Abstract
This interview-based article addresses the question of how management educators can increase their effectiveness in communicating with their students. A challenge for management educators who are looking to bring their teaching and impact to the next level is that there is a voluminous literature regarding effective communication best practices. The current article focuses on what management educators should prioritize to better engage their students, communicate with their students, and disseminate their work beyond academia. To help management educators determine which of the many effective communication practices should be focused on, the current article presents an interview with someone who is among the most influential scientist–practitioners in the field of management, Gary Latham. We advocate for management educators to set a specific, challenging goal for improving their teaching performance, and to also implement one or more of the following recommendations to communicate memorably when teaching management education students: (1) using everyday, layperson rather than scientific language; (2) emphasizing the value of behavioral science theory for practice; (3) explaining the danger of ignoring conditional variables; and (4) capturing and keeping students’ attention by presenting surprising findings.
Communicating effectively not only through academic publications and conference presentations, but also in a way that incites people to put the research from the organizational sciences into practice will help make the study of management a worthwhile education. This interview-based article provides answers to the following question: how can management educators effectively communicate with students as well as managers in ways that will inspire them to take action based on behavioral science findings? A challenge for management educators who are looking to bring their teaching and impact to the next level is the large volume of literature regarding effective communication best practices. Thus, the main goal of the current article is to provide a focus on what management educators can do to better engage their students, communicate memorably with their students, and disseminate their work beyond academia. To be clear, we are not saying that management educators must be elite in all areas, rather we are trying to say that if we can improve in any of these areas, then all of us might be able to do a little more to move the practice of management education forward in society.
Graduate and post-graduate programs continue to focus on providing intensive training regarding the acquisition of disciplinary knowledge and developing the research skills of their doctoral students (Sharmini & Spronken-Smith, 2020). However, beyond conducting publishable research, professorial appointments have many teaching-related responsibilities, yet there tends to be an overall lack of teaching preparation provided in graduate business programs (Marx et al., 2016). Other scholars have noted that graduate programs are not properly designed to develop the teaching competencies of students (Pittaway et al., 2023). Thus, there are inconsistencies across how doctoral programs approach teaching graduate students how to teach management principles (Bonner et al., 2020). The Rotman School of Management, University of Toronto, is currently offering a program for faculty that is designed to help newly hired faculty to address the common issue of a lack of teaching preparation provided in graduate business programs.
An additional, related concern is the consistent finding in the organizational sciences that there is a large gap (e.g., Neumann et al., 2021; Rynes et al., 2002) that continues to grow (e.g., Fisher et al., 2021; Rynes, 2012) between the research findings that are taught in management education courses and the practices that are actually being used in organizations. This is a concern for our undergraduate and graduate students who will soon become the future leaders and managers of organizations as they will not have mastered, let alone internalized, research- and evidence-based practices that have been shown to make a tangible impact on important employee and organizational outcomes (Huselid, 1995; Wright & Ulrich, 2017).
The research–practice gap has been discussed with regard to the concept of managerialism as a class ideology (e.g., Clegg, 2014). Klikauer (2013) defines managerialism as the combination of management knowledge and beliefs used by managers to control decision-making in organizations and in society. It is the training that managers receive in business schools that gives rise to their belief that they possess a unique set of knowledge and techniques that allow them to have “privilege” within and outside the organization (R. R. Locke & Spender, 2011). Parker (2002) has argued that managerialism often fosters cruelty and inequality. Yet, business schools for the most part have not responded to these issues (Klikauer, 2013). Thus, there is an imperative need to educate students on the divide that exists between many of the topics that are taught in business schools (e.g., fairness, equity, ethics) and the inappropriate practices that are currently used in some organizations. Arguably better communication, as management educators, can narrow the research–practice gap and remove many of the concerns due to managerialism.
Because of the lack of teaching preparation provided in graduate business programs (Marx et al., 2016), there remains an opportunity to provide management educators direction on ways they can communicate effectively with students. Communicating in memorable, meaningful ways with those who will be the future leaders in the public and private sectors should help them understand how to apply the concepts from the organizational science literature, thus minimizing, if not closing, the research–practice gap (Fisher et al., 2021; Neumann et al., 2021; Rynes, 2012; Rynes et al., 2002). However, this is not an easy solution as there is a voluminous literature pertaining to best practices of communication. Thus, this task can be daunting. Nevertheless, mastering best practices can have a significant impact on communicating effectively within and beyond academia, a worthwhile endeavor.
