Introduction
Maintaining Effective Relationships
Facilitating cooperation between scholars and practitioners is a crucial step in furthering the development of a specific discipline. As a result, noticeable improvements can be achieved. In their article, Buick, Blackman, O’Flynn, O’Donnell, and West (2015) consider the means of enhancing communication between a practitioner and a scholar. By introducing new ideas such as coproduction and addressing the problems such as the research-practice gap, Buick et al. (2015) contribute to the solution of the problem greatly.
Strengths
What Makes the Article Stand out
The authors scrutinize the concept of “co production” (Buick et al., 3015, p. 35), therefore, tackling the predicament in a direct and unambiguous manner. The phenomenon of co production partnership can be interpreted as the idea of working together to determine the research problem and search for its solutions. Buick et al. (2015), therefore, should be given credit for the uninhibited way in which they inspect the dilemma. The direct and well-structured method of analysis helps identify the solutions much faster and more efficiently.
Furthermore, Buick et al. (2015) do not shy away from some of the controversial aspects of the obstacle, e.g., the tensions between scholars and practitioners. Instead, they suggest the means of managing the conflicts including the idea to “contextualize research problems” (Buick et al., 2015, p. 37). As a result, new pathways of handling the issue are located.
Weaknesses
What Needs Further Improvements
However, some of the aspects of the paper could use improvements. For example, the challenges of co production partnerships seem to be described very briefly. A deeper insight into the problem would have been a welcome addition to the paper.
Adding to the Knowledge Base
The Contribution
Nevertheless, the researchers have contributed to the management of the issue extensively. For example, a detailed description of the coproduction partnership as a concept served as the foil for designing an entirely new approach toward managing the practitioner-scholar relationships. Moreover, the emphasis on long-term relationships between practitioners and scholars that the project built by Buick et al. (2015) serves as the foundation for creating the knowledge base that will, later on, help improve the quality of services extensively.
Furthermore, the concept of self-awareness that Buick et al. (2015) suggest as the tool for reducing the threat of a conflict deserves a mention. The discovery and the further promotion of self-awareness in the relationships between a practitioner and a researcher add an important detail to the understanding of the subject matter. As a result, the process of monitoring the communication process and controlling it becomes easier.
Framing the Problem
A New Perspective
Buick et al. (2015) owe most of their successful solutions to the new perspective from which they viewed the problem. The use of the “lived experiences” (Buick et al., 2015, p. 39) that were used to analyze the issue and resolve the dilemma was the groundbreaking technique that made the research successful. Focusing on the actual problems in the relationships of scholars and researchers, the authors of the study made it possible to manage the problem.
Conclusion
Practitioner-Scholar Relationships
The discord between research and practitioners is an impediment to the successful development of a discipline. Therefore, a set of tools for addressing the problem needs to be designed. Buick et al. (2015) suggest the use of co production partnership as the means of helping the opponents reconcile. While having minor problems, the study can be deemed as an important contribution to the management of the issue.
Reference
Buick, F., Blackman, D., O’Flynn, J., O’Donnell, M., & West, D. (2015). Effective practitioner–scholar relationships: Lessons from a co production partnership. Public Administration Review, 76(1), 35-47. Web.