1. 1
Enhancing Marketing Practice -
Creating Interplay between
Theoretical & Practical
Knowledge through Reflective
Practice
An Autoethnographic Study within Marketing Consultancy Firms
Johan C. Engren
Jakob A. Schlyter
Stockholm Business School
Master’s Degree Thesis 30 HE credits
Subject: Marketing
Program: Consumer and Business Marketing, 120 HE credits
Spring semester 2015
Supervisor: Henrikki Tikkanen

2. 2
Acknowledgements
Our informants: For your engagement and participation.
Our tutors: For your support and guidance.
United Spaces: For your hospitality and for lending us office space
Professor Erik Thomas, University of Northern Carolina
Abstract
Tons of research is conducted each year on new marketing theories and perspectives, but
very little about how theory reaches practice. In the current fast paced society, marketing
practice is argued to be lagging behind in development due to a slow integration of theories in
practice. With this qualitative autoethnographic study, we propose, that the concept of
reflective practice could function as a facilitator for interplay between theoretical and practical
knowledge, aiming to enhance the quality of marketing practice. Additionally, novice
practitioners are proposed to function as a communication channel of theory to practice. We
found that the concepts of openness and critical breadth were essential for reflective practice,
as these two concepts widened the scope of reflection, and emphasized the value of theoretical
knowledge. However, it seemed that novices lacked the understanding for the purpose of
theoretical knowledge, as well as the skills needed to integrate theory in practice, in order for
them to function as a new communication stream.

3. 3
Note to reader
This thesis is an autoethnographic study where we, as authors, speak freely throughout the
text, integrating our personal experiences and perspectives on the subject. An
autoethnographic study is “a form, or method, of research that involves self-observation and
reflexive investigation in the context of ethnographic fieldwork and writing” (Maréchal 2010, p.
43). However, no conclusions are made solely on our own arguments unless they are anchored
in existing literature or empirical findings.
Figure 1 - The authors
Johan Engren
Age: 28
Education:
- Master of Science in Marketing, spring
2015, Stockholm University
- Bachelors of Science in Business
Administration, Buskerud and Vestfold
University College
Experience:
- Management Consultant, Senior and
Young
- Internship: Brand Management
Consultant, LynxEye
- Internship: Sales Intern, World Wide Sales
Internship, Cisco Systems, UK
- Media Consultant, Amedia Vestfold,
Norway
Jakob Schlyter
Age: 24
Education:
- Master of Science in Marketing, spring
2015, Stockholm University
- Bachelors of Science in Business
Administration, Stockholm University
Experience:
- Management Consultant, Senior and
Young
- Teacher, Älta Skola

4. 4
Table of Contents
Acknowledgements--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------2
Abstract -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------2
Note to reader ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------3
Table of Contents-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------4
1.0 Introduction -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------6
1.1 What we aimed for---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------6
1.2 The question we answered----------------------------------------------------------------------------7
1.3 How we structured the thesis -------------------------------------------------------------------------7
2.0 Literature Review------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------8
2.1 The gap in marketing------------------------------------------------------------------------------------8
2.2 The gap is not a problem-------------------------------------------------------------------------------9
2.3 Theoretical and practical knowledge -------------------------------------------------------------- 10
2.4 Theoretical Framework ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 11
2.4.1 Reflective practice ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 11
2.4.2 Novice practitioners------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 16
2.4.3 Theoretical conclusion -------------------------------------------------------------------------- 17
3.0 Research Design----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 18
3.1 Research questions ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 20
3.2 Scientific perspective---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 21
3.3 Method --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 21
3.4 Informants ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 22
3.5 Interviewing process ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 25
3.6 Method of analysis------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 25
3.7 Critical consideration of sources ------------------------------------------------------------------- 26
3.8 Research ethical reflection -------------------------------------------------------------------------- 26
4.0 Empirical presentation, Analysis and Findings------------------------------------------------ 27
4.1 The Gap-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 27
4.1.1 Theoretical knowledge -------------------------------------------------------------------------- 28
4.1.2 Communication ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 30
4.1.3 Interplay -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 31

5. 5
4.2 Reflective Practice------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 32
4.2.1 Understanding critical depth vs. critical breadth ------------------------------------------ 32
4.2.2 Openness, the foundation for reflective practice------------------------------------------ 33
4.2.3 Balance between short-term and long-term thinking------------------------------------- 34
4.3 The novice practitioner ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 35
4.3.1 The purpose of hiring a novice practitioner ------------------------------------------------ 37
5.0 Discussion and Critical Reflection----------------------------------------------------------------- 37
5.1 Integrating reflective practice in marketing------------------------------------------------------- 38
5.1.1 How can reflective practice be adopted? --------------------------------------------------- 38
5.1.2 What conditions within the practice affect interplay? ------------------------------------ 38
5.2 Reflective novices ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 39
5.2.1 How can novice practitioners utilize reflective practice? -------------------------------- 40
5.3 Open-minded managers ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- 40
5.3.1 How can managers utilize novice practitioners?------------------------------------------ 41
6.0 Conclusion ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 41
6.1 To managers-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 42
6.1.1 The purpose of hiring a novice practitioner ------------------------------------------------ 42
6.1.2 Balancing optimization with development -------------------------------------------------- 42
6.2 To novice practitioners-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 43
6.2.1 Understanding critical depth vs. critical breadth ------------------------------------------ 43
6.2.2 Understanding the purpose of theoretical knowledge ----------------------------------- 43
6.3 To academia -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 43
6.3.1 Academia must acknowledge their responsibility----------------------------------------- 43
6.4 Further research --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 44
7.0 Limitations of Research ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 44
References------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 45
Appendix 1 – Interview Guide ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- 49
Appendix 2 – Reflective Practice Handout ----------------------------------------------------------- 52

6. 6
1.0 Introduction
Marketing companies’ resources are mostly based on human capital (i.e. knowledge), since
there is no real production of physical products. However, we have noticed a great problem in
the field of marketing. New theoretical knowledge derived of marketing research does not
reach practice and thus, is not being implemented. Additionally, students learn conceptual
theories and concepts in school but soon realize that while on their first job they perform highly
practical tasks. Marketing managers, who graduated years ago, develop their practice
unknowing of what current research discuss, and you get a sense of: ‘what worked yesterday
might as well work tomorrow, as long as we improve it a little bit’. Students do not see the
practical relevance of the theories and thus lack purpose while studying, and practitioners do
not really challenge their worldview. Thus, marketing practice is therefore falling behind and
does not utilize the stream of new theoretical knowledge from current research, directly made
available from students.
During our time at the university, we felt frustrated that a theoretical education would not
provide with the relevant knowledge that could be useful when entering the business world,
thus resulting in bad self-esteem. However, during our time at the master's program in
marketing, we came to realize that theoretical and practical knowledge were two different sets
of knowledge that had to be regarded and executed differently. Theoretical knowledge
describes the ‘why’ and practical knowledge explains the ‘how’. Understanding the
fundamental definition and purpose of these two types of knowledge streams is essential in
order to see the value of integrating theory in practice.
- Engren & Schlyter
Many authors have addressed the problem of the gap between marketing academia and
practice in the literature (e.g. Razzaque 1998; Brown 2001; Hunt 2002). However, the research
focuses mostly on describing the problem itself, rather than suggesting solutions to the
problem. Interestingly enough, within other fields such as education and medicine, we found
literature emphasizing the need for interplay between theoretical and practical knowledge, in
order to bridge the gap in their fields (e.g. Ruth-Sahd 2003; Paterson & Chapman 2013).
Interplay is defined as “the way in which two or more things or people affect each other”
(Oxforddictionaries n.d). In this study we used the term interplay to describe interaction in the
context of academia and practice.
The idea of reflective practice; is a collection of concepts that potentially improves business,
by creating a framework for practice and a general understanding of the world. The practice,
thus, emphasizes the interplay of theory in the business world (Thomson & Thomson 2008).
Reflective practice has not only shown to bridge the disconnection, but it also allowed for
novice practitioners to utilize their theoretical knowledge in practice (Ruth-Sahd 2003).
1.1 What we aimed for
With this study we aimed to contribute with a new perspective of the gap between academia
and practice, within the field of marketing. We wanted to put forward a different approach to

