Translating management research for immediate business impact: Chinese Management Insights

See on Scoop.itDual impact of research; towards the impactelligent university

Chinese Management Insights is a Chinese-English bilingual publication that converts leading academic research on China-related topics into summaries that can be easily read and used by managers. These summaries exclude most of the academic theory, research methodology and literature references that are in the original full papers, and focus on what is directly useful to managers. Most of the papers come from Management and Organization Review (MOR), published by the International Association for Chinese Management Research (IACMR) with selected China-related articles from other leading journals. All the summaries have been approved by the authors of the original articles. The summaries in this journal have been rewritten from the original articles primarily by George Yip. In addition, in some issues, we will publish one or two executive perspectives on their management philosophy and best management practices of their companies.


Editorial Team
Founding and Advising Editor – Anne S. Tsui (, Professor at Arizona State University and Editor-in-Chief of Management and Organization Review
Executive Editor – Xiao-Ping Chen (, Professor at the Foster School of Business, University of Washington
Co-Executive Editor – George Yip (, Professor at China Europe International Business School (CEIBS)
Chinese Editor – Katherine Xin (, Professor at China-Europe International Business School
Managing Editor – Eve Yan (, Guanghua-Cisco Leadership Institue, Peking University

Supporters Group
Guanghua-Cisco Leadership Institute, Guanghua School of Management
Business Review
China Entrepreneurs Forum


See on

Bridging the Research-Practice Gap in Management Research

See on Scoop.itDual impact of research; towards the impactelligent university




Management research often bears little resemblance to management practice. Although this research- practice gap is widely recognized and frequently lamented, there is little discussion about how it can be bridged. We partly remedy this problem in this paper by describing our experiences with the Network for Business Sustainability. Our experiences showed that the paradoxes underlying the relationship between research and practice make bridging this gap difficult. We argue that the reason why the research-practice gap endures is that bridging it is beyond the capabilities and scope of most individuals, and we call for the creation of intermediary organizations like the Network for Business Sustainability. We close by outlining some of the activities that can be undertaken by these boundary-spanning intermediary organizations, with the hopes of better aligning management research and practice.


Bridging the Research-Practice Gap, by Pratima Bansal, Stephanie Bertels, Tom Ewart, Peter MacConnachie and James O’Brien, appeared in the February 2012 issue of the Academy of Management Perspectives.



See on

Most business schools need a new business model; The key steps necessary for creating a relevant business school

See on Scoop.itDual impact of research; towards the impactelligent university

Most business schools need a new business model.


Most business schools need a new business model. Numerous writers in this column have argued about the unsustainability of the current model, which primarily rewards academic research while not generating sufficient revenue to fund that very expensive activity. Only a few wealthy schools are exempt from this dilemma. From my experience that research-revenue circle can be closed only by engaging faculty with the oft-neglected, yet rich, constituency of practitioners.

Engaging faculty members successfully requires changing their mindset and also transforming the business model of the school so that it gives some priority to activities that involve practitioners: applied research, publication in managerial journals, media presence, advisory boards and the like.


enjoy reading the rest @ FT Soapbox




The key steps necessary for creating a relevant business school

By George Yip

See on

Portal Run My Code; create impact by sharing your research methodology; first Call launched for Code in Economics and Management

See on Scoop.itDual impact of research; towards the impactelligent university

RunMyCode is a website allowing people to run computer codes a

ssociated with a scientific publication using their own data and parameter values. The service only requires a web browser as all calculations are done on a dedicated cloud computer. Once the results are ready, they are automatically displayed to the user.

RunMyCode is a non-for-profit scientific website founded by academics and funded by several national research agencies and universities. The goal of the website is to make academic

research easier to use and to replicate. RunMyCode relies on the concept of a paper’s companion website.

The service is completely free of charge.


First Call for Code in Economics and Management:

See on

A guide to monitoring and evaluating policy influence; a typology for influencing activities

See on Scoop.itDual impact of research; towards the impactelligent university

This paper looks at how to monitor and evaluate activities that aim to influence policy. A starting point, then, is to look at what ‘policy’ is, and how to understand change (or stasis) in policy. Rather than seeing

policy as one single, discrete decision, it is important to broaden one’s view, so that policy is understood as a series of documents and decisions that are best described as a set of processes, activities or actions.


