【24h】

Editor's note

机译:编者注

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
获取外文期刊封面目录资料

摘要

Most readers of JBS are probably quite familiar with the practitioner-academic debate as it pertains to publishing and management education. Practitioners do not read scholarly journals and generally make their decisions without advice from academics on the latest research. Academia continues to educate future managers but has little contact with the business world those managers will enter. All of this is simplified and rife with exceptions, but the gist is accurate.rnEveryone agrees that the chasm between academia and business still exists and may even be widening. There is much discussion but the problem continues unabated. Therefore, it took a certain amount of courage for John Humphries and his colleagues from Texas A&M to weigh in on this great divide. Their paper is crisp, candid and should encourage dialogue between the two camps. I would be delighted to receive comments from readers on the subject.
机译:JBS的大多数读者可能对从业者学术界的辩论非常熟悉,因为这与出版和管理教育有关。从业者不会阅读学术期刊,并且通常在没有学者就最新研究提出建议的情况下做出决定。学术界继续教育未来的管理者,但与这些管理者将进入的商业世界接触很少。所有这些都经过简化和例外处理,但要旨是准确的。每个人都同意学术界和企业之间的鸿沟仍然存在,甚至可能在扩大。讨论很多,但问题依然存在。因此,得克萨斯州A&M的约翰·汉弗莱斯(John Humphries)和他的同事们在这种巨大的分歧中占了一定的勇气。他们的论文清晰,坦率,应鼓励两个阵营之间的对话。我很高兴收到读者对此主题的评论。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号