Despite the repeated calls to address the inadequate development of graduate student teaching competency (e.g., Marx et al., 2016), little has changed. Promising initiatives since this call include implementing a doctoral seminar on teaching (Bonner et al., 2020), and providing scaffolding to help gradually develop the teaching competencies of graduate students (Pittaway et al., 2023). Nevertheless, it appears that these are not common practices across institutions.
In addition to training gaps during their graduate education, early career academics enter a field with other challenges such as the need for having more academics that are engaged with stakeholders beyond their institution. Despite the ongoing call for more publicly engaged academics (Hoffman, 2021), and warnings that our discipline is in crisis (Tourish, 2020), academic insularity and the gap between research and practice continue to persist. Potential solutions across various aspects of work (e.g., work rewards, organizational culture, classroom engagement, job design) include rethinking existing reward structures for academics (Hoffman, 2021), and building a collaborative culture between faculty and administrators (Ritter, 2019). Further, Hoffman (2021) provided recommendations that include telling stories, knowing your audience, and embracing social media. Fink (2013) has advocated a learning-centered approach, which includes utilizing interactive coursework. Other scholars have recommended rewarding publications that have practical impact (e.g., Shapiro et al., 2007). Similarly, Balkin and Mello (2012) advocated for conducting research that is relevant to practitioners.
In summary, there is a lack of effective doctoral-level training regarding how to effectively engage students in the classroom and how teaching practices can be used to minimize the research–practice gap. Where would professors start if they were interested in increasing their communication skills with students and managers? Reading all of the relevant literature on this topic would be daunting for any graduate-level student or current professor to sort through the sundry recommendations. As an attempt to move the discussion of this issue forward, we aim to provide insights that will help management educators prioritize what they should focus on if they want to increase their ability to communicate effectively with management and management students.
Thus, the goal of this article is to open a discussion regarding which of the many effective practices can have the most impact on the ability of management educators to effectively communicate with their students, as well as managers, to implement research relevant practices. To that end, conducting an interview with someone who has excelled throughout an entire career with both academic scholarship as well as making a difference in the lives of students and managers should be helpful. The interviewee is Dr. Gary Latham (https://discover.research.utoronto.ca/11453-gary-latham), who exceeds the criterion of being an impactful management scholar as he is among the most influential figures in the field of management. Dr. Latham is a Professor at the Joseph L. Rotman School of Management at the University of Toronto in Toronto, Ontario, Canada. He is a pioneer of goal setting theory and has more than 90,000 citations and an h-index of 114. Dr. Latham is a former President of the Canadian Psychological Association, the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology (SIOP), and Work and Organizational Psychology, a division of the International Association of Applied Psychology. He is the first recipient (one of two) of both the Distinguished Contributions to Science and to Practice awards from SIOP. The following interview with Dr. Latham provides a unique opportunity to discuss which communication practices management educators should focus on in order to effectively communicate with management education students and managers in the private and public sectors, in addition to the academic community.
Interview
SR: How have you been able to communicate so effectively with your students throughout your career?
I view myself as bilingual. By that I mean I speak a scientific language when I’m speaking at scholarly societies or writing for scientific journals. I communicate using everyday, layperson language when I’m talking to managers and MBA students. I use scientific language when I’m talking in PhD seminars, but never do I do so when I’m in an MBA classroom.
SR: How do you describe and define what comprises “science,” and does the domain of research on behavioral science qualify as a science?
The operational definition of the science of HRM, OB, and industrial-organizational psychology involves the manipulation of an independent variable to determine the effect on a dependent variable while holding other variables constant. The latter is done by random assignment of participants to the experimental group, who receives the independent variable (e.g., goal setting) or to the control group (the participants are treated the same as those in the experimental group, hence all variables are held constant and controlled in the two conditions with the exception of the independent variable). When a scientific experiment is not possible, behavioral scientists look at correlations. They examine the relationship between two or more variables (e.g., a predictor[s] and a criterion or criteria). The drawback of correlational studies is that causality cannot be inferred.
SR: What advice do you have for management educators who would like to better engage their students while teaching them theoretical concepts in the organizational science literature?