The author mentions five key dimensions of possible policy impact:


• Framing debates and getting issues on to the political agenda: this is about attitudinal change drawing attention to new issues and affecting the awareness, attitudes or perceptions of key stakeholders.


• Encouraging discursive commitments from states and other policy actors: affecting language and rhetoric is important to, for example, promote recognition of specific groups or endorsements of international declarations.


• Securing procedural change at domestic or international level: changes in the process whereby policy decisions are made, such as opening new spaces for policy dialogue.


• Affecting policy content while legislative change is

not the sum total of policy change, it is an important elemen


• Influencing behaviour change in key actors: policy change requires changes in behaviour and implementation at various levels in order to be meaningful and sustainable.

See on

NSF launches impactful vison and strategy for a 21st century cyberinfrastructure framework for science and education

See on Scoop.itDual impact of research; towards the impactelligent university

NSF will take a leadership role in providing software as enabling infrastructure for science and engineering research and education, and in promoting software as a principal component of its comprehensive CIF21 vision. This includes ensuring comprehensive, usable, and secure software and services to further new scientific discovery and innovative education approaches by its researchers working in a globally connected and data-enabled world; fostering sustainable communities of software users, researchers, developers, industrial scientists and engineers, educators, and students that span disciplines, professions, and regions/countries; and promoting new approaches to learning and workforce development in software, and supporting investigations in the use of software for novel learning mechanisms. Reducing the complexity of software will be a unifying theme across the CIF21 vision, advancing both the use and development of new software and promoting the ubiquitous integration of scientific software across all disciplines, in education, and in industry.


To meet the challenges before it, NSF will adopt, as part of its larger CIF21 mission and program, five interconnected strategic goals for
delivering and sustaining software to advance science and engineering research and education:
•• Capabilities: Support the creation and maintenance of an innovative, integrated, reliable, sustainable and accessible software ecosystem providing new capabilities that advance and
accelerate scientific inquiry and application at
unprecedented complexity and scale.
•• Research: Support the foundational research necessary to continue to efficiently advance scientific software, responding to new technological, algorithmic, and scientific advances.
•• Science: Enable transformative, interdisciplinary, collaborative, science and engineering research and education through the use of advanced software and services.
•• Education: Empower the current and future diverse workforce of scientists and engineers equipped with essential skills to use and develop software. Further, ensure that the software and
services are effectively used in both the research and education process realizing new opportunities for teaching and outreach.
•• Policy: Transform practice through new policies for software addressing challenges of academic culture, open dissemination and use, reproducibility and trust of data/models/simulation, curation and sustainability, and that address issues of governance, citation, stewardship, and attribution of software authorship.



See on

Twitter, peer review and altmetrics: the future of research impact assessment

See on Scoop.itDual impact of research; towards the impactelligent university

New tools are challenging the monopoly of impact factors as the sole measure of research quality, but are they up to the job?


“No one can read everything. We rely on filters to make sense of the scholarly literature, but the narrow, traditional filters are being swamped. However, the growth of new, online scholarly tools allows us to make new filters; these altmetrics reflect the broad, rapid impact of scholarship in this burgeoning ecosystem. We call for more tools and research based on altmetrics.”

This quote is taken from the introduction to the altmetrics manifesto. And the reason it’s a manifesto, rather than a mission or vision statement, is arguably because changing the way scholarly impact is measured is going to need something of a revolution – and no revolution is complete without a manifesto.

So why is a revolution needed? Because long before the tools even existed to do anything about it, many in the research community have bemoaned the stranglehold the impact factor of a research paper has held over research funding, careers and reputations. As bloggers Victor Manning and William Gunn wrote: “Influence is only one dimension of importance”. Other bugbears include the slowness of peer review and the fact that impact is not linked to an article, but rather to a journal, as this blog from the Scholarly Kitchen points out.


See the interesting comments on the guardian website



See on

RSS Business School News

  • An error has occurred; the feed is probably down. Try again later.
Locations of Site Visitors

Altmetric Related stuf

if(typeof(AltmetricWidget) !== 'undefined'){ window.AltmetricWidget489 = new AltmetricWidget("AltmetricWidget489"); }}

%d bloggers like this: