The four schools of thought in research and development management and the relationship of the literature to practitioners' needs

Show simple item record

dc.contributor.author Falkingham, Leslie T.
dc.contributor.author Reeves, Richard
dc.date.accessioned 2008-07-30T14:01:10Z
dc.date.available 2008-07-30T14:01:10Z
dc.date.issued 1997
dc.identifier.isbn 1 85905 102 2
dc.identifier.uri http://hdl.handle.net/1826/2821
dc.description.abstract Abstract We have found that publications in the literature on R&D management can be classified according to four different forms of reasoning about the R&D process, which we call schools of thought. We have also found that managers of research subscribe to the same four forms of reasoning. The fact that managers unconsciously think in one of four different ways about R&D management explains some of the problems that occur in practice. A preponderance of publications favour one school of thought, whereas a preponderance of practical managers favour a different one. This raises a doubt about the degree to which the published papers meet practitioners' perceived needs. en_UK
dc.language.iso en en_UK
dc.publisher Cranfield School of Management en_UK
dc.relation.ispartofseries School of Management Working Papers;14/97 en_UK
dc.relation.ispartofseries SWP; 14/97 en_UK
dc.title The four schools of thought in research and development management and the relationship of the literature to practitioners' needs en_UK
dc.type Working Paper en_UK


Files in this item

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

Search CERES


Browse

My Account

Statistics