Well, I explain “right off the bat” the value of theory in the behavioral sciences to our day-to-day lives. Consider the hard sciences, such as physics. They have little relevance for what people choose to do in their day-to-day lives. But that’s not true of the behavioral sciences. In the behavioral sciences, particularly organizational psychology and organizational behavior, theories enable us to predict, explain, and influence a person’s or a team’s behavior. This is a valuable technique to have in your toolkit that you don’t obtain anywhere else. Once I explain a theory using everyday language, I turn the question over to the class. I’ll ask, “How can you use this or that theory?” So, for example I’ll say, “We all fall off the horse or fall off the bicycle from time to time. Everyone experiences setbacks in their lives. What differentiates winners from losers is resiliency.” And then I talk about social cognitive theory and self-efficacy. I conclude by asking them, “How are you going to use this theory and the research that supports it in your day-to-day lives?” So, I get them interested in the day-to-day practice of behavioral science concepts from their perspective.
SR: How do you define the term “theory,” and what are your thoughts on the issue of “managerialism” as a class ideology?
A theory in the behavioral sciences provides a framework for predicting, explaining, and influencing behavior. A theory specifies (a) the causal relationship between the independent (e.g., goal setting) and dependent (e.g., job performance) variable, (b) the conditions as to when the causal effect takes place (i.e., boundary conditions, moderators, and conditional variables are synonyms), and (c) the explanations (i.e., mediators) as to why the causal effect occurs.
As for managerialism, virtually any scientific finding in the behavioral sciences, as well as medical, is subject to misuse. The misuse is a function of the values of the user. As for physics, was the development of the atom bomb by scientists and the use of the atom bomb during World War II by the U.S. Government for the good or the harm of society?
SR: Using your work on goal setting theory as a specific example, how do you explain how to use goal setting to your students especially considering the nuances of this theory, such as the associated moderators (e.g., an individual’s ability, resources, commitment, performance feedback) and types of goals (e.g., performance, learning, behavioral, primed)?
By the time undergraduate students in psychology departments and business schools are in their third year, they understand the causal relationship between goal setting and performance; they understand that specific, challenging goals lead to higher performance than a generalized goal such as urging someone to do their best, or simply meandering with no goals. But they don’t know much, if anything, about the important moderator variables specified by the theory. So, I explain them in everyday language. A better term than moderator for student understanding is a conditional variable. For example, higher performance goals should be set rather than easier goals on condition that we have taken into account the person’s ability and especially situational resources with few if any constraints.
I explain the danger of ignoring the conditional variables specified by the theory. For example, one big danger is to set a performance goal when you should set a learning goal. When a performance goal is set without taking into account an individual’s or a team’s ability, the person’s anxiety is likely to go up. Rather than coming up with a plan in a systematic way as to how to attain a performance goal, people behave haphazardly, and performance is worse for a team as a result of setting a performance goal than if they had no goal at all. If you lack the ability and resources to attain a performance goal, you need to set a learning goal where the focus is on the process rather than the outcome: “Let’s develop a plan for how we’re going to master the task as opposed to focusing on attaining a specific outcome.” A good example I can give you is golf. Anybody who has never played golf who sets a performance goal of obtaining a score of 99 or below is foolish. Golf can be a very frustrating game so what you want to do is to set a learning goal: “I’m going to set a goal for learning five ways that I can use my putter to get the ball in the hole.” The focus of a learning goal is on discovering or developing a process or procedure for task mastery as opposed to focusing on an end result.
SR: What are some of the common misinterpretations of goal setting theory that students make and how do you avoid these misinterpretations?
One way to avoid misinterpretations, I’m repeating myself, is to know the conditions under which goals have a beneficial versus a detrimental effect on an individual’s behavior. Another is to realize that a performance goal is only one type of goal. There are also learning goals and there are behavioral goals. For a behavioral goal, you focus on the behaviors that are critical to performing the task at hand. In some cases, performance goals don’t exist. Take for example, teamwork. You want to define the behaviors that constitute team playing in your study group in the MBA program or in your department at work, and then you set goals for engaging in those behaviors. Another example is ethical behavior. Once you’ve defined what constitutes ethical behavior in your study group or your workplace, you then set goals for engaging in those behaviors. So, goal setting theory isn’t just about performance goals, it is also about learning goals, behavioral goals, and primed goals. Overall, there are four different types of goals (performance, learning, behavioral, primed), hence students need to know when to use which one under what circumstance.
SR: Regarding the recent findings of your goal setting research related to priming goals in the subconscious, how do you communicate with your students about surprising findings?
