Reply - Nice try, bill, but... There you go again

Andrew H. Van De Ven, Paul E. Johnson

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

13 Scopus citations


Bill McKelvey's commentary is provocative, but four points need correction. (1) The purpose of engaged scholarship is not just to advance practice but to create scientific knowledge. (2) Bill's food chain metaphor mistakenly views the gap between science and practice as a knowledge transfer problem. (3) Bill ignores the impact of biases of researchers by only focusing on practitioner bias. (4) He considers differing views of researchers and practitioners as antithetical; we view them as complementary.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)830-832
Number of pages3
JournalAcademy of Management Review
Issue number4
StatePublished - Oct 2006


Dive into the research topics of 'Reply - Nice try, bill, but... There you go again'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this