Category: Writing

Relationship between Theory and Practice

Order Instructions:

This is the second question of four questions in the comprehensive exam toward PhD program. I have already sent my information and all four questions at once, but in case you may need it again, can be forwarded.
Four questions are pasted below, please respond to the second question and when doing so please pay attention to the informative papers that have been sent for previous question:

Question 1: Theory

Theories play a vitally important role in guiding research and organizing and making sense of research findings. In spite of the great importance of theory-building and theory testing within your field of specialization, there is no generally accepted conception of what a theory is. Because your dissertation must contribute to theory, you must have a clear understanding of the variety of conceptions of theory, types of theories, and ways of contributing to theory and be able to justify how, exactly, your study contributes to theory.

Part 1
Using Gelso (2006), Harlow (2009), Stam, H. (2000, 2010), Wacker (1999), and five additional peer-reviewed articles from your specialization, discuss scholarly views on the nature and types of theory. Compare and contrast at least three views of what constitutes a theory, including the view you will use in Part 3 of this question. Be sure to distinguish theory from related concepts, such as hypothesis, paradigm, model, and concept.

Part 2
Using Ellis & Levy (2008), Harlow, E. (2009), and five additional peer-reviewed articles, review the scholarly literature on the relationship between theory and research and the ways research (quantitative and qualitative) can contribute to theory. Discuss at least three ways research can contribute to theory.

Part 3
Pick a theory (in one of the views of what constitutes a theory that you identified in Part 1) of current interest directly related to the topic area of your dissertation. A theory is currently of interest if there are articles published on it in the past five years. Using at least 10 published, peer-reviewed research articles:

1. Explain how the theory adds or may add to our understanding of your field and/or research topic.

2. Discuss and analyze the literature on two areas of controversy or unanswered questions related to the theory.

The structure of your paper should be as follows:
Title page
Body (10-15 pages, no more or less; APA Style; use appropriate headings for organization of the paper)
References (APA Style)

Learning Outcomes:
1. Compose a theoretically sound and conceptually rich essay that demonstrates knowledge of fundamental subject areas of a student’s academic discipline and specialization.

Question 2: Practical Application

Your dissertation research must contribute to theory. Your research and the theory to which it contributes may or may not have a practical benefit or application. There is no doubt, however, that there is a theory in your dissertation topic area that does have a practical application.

Part 1
Referencing at least five peer-reviewed journal articles or scholarly books, discuss views on the relationship between theory and application or practice. How can a theory guide or inform practice? What are the issues involved in translating theory into practice? Be sure to keep in mind the various conceptions of theory you discussed in Question 1.

Part 2
Referencing at least five peer-reviewed journal articles, fully describe a theory of current interest in your topic area. A theory is currently of interest if there are articles published on it in the past five years. This theory may or may not be the same as the one you examined in Question 1, Part 3. Describe a current view of the theory, not the founder’s view or a classic view. Your answer should be no more than three pages long.

Part 3
Identify at least five scholarly articles (published in the last 5 years) that address how the theory you discussed in Part 2 has actually been applied. (Draw on your response to Part 1 in order to define what you mean by an application of a theory to an actual problem or situation.) Critically evaluate the appropriateness of the uses to which the theory has been applied. Consider, for example: Are the applications premised upon an accurate understanding of the theory and its scope? Do the applications “go beyond” what the theory claims? Is the reasoning linking application and theory sound?

The structure of your paper should be as follows:
Title page
Body (10-15 pages, no more or less; APA Style; use appropriate headings for organization of the paper)
References (APA Style)

Learning Outcomes:
2. Critique existing research and design a methodologically sound approach to research in the student’s academic specialization(s).

Question 3: Research

The ability to read, understand, critique, and integrate research studies and to design a study to address a gap in the research literature is a vital tool for a doctoral student. As you write your dissertation, you may be reading hundreds of studies, many of which you will evaluate as part of a coherent literature review.

