Who Do We Write for? Strategies for Network Formation of a Research Program
Miguel Pina e Cunha & Stewart Clegg
What the paper says
No scholar is an Island: we are all networks and write for our networks. These networks, sometimes call research programs are scholarly communities kept together by a common interest. The work of these communities constitutes a polyphony, which constitutes the conversation we are joining. These communities are composed by different types of members with diverse types of interests. Some members constitute the hard core of the theory, the big names. This inner circle is complemented by the participants in the paradigm, people whose research conceptually and empirically tests and advances the theory, through confirmation and disconfirmation. Other participants are critics, who challenge the ideas. Without critics, the program will lose vitality, regardless of its “goodness”. Another, more external circle, is composed by those who conduct applied research, translating the theory to wider, managerial audiences. This circle exists only if the theory gained sufficient attention to “deserve” to be translated. Finally, some theories get the attention of some diffusers who popularize it to the general public. A vital ecosystem is composed by all these providers that target different audiences but that, as a collective, play important roles in the market for ideas.
Evidence weight
Balanced mode · F 0.40 / M 0.15 / V 0.05 / R 0.40
| F · citation impact | 0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20 |
| M · momentum | 0.50 × 0.15 = 0.07 |
| V · venue signal | 0.50 × 0.05 = 0.03 |
| R · text relevance † | 0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20 |
† Text relevance is estimated at 0.50 on the detail page — for your query’s actual relevance score, open this paper from a search result.