The IS academic-practitioner disconnect: Exploring the practitioner perspective through action research
Darroch, FD (2010) The IS academic-practitioner disconnect: Exploring the practitioner perspective through action research. PhD thesis, University of Tasmania.
The Information Systems (IS) field has struggled to achieve a functional relationship
between academia and practice. Debate has persisted among academics, but without
apparent progress. The relationship is characterised as suffering a 'disconnect', largely
resulting from a 'communication deficit'. The problem is complex and interrelated with
other major academic debates regarding the field's identity.
The applied nature of the field and the importance of practitioners as stakeholders in
academic research underline the significance of the academic-practitioner relationship.
Prominent academics question the future viability of an IS academic discipline, and warn of
an impending crisis. They advocate 'proactive change' by engaging with practitioners, and
call for empirical research into the practitioner perspective of the relationship.
There are two primary objectives of this research.
The first is to explore the practitioner perspective on the relationship with IS academia and
the role played by academia. The second is to trial, via Action Research (AR), an engagement
approach that can be shown effectively to address the disconnect.
The research objectives are achieved via two complementary AR cases.
The first, the 'BA Workshop case', is 'problem-driven', and the research context is heavily
influenced by academia. The second, the 'PM Alliance case', is 'researcher-driven', and the
research setting is predominantly influenced by its industry location.
For the purposes of this thesis, the theoretical framework is referred to as the Academic Practitioner
Interaction Theoretical Framework (APITF). This framework, which underpins
the interaction approaches, is primarily based on Boundary Spanning Theory. It adopts the
Dialogical Action Research (Dialogical AR) approach. It also draws on the conception of IS as
a 'design science' and the principles of Mode 2 Knowledge.
These cases yielded a variety of qualitative data in the form of transcribed interviews,
emails and personal communications, observations, and corporate documentation. The
cases were conducted under an interpretivist-pragmatist paradigm, which acknowledges
the subjective nature of the research. The data are analysed using thematic analysis
The research provides an in-depth understanding of the practitioners' perspective of
academia and the academic role. It also yields insights into the current state of the relationship, and the causes of the disconnect. Seeking the practitioners' viewpoint in a
context of deeply engaged action facilitated a more meaningful response from the
practitioners. It also enabled the Author to make more informed observations.
Both cases provide evidence to support the efficacy of the APITF as a basis for conducting
academic-practitioner interactions that can overcome the relationship disconnect. While
the success of the boundary spanning role may seem intuitively obvious, the emphatically
positive response from practitioners is noteworthy.
The key features of Dialogical AR are also confirmed as prescribing appropriate roles for
both academics and practitioners to interact productively. Overall, the evidence suggests
that the boundary spanning role may be the crux of a potential solution. While the concept
of academic-practitioner engagement is inherently appealing, such interactions are
This research makes two main contributions.
Firstly, it provides an in-depth understanding of the practitioner perspective. Secondly it
answers the call for pragmatic, action-based responses to the academic-practitioner
disconnect, and demonstrates how highly functional relationships between academics and
practitioners can be achieved.
|Item Type:||Thesis (PhD)|
|Additional Information:||Copyright 2010 the Author - Embargord until May 2012|
|Deposited By:||UTAS ePrints Officer|
|Deposited On:||11 Jul 2011 15:32|
|Last Modified:||25 Jul 2012 14:07|
|ePrint Statistics:||View statistics for this ePrint|
Repository Staff Only: item control page