Standard

Negotiating reciprocal relationships : Practices of engaged scholarship in project studies. / van Marrewijk, Alfons; Dessing, Nick.

In: International Journal of Project Management, Vol. 37, No. 7, 01.10.2019, p. 884-895.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleScientificpeer-review

Harvard

van Marrewijk, A & Dessing, N 2019, 'Negotiating reciprocal relationships: Practices of engaged scholarship in project studies', International Journal of Project Management, vol. 37, no. 7, pp. 884-895. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2019.07.001

APA

van Marrewijk, A., & Dessing, N. (2019). Negotiating reciprocal relationships: Practices of engaged scholarship in project studies. International Journal of Project Management, 37(7), 884-895. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2019.07.001

Vancouver

van Marrewijk A, Dessing N. Negotiating reciprocal relationships: Practices of engaged scholarship in project studies. International Journal of Project Management. 2019 Oct 1;37(7):884-895. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2019.07.001

Author

van Marrewijk, Alfons ; Dessing, Nick. / Negotiating reciprocal relationships : Practices of engaged scholarship in project studies. In: International Journal of Project Management. 2019 ; Vol. 37, No. 7. pp. 884-895.

BibTeX

@article{88faed7f7fc9408a9d2def10155d5475,
title = "Negotiating reciprocal relationships: Practices of engaged scholarship in project studies",
abstract = "Engaged scholarship is frequently being advocated to bridge the knowledge gap between academic scholars and project practitioners. Through the methodology of engaged scholarship academics establish a reciprocal relationship with the project community while adhering to the standards of quality scholarship. Notwithstanding its growing popularity, in project studies we do not learn much about the practices involved in engaged scholarship, neither is the concept theoretically well developed. We argue that, to further the project studies debate, methodological reflection on the reciprocal relationship between academics and practitioners is needed. For this purpose, we provide an analytical framework containing four elements; goals, negotiation practices, reciprocity typology and outcomes of project studies. We then use this framework to analyze three engaged project studies. The paper contributes to project studies with an enhanced concept of engaged scholarship containing three types of reciprocity; generalized, balanced and negative reciprocity. Furthermore, we found that a reciprocal relationship is negotiated and changes over time. We identified four mechanisms that negatively impact the academic and practical outcomes of engaged scholarship studies.",
keywords = "Engaged scholarship, Knowledge gap, Methodology, Practices, Project studies, Reciprocity",
author = "{van Marrewijk}, Alfons and Nick Dessing",
year = "2019",
month = oct,
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.ijproman.2019.07.001",
language = "English",
volume = "37",
pages = "884--895",
journal = "International Journal of Project Management",
issn = "0263-7863",
publisher = "Elsevier",
number = "7",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Negotiating reciprocal relationships

T2 - Practices of engaged scholarship in project studies

AU - van Marrewijk, Alfons

AU - Dessing, Nick

PY - 2019/10/1

Y1 - 2019/10/1

N2 - Engaged scholarship is frequently being advocated to bridge the knowledge gap between academic scholars and project practitioners. Through the methodology of engaged scholarship academics establish a reciprocal relationship with the project community while adhering to the standards of quality scholarship. Notwithstanding its growing popularity, in project studies we do not learn much about the practices involved in engaged scholarship, neither is the concept theoretically well developed. We argue that, to further the project studies debate, methodological reflection on the reciprocal relationship between academics and practitioners is needed. For this purpose, we provide an analytical framework containing four elements; goals, negotiation practices, reciprocity typology and outcomes of project studies. We then use this framework to analyze three engaged project studies. The paper contributes to project studies with an enhanced concept of engaged scholarship containing three types of reciprocity; generalized, balanced and negative reciprocity. Furthermore, we found that a reciprocal relationship is negotiated and changes over time. We identified four mechanisms that negatively impact the academic and practical outcomes of engaged scholarship studies.

AB - Engaged scholarship is frequently being advocated to bridge the knowledge gap between academic scholars and project practitioners. Through the methodology of engaged scholarship academics establish a reciprocal relationship with the project community while adhering to the standards of quality scholarship. Notwithstanding its growing popularity, in project studies we do not learn much about the practices involved in engaged scholarship, neither is the concept theoretically well developed. We argue that, to further the project studies debate, methodological reflection on the reciprocal relationship between academics and practitioners is needed. For this purpose, we provide an analytical framework containing four elements; goals, negotiation practices, reciprocity typology and outcomes of project studies. We then use this framework to analyze three engaged project studies. The paper contributes to project studies with an enhanced concept of engaged scholarship containing three types of reciprocity; generalized, balanced and negative reciprocity. Furthermore, we found that a reciprocal relationship is negotiated and changes over time. We identified four mechanisms that negatively impact the academic and practical outcomes of engaged scholarship studies.

KW - Engaged scholarship

KW - Knowledge gap

KW - Methodology

KW - Practices

KW - Project studies

KW - Reciprocity

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85069739445&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.ijproman.2019.07.001

DO - 10.1016/j.ijproman.2019.07.001

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:85069739445

VL - 37

SP - 884

EP - 895

JO - International Journal of Project Management

JF - International Journal of Project Management

SN - 0263-7863

IS - 7

ER -

ID: 55930290