ADDRESSING THE EMIC–ETIC OSCILLATION IN BUSINESS EDUCATION

This article offers a lively and spirited debate on the pros and cons of relating research to practice. The authors ’ goal is to illuminate fundamental issues in the debate in detail, consider a variety of prescriptions, and then come to a mindful conclusion about a course of action. The article begins with a point–counterpoint debate to make sure that scholars fully understand the issues in play. Mike Tushman starts off by arguing for an emic approach. He believes that scholars are most effective when they closely work with management and organizations. John Kimberly counters with an etic perspective. He argues that scholars need to keep their distance. Two attempts to make sense of the many issues raised in the debate close the article. First, Bill Starbuck steps back and offers his ideas about what the debate means for continuing scholarship. And then Sue Ashford brings the exchange to a conclusion. She draws on her many years in the dean’s office to offer her wisdom about how to best organize business schools in the coming years. In the end, the authors know that there will be nearly as many errors as trials when the world’s business schools determine how best to proceed. Their aim here is to minimize the effects of these errors. If and when schools do err, the authors want to be sure that they do it with their eyes wide open