Mapping the Impact Pathways: How Management Research Can Be Relevant? Hazhir Rahmandad Post-doctoral Associate MIT

Problem:Our Research Is Not Relevant A personal experience: AOM 2003 Accepted but not often discussed –Scott & Shore Why Sociology Does Not Apply? –Hambrick 1994: What if the Academy Actually Mattered? The side effects are more important than the desired effects: –Ferraro, Pfeffer, & Sutton 2004: Economics Assumptions –Mintzberg Managers, not MBAs

How to address the problem? Writing for practitioners: –Popular management books –Journals for executives –Translating articles into understandable language Working with practitioners: –Action research –Project-based teaching Setting up institutions: –Professional chapters –Practice contribution awards The problem persists  Maybe we should first understand it better

Proposed Approach Define relevance Understand how that relates to day-to-day activities: mapping impact pathways Understand the significance of different pathways Use this model to talk about policy for improvement

Defining Relevance I define research to be relevant if it leads to: “Changing how things get done, through anticipated channels”

The Research-Action link Action (how, how much) Research Activity ?

Example: Use of Computers

Carriers of Knowledge ActionBasic Research Linking Research and Action

Mechanisms for Research Impacting Action Research creates knowledge and concepts that when understood well, change decision- making –Typical channels for carrying them include teaching, books, scientific papers, etc Research results are embedded in artifacts and processes that change action directly –Typical pathways include technology, tools, processes of decision-making etc

Carriers of Knowledge ActionResearch Management Research Link to Action The impact is through understanding of theories in previous stage The impact doesn’t require detailed understanding of the previous stage

Impact of Knowledge Carriers The Effectiveness of Carrier Unit Cost of Carrier Low High Low High Paper Book Teaching Consulting Games Interfaces Organizational Innovations Color codes represent relative attention given to the carrier in academic circles

Why resources go to low- impact carriers? Some Hypotheses: Cognitive biases: –Pathways requiring understanding are more tangible Path dependence in incentive structures –Papers have become the main carrier Complexity of design of high-impact carriers –The concepts are rarely generalizable enough

Missing Piece: Design Design mindset –Management Tools and Processes –Games and simulators –Interfaces –Organizational design Creating artifacts and processes that embed and carry the knowledge and act as change agents, often through carriers that don’t require complete understanding of the previous stage:

Examples of Design Activity Brain-storming as a process Games –General: e.g. Beer Game –Specific: e.g. Software (e.g. data-mining, SCM, Finance) Interface design Organizational Innovations (e.g. PRTM work)

Some Potential Academic Areas User interfaces Individual learning environments Coordination and decision-making systems Design of incentive structures and feedback mechanisms Information processing systems Tools and processes for group work Tools for public policy intervention Tools for organizational change

Why Design Needs Academia? The social design field is in infancy and the markets are not developed Intellectual property is not well- established, therefore R&D returns are not appropriable

Why Academia Needs Design? Relevance Testing theories in Action Guiding the focus of theory building (a pragmatic philosophy of science) Technology has been essential to the growth of science

Opportunities Open field with lots of opportunities Increasing awareness => funding Connection to industry and therefore flexibility Socially valuable contributions

Challenges Academic Incentives: –Hard to find a job –Hard to publish –Hard to get tenure Lack of appropriate training Multi-disciplinary