Select five empirical articles from peer-reviewed journals that:
• you consider critical to your understanding of your area of dissertation research
• all address a particular phenomenon and attempt to contribute to theory about it

Part 1
1. Describe each study, including:
• the research problem, questions, or hypotheses
• the research purpose
• type of design and elements of the design (e.g., sample, data analysis, operationalization of constructs)
• threats to validity and if and how they were addressed
• the findings and their implications

2. Critically evaluate each study: Does the author make a compelling case for the meaning and significance of the findings?

Part 2
Write a literature review that explains what is known and not known about the phenomenon based on a critical evaluation of the five studies.

Part 3
Develop a research question that addresses one of the unknowns you identified in Part 2 and sketch a quantitative or qualitative study that can answer the question about what is unknown and contribute to theory (in some sense of theory you discuss in Question 1).

Address:
• the research purpose
• type of design and elements of the design (e.g., sample, the type of data you need to collect and how you will collect it, data analysis)
• the strengths and weaknesses of your envisioned design and methods
• quantitative: threats to validity and how your design will address them
• quantitative: the constructs you will measure and what you will do in order to determine how to operationalize them (you need not identify specific measures)
• qualitative: your means of ensuring the quality of your findings
• justification for why your chosen design and methods are more appropriate for your research question than alternatives you have considered
• your methods of data analysis
• how the data you collect will enable you to answer your research question and contribute to theory

Draw on the additional resources for this course for guidance in understanding the concepts (e.g., internal validity, threats to validity, and operationalization) needed to address this question.

The structure of your paper should be as follows:
Title page
Body (10-15 pages, no more or less; APA Style; use appropriate headings for organization of the paper)
References (APA Style)

Learning Outcomes:
3. Apply relevant theory and research from the student’s specialization coursework to real life situations where he or she solves specific problems and discusses implications.

Question 4: Ethics

As you know, scientific research must be conducted in accordance with ethical principles. The ethical principles of research are defined in:

Ethical Principles of Psychologists and Code of Conduct
Standard 8: Research and Publication
http://www.apa.org/ethics/code/index.aspx

The National Academy Of Sciences, National Academy Of Engineering, and Institute Of Medicine Of The National Academies have a more detailed and comprehensive set of ethical guidelines for scientific research:

Committee on Science, Engineering, and Public Policy (U.S.), National Academy of Sciences (U.S.), National Academy of Engineering., & Institute of Medicine (U.S.). (2009) On being a scientist: A guide to responsible conduct in research, (3rd ed.). Washington, D.C: National Academies Press.
http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=12192

Write a paper in which you discuss how you will ensure that all aspects of your doctoral research, from literature review to conducting research, to writing the dissertation manuscript will be done with care and integrity and will meet the ethical standards of scientific research. Reference the two publications above and at least five additional peer-reviewed articles.

You must justify all the steps you will take to ensure the ethical integrity of your dissertation project and not simply describe standard practice. You must show that you have your own clear set of ethical principles and that you know how to apply them to your work. You must do more than just paraphrase ethical guidelines. You must explain specifically how you will apply published ethical guidelines and concepts to what you will do in your research (as you envision it at this point).

Be sure to address the following:
• Plagiarism
• Risk assessment
• Informed consent
• Privacy and confidentiality
• Data handling and reporting
• Mistakes and negligence
• Working with a Mentor
• Northcentral University requirements for IRB approval

Conclude your paper with your thoughts on the following statement:

Ethical scientific researchers have a commitment to all who are touched by their research—participants who share their lives and time, mentors and advisors, reviewers, future readers, and supporters and cheerleaders on the journey—to take care and do their work well.

The structure of your paper should be as follows:
Title page
Body (10-15 pages, no more or less; APA Style; use appropriate headings for organization of the paper)
References (APA Style)

Learning Outcomes:
4. Integrate knowledge of ethical practices with principles of professional practice as it applies to specific scenarios within the student’s academic discipline and specialization.

