Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Intellectual ...

Lorne Booker et al.
Knowledge is useful to practitioners only if it creates capabilities and guides action. Therefore,
business research can be deemed to be relevant to practice if it influences decisions or guides
actions <strong>of</strong> industry pr<strong>of</strong>essionals.
1.2 Paths <strong>of</strong> relevance
There are two paths through which practitioners can be influenced by academic research - direct and
indirect knowledge transfer. Direct knowledge transfer takes place when practitioners use academic
research directly. For example, it occurs when industry pr<strong>of</strong>essionals read peer-reviewed journal
articles or attend academic conferences. Indirect knowledge transfer occurs when academic research
is translated through intermediaries into a form that is more readily interpreted and applied by industry
pr<strong>of</strong>essionals. Some examples <strong>of</strong> indirect knowledge transfer include workshops, classes, consultants
or think tanks. Indirect knowledge transfer occurs when practitioners learn about academic research
in any way except through direct utilization.
The proposition that business research is irrelevant is predicated on <strong>the</strong> assumption that research is
relevant only when direct knowledge transfer occurs. Research is deemed to be relevant if
practitioners access research directly. A recent study concluded that this mechanistic assumption is
inappropriate (self-citation). Academic research is also relevant to practice when indirect knowledge
transfer takes place. This study investigates <strong>the</strong> indirect route to knowledge transfer. It seeks to
understand how academic research becomes relevant to practice by investigating routes <strong>of</strong> indirect
knowledge transfer.
1.3 Knowledge markets and <strong>the</strong> relevance issue
The knowledge market model is a useful <strong>the</strong>oretical lens for studying <strong>the</strong> distribution <strong>of</strong> academic
discoveries. It is based on <strong>the</strong> recognition that when <strong>the</strong>re are providers <strong>of</strong> knowledge and consumers
<strong>of</strong> knowledge, a market must exist (Davenport and Prusak 1998, p. 25). Knowledge market <strong>the</strong>ory
views knowledge management as a market coordination problem (Fang and Su 2008). Knowledge
utilization is optimized by maximizing <strong>the</strong> efficiency <strong>of</strong> knowledge markets.
Markets must perform three functions: i) to match buyers and sellers; ii) to facilitate transactions; and
iii) to provide a legal and regulatory institutional infrastructure to facilitate and regulate transactions
(Bakos 1998). In order to perform those functions, markets must match buyers and sellers, furnish
information about supply and demand, and provide a mechanism for exchange and for <strong>the</strong> settlement
<strong>of</strong> accounts. When <strong>the</strong>se functions are performed well, markets are efficient but when <strong>the</strong>y are unable
to balance supply with demand, <strong>the</strong> markets fail. Examples <strong>of</strong> market failures include externalities,
public goods, merit and demerit goods, and non-competitive markets. When people state that a
market has failed <strong>the</strong>y make a normative judgment that an intervention is required to correct <strong>the</strong>
situation (Dahlman 1979).
Knowledge markets perform <strong>the</strong> same functions as regular markets. Knowledge markets facilitate <strong>the</strong>
promotion, distribution, communication and acquisition <strong>of</strong> knowledge (Davenport and Prusak 1998). In
efficient knowledge markets, <strong>the</strong> demand for knowledge should trigger people to specialize in <strong>the</strong> area
where expertise is needed. It should inspire <strong>the</strong>m to dedicate time and effort to solve high quality
problems. The knowledge market perspective can be applied to markets inside organizations (internal
knowledge markets) or markets between organizations (external knowledge markets).
Knowledge markets are also subject to market failures (Matson Patiath, and Shavers 2003). These
include ineffective codification mechanisms, poor incentives to codify/share knowledge, limited
external knowledge sources, unproductive delivery systems, lack <strong>of</strong> awareness <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> existence <strong>of</strong>
knowledge, insufficient number <strong>of</strong> brokers/intermediaries, and unprotected intellectual property.
Declarations <strong>of</strong> academic irrelevance can be interpreted as assertions that academic knowledge
markets have failed and that intervention is required.
1.4 Chartered Business Valuators
Chartered Business Valuators are pr<strong>of</strong>essionals who are members <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Canadian Institute <strong>of</strong>
Chartered Business Valuators (CICBV). They are experts at quantifying <strong>the</strong> worth <strong>of</strong> a business, part
<strong>of</strong> a business, <strong>the</strong> securities <strong>of</strong> a business, or <strong>the</strong> tangible or intangible assets <strong>of</strong> a business. The role
<strong>of</strong> CBVs is to increase <strong>the</strong> objectivity (and reduce <strong>the</strong> subjectivity) <strong>of</strong> business valuations. In order to
91