This Article Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Worren, N. A. Articles by Elliott, R. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

When theories become tools: Toward a framework for pragmatic validity

Kvaerner

Karl Moore

McGill University

Richard Elliott

University of Exeter

In this article we discuss the characteristics of knowledge that lead to practical utility. We first review previous efforts at identifying the characteristics of useful knowledge. These contributions are grouped into three perspectives according to which representational mode they imply: propositional, narrative, or visual. We develop a framework for pragmatic validity that encompasses knowledge represented in all three modes. However, we also note an over-reliance on the propositional mode in academia, which contrasts with a preference for narrative and visual knowledge among practitioners. Explicit and propositional knowledge are key criteria for achieving scientific validity, but more ambiguous knowledge serves important functions in organizational life and may thus possess pragmatic validity. We highlight the role of conceptual models expressed in a visual format, a representational mode that has received little attention in the literature. We end with suggestions for further research that may extend the notion of pragmatic validity and lead to a more refined framework for the development of useful knowledge.

Key Words: pragmatic validity • prescriptive theory • representational modes • tools

Human Relations, Vol. 55, No. 10, 1227-1250 (2002)
DOI: 10.1177/0018726702055010082


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				A. P. Spee and P. Jarzabkowski Strategy tools as boundary objects Strategic Organization, May 1, 2009; 7(2): 223 - 232. [PDF]

				A. Westhues, J. Ochocka, N. Jacobson, L. Simich, S. Maiter, R. Janzen, and A. Fleras Developing Theory From Complexity: Reflections on a Collaborative Mixed Method Participatory Action Research Study Qual Health Res, May 1, 2008; 18(5): 701 - 717. [Abstract] [PDF]

				J. Trullen and J. M. Bartunek What a Design Approach Offers to Organization Development Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, March 1, 2007; 43(1): 23 - 40. [Abstract] [PDF]

				D. Andriessen Designing and Testing an OD Intervention: Reporting Intellectual Capital to Develop Organizations Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, March 1, 2007; 43(1): 89 - 107. [Abstract] [PDF]

				C. D. Jacobs and L. Th. Heracleous Constructing Shared Understanding: The Role of Embodied Metaphors in Organization Development Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, June 1, 2006; 42(2): 207 - 226. [Abstract] [PDF]

				K. Morrell and J. Hartley A model of political leadership Human Relations, April 1, 2006; 59(4): 483 - 504. [Abstract] [PDF]

				A. G. L. Romme and G. Endenburg Construction Principles and Design Rules in the Case of Circular Design Organization Science, March 1, 2006; 17(2): 287 - 297. [Abstract] [PDF]

				M. Rose Good Deal, Bad Deal? Job Satisfaction in Occupations Work Employment Society, September 1, 2003; 17(3): 503 - 530. [Abstract] [PDF]