SAMPLE ANSWER

Comprehensive Exam: Question 2

Part 1

Relationship between Theory and Practice

The association existing between practice and theory happens to be an extensive discussion in various scholarly literatures that cover diverse disciplines or fields of study. According to Aertsen, Jaspaert and Van-Gorp (2013), the systematic nature of any theory is often focused on the provision of an illustrative or explanatory leverage on a given issue by offering descriptions of innovative characteristics of events/phenomena. A theory can also provide predictive utility. In relation to this, there exist three influential notions/views/opinions that hold theories to be (1) instruments of performing things in the world; (2) reducible to observables; and (3) statements concerning existing things or events. All academic studies are dependent on theory. A theory offers a model for evaluation, enhances the establishment of academic discipline/filed in an efficient manner, and is required in the applicability aspect of real world issues. As such, theory acts as a driving force towards the accomplishment of practice and research. Apart from its application is social disciplines, theory possess a revealing and practical connections to medicine, physics, biology, chemistry and other life disciplines as it contributes to significant practice, predictions and discovery explanations.

Brownlie, Hewer and Ferguson (2009) argue that the most common/famous assertion or statement is that nothing happens to be as practical as a good theory. A good theory serves as a baseline in which appropriate/best practices can be established. Despite a good theory being significant in the realization of an informed practice, and continual maturity and improvement of a discipline, it also possesses the ability to improve the practice and comprehension/understanding of practitioners. On the contrary, many scholars have continued to debate and discuss various controversies that are associated with the association between practice and theory in relation to the perceived gap between these two aspects. These scholars discuss such controversies in two dimensions, which are the viewpoint of practitioner and academic viewpoint. Chan, Chan & Liu (2012), claim that practitioners are often asking the question concerning the necessity of theories and when they can be used by such practitioners. In relation to this, the academic happens to be guided and propelled towards thorough and increasingly relevant/applicable theoretical contributions/donations that may contradict the practitioners’ demands. According to Chan, Chan & Liu (2012), a theory is the reality, and its pursuit by academicians is based/grounded on its revelatory and explanatory potential, which has the ability to invoke themes within extant literature that can result into overall shift in paradigm. According to Hatlevik & Katrine (2012), theories have claimed that in applied disciplines of leadership and management, theoretical propositions/proposals should be inspired or drive by the appropriateness of the practice for the advancement and progression of knowledge within a continuous cycle.

A research-driven theory possess a direct relevance to practice, and is beneficial to the discipline/field. However, what comprises a theoretical donation/contribution within the field or discipline of study can act as another source of contention among academicians. In relation to this, a theory-practice association is considered a communication relationship.  Sammut (2014) argues that engaged scholarship, which is considered a remedy to perceived or real gap, requires a more mode of query or investigation to convert information offered by practitioners and scholars into actions with the aim of addressing issues involved in a given discipline. Even within, methodological, theoretical and contextual situations, the use of a range of methods in testing theories informs practice, and yields substantive and valued knowledge. In relation to this, it can be argued that a theory yields research, and research produces and refines theory.

Ragozzino & Moschieri (2014) argue that there is often a tension between practice and theory. These two distinct realms are connected to each other via a process of application and abstraction. To describe this relationship/association by way of theory, it can be argues that practice reterritorializes theory and theory deterritorializes practice. As a result, this interaction can lead to a practice that is becoming a theory, and a theory that is becoming a practice. Furthermore, to describe this association by way of theory, it can be noted that practice happens to be an applied theory and theory happens to be an abstracted practice. Sammut (2014) claims that there exists an age-old issues/problem with the association/relationship between practice and theory in that individuals who are specialized in practice always argue that those specialized in theory are separated or detached from the real/actual world, which is the world of practice. On the other side, individuals who are specialized in theory always claim that those individuals who have specialization in practice lack fundamental understanding or comprehension of what they do. As such, the conflict between pro-theory and pro-practice individuals often leads to contradictory and incongruous practices.

Suddaby (2014) argues that, there exist a third group of persons that embody or embrace the becoming, the application/abstraction process. Individuals that belong to this category act as conduit in that they bridge the two worlds (pro-practice and pro-theory worlds). In relation to this, there exists a given art to explaining or describing the core of theory using words of an individual who practices. On other hand, there exist a given art to joining the essences associated with practices and submitting it to individuals who theorize. As such, building or establishing this bridge serves an act of creation, building or opening of space.