7. 7
practice for achieving interplay between theoretical and practical knowledge, since we
proposed this to be a solution, for the slow development marketing practice is criticized for.
1.2 The question we answered
We aimed to cast new light on the disputed gap between research and practice and, ultimately,
to discuss how interplay between theory and practice could enhance the field of marketing. We
proposed that the concept of reflective practice could be an alternative approach for interplay
and a possible new practical approach to marketing. Our main research question was:
How can the concept of reflective practice be adopted within marketing practice, and what
conditions within reflective practice might affect interplay between theoretical knowledge and
practical knowledge?
1.3 How we structured the thesis
In order to get a better understanding of why theory was not integrated in practice, we needed
to understand the problem from a broader perspective. To put our research in context, we first
started our investigation of the widely discussed gap between academics and practitioners in
marketing. The focus was to understand the underlying conditions and dynamics affecting the
gap between the two groups. We realized that the gap between practice and academics, in
itself, was not the problem. Rather, the gap could be seen as positive for the development of
marketing knowledge, since it allowed academics and practitioners to be unbiased by one
another (Gummesson 2002).
The next step in our investigation was to understand the concepts of theoretical and practical
knowledge and how the two types of knowledge affect one another. With a better
understanding of the dynamics between practice and research, we came to the understanding
that theoretical knowledge does not seem to reach practice (Hunt 2002). Therefore, we looked
further into what the literature could tell us about communication between practitioners and
academics.
We then realized that the literature, discussing communication, was scarce and did not address
the fundamental issue of the integration of theoretical knowledge in practice, but solely
discussed the problem with the communication itself. Investigating this further, by turning our
heads to other professions, we noticed that within medicine and education, the problem of
integrating theory with practice was addressed as well (Cheraghi, Salasli and Ahmadi 2007).
However, the concept of reflective practice was, discussed here in this case as an approach
to solve the real issue of integration of theory in practice, not just the communication. By
structuring a summary of how we interpretation the concept of reflective practice, we built the
basis for our theoretical framework. We thought this was a promising approach when
challenging the problem regarding integration of theory in practice.
However, we realized that reflective practice, in itself, did not function as a communication tool
of knowledge to practice. Nevertheless, novice practitioners hold the latest research, and thus,
seemed to suit this role as an indirect communication stream of knowledge to practice. From
our own experience, as master’s students, we realized that graduates from universities hold
both knowledge and understanding of the latest theories within marketing research. However,

8. 8
the student entering his/her first job is almost neglected in the literature discussing
communication of theoretical knowledge into practice. Our theoretical framework was
consequently enhanced and further developed with insights of the conditions, facing novice
practitioners and ideas of how this group of people could function as facilitators of theoretical
knowledge to practice.
We conducted an ethnographic study (Maréchal 2010), and carried out qualitative interviews
(Holme & Solvang 1997) that were semi-structured (Flick 2009), with managers and novice
practitioners from Swedish marketing consultancy firms as our informants. Through a constant
comparative method, (Fournier 1998) we analyzed the empirical data, in order to test our
propositions. To complete our analysis, we added an autoethnographic perspective (Maréchal
2010) and could, through a triangulation method (Flick 2009), further deepen our
understanding of the issue and find disruptions that helped answer our research questions.
2.0 Literature Review
One of the most discussed issues within the field of marketing, has been the gap between
practitioners and academics (Nyilasy & Reid 2007). Hunt (2002) argues that the gap in
marketing is much wider and, on a deeper level than what is expected in other fields such as
law, engineering and medicine. He even states that practitioners and academics live in two
separate worlds. Brannick and Coghlan (2006) view the gap as a lack of harmony between
theory and practice, which is harmful for the marketing field.
2.1 The gap in marketing
The problem with the gap between academics and practitioners, is that there is a discrepancy
between theory and the practical applications of that theory (Hunt 2002). Since the two groups
do not collaborate, the knowledge development within the field it is slowed down. Furthermore,
the gap could lead to the loss of knowledge since the gap disrupts the interaction between
practitioners and academics (Razzaque 1998). Brown (2001) adds to this by arguing that the
focus on marketing, as a science, has hurt the development of marketing knowledge, and has
increased the gap between the two groups. For many years, researchers and practitioners
have argued that marketing should be considered a science (Brown 2001). To summarize an
extensive discussion, the favor for marketing as an art rather than science, has been
predominant in postmodern times and has thus requested a more interpretivistic approach to
research (Brown 2001).
The reason for this wide gap, mainly derives from academics’ lack of trust in practitioners’
methods, leading them to criticize practitioners for being biased and unqualified (Razzaque
1998). The practitioners, on the other hand, regard academics as too subjective and non-
pragmatic (Razzaque 1998). The practitioners feel disappointed with marketing academia
since they experience a lack of research on how to implement marketing theory in practice
(Hughes, Tapp & Hughes 2008). On the other hand, academics argue that practitioners are
lagging behind when it comes to the implementation and use of new marketing theory (Hughes,
Tapp & Hughes 2008). Even more noticeable is the fact that practitioners have different goals
and objectives. Practitioners have restricted time-lines and budgets, while academics have
not. Both Razzaque (1998) and Brannick and Coghlan (2006) argue that practitioners are
affected by a need to act, while academics are not. Marketing practitioners thus, spend more