We’re still in the early stages of research on priming goals in the subconscious. The importance for managers and MBA students is knowing that conscious and subconscious goals have an additive effect on performance; you don’t choose one over the other, you want to choose both. What I do in the MBA classroom is show how the power of words, especially achievement-related words, have a positive effect on an individual’s performance even though the person is unaware of the influence that those words have on her or his behavior. Similarly, photographs showing people working in a team has positive impact on team playing behavior even though people are not consciously aware that the photograph is influencing them. You can even prime problem solving. I show a picture of Rodin’s The Thinker and discuss how observing that photograph increases your ability to come up with solutions to problems that were originally difficult to solve (Chen et al., 2021; Chen & Latham, 2014; Latham et al., 2023). That really gets the students’ attention.
SR: What role do textbooks play in the context of your bilingual language skills and effective communication practices?
The great textbooks for undergraduate students are those that are written in a meaningful, memorable way. They capture and retain the interest of the reader. Abstruse scientific terms are eliminated in favor of language that laypeople can easily understand.
SR: Moving in a different direction, in what ways do you consider the practical impact of your work when you are planning and conducting research? As you are working on a research project, are you considering the practical implications of that work?
In my field there is what is known as the scientist–practitioner model. I’m as much interested in practice as I am in science. I use science to help me in solving issues that are problematic in society, particularly in the public and private sectors. So, I use my scientific knowledge when addressing a subject, and the subject matter that I pick is always one that has relevance to the real world as opposed to solely advancing some theoretical concept.
SR: What advice do you have for management educators who would like to make an impact on the practice of management beyond their academic publications and conference presentations?
If it’s possible, teach in an executive MBA (EMBA) program or get involved in your business school’s executive, non-degree programs. The benefit of getting involved with those types of programs is that you start hearing concerns from the perspective of managers. Listening to managers’ concerns can be a wonderful source of issues that you want to investigate from the standpoint of science in order to come up with lasting solutions of relevance to the real world. If your institution doesn’t have an EMBA or executive program, join such organizations as Rotary (https://www.rotary.org/en; Rotary, n.d.), and again, just listen to the concerns of the speakers and the people sitting at your table who are at a loss as to, for example, how to reduce voluntary turnover, or ways to bring down silos. Not only do you hear their concerns, but you’re likely to get an invitation to work with them in their organization to solve the problems that are confronting them. From my standpoint, working with managers generates more valuable research for the public than confining research to the use of students from a psychology 100 class.
SR: You are obviously a highly impactful scholar, engaged service contributor, and effective management educator; how do you have time to also focus on communicating effectively with your students and others who can use your research in practice?
It is always a matter of prioritization. From my perspective, from my value system, people in my field have an ethical obligation to disseminate their findings to the public. Let me give you an example from the medical profession. They have decreased or totally eradicated mumps, measles, and polio. They’ve done wonders with reducing suffering with HIV. Consequently, they have published their results in tier one, top notch medical journals. What if it stopped there and the information was never disseminated to the public? Years later a newspaper reporter goes through these journals and discovers, oh my gosh, a vaccine for polio was discovered way back in the mid-1950’s and the public has yet to know about it. Yet here it is in 2024 and polio is still ravaging people. My guess is that there would be a public outcry. It’s just as important in our field to publish our findings in scientific journals to advance the field of management. But, it is equally important for us to get that information to the public so that it’s being used; our findings in organizational science are almost always beneficial to society. I think it’s highly unethical for us to simply publish our findings in a scholarly journal and stop there. That in my opinion is unacceptable.
SR: What can be done in our institutions to help close the research–practice gap and facilitate effective communication between academics and the people who can use our research in practice?
The problem arguably rests in large part with the Deans. I fortunately have had, without exception, wonderful Deans who believe that young assistant professors, who are newly minted PhDs, should prove that they’re effective researchers. They must prove that their research is of sufficient quality to be published in top scientific journals, and then, when they become associate professors, they and the full professors, in addition to publishing in scientific journals, should be rewarded for publishing in widely read practitioner journals. They should be rewarded for getting involved in conferences and societies that impact society, not only fellow scholars, but the public as a whole. Take for example the Society for Human Resource Management (SHRM; https://www.shrm.org/; Society for Human Resource Management, n.d.). They’re involved in 150 countries, and they have more than 360,000 members. If you speak at their conference or if you publish in one of their outlets, you have the opportunity to influence thousands of people who may put into practice your research findings. SHRM is just one example. There are others, such as the American Society for Training and Development where you can communicate your research findings to the real world. Deans need to acknowledge and reward the importance of doing so, not restricting rewarding only those who gave a talk at a scholarly society. My motto, taken from Kurt Lewin years ago, is no research without action, no action without research (as cited in Marrow, 1969).