Suddaby (2014) claims that the relationship between practice and theory can be termed as dichotomous. In relation to this, the view of practice and theory as independent/dichotomous association between the mind and spirit, and the phenomenal world traces its roots in the ancient universe/world. For Plato the universe of appearances refers to the phenomenal world, which is understood or comprehended by belief and imagination. According to Ragozzino & Moschieri (2014), such a world needs to be separated or distinguished from the higher, abstract and intelligible world that is grasped via thinking, intelligence and knowledge. In relation to this, it can be argued that the Platonic views led to the ascendency of deliberate and careful observation of the phenomenal universe over the philosophical reflection. Moreover, Platonic views contributed to the establishment of a platform on which enlightenment, and the scientific, industrial and information revolutions were accomplished or attained. As a result, science, empiricism and technology displaced philosophy as primary methods through which the phenomenal universe and nature of human cognition, mind, being and feeling could be comprehended.

Issues Involved in the Translation of Theory into Practice

The association existing between practice and theory happens to be crucial in that practice informs theory and theory informs practice. However, there exist several issues, assumptions and controversies surrounding the translation conversion of a theory into practice. In the real sense, the gap between practice and theory is considered a knowledge transfer issue/problem. The initiation of information and dialogue between practitioners and scholars is a suitable method of addressing the perceived misassumption and divide between practice and theory. According to Chan, Chan & Liu (2012), engaged scholarship promoted the appropriateness of research for practice apart from its contribution to the progression of knowledge in a given domain. As such, this argument can be employed in addressing the issue of knowledge production. In addition, to claim that the knowledge of practice and theory are separate does not amount to the statement that these two elements act as substitutes to each other. However, it can be argued that practice and theory complement each other. Taking into consideration the association between application/practice and theory, a framework of four stages that explains the association between the two elements has been developed. The first phase of this model focuses on the conceptual establishment stage, which offers an initial comprehension and description of the dynamics and nature of a problem, phenomenon or issues that happens to be the focus of a theory. The second stage involves the operationalization process, which takes into consideration the explicit link between the conceptual establishment stage and practice. The thirds stage/phase involves the disconfirmation or confirmation aspects. This phase takes into consideration issues such as implementation, planning, evaluation and design of appropriate studies and research agendas to disconfirm and confirm theoretical framework, which is central to theories. Consequently, the last stage involves the application process, which tests or evaluates the theory via learning and experience from the real world context. In relation to this, practice is evaluated with the aim of certifying the relevance and significance of theory. This undertaking is executed with the aim of improving problem solving and action. According to Aertsen, Jaspaert & Van-Gorp (2013), the continuous or constant refinement and improvement is founded on the learning acquired from the application stage as theory can never be compete.

Part 2

Theory of Current Interest in My Topic Area

My topic area focuses on the investigation of the effect that the prevailing construction worker wage has on the expenses or costs of constructions of affordable housing for various seniors within California in relation to the employees’ wage rate of market construction. Taking that my topic area focuses on one of the significant role of the HRM, which is the determination of salaries and benefits of employees, the most probable theory of interest within my topic area is neo-institutional theory (Csaba, 2009). Neo-institutional theory exists among the principle theoretical perspectives that are employed in understanding organizational behaviors as studied or investigated in other organizations or as influenced by other organizations, and wider social pressures or forces, especially broader cultural beliefs and rules. Early or initial scholars/academicians focused on the theorization and documentation of the manner in which the construction of wider cultural rules and beliefs comprised actors, and enhanced organizational isomorphism, which involves the growing or increasing similarities of firms within a given field or discipline. Consequently, the scope o coverage of the theory was extended to account for the change and transformation of institutions or organizations alongside the heterogeneity of practices and actors in fields (Goldmann, 2011). Taking this aspect into consideration my topic area aims at ensuring that the current practices of the HR, which seem to embrace low construction worker wage, within the construction industry. In relation to this, my study focuses on ensuring that there is a transformation in the prevailing construction worker wage within construction industry. As such, neo-institutionalism happens to be relevant to my topic area. Being that neo-institutionalism focuses on the change and transformation of institutions several strands of views and theorizations have emerged concerning this theory. Most of these theorizations are related to the perspective of institutional logics. While neo-institutionalism is associated closely with informed debates and ideas in management and sociology, this theory draws or borrows most from social and cognitive psychology, political science, anthropology and economics.

