‘Challenge conventional wisdom’: What makes an effective research group?

This HEPI blog, continuing a series, was kindly authored by Adam Lindgreen, Professor of Marketing at the Copenhagen Business School & Extraordinary Professor at the Gordon Institute of Business Science at Pretoria University, C. Anthony Di Benedetto, Professor of Marketing at Temple University, Pennsylvania, Roderick J. Brodie, Emeritus Professor of Marketing at University of Auckland, and Peter Naude, Professor of Marketing at Manchester Metropolitan University.

Our previous two blogs discussed how universities can support academics in generating original ideas, and how department heads can facilitate a strong research culture. In this blog, we will discuss how management can help research groups to produce a sustainable research stream of original research. In this discussion, we will outline questions that management can have with the research groups, questions that should help the research groups to nurture sustainable research so that a university’s investment in research groups is successful.

We contend that the following five conditions offer a helpful vantage point for management in its ongoing discussions with research groups. The first condition is a research group’s capability to identify an important research problem, which is of academic and practical interest that creates future research opportunities. Thus, management could ask: which prevailing view of understanding a given phenomenon is the research group challenging? Which methodologies are adopted? Which data does the research draw on? What are the research objectives?

The second condition is a research group’s capability to initiate the research stream by bringing together talented scholars to realize research opportunities. Thus, management could ask: which curiosity drives the research group? What opportunities does the group see? Which members are part of the group? What are their abilities—and how do members complement each other?

The third condition is a research group’s capability to provide clarity in its academic arguments, which provide foundations for the emerging research stream. Thus, management could ask: does the research group offer conferences or summits that allow members to present their ongoing research to tighten their logic and clarity before ultimate submission to a journal? Is a doctoral colloquium part of such conferences or summits? Will the group facilitate mentorships?

The fourth condition is a research group’s capability to develop a network of talented researchers who continue to embrace research opportunities. Thus, management could ask: how does the research group create, maintain, and develop a network of researchers? How do the group’s members negotiate the way forward in terms of getting researchers in the network to agree on a common way forward to study the phenomenon under investigation? How will the group facilitate relationships and interactions between members of the network?

Finally, the fifth condition is a research group’s capability to produce research that consolidates knowledge in a particular area, which provides foundations for further innovative research. Thus, management could ask: does the research group intend to build an online platform that acts as a resource for all its members? Are edited volumes consolidating the members’ research part of the group’s dissemination efforts? What about monographs and special issues?

We also argue that five additional conditions build on the above five initial conditions and that impact the success of the research stream.

First, a research group needs to give greater emphasis to the process of theorizing rather than to the focus on theory. To reach a sufficient level of abstraction, a research group should avoid being firmly based on real-world data. Thus, management could ask: does the research group reflect a broad understanding of different academic fields and a keen understanding of the practicalities that organizations face? Are multi-method designs employed that allow the mutual understanding and operationalization of theories?

Second, a research group needs to put a process in place to sustain leadership and innovation. Thus, management could ask: how will leadership be distributed across the research network? Who will propagate new initiatives and keep the momentum in the research stream? Equally important is whether the research group will keep innovation narrow and deep. Will methodologies remain the same, or will more methodological and analytical variance be introduced?

Third, a research group must have the persistence to get research accepted in high-quality journals. Thus, management could ask: what will the research group do when its research does not fit norms and practices that reviewers are familiar with? How will the group convince journal editors to recognize and support its innovative research that challenges conventional thinking? Is it better to publish in already established journals or in new independent journals? How does the group intend to nurture and grow a new independent journal so that it influences the broader community?

Fourth, a research group needs its research to become visible and understood by other researchers. Thus, management could ask: where will the research group publish its research findings and policy implications? How will the grop ensure that its research achieves recognition offline? How will the group work with social media?

Finally, members of a research group should have the tenacity and resilience to challenge conventional wisdom and the conviction to stick the the research stream. Thus, management could ask: what will the research group do when its unconventional research is met with resistance? How will the group’s members support each other and the group itself?