, L. ( 2009). Why the rigor-relevance gap in management research is unbridgeable. Journal of Management Studies, 46, 516-533.
61.
Langley, A. ( 2010). The challenge of developing cumulative knowledge about strategy as practice. In D. Golsorkhi, L. Rouleau, D. Seidl , & E. Vaara (Eds.), Cambridge handbook of strategy as practice (pp. 91-106). Cambridge , England: Cambridge University Press.
62.
Lewandowski, J.D. ( 2000). Thematizing embeddedness. Reflexive sociology as interpretation . Philosophy of the Social Sciences, 30, 49-66.
63.
Løwendahl, B., & Revang, O. ( 1998). Challenges to existing strategy theory in a post: Industrial society. Strategic Management Journal, 19, 755-774.
64.
Lyles, M.A. ( 1995). Commentary: A comment on the relevance of strategy research . Advances in Strategic Management, 12B, 111-114.
65.
MacIntosh, R., & MacLean, D. ( 2008). Mode 2. In R. Thorpe & R. Holt (Eds.), Sage dictionary of qualitative management research (pp. 136-138). London, England: Sage.
66.
Mintzberg, H. ( 2004). Managers not MBAs. A hard look at the soft practice of managing and management development. San Francisco, CA : Berrett-Koehler.
67.
Mohrman, S.A., Gibson, C.B., & Mohrman, A.M., Jr. (2001). Doing research that is useful to practice: a model and empirical exploration. Academy of Management Journal, 44, 357-375.
68.
Nahapiet, J., & Goshal, S. ( 1998). Social capital, intellectual capital and the organizational advantage. Academy of Management Review, 23, 242-266.
69.
Nicolai, A.T. ( 2004).The bridge to the real world: Applied science or a schizophrenic tour de force? Journal of Management Studies, 41, 951-976.
70.
Nicolai, A., & Seidl, D. ( 2010). That’s relevant! Different forms of practical relevance in management science. Organization Studies, 31, 1257-1285.
71.
Nicolini, D., Gherardi, S., & Yanow, D. ( 2003). Knowing in organizations: A practice-based approach. Armonk, NY: M. E. Sharpe.
72.
Oakes, L.S., Townley, B., & Cooper, D.J. ( 1998). Business planning as pedagogy: Language and control in a changing institutional field. Administrative Science Quarterly , 43, 257-293.
73.
Orlikowski, W. ( 1997). Sociomaterial practices: Exploring technology at work . Organization Studies, 28, 1435-1448.
74.
Orlikowski, W. ( 2010). Engaging practice in research: Phenomenon, perspective, and philosophy. In D. Golsorkhi, L. Rouleau, D., Seidl , & E. Vaara (Eds.), Cambridge handbook of strategy as practice (pp. 23-33). Cambridge , England: Cambridge University Press.
75.
Orr, J. ( 1996). Talking about machines. Ithaca, NY : ILR Press.
76.
Paroutis, S., & Heracleous, L. (2010, March). First-order strategy discourse: The strategy meaning-making process in practice. Paper presented at the SMS Mini-conference, Finland.
77.
Pelz, D.C. ( 1978). Some expanded perspectives on use of social science in public policy. In J. M. Yinger & S. J. Cutler (Eds.), Major social issues: A multidisciplinary view (pp. 346-357). New York, NY: Free Press.
78.
Rasche, A., & Behnam, M. ( 2009). As if it were relevant. A systems theoretical perspective on the relation between science and practice. Journal of Management Inquiry, 18, 243-255.
79.
Rasche, A., & Chia, R. ( 2009). Researching strategy practices: A genealogical social theory perspective. Organization Studies, 30, 713-734.
80.
Rynes, S., McNatt, B., & Breetz, R. ( 1999). Academic research inside organizations: Inputs, processes, and outcomes. Personnel Psychology, 52, 869-898.
81.
Sandberg, J., & Tsoukas, H. (in press). Grasping the logic of practice: Theorizing trough practical rationality. Academy of Management Review.
82.
Scherer, A.G. ( 2003). Modes of explanation in organization theory. In H. Tsoukas & C. Knudsen (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of organization theory (pp. 310-344). Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
83.
Seidl, D. ( 2007). General strategy concepts and the ecology of strategy discourses: A systemic-discursive perspective. Organization Studies, 28, 197-218.
84.
Seidl, D. ( 2009). Productive misunderstandings between organisation science and organisation practice: The science-practice relation from the perspective of Niklas Luhmann’s theory of autopoietic systems. In R. Magalhaes & R. Sanchez (Eds.), Autopoiesis in organization theory and practice, advanced series in management (pp. 133-148). Amsterdam, Netherlands: Elsevier.
85.
Spee, A.P., & Jarzabkowski, P. (2009). Strategy tools as boundary objects. Strategic Organization, 7, 223-232.
86.
Starkey, K., & P. Madan, P. (2001). Bridging the relevance gap: Aligning stakeholders in the future of management research. British Journal of Management, 12(Special Issue), 3-26.
87.
Swartz, D.L. ( 2008). Bringing Bourdieu’s master concepts into organizational analysis. Theory and Society, 37, 45-51.
88.
Tsoukas, H., & Knudsen, C. ( 2002). The conduct of strategy research. In A. Pettigrew, H. Thomas, & R. Whittington (Eds.), Handbook of strategy and management (pp. 411-435). London, England: Sage.
89.
Van de Ven, A., & Johnson, P. ( 2006). Knowledge for theory and practice. Academy of Management Review, 31, 802-821.
90.
Wacquant, L. ( 2006). Pierre Bourdieu. In R. Stones (Ed.), Key contemporary thinkers (e-book ). London England: Macmilllan
91.
Wacquant, L.J.D. ( 1989). Towards a reflexive sociology: A workshop with Pierre Bourdieu. Sociological Theory, 7, 26-63.
92.
Weick, K. ( 1999). That’s moving. Theories that matter. Journal of Management Inquiry, 8, 134-142.
93.
Whittington, R. ( 1996). Strategy as practice. Long Range Planning , 29, 731-735.
94.
Whittington, R. ( 2006). Completing the practice turn in strategy research. Organization Studies, 27, 613-634.
95.
Whittington, R., Jarzabkowski, P., Mayer, M., Mounoud, E., Nahapiet, J., & Rouleau, L. ( 2003). Taking strategy seriously: Responsibility and reform for an important social practice. Journal of Management Inquiry , 12, 396-409.