Commentary and Practical Implications for Management Educators and Institutions
The purpose of this interview was to help management educators gain insights on what they can do to effectively communicate with students as well as managers who can put research findings into practice. The insights gleaned from this interview present a unique opportunity to discover which of the many effective communication best practices have been able to “make a difference” for someone who is not only a scholarly leader in the field of management, but is also known to be a strong communicator with students and managers. The interview discussion led to not only Dr. Latham’s top practical recommendations for communicating effectively while teaching management education students, but also his top practical recommendations for how management educators can make an impact on the practice of management as well as what institutions can do to help close the ongoing research–practice gap.
Recommendations for Communicating Effectively While Teaching Management Education Students
Next, we present Dr. Latham’s main recommendations for what actions to take in order to communicate memorably when teaching management education students.
(1) Use everyday, layperson rather than scientific language: Although research articles, and to some extent undergraduate textbooks, contain technical, scientific language, one piece of advice that emerged from the above interview is to ensure that readily understandable language is used when communicating to students, such as framing moderated relationships as “on condition that. . .” An additional practical implication associated with this recommendation is to write undergraduate textbooks using meaningful, memorable language that captures and retains the interest of the reader. The lack of innovation in the approach to textbook content is an enduring issue (Cameron et al., 2003). Moreover, theories presented in management textbooks are often explained ineffectively (Snyder, 2014). Thus, we educators should strive to select a textbook that is written in more understandable language and, when this is not possible, find a supplementary source (perhaps an open educational resource [OER]) that is written in everyday, layperson language. A great example of a non-text-based resource for the subject of business ethics is Ethics Unwrapped (https://ethicsunwrapped.utexas.edu/; Ethics Unwrapped, n.d.) out of the McCombs School of Business at The University of Texas at Austin.
(2) Emphasize the value of behavioral science theory for practice: Communicate to students the point that understanding the theories in the organizational sciences will allow them to better predict, explain, and influence the behavior of others. Make it clear that when they are managers, they will inevitably be needing this knowledge if they are to influence the performance of their employees positively. Asking students to reflect on how they are going to use the subject matter being discussed in class in their day-to-day lives gets them interested in and gets them to see the relevance of the theoretical concepts being taught. Dr. Latham defined a theory as something that provides a framework for predicting, explaining, and influencing behavior.
The recommendation to communicate carefully and intentionally is consistent with best practices from the pedagogical literature (e.g., Bain, 2004; Fink, 2013). This advice can also be applied to management educators themselves as they can ask themselves how they can apply a theory, such as goal setting theory, to their teaching practice. To elaborate, management educators can experiment with setting a specific goal for improving their teaching performance rather than a generalized goal, or worse, not having a goal. It is also worth noting that beyond the recommendations gleaned from this interview, there are other additional options for increasing student engagement: challenging students to reconsider their underlying assumptions, treating student opinions with respect (Bain, 2004), and using active or experiential learning (Fink, 2013).
(3) Explain the danger of ignoring conditional variables: The next piece of advice was to ensure that students comprehend the importance of conditional variables in order to help them avoid misinterpretations, or thinking that one theory or practice will be applicable in all settings.
A reason given by Ryan and Tippins (2004) for the ongoing research–practice gap is that practitioners believe that the research literature does not take into account the specific contextual factors that they experience in their respective organization. Thus, underscoring the importance of explaining relevant conditional variables to students. Failing to consider the impact of conditional variables will limit their ability to attain desired outcomes. For example, if students set performance as opposed to learning or behavioral goals (as discouraged by goal setting theory; e.g., E. A. Locke & Latham, 1990) when they are just starting out in their career, when they are still learning their role, this error will likely have a detrimental impact on their performance and career progression.
Likewise, management educators, using goal setting theory, should take into consideration their ability and the resources provided by their institution when determining what type of goal to set for improving their teaching performance. For example, a new management educator who is not receiving institutional support for their teaching responsibilities should set a learning (e.g., discover, develop a new process for encouraging student participation) or behavioral (e.g., begin each lecture with a surprising-research finding) as opposed to a performance goal (e.g., increase my teaching evaluation rating by one scale point).
(4) Capture and keep students’ attention by presenting surprising findings: Dr. Latham recommends presenting compelling, memorable, and surprising examples to encourage students to attend to and be excited about the course subject matter.
Recommendations for Making a Greater Impact on the Practice of Management
Next, we present Dr. Latham’s additional recommendations that pertained to what actions management educators can take in order to make a greater impact on the broader practice of management.
