The theory-practice divide:thoughts from the Editors and Senior Advisory Board of EJM

Purpose – The purpose of this editorial is to bring together thoughts and opinions from the Editors and Senior Advisory Board of EJM regarding the nature of the long-debated “theory-practice divide” in marketing scholarship. Design/methodology/approach – The authors synthesise diverse opinions from senior academics in order both to inspire further debate in marketing scholarship, and to draw some important conclusions for marketing academia as a whole. Findings – The authors propose that, for marketing scholarship to mature and progress, room must be found for those who wish to focus both on practical and on pure marketing scholarship. Career advancement from both routes is vital. Research limitations/implications – The topic of the theory-practice gap is complex. Many diverse opinions are cited and, due to space constraints, the coverage of many issues is necessarily brief. Practical implications – Scholars should find the thoughts contained in the paper of significant interest. Originality/value – The paper appears to be the first to bring together such a set of diverse opinions on the subject, and to try to draw some overall pragmatic conclusions, while still recognising the multiplicity of valid thought in the area.

Guest editors' introduction : emerging patterns of HRM in the new Indian economic environment

Special Issue: Special Issue: Emerging Patterns of HRM in the New Indian Economic Environment

Guest editors' introduction : diversity and inclusion in different work settings:emerging patterns, challenges, and research agenda

The purpose of this article is to analyze and highlight the developments in the current scholarship on managing diversity and inclusion (D&I) and provide insights for future research. While doing so, the article advances our understanding of “what matters” in this field, through the integration of different literature concerning the dimensions of D&I. It also provides a neo-institutionalist framework, which locates different themes in the D&I scholarship to assist in further development of the field. It argues for a consideration of inquiry in D&I from a neo-institutionalist perspective to encourage interdisciplinarity and align with broader social science research in human resource management (HRM) and development, highlighting the complexity involved in the theorizing of D&I management in organizations. Specifically, we argue for the need to engage with a variety of stakeholders concerned with the management of D&I, to enable cross-fertilization of theories and mixing methods for future research designs. The article also introduces the manuscripts included in this special issue and build on them as well to develop the future research agenda. © 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Guest editors’ introduction: is the HRM process important? Past, current, and future challenges

Ten years ago, Bowen and Ostroff (2004) criticized the one-sided focus on the content-based approach, where researchers take into account the inherent virtues (or vices) associated with the content of HR practices to explain performance. They explicitly highlight the role of the psychological processes through which employees attach meaning to HRM. In this first article of the special section entitled “Is the HRM Process Important?” we present an overview of past, current, and future challenges. For past challenges, we attempt to categorize the various research streams that originated from the seminal piece. To outline current challenges, we present the results of a content analysis of the original 15 articles put forward for the special section. In addition, we provide the overview of a caucus focused on this theme that was held at the Academy of Management annual meeting in Boston in 2012. In conclusion, we discuss future challenges relating to the HRM process approach and review the contributions that have been selected—against a competitive field—for this special issue