Current Views of the Neo-Institutional Theory    

Taking into consideration the evolution that that the neo-institutionalism theory has undergone, different scholars have established different views concerning the three traditionally/conventionally recognized forms of neo-institutionalism. These forms include the sociological, historical and rational choice. Besides, there has been a fourth development of a fourth view of neo-institutionalism, which is the discursive neo-institutionalism. According to Gruchy (2011), the three form of neo-institutionalism (sociological, historical and rational choice) share one thing in common in that they are effective in explaining the aspect of continuity, as opposed to change.  Hasselbadh & Kallinikos (2009) argue that in all the three forms of neo-institutionalism, which are employed in analyzing organizations, the primary role of institutions is serving as constraints.  In relation to this, political RI (rational choice institutionalism) focuses on rational actors/agents who pursue their interests by following a logic or judgment of calculation in political institutions or organizations, which are considered systems/structures of incentives. On the other hand, HI (historical institutionalism focuses on the aspect of detailing improvement of political institutions, which are explained as regularized designs/patterns and routinized practices that are subject to a judgment of path-independence. SI (social institutionalism) focuses on social actors who act in accordance to a sense/judgment of appropriateness in political organizations or institutions, which are described as culturally-framed and socially-constituted norms and rules.

Scholars have also made advancements in including views of institutionalism that transcend the political arena. As a result, a new view of neo-institutionalism, which is the discursive neo-institutionalism, has been developed. According to Junker (2011), discursive institutionalism is a common instrument among academicians/scholars who employ discourse and ideas in explaining political change or transformation within organizational/institutional context. Hatlevik & Katrine (2012) argue that scholars who take discourse and ideas seriously should be considered discursive institutionalists. Discursive institutionalism has been associated with many names such as ideational institutionalism, constructivism institutionalism and ideational turn among others. According to Ragozzino & Moschieri (2014), discursive institutionalism happens to be an umbrella concept/idea for the vast series or range of functions within political science, which take account or records of the substantive content of views and interactive processes by which process or procedures are exchanged and conveyed via discourse. In relation to the substantive dimension/aspects of discourse and ideas, discursive institutionalism (DI) academicians/scholars consider views about what ought to be and what is at various levels of generality. Goldmann (2011) argue that the ideas of what ought to be and what is should be focused on moving from policy views. Other scholars have also focused on the aspect of paradigms or programmatic ideas. Consequently, other scholars have also considered aspects of what ought to be and what is as deeper philosophical views. According to Hatlevik & Katrine (2012), various types of ideas/views with the inclusion of cognitive views that are justified in term of necessity and interest-based logics should also be considered in the determination of aspect of what ought to be and what is. Taking these arguments into consideration, it is clear that various scholars have conflicting views concerning the theory of neo-institutionalism.