(1) Enhance the practical impact of research via the scientist–practitioner model: The scientist–practitioner model specifies that academics and practitioners must develop a reciprocal relationship. Both parties must investigate important issues, measure important outcome variables, and share knowledge effectively (Latham, 2001; Rupp & Beal, 2007). For academics, when conducting research, it is important to be interested in not only the scientific advancement that is being made, but also the practical implications of that research for managers (Balkin & Mello, 2012). Reflecting on the scientist–practitioner model, and thinking about ways to conduct research that has important practical implications, will help management educators put themselves in a position to make a greater impact on the practice of management.
(2) Get involved in executive MBA and executive programs or other relevant organizations (e.g., Rotary): This was a valuable suggestion for helping management educators ensure that the research they are conducting will have an impact on the people who can use that research in practice, such as executive MBA students or executive program participants. Because not all institutions have these students, it was also helpful to learn about the suggestion for joining organizations such as Rotary (you can search for a Rotary club using this link: https://my.rotary.org/en/club-search) in order to understand the issues that are being experienced by business professionals that future research investigations might resolve. Other recommendations besides Rotary could include searching for a local Chamber of Commerce, United Nations Global Compact, or other organization that is available for networking and sharing interests with practitioners. Focusing future research efforts on these issues helps to ensure that the research being conducted will have relevance to the community of practitioners. This recommendation is consistent with the scholarship of engagement, which Boyer (1996) referred to as the pursuit of the academy to be a better partner for addressing social, economic, and ethical issues. Beyond the recommendations from this interview, perhaps there will be merit in considering additional options such as focusing primarily on civic and social rather than market and economic implications (Peters, 2000), creating public information networks that provide resources to solve problems (Barker, 2004), and the acknowledgment of the importance of engaged scholarship contributions in faculty tenure and promotion decisions (Franz, 2009).
(3) Conduct research involving managers as opposed to undergraduate students: Another suggestion for helping to ensure the practical impact of our research is to use managerial and employee samples as opposed to undergraduate students. This recommendation seems especially apt for research to have practical implications for the public and private sectors. Although it can be helpful, as an initial step, to conduct our research with undergraduate students, it is important to verify the replicability of those results with employees. The idea of involving students in research on managers may also help to further advance the broader practice of management.
(4) Disseminate findings to the public: One of the most poignant parts of the interview was Dr. Latham’s emphasis on the responsibility of management educators to disseminate their findings to the public. Currently engrained in graduate training, and tenure and promotion decisions for many business schools is the importance of publishing research in top tier scholarly journal outlets (e.g., Judge et al., 2007). Equally important should be the importance of getting that information to the public. Failing to disseminate research findings to practitioners was a reason given by Ryan and Tippins (2004) for the research–practice gap. Management academics need to be trained regarding ways to disseminate their findings to the public. Hence, more needs to be done from an institutional standpoint to help make this happen.
Recommendations for What Institutions Can Do to Help Close the Research–Practice Gap
It was recommended that Deans of business schools reward associate and full professors for publishing in widely read practitioner outlets, and presenting their findings at highly attended practitioner conferences in order to help close the research–practice gap. Rethinking existing reward structures for academics, and building a culture that supports those who pursue scholarship with practical applications is a “must” (Hoffman, 2021; Ritter, 2019). Messages regarding research findings are not always easy to understand. Thus, it is important to supplement a low channel richness option (e.g., written magazine article) with a high channel richness option (e.g., conversations during a speaking opportunity; Lengel & Daft, 1988). This recommendation is consistent with the practice of repeating a message more than once, and through different channels, in order to ensure that the message is received (Neeley & Leonardi, 2011). Further, graphical visual aids enhance practitioner receptiveness to using research-based practices (Zhang et al., 2018).
Conclusion
The focus provided from the interview with Dr. Latham will hopefully help management educators develop and implement practices that will allow them to impact their students and managers to use research-based practices. The practices that have helped Dr. Latham to communicate so effectively throughout his career should allow other management educators to do likewise, and in doing so narrow the existing gap between research and practice. We advocate for management educators to set a specific, challenging goal for improving their teaching performance rather than having no goal or a vague, generalized goal. In closing, we encourage management educators to set a goal to try at least one of the above practices, and to consider how they too can embrace the following mantra that Dr. Latham borrowed from Kurt Lewin: “No research without action, no action without research.”
Footnotes
Declaration of Conflicting Interests
The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
Funding
The authors received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