9. 9
resources on investigating and solving problems connected directly with their business
(Brannick & Coghlan 2006), hence representing a more practical knowledge development.
Academics, on the one hand, spend their time developing and describing particular concepts
and phenomena, and understand the relationships between them (Brannick & Coghlan 2006),
hence producing a more conceptual and theoretical knowledge. These different objectives and
goals seem to have affected the gap, creating disruption and miscommunication. However, it
is important to understand that practitioners and academics need each other since they
contribute with different types of knowledge (Hughes, Tapp and Hughes 2008).
2.2 The gap is not a problem
Gummesson (2002) argues that the knowledge construction and theory will be damaged if
academia moves too close to the practitioners’ world. He stresses the importance of ‘general
theoretical knowledge’ as it enables the companies to be more agile in changing market
conditions. Following this reasoning, that the gap is not the problem itself, one can see the
benefits of the two different groups being separated. Thomson and Thomson (2008) argue that
there is a dynamic effect between the two types of knowledge, since the academic world
produces theoretical knowledge, which informs practice and practitioners produce practical
knowledge, in which theory can be tested. However, in order for practice to benefit from
theoretical knowledge, the theories must reach practitioners. Unfortunately, the level of
communication is not sufficient (Hansotia 2003).
According to Hunt (2002), academics within marketing have a responsibility to provide
theoretical knowledge. This knowledge is mostly communicated through marketing journals.
However, a significant number of practitioners do not read current research (Hughes, Tapp &
Hughes 2008), especially not research journals (Hunt 2002). Nyilasy and Reid (2007) contend
that this type of direct flow of knowledge is unrealistic and propose that the ‘communication
gap’ could be bridged through the facilitation of an indirect flow. Hansotia (2003) made much
the same point when describing how ex-academics and consultants can create this indirect
flow of knowledge because they have an interest in theories and ideas about marketing.
Grundvåg Ottesen and Grønhaug (2004) added to this line of reasoning and stated that
consultants are experts in both fields (i.e. they possess both theoretical and practical
knowledge) and therefore play an important role in implementing theoretical knowledge in
practical contexts.
Even though ex-academics and consultants are mentioned as indirect sources of
communicating theory to practice, the literature is scarce when it comes to highlighting novice
practitioners in this discussion. Practitioners, who recently graduated from universities, have
learned the latest theoretical knowledge from academia (Paterson & Chapman 2013), and
could potentially be more relevant messengers of ‘new’ theoretical knowledge than ex-
academics and consultants.
Since communication of knowledge within marketing was argued to be a problem, we needed
to further understand the dynamics between theoretical and practical knowledge; what the two
types of knowledge actually stood for, how they enhanced each other, and most importantly,
how the two types of knowledge could achieve effective interplay in practice.

10. 10
2.3 Theoretical and practical knowledge
According to Thomson and Thomson (2008), a theoretical knowledge base is “a set of
concepts that help us make sense of our experience” (Thomson & Thomson 2008, p. 24). As
mentioned earlier, Gummesson (2002) highlighted the importance and necessity of ‘general
theoretical knowledge’. He argued that theoretical knowledge enhance our ability to
understand major changes in market conditions and is necessary for achieving progress in
practice. Thomson and Thomson (2008) follow this reasoning stating that: “theory need not be
formal theory, rather, the term ‘theory’ is used to refer to those concepts that we build up into
a framework that helps us make sense of our lives in general and our work in particular” (p.
24). Additionally, Grundvåg Ottesen and Grønhaug (2004) argue that theory should not be
used for direct implementation, theory should rather be understood as conceptual, and function
as a framework. Thomson and Thomson (2008) continue on this reasoning saying that: “while
research can, and often does, cast light on practice issues, it is rarely the case that the research
is so definitive that it gives us a clear path to follow” (p. 18). They argue that the key is to be
able to integrate the research with a wider knowledge base and experience before it can be of
use in practice.
The wider knowledge base and experience that Thomson and Thomson (2008) discussed in
the previous section could be referred to as practical knowledge. Practical knowledge is the
knowledge of how to do things in a professional context and is derived, at least partly, from
theoretical knowledge (Van de Ven & Johnson 2006). Paterson and Chapman (2013) follow
this notion of how experience relates to practical knowledge; referring to Benner (1984) they
discuss how novice practitioners develop their practical knowledge as they increase
experience in a firm (Benner 1984 in Paterson & Chapman 2013). The practical knowledge
helps the novice practitioner, to effortlessly make intuitive fluid decisions and is perceived more
relevant because it leads directly to actions (Grundvåg Ottesen & Grønhaug 2004)
Theoretical knowledge could thus be seen as conceptual, conducted and developed within the
academy and function as a wider knowledge base of general understanding. Practical
knowledge, on the other hand, comes from experience and is more contextual and action
based. Grundvåg Ottesen and Grønhaug (2004) discuss how these two types of knowledge
correlate and interplay, arguing that “prior related knowledge is needed to make use of new
information” (p. 527), meaning that one needs to have an understanding of the purpose and
application of theoretical knowledge, in order to make sense of new theory.
In the field of marketing, the literature is scarce when it comes to discussing how the two types
of knowledge should interplay. Turning to the field of nursing, the literature has a lot more to
offer. Cheraghi, Salasli and Ahmadi (2007), for example, acknowledge theoretical knowledge
to be derived from schools. However, instead of blaming universities to be theoretical and
teaching non-practical knowledge, they argue that the school should educate the student how
to transfer the theoretical knowledge into practical use. Ruth-Sahd (2003) continues this
argument proposing that reflection could work as a tool for narrowing the gap between theory
and practice, as it facilitates assessment of past experiences and underlying assumptions. In
this way, reflection helps to identify what guides, and ultimately enhances practice (Ruth-Sahd
2003). Schön (1983) supported the discussion of reflection, as well. He proposed that
companies had to realize how theoretical knowledge could inform practice, and he suggested
implications of how to utilize that theory. He argued that companies had to adopt the concept

11. 11
of reflective practice, as a facilitator for interplay between theoretical and practical knowledge.
Thomson and Thomson (2008) have developed this idea further on, arguing that: “we need
reflective practice in order to be able to integrate those research findings into our wider
knowledge base and experience so that they can be of use to us” (p. 19).
The idea of reflective practice is interesting as it allows academia and the business world to
perform in their separate areas of interest. Academia produces the theoretical knowledge that
informs practice, enhancing practitioners’ knowledge base and ultimately practice. With
reflective practice the discussed gap between academics and practitioners would not
necessarily be closed, rather, it could be bridged.
2.4 Theoretical Framework
We found, from the literature, that practice needs both practical and theoretical knowledge, in
order to develop (Thomson & Thomson 2008). Therefore, the gap between practice and
academia could be seen as positive, as the two groups could excel in their respective expertise
areas and not being biased by one another (i.e. academics enhance theoretical knowledge
and practice enhance practical knowledge). However, we found that two problems remained.
First, we noticed that communication of theoretical knowledge to practice was unsatisfying and
thus hindered theory to reach practice. Secondly, even if theory were to reach practice, a
lacking ability to integrate theory with practice still hindered the interplay. Within other fields,
such as medicine and education, reflective practice reinforced the interplay between theory
and practice and the concept seemed fruitful to marketing as well. Reflective practice is “a set
of concepts that provide a framework of understanding and a foundation for our practice”
(Thomson & Thomson 2008, p. 12). Additionally, ex-academics and consultants were argued
to function as indirect informers of theory to practice. However, novice practitioners seemed to
better suit the need of communicating ‘recent’ theory. Based on this reasoning, we looked
further into the literature in order to create a theoretical framework for our analysis, aiming to
understand and describe the concept of reflective practice and the conditions around novice
practitioners.
2.4.1 Reflective practice
Within the concept of reflective practice, reflection is a fundamental behavior, which underpins
the foundation of the practice (Thomson & Thomson 2008). Reflection in this sense “is the
ability to think and consider experiences, perceptions, ideas [values and beliefs], etc. with a
view to the discovery of new relations or the drawing of conclusions for the guidance of future
action” (Quinn 1998 in Thomson & Thomson 2008, p. 29). Reflective practice has mostly been
adopted within, the fields of nursing and social work for some time (e.g. Ruth-Sahd, 2003). The
practice has also been discussed in management literature, but very little literature discusses
the implementation of the practice within marketing. The idea of reflective practice, addresses
the same issue of how we interpret the main problem of the gap in marketing; namely, it aims
to establish interplay between theoretical and practical knowledge, and thus, bridge the
disputed gap. By adopting reflective practice in a marketing context, we saw the potential of
developing marketing practice through integration of new theory. This proposition was
reinforced since the heart of the concept is to become “aware of the knowledge that informs
our practice – making it more visible” (Thomson & Thomson 2008, p. 18).