Part 3

Appropriateness of the Uses to Which Neo-Institutionalism has been applied

The systematic nature, which is associated with a theory, focuses on the provision explanatory or descriptive leverage on an issue. As such, theory contributes significantly to explaining innovative characteristics of an event. Besides, the systematic nature of a theory allows it offer predictive utility. According to Csaba (2009) and Goldmann (2011), theory that is inspires or motivated by research has a direct relevance to beneficial discipline and practice. In relation to this, the neo-institutional theory can be applied to various disciplines or fields. This theory can be applied in five different areas of practice. Gruchy (2011) employed neo-institutional model in examining human resource management practices (HRM practices). This application was done in relation to multinational corporations that operate in nations such as Russia, Finland and U.S. The application of the neo-institutional theory in addressing issues involved in the HRM practice is often common in organizations that associated with the pressure and social influence to adopt best practices. In relation to this, it can be argued that employee development act as a significant source of competitive advantages to firms, which makes it significant for companies/firms to adopt appropriate HRM practices. Taking this aspect into consideration, the neo-institutional isomorphic processes offer three separate or distinctive definitions/explanations (1) normative as a result of the dissemination of professional patterns of organizations (2) coercive as a result of the government policies/regulations and (3) mimetic where firms imitate or copy other firms. It is vital to note that neo-institutional theory does not provide a lens for generic/broad organizational construct, but offers a lens for addressing institutional pressure. In relation to this, there are two controversial issues that are associated with the study conducted by Gruchy (2011). These issues are explicit despite the researcher identifying local institutional forces from the subsidiaries of the multinational corporation investigated in the study. The first controversial issue is that HRM practices are not championed or defined by any professional agency to warrant the presence of normative pressure. The second controversial issue is that the adoption of best HRM practices is not under appropriate regulation or is not regulatory. As such, it can be argued that neo-institutional theory helps in the comprehension of the determining factors of HRM practices. However, in the study executed by Hasselbadh & Kallinikos (2009), the theoretical constructs/buildups of the neo-institutional theory do not justify the event/phenomenon investigated in the research. In relation to this, the differentiation of the normative, coercive and mimetic influences presents problems.

Hatlevik & Katrine (2012) borrowed from neo-institutional theory to offer an in-depth understanding of the agents or factors that shaped how the policies of the human resource can be adjusted in relation to the externally imposed UK policy against age discrimination. In relation to this, the researcher’s theoretical lens addressed two factors. The first approach involved the examination of the UK’s policy on HR regulations, while the second approach focused on the investigation of other forces, which impact on the introduction of policies, apart from the legislation.

Evaluation of the Appropriateness of Uses to which Neo-Institutionalism Has been Applied, and the Researchers’ Accurate Comprehension of the theory and its Scope

Researchers have succeeded in demonstrating an appropriate use or application of the neo-institutionalism theory. As a theoretical perspective, the neo-institutional theory employs or uses three isomorphic pressures in analyzing forces to which the HRM is subjected. These pressures include mimetic, normative and coercive forces. Taking into consideration the perspectives of researchers, the convergence of these three forces can be described or explained within the HR (Csaba, 2009). The first point of convergence is the coercive force introduced by the legislation of UK against age discrimination. The second point of convergence is the mimetic force introduced by agencies such as the Age Positive and Employers’ Forum on Age.  The third point of convergence is the normative force from professional networks like the Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development. As such, the study Goldmann (2011) focused on the investigation of how coercive pressure or force from new policy introduced by the UK government was viewed within firms in the UK. This goal was accomplished by focusing on the natural attitude associated with individuals with stereotypes and diverse agendas. Despite the neo-institutional theory being restricted to the study of the effects of isomorphic forces within firms, Goldmann (2011) identified that organizational aspects such as preexisting values, complexities, diverse stakeholders, interest groups and sectorial distinction complicate and delay the execution of legislations associated with HRM practices.

Despite the internal elements/factors associated with firms, the neo-institutional theory helps in the examination of events/phenomena within the theory’s proposition, with proof from the three isomorphic pressures. On the other hand, there exists a gap or need for further research on what comprises the definition of pre-existing circumstances and other internal values of HR within the context of the neo-institutional theory. Taking into consideration the views or perspective of the neo-institutional theory, Gruchy (2011) established a case study that can be employed in understanding how external and internal organizational factors determine the organizational actions. Gruchy (2011) focused on the identification of the aspect of regulation in terms of Sarbanes-Oxley Act, which comprises a force that encouraged/motivated the top managers to initiate or implement a change within ABC international. Interactions and communications with professional publications and associations comprised the normative influence. Although Gruchy (2011), could not discover the existence or presence of mimetic isomorphism, the assessment of the generators of pressures within the context of neo-institutional theory offered to separate effects. The first effect was associated with the coercive pressure of Sarbanes-Oxley that motivated top managers to mandate/command top-down information security that is related to changes across the whole/entire company. The second effect is associated with the provision of significant source of views concerning the security practices, policies and technologies that can be adopted by managers.

Whether the Researchers go beyond the Scope of Neo-Institutionalism, and Whether the Reason/Judgment Linking Theory to Application is Sound.

