LAUSR

Abstract A practitioner's perspective on the Academic-Practitioner Gap is offered, resulting in several suggestions for both the Academic and the Practitioner. There is a continuum from “pure science” to “pure application” that may well have different optimal points and ranges for different issues. A large number of research studies are cited to define the scope and depth of the Gap; then the academic contribution to three important HR areas are reviewed: Performance Management; Learning and Development; and Talent Management. It is concluded that the Academic-Practitioner Gap is not only inevitable but in some ways highly productive by creating a sort of tension and push-pull that drives needed discourse. Therefore, the real issue here, and standard for answering the “So What” application question, is about the optimal size and nature of the gap. Science can inform practice; and practice needs to get better at laying out where they need stronger scientific underpinnings for the design of HR practices. Through actually communicating, the different perspectives of the academic and the practitioner may well motivate innovation and creativity; fostering both deeper insights and better applications. This will require re-assessing the roles and reward systems for the academic and the practitioner, so that there is greater motivation to sit at the table together. It is further concluded that we need to keep getting better at this—and especially in those areas where the practice of HR is evolving and the profession of HR hangs in the balance.