12. 12
Thomson and Thomson (2008) discuss how “reflective practice entails the synthesis of self-
awareness, reflection and critical thinking” (p. 29). They argue that reflective practice is more
than just a thoughtful management process and emphasize the need for a focus on the wider
social and organizational aspects. Within the field of teaching, the implementation of reflective
practice is more established, and Ruth-Sahd describes how the practice is a “viable part in the
growth and development of novice teachers” (Ruth-Sahd 2003, p. 284). In their paper,
Paterson and Chapman (2013) discuss the mandatory implementation of reflective practice
within physiotherapy arguing that the concept allows practitioners to become more
professional.
Using the concept of reflective practice as a facilitator, integrating theoretical and practical
knowledge to see the world differently and ultimately enhance performance, it is important to
challenge predetermined perceptions of the world. Implicit knowledge is the kind of knowledge,
which is unconsciously accepted as our reality, and lays the foundations for actions and
decisions (Rebuschat 2013). However, if we don't challenge our knowledge, and perceptions,
we might fail to notice how the world around us changes and thus, base decisions and actions
on premises, which might be outdated. This occurrence is called closed knowledge (Thomson
&Thomson 2008), and could damage knowledge development, and thus, do not play well with
reflective practice. Thomson and Thomson (2008) thus highlight the importance of open
knowledge as opposed to closed knowledge. Open knowledge, is open for scrutiny and
challenge, and practitioners must focus on an open knowledge base, i.e. understanding what
information being used, and why it is appropriate (Thomson & Thomson 2008). With this, they
mean that the practitioners need to be mindful about why they view the world the way they do,
on what premises they make decisions and then be open to challenge that perception. From
the literature, we remember that theoretical knowledge informs and challenge our perceptions
and thus, it is important that practitioners adopt an open mind towards knowledge.
What is more important: Thomson and Thomson (2008) discuss how factors, on a personal
and organizational level, affect the concept of reflective practice. In the next section we will
discuss these two stakeholders respectively.
2.4.1.1 The reflective practitioner
The reflective practitioner is characterized by the ability to reflect upon how the macro and
micro perspectives interplay. In other words, is better suited to connect theoretical knowledge
with practice. In the following sections, we highlighted important characteristics of the reflective
practitioner, and interpreted them into two themes: Reflective thinking described the
fundamental ideas of the reflective thinking process and how the critical aspect affects this.
Reflection within an organizational context summarized how the reflective process transfers
into the organizational context.
2.4.1.1.1 Reflective thinking
It is important not to let habits blind you to opportunities and new ideas. Nietzsche (1988 in
Thomson & Thompson 2008) discusses how people in general “tend to meekly do what is
expected of them and follow routines and patterns uncritically, without putting their own stamp
on their actions and thus on their lives more broadly” (p. 48). Thomson and Thomson (2008)
follow this reasoning arguing, “if you always do what you’ve always done, you’ll always get
what you always got” (p. 35). Reflective thinking is defined by the ability to use mindfulness,

13. 13
analytical and critical thinking, and thus, becomes the foundation of which reflective practice is
structured upon. Mindfulness in this sense should remind the practitioner not to “simply
following routinized patterns of thought and thus standardized forms of practice” (Thomson &
Thomson 2008, p. 32).
Analytical thinking involves critically picturing recurring themes, issues and patterns that
constitute a given situation (Thomson & Thomson 2008). In order to use analytical thinking in
a critical manner, one needs to have critical depth, or “look beneath the surface to see what
assumptions and forms of reasoning are influencing the circumstances” (Thomson & Thomson
2008, p. 26). Critical depth could be further understood with the concept of technical rationality.
Technical rationality describes people who live their life after cause and effect and a means to
end perspectives (Townley 2008). This fosters individuals to look beyond the obvious and
question their surroundings; critically reflecting broader and deeper upon conditions faced in
day-to-day work.
It is important to not only break things down into their components, but also, link those
components to holistic pictures. This idea can be referred to as the concept of helicopter vision.
Helicopter vision is the ability to see how specific issues fit into the ‘big picture’ or “the ability
to: (i) rise above a situation to get the overview of how the component parts fit together and
how they create the overall situation; and (ii) descend back into it to be able to deal with it in
an informed way” (Thomson & Thomson 2008, p. 49). Helicopter vision is related to the concept
of critical breadth where “one needs to locate what is happening in the wider social context –
that is, see what processes are occurring at a micro level, as part of a more holistic social and
political picture, then at the macro level” (Thomson & Thomson 2008, p. 26). Townley (2008)
discusses how the concept of institutional rationality, implies that major institutions organizing
social life (e.g. religion, law, government, family etc.) create a consistent logic upon which
rational decisions are made. Looking at Thomson and Thomson’s (2008) idea of critical
breadth, it is important to understand that institutional rationality is not present. Rather, there
should be a sense of institutional ‘irrationality’. A reflective practitioner should acknowledge
major institutions that organize social life but be critical and question macro level occurrences
to understand what processes are happening on a micro level. As we know from the literature,
theoretical knowledge is by definition conceptual and less contextual, practical knowledge on
the other hand is more specific and action based (Grundvåg Ottesen & Grønhaug 2004).
Institutional ‘irrationality’, critical breadth and helicopter vision, then, becomes essential for the
integration of theoretical knowledge.
2.4.1.1.2 Reflection within an organizational context
Looking at the reflective practitioner, within an organizational context, it is important to
understand how culture, processes and goals affect practice (Thomson & Thomson 2008).
Potentially, these goals, norms and cultures are based on wrong assumptions, heading the
practitioner in the misleading directions ultimately not achieving intended results. Analyzing
management literature, we found that the concept of double-loop learning best described this
ability. Double-loop learning then, is an ability of reviewing and negotiating both norms, cultures
and goals, making sure that the strategic decisions are made on the right assumptions (Argyris
1991). Double-loop learners then, are people who ‘learn how to learn’ and are better suited
dealing with changing professional environments (Argyris 1991). This characteristic would
therefore suit the reflective practitioner within an organizational context.