Despite the fact that neo-institutional theory does not describe how companies are supposed to handle conflicting demands, Gruchy (2011) employed the buildup dual influence from internal management and internal force in positing such conflicting interactions/association. Nevertheless, despite such as view being founded on assumption, it offers future research opportunities. Gruchy (2011) employed the neo-institutional theory in conducting a research/study with the aim of investigating the functions of institutional mechanisms, and moderating functions of social network systems and cultural values in dispersion/diffusion of global/universal work value within the realm/context of multinational firms or multinational organizations. Furthermore, the research proposed that the normative and regulative institutional processes have the likelihood of diffusing global work values in more efficient manner among the members or subsidiaries of the MNOs (Multinational Organizations). However, the coercive and regulative institutional processes are enacted rules and laws in specific environments that enhance certain forms of behavior or restrict others. In relation to this, the support of the regulatory or coercive force as experienced in Junker, (2011) study. According to Hatlevik & Katrine (2012), multinational organizations should incorporate the shared universal work values for them to create a working environment, where employees have the ability to coordinate their activities and communicate their views with the aim of reaching similar goals. However, approach is not applicable to or practicable with multinational organizations’ subsidiaries that are located in various cultures. Csaba (2009) offers a different perception about the international research/study involving the dispersion/diffusion of normative or coercive institutional pressures or forces with the globalized context due to jurisdictional preferences. In like manner, Goldmann (2011) hypothesized that leadership traits/characteristics, openness to cultural diversity, performance orientation and customer orientation are work values that can result into the transpiration/leaking of the global work environments. Such arguments cannot be generalized within the realm, of neo-institutional theory or the practicability of isomorphism as a result of the differences existing in institutional context nations. As such, such claims are considered an attempt to move beyond the theoretical proposal/proposition.  Besides, the researchers’ reasoning/judgments have contributed significantly to the linking of linking of theory and application in a sound manner.

References

Aertsen, T; Jaspaert, K., & Van-Gorp, B. (2013). From Theory to Practice: A Crisis Simulation Exercise. Business Communication Quarterly, 76(3) 322-338.

Brownlie, D; Hewer, P., & Ferguson, P. (2009). Theory into Practice: Mediations on Culture of Accountability and Interdisciplinarity in Marketing Research. Journal of Marketing Management, 23(5/6) 395-409

Chan, A; Chan, K., & Liu, K. (2012). A Triadic Interplay between Academics, Practitioners and Students in the Nursing Theory and Practice Dialect. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 68(5) 1038-1049.

Csaba, L. (2009). From Sovietology to Neo-Institutionalism. Post-Communist Economies, 21(4) 383-398

Goldmann, K. (2011). Appropriateness and Consequences: The Logic of Neo-Institutionalism. Governance, 18(1) 35-52.

Gruchy, G. (2011). Neo-Institutionalism, Neo-Marxism and Neo-Keynesianism: An Evaluation. Journal of Economic Issues, 18(2) 547

Hasselbadh, H., & Kallinikos, J. (2009). The Project of Rationalization: A Critique and Reappraisal of Neo-Institutionalism in Organization Studies. Organization Studies, 21(4) 697

Hatlevik, I., & Katrine, R. (2012). The Theory-Practice Relationship: Reflective Skills and Theoretical Knowledge as Key Factors in Bridging the gap Between Theory and Practice in Initial Nursing Education. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 68(4) 868-877

Junker, J. (2011). Theoretical Foundations of Neo-Institutionalism. Journal of Economics & Sociology, 27(2) 197-213.

Sammut, K. (2014). Transformative eLearning Theory and Coaching: Application in Practice. International Journal of Evidence Based Coaching & Mentoring, 1(8) 39-53.

Suddaby, R. (2014). Editor’s Comments Why Theory? Academy of Management Review, 39(4) 407-411.

Ragozzino, R., & Moschieri, C. (2014). When Theory Doesn’t Meet Practice: Do Firms Really Stage their Investments? Academy

We can write this or a similar paper for you! Simply fill the order form!