14. 14
2.4.1.2 The reflective organization
As discussed above, critical reflection is very much about developing sensitivity to contextual
factors, in order for more tactical knowledge to be tested and challenged. In the previous
section, we looked at some of the key personal traits we found most important for the individual
to better perform this practice. However, if the organization and management team do not
support the idea of reflective practice, the individual might have a hard time executing it.
Thomson and Thomson (2008) make an important note to this discussion as they point out
how “experience creates the potential for learning but, in itself, it teaches us nothing directly. It
is what we do with experience that is the best teacher” (p. 51). With this notion we understand
the potential dangers of managers assuming that throwing people in “the deep end of workload
pressures, they will learn to swim” (Thomson & Thomson 2008, p. 47). Therefore it is of equal
importance to understand the organizational factors that need to be taken into consideration
in order for reflective practice to be facilitated. We categorized three fundamental
organizational concepts that we understood to be fundamental for the practice. Below, we
discuss how openness affects learning and knowledge development, how reflective space
facilitates reflection and how the reflective process must be understood, as a behavior, rather
than an activity.
2.4.1.2.1 Openness
One of the basic organizational premises of reflective practice is the concept of openness, as
it ties back to learning and knowledge development (Thomson & Thomson 2008). Thomson
and Thomson (2008) elaborated on openness to include open knowledge (i.e. knowledge
should be seen as open to challenge and scrutiny, and be allowed to grow and develop over
time), openness to learning (as in being willing to learn from what we do well, not only from our
mistakes) and open-mindedness (i.e. allowing scope for creativity by not having fixed or
preconceived ideas). From management literature, we identified three concepts that
elaborated on the idea of openness. These concepts gave us further understanding of
implications and organizational focuses, relevant for management to utilize, and so potentially
facilitate openness. First, the human resource model is an organizational concept that
emphasis on “flexibility and internal focus, with cohesion and morale as means and human
resource development and participant satisfaction as ends” (Ostroff & Schmitt 1993, p. 1346).
This model implies that human capital is essential as a resource and should be focused on as
an asset; thus, it aspires for employee satisfaction and development. In this way, the human
resource model could foster a more holistic agreement on open knowledge, as it would be a
focus for the management to enhance knowledge among employees. Second, closely related
to the human resource model is the concept of a learning organizational culture. Slater (1995)
defines a learning organization as a “culture that (1) places the highest priority on the profitable
creation and maintenance of superior customer value while considering the interests of other
key stakeholders; and (2) provides norms for behavior regarding the organizational
development of and responsiveness to market information” (p. 67). From this, we understood
how the concept of a learning organization, followed Thomson and Thomson’s (2008) idea of
openness to learning, as it implied learning from events that the organization faces. Finally, a
decentralized organizational structure, in general, and a distribution of responsibility and
teamwork, in particular, has shown to promote innovation and creativity and thus, elaborates
on Thomson and Thomson's (2008) idea of open-mindedness. This is because it is within more
people’s interest and responsibility to enhance their knowledge, and drive development (Slater

15. 15
1995). These three organizational perspectives, individually and combined, reinforce the
understanding of the concepts of openness within the organization. It gives managers more
defined perspectives for the facilitation of openness and how this ultimately could reinforce the
facilitation of reflective practice.
2.4.1.2.2 Creating reflective space
A common perception amongst managers is that employees, in general, and novice
employees in particular eventually, will ‘learn how to swim’. When striving for short-term results,
this idea could result in an overload of tasks, thus time for reflection would potentially not be
prioritized. One important organizational and managerial responsibility is to provide personal
reflective space for the practitioner, i.e. that a practitioner’s workload needs to be managed so
to allow time for reflection. If a practitioner is too busy with practical tasks, short-term delivery
etc. there is a risk of getting stuck in routines, not thinking critically or connecting practical tasks
with a broader and deeper meaning. This, in turn, affects long-term development negatively.
Thus, experience in itself does not guarantee learning, it is what we do with the experience
that is the best teacher; time for reflection then becomes highly important. (Thomson &
Thomson 2008)
In addition to providing the time and space for individual reflection, Thomson and Thomson
(2008) highlight the importance of reflection in pair. This could for example include mentoring,
supervision and coaching. As for any manager, it is important to nurture and maximize the
company’s resources. With no direct manufacturing of physical products, consultancy
companies’ resources mostly lie within human capital (i.e. knowledge) (Hansen, Nohria &
Tierney 2000). Reflection in pairs becomes particularly important, as it not only has the
potential for increasing the human capital but also help to prevent practitioners drift away from
their objectives (Thomson & Thomson 2008). The manager holds practical knowledge received
from work experience and should be able to work as a filter for the practitioner to test concept
and ideas i.e. supporting the employee to challenge their knowledge, yet stay true to company
goals and strategies.
Group learning is an additional forum for reflection and could be performed in training courses,
conferences, seminars, learning sets etc. A key aspect of such group-exercises is a mutual
understanding of individual work-challenges, world-views, learning abilities etc. The
organization must understand the potential benefits of such practice and facilitate physical
meeting space for group learning to occur. When initiating group learning, it is important to
facilitate for the learning to be transferred into action. A potential threat would be that
employees would only recognize the learning within the exercise eventually lose, and forget
the essence, when they go back to their day-to-day work. By assigning direct action plans and
distributing responsibility to the employees, the manager could facilitate for the learning to be
permanent and not forgotten. (Thomson & Thomson 2008)
2.4.1.2.3 Reflective process
As discussed throughout this review the individual has a responsibility to make reflection
happen. However, the manager and several organizational factors need to facilitate for
reflection. In addition to this, Thomson and Thomson (2008) discuss the aspect of timing the
reflection. They argue that reflection should occur constantly and be seen as a behavior, rather
than an activity. What they mean by this is; the importance in understanding how reflection

16. 16
should take place before, during and after an event. Understanding the categorizing of
reflection, in these three levels, helps both managers and reflective practitioners to prioritize
and structure their practice. However, reflection before, during and after action is not a linear
process, which follows a recurring pattern. Rather, it helps clarify the reflection process as a
behavior and to put reflection in context. (Thomson & Thomson 2008)
Having looked at reflective practice from both the individual and the organizational perspective,
we understood that individuals have to be open-minded and able to reflect on a macro, as well
as a micro, level. Additionally, in order to facilitate reflective practice, organizations have to
foster a culture where reflective space and openness is valued and prioritized (Thomson &
Thomson 2008). From this, we saw that reflective practice has the potential of facilitating
interplay between theoretical and practical knowledge within marketing practice.
2.4.1.3 Criticism
Although most literature was positive towards reflective practice, there was some criticism.
Having studied reflective practice within the field of education, Ruth-Sahd (2003) was positive
to the concept, but highlighted that very little evidence was shown to it actually improve
practice. She argued that “little is known about the development of reflective capabilities, the
possible negative outcomes of reflection, how reflection actually looks in practice from a data-
based viewpoint, and what kind of learning results from reflective practice” (Ruth-Sahd 2003,
p. 489). Additionally, Paterson and Chapman (2013) referred to Mann et al. (2009) in their
paper on physiotherapy, arguing that little direct evidence in the literature associated reflective
practice with competence. Despite the lack of proven results within other fields, we believed
that the implementation of reflective practice, within a marketing context, had the potential of
creating positive outcomes of interplay between theory and practice.
However, in the literature of the gap, we recognized that indirect communication created
potential for new theory to reach practice (Hansotia 2003). Novice practitioners hold new
theoretical knowledge (Bjørk et al. 2013) and so, seemed to suit the profile as a potential,
indirect, messenger of knowledge to practice. In order to investigate the potential, for the
novice practitioners to function as messengers of new theoretical knowledge, we needed to
further understand the condition the novice faces early in their career.
2.4.2 Novice practitioners
Reflective practice, in its essence, is a framework for our practice, facilitating interplay between
theory and practice to enhance knowledge in general. It is well known that senior practitioners
possess practical knowledge from years of experience (e.g. Grundvåg Ottesen & Grønhaug
2004; Bjørk et al. 2013). However, managers are busy people who often lack education,
experience and training to understand academic research (Grundvåg Ottesen & Grønhaug
2004). This is clearly a problem since one must have ‘related knowledge’, in order to
understand and adopt new knowledge (Grundvåg Ottesen & Grønhaug 2004). Even if new
theoretical knowledge would be communicated into an organization that performs reflective
practice, theoretical knowledge may not be understood and interplay would be difficult to
achieve.

17. 17
Ex-academics, on the other hand, have the knowledge, interest and ideas about new research,
and are thus argued to be one of the channels that new theory reaches the industry (Hansotia
2003). Paterson and Chapman (2013) followed this reasoning, as they discussed how novice
practitioners hold, what they called propositional knowledge; knowledge acquired from
academia. However, since novice practitioners are recent graduates, early in their career, they
lack practical experience and therefore are limited in decision-making within the business world
(Paterson & Chapman 2013). Relying on theoretic knowledge, their practice is argued to be
limited and inflexible (Paterson & Chapman 2013).
An interesting aspect, of the discussion of novice practitioners, can be found within the field of
nursing. In Cheraghi, Salasli and Ahmadi’s (2007) article, they found that newly graduated
students’ biggest challenge was that they felt unable to use their education while in practice.
The examined students felt that they were just sat on practical duties when starting their first
job. As a consequence, their theoretical knowledge, learned in school, was hard to utilize
because they did not get the chance to. Cheraghi, Salasli & Ahmadi (2007) thus argued, that
the school had to be more practice orientated, and teach students how to transfer theoretical
knowledge into practical use. Continuing to look into the field of nursing, Pultorak’s (1996)
conclusion of his qualitative research, involving 82 novice teachers, was that “reflectivity is a
viable part in the growth and development of novice teachers” (p. 284). Schön (1990) also
proposed reflective practice to be a critical process by which beginners, in a discipline, can
recognize consonance between their individual practices and those of successful practitioners.
When analyzing the literature, we understood that novice practitioners needed to hold prior
‘related knowledge’, in order to understand new theories and concepts from academia and
research, a skill that Grundvåg Ottesen and Grønhaug (2004) proposed senior practitioners’
lack. Additionally, the novice practitioners supposedly possess the latest research streams
after finishing their theoretical education. As we have seen, throughout our discussion of
reflective practice, the concept works as a facilitator for theoretical knowledge to inform
practice. Both Schön (1990) and Pultorak (1996) discuss how reflection is proven to help
novice practitioners in their early careers. However, at least within the field of nursing, novice
practitioners start out their career carrying out mainly practical tasks since they are unable to
utilize their theoretical knowledge (Köpsén & Nyström 2012). This phenomena seems to be a
result of novice practitioners being accused of lacking practical experience and are perceived
to be limited in their practice.
2.4.3 Theoretical conclusion
The discussion of a gap in marketing, between academia and the business world, is somewhat
two-dimensional. One research stream argues that academia must move closer to the
business world, in order for research to become more contextual, and thus relevant in practice.
The other stream argues that it is not the gap that is the problem, but rather, the lack of
dissemination of new theory and the inability to integrate that theory. Both streams agree that
the development of marketing, as a field, is slowed down due to the inadequate integration of
theory into practice. ‘Theory’, is in this sense, is the knowledge that informs our practice; and
the business world is the forum, in which theory is tested. A separation between the fields then,
could actually be beneficial, as it would allow the two fields, to develop independently, and to
enhance their respective expertise. However, communication of new theory, and the ability to

18. 18
integrate theoretical knowledge is lacking, and thus, acts as a barrier for the more rapid
development of marketing as a field.
The amount of marketing-related research, conducted on the issue of communication and
integration of theory into practice, has been insufficient. This constituted the theoretical
knowledge gap, which we aimed to fill. In the fields of medicine and education, the concept of
reflective practice has proved to create more effective interplay, between academia and the
business world. Maintaining a focus on both the broader perspectives, which change our
worldview, while staying focused on the contextual factors, facilitates making theoretical
knowledge more relevant in practice. Fundamental for the practice, is the notion of openness
and the ambition to question the world, as we see it. However, theoretical knowledge will
become relevant to this degree, only if it is communicated to the reflective organization. Novice
practitioners have the required prior knowledge, and understanding of theory. However, if the
novice practitioners are assigned solely on practical tasks, theoretical perspectives from
academia become less relevant (Thomson & Thomson 2008).
Understanding marketing as an art rather than a science, has long been discussed within the
field, and thus, requires a more interpretivistic approach to implementation, as it would be naive
to believe that there is one universal solution to all marketing questions (Brown 2001).
Reflective practice aims to prepare practitioners better in questioning their worldview and
adapting to conditions, which challenge their perspectives and hence their practice (Thomson
& Thomson 2008). Schön (1983) mentions the ‘artistic practitioner’, in his elaboration of
reflective practice, and argues for professional artistry, i.e. using theoretical knowledge as a
palette to paint out the framework for practice. Given then, that the field of marketing requires
this artistic approach, we consider reflective practice to suit marketing. Figure 2 summarizes
the fundamentals of reflective practice.
3.0 Research Design
Marketing practice is argued to develop slowly due to insufficient integration of new theory into
the business world (Razzaque 1998). This is problematic, since research loses its relevance,
and practice is slow in development. Additionally, ex-students entering the business world are
argued to hold the latest research and would function as an indirect communication channel
for the research to be put into practice. But, as within other fields, novice practitioners are
assigned to perform practical tasks where theoretical knowledge is difficult to apply, and so
their knowledge will not be utilized.
With this study we aimed to contribute with a new perspective of the gap between academics
and practitioners, within the field of marketing. We wanted to discuss a different approach for
achieving interplay between theoretical knowledge and practical knowledge, as we believed
that this interplay is the salvation for enhancing the performance and development in
marketing.

19. 19
Figure 2 - Reflective Practice Summary
Reflective Practice
Reflective practice is a set of
concepts that provide a
framework of understanding,
and a foundation for practice
Reflection is the ability to think
and consider experiences,
perceptions, ideas, values and
beliefs, etc. → The skill to link
theory to practice
The practice aims to establish
interplay between theoretical
and practical knowledge.
Fundamental for the practice is openness:
The concept of openness constitutes of knowledge and world-view being open to challenge and
scrutiny, allowing creativity to challenge preconceived ideas, with a willingness to learn.
The Reflective Practitioner The Reflective Organization
Reflective thinking
 Mindfulness: not simply following
routinized patterns of thought and thus
standardized forms of practice.
 Analytical thinking: critically picturing
recurring themes, issues and patterns
that constitute a given situation.
 Helicopter vision: the ability to see how
specific issues fit into the ‘big picture’
and vice versa.
Critical use of knowledge
 Critical depth: one should not accept the
situation at face value; rather look
beneath the surface to see what
assumptions and forms of reasoning are
influencing the circumstances.
 Critical breadth: one needs to locate
what is happening in the wider social
context – what processes are occurring
at a micro level as part of a more holistic
social and political picture (macro level).
Reflection within an organizational context
 Double-loop learning: reviewing and
negotiating goals, norms and culture,
making sure that the strategic decisions
are made on the right assumptions.
Openness
 Open knowledge: the explicit use of
knowledge that is open to challenge and
scrutiny, as opposed to closed
knowledge that is potentially dogmatic
and a barrier to learning.
 Open-mindedness: not having fixed or
preconceived ideas – allowing scope for
creativity.
 Openness to learning: being willing to
learn from not only our mistakes, but
also from what we do well.
Creating reflective space
 Personal reflective space: experience in
itself does not guarantee learning, a
practitioner’s workload need to be
managed so that there is time for
reflection.
 Reflection in pair: including mentoring,
supervision, coaching etc.
 Group learning: learning performed in
training courses, conferences, seminars
etc. A mutual understanding of individual
work challenges and learning’s is key.
Reflective process
 Reflection during: Reflection under an
event: while carrying out an activity.
 Reflection after: after the event or task
has been carried out.
 Reflection before: planning and being
able to think ahead about what might
encounter.

20. 20
3.1 Research questions
By casting a new light on the disputed gap between research and practice, and ultimately,
discuss how interplay between theory and practice could enhance the field of marketing: we
proposed that the concept of reflective practice could be an alternative approach for creating
interplay. Our main research question was:
How can the concept of reflective practice be adopted within marketing practice, and what
conditions within reflective practice might affect interplay between theoretical knowledge and
practical knowledge?
In order to answer this research question, we analyzed the literature of reflective practice and
understood that the practice mainly had two dimensions: the performers (i.e. practitioners) and
the organizational context (i.e. managers). We realized that recently graduated students, early
in their career, held a neglected stream of knowledge, of practice. Recent graduates, in this
sense, supposedly have a superior knowledge of new marketing theories since they have
spent years studying. Recent graduates also hold ‘prior related knowledge’, i.e. they
understand the concepts of theoretical knowledge in particular, and academic language in
general. Required knowledge in this sense is argued to be vital, in order to understand new
knowledge (Grundvåg Ottesen & Grønhaug 2004). On these two premises, our second
proposition was that novice practitioners had the potential of function as an indirect stream of
theory to practice. From this, we developed the first sub-question that could help us answer
our main research question:
How can novice practitioners utilize the concept of reflective practice, in order to communicate
theoretical knowledge to the business world?
As the concept of reflective practice presupposed organizational support and practical
facilitation, it was important to understand how managers viewed the relationship between
knowledge development and novice practitioners. This understanding gave us insights and a
second perspective that helped us answering our main research question. In order to
understand these relationships our second sub-question became:
How can marketing managers benefit from novice practitioners?
We believed that these two sub-questions could help us describe the relevant dynamics within
marketing firms to further understand the conditions within reflective practice, which could
affect interplay between theoretical and practical knowledge.

21. 21
3.2 Scientific perspective
With our study, we wanted to describe and understand, rather than explain, the dynamics of
reflective practice, put in a marketing context. With this interpretivistic point of view (Flick 2009),
our purpose was to make people think, create awareness and point out alternatives of how
theory and practice combined could enhance the field. We aimed to understand the
relationships between the context of marketing practitioners and the theoretical concepts. This
called for an abductive research approach; thus, this approach aims to investigate the
relationships between everyday language and broad concepts (Dubois & Gadde 2002).
3.3 Method
Since we wanted to contribute, create awareness and bring new insights to the discussion of
the gap, we used a qualitative research method, which aims to create a deeper understanding
of a particular phenomenon (Bryman & Bell 2005). In order to understand social interactions,
behaviors and perceptions that occur within organizations we conducted an ethnographic
study (Maréchal 2010). In this way, we had the opportunity to reflect about the conditions,
which practitioners, managers and organizations face, in a marketing setting. We chose to
conduct qualitative interviews, since qualitative interviews aim to create a deeper
understanding of a phenomenon and enable new insights to a discussion (Holme & Solvang
1997).
Since both authors had experiences from marketing academia and marketing practice we saw
the potential of adding our own experiences to the study. This called for an autoethnographic
research method, which allowed us to involve “self-observation and reflexive investigation in
the context of ethnographic fieldwork and writing,” (Maréchal 2010, p. 43). Integrating our own
reflections in the analysis we could ‘live the way we preached’, being reflective throughout our
study and put our findings into context by adding a story like dimension to our research.
Doloriert and Sambrook (2012) argue that autoethnography has been portrayed in different
streams within the ethnographic research field. First, “evocative interpretivist
autoethnographers write emotionally laden, artistic, heartfelt, and often distressing, narratives,
conversations and performances” (Doloriert & Sambrook 2012 p. 84). Secondly,
autoethnography aiming towards analytical standard, in this position the stream requires: “(1)
complete member researcher status, (2) analytic reflexivity, (3) narrative visibility of the
researcher’s self, (4) dialogue with informants beyond the self and (5) commitment to
theoretical analysis" (Anderson, 2006 p. 378). Thirdly, autoethnography as a political radical
approach, is described as “texts [that] democratize the representational sphere of culture by
locating the particular experiences of individuals in a discrepancies with dominant expressions
of discursive power” (Neumann 1996, p.189).
In this study we adopted the second approach Doloriert and Sambrook (2012) discussed, as
we aimed to be more analytical and provide a more comprehensive understanding of the
subject. In order to stay in line with this stream of autoethnography we fulfilled Andersons
(2006) requirements as we: (1) provided the reader with a bio of both authors (figure 1). (2)
We were analytical and reflexive throughout the analysis as we put the findings in context of
our own experiences whenever they were relevant. (3) We aimed for a narrative visibility of
ourselves, by extensively refer to ourselves as we added our views. (4) We conducted
objective dialogues with the informants, only to add our experiences to question certain

22. 22
discrepancies during the interviews. And, (5) we committed to an extensive theoretical analysis
and built none of our findings solely on our own arguments.
Doloriert and Sambrook (2012) discussed the benefits of adopting this form ethnographic study
as they argued that autoethnography “contribute an understanding to the greater culture” (p.
85). By adopting this method we additionally aimed to add the benefits portrayed by Ellis and
Bochner (2010) as they argued that autoethnography could “illustrate facets of cultural
experience, and, in so doing, make characteristics of a culture familiar for insiders and
outsiders” (p. 9)”.
3.4 Informants
We used a purposeful collection strategy in order to select informants, for our collection of
empirical data. This type of selection is useful when finding informants with relevant
background for the purpose of the study (Palinkas et al. 2013). We aimed to select informants
with two types of background.
First, we wanted to collect data from novice practitioners who recently graduated from
universities with a degree in marketing, and who currently work as marketing consultants. This
was because they were assumed to hold a sufficient understanding of new marketing theories
and had some experience from our field of study.
Secondly, we wanted to collect data from managers in marketing consultancy firms, with
responsibility of knowledge development. The reason, why we chose to study novice
practitioners and managers within marketing consultancy firms was because they are seen as
experts within marketing, and thus dependent on knowledge development. We also believed
that consultants would be unbiased from a specific industry.
For the interviews, we targeted four well-acknowledged Swedish marketing consultancy firms.
These companies were chosen because we had good relations with all four of them, giving us
easy access to the most purposeful informants. We selected one novice practitioner and one
manager from each firm. It was important for us to interview one novice and one manager from
the same company, since we believed that two perspectives from different levels of the same
company could provide more comprehensive data. We considered eight informants to be
adequate in order to provide with an understanding of the phenomenon under investigation,
and to reach the aim of study.
In Figure 3 follows a brief presentation of the informants and the four profiled Swedish
marketing consultancy firms.

23. 23
Figure 3 - Presentation of Informants
Company 1 Manager, interview conducted 23/4-2015
Company 1 is a Swedish brand
management consultancy firm that
was founded in 1999. Its vision is to
become one of the world’s top three
authorities within brand
management. Company 1 uses the
latest expertise, ideas and research
and it has won several official
Swedish awards within marketing.
Company 1 works with companies
such as Volvo, Samsung, Carlsberg,
Spotify, Bentley and Unilever.
(Manager Company 1 2015)
Age: 47
Position: Co-founder and partner at Company 1
Prior Experience: Brand manager for Procter &
Gamble
Education: Bachelor of Science in Business
Administration, Stockholm University
Novice, interview conducted 31/3-2015
Age: 30
Position: Brand management consultant at
Company 1
Education: Master of Science in Marketing,
Stockholm University
Company 2 Manager, interview conducted 20/3-2015
Company 2 is a PR firm that works
with communication, media relations
and public relations. Company 2
develops and strengthens brands
through strategic and digital
communications, media and
education. The company was
founded in 1996 and through senior
experience
and youthful creativity it helps their
clients in developing and maintaining
good relations. Company 2 works
with companies like Fly Emirates,
Pirelli, Däckia, Gran Turismo and
Svenska Seglarsällskapet.
(Manager Company 2 2015)
Age: 63
Position: CEO and founder of Company 2
Prior Experience: PR manager at different
companies in Sweden
Education: Economics, Stockholms University
Novice, interview conducted 27/3-2015
Age: 29
Position: PR consultant at Company 2
Education: Bachelor of Science in Public Relations,
Mittuniversitetet

24. 24
Company 3 Manager, interview conducted 8/5-2015
Company 3 is a leading
communication firm in Sweden,
founded 1989 with 45 employees. It
focuses on strategic advice within:
digital communication, graphic design,
internal communication, concept and
campaign, media relations, public
affairs, crisis communication and
brand development. Company 3 has
received several official Swedish
awards within marketing. Company 3
works with companies like Södertörns
Högskola, Arla, Sida and NCC.
(Manager Company 3 2015)
Age: 40
Position: Head of Department and member of
Company 3 executive board
Prior Experience: Management consultant and
project manager
Education: Master of Science in Political Science,
Uppsala University
Novice, interview conducted 30/3-2015
Age: 27
Position: Consultant and Digital Director at
Company 3
Prior Experience: Master of Science in Marketing,
Stockholm University, additional courses from
Berghs and Hyper Island
Company 4 Manager, interview conducted 22/4-2015
Company 4 is a branding agency that
works in the intersection of brand and
business development. Its motto is
that strategy and creativity need each
other to be truly disruptive. Company
4 works with for example branding,
business development, concept
development, design, consumer
insights and strategy. Company 4 was
founded in 2012 and has been
awarded several official Swedish
marketing awards.
(Manager Company 4 2015)
Age: 37
Position: Partner and manager at Company 4
Prior Experience: Management consultant at Cap
Gemini
Education: Master of Science in Physics, Lund
University
Novice, interview conducted 10/4-2015
Age: 26
Position: Strategist at Company 4
Prior Experience: Master of Science in Business
Administration, Stockholm University

25. 25
3.5 Interviewing process
Our main objective for the interviews was to understand the context of marketing practitioners
and marketing organizations, in order to test our propositions. Therefore, we conducted an
interview guide (appendix 1) with semi-structured questions, since these types of interviews
are suitable for studying subjective theories in relation to everyday knowledge (Flick 2009).
With this structure, we were able to put the interviews in context by dividing the interview guide
into three parts. First, we started our discussion within the gap in marketing, asking questions
about the informants’ background and personal view on practice and academia. This type of
background questions helped to ascertain the simple descriptive details of the informants
(McCracken 1988). Secondly, a broad introduction of the concept of reflective practice was
given to the informants (appendix 2), this presentation was followed by open-ended questions
in line with the themes and structure, used to present reflective practice, in the literature review.
Using open-ended questions helped us to keep a low profile (i.e. not bias the informants) and
made sure that we did not influence the results (McCracken 1988). Thirdly, during the end of
the interviews, we focused on how novice practitioners could function as an indirect stream of
theoretical knowledge to practice, by investigating the conditions of novice practitioners, within
their respective company. In this last part of the interview, we had separate questions for the
managers and the novices, as we needed to understand the issue from their unique
perspectives.
3.6 Method of analysis
The analysis of the empirical data was performed in three steps. In the first step we started out
by coding the individually transcribed interviews, into three main themes that followed our
interview guide: the gap, reflective practice and the novice practitioner. Coding the data into
categories, in this sense, is a way to conceptualize the informants’ own experience and
worldview and additionally, it helps the researchers to develop theoretical insights (Lincoln &
Guba 1985).
In the second step, we summarized the data from the novice practitioners and the managers
respectively, highlighting both recurring views and counter perspectives. In the third and last
step, we analyzed both summaries (i.e. the summary of the novices and the managers) and
conducted our final empirical summary. This summary combined the managers’ and novice
practitioners’ data, again highlighting recurring views and counter perspectives.
Within the final empirical summary, we also coded the data of the gap into three sub-themes:
theoretical knowledge, communication and interplay. It was important for us to dig deep in
understanding how the informants viewed the gap, as we noticed how this perspective was
fundamental to our propositions.
From our final empirical summary, we compared and contrasted our findings with the
theoretical background, aiming to find the true insights of how reflective practice could enhance
the field of marketing. This type of constant comparative analysis, allowed us to move back
and forth between the literature and the empirical material and thus create a deeper
understanding of the phenomenon itself (Fournier 1998).
Since this was an autoethnographic study, we put the analysis into context by incorporating
our personal experiences whenever it was of relevance, in relation to our findings. With this

26. 26
triangulation method, taking different perspectives of the issue (Flick 2009) we could enhance
our understanding of the phenomenon. By understanding the patterns of how: and especially
why, the informants reacted to our questions and propositions, we were able to find interesting
discrepancies that later on constituted the foundation for our discussion.
3.7 Critical consideration of sources
Source criticism is important for a scientific study, since the credibility of theoretical and
empirical sources are tested and reflected upon. As far as our theoretical research was
concerned, we only used published, peer-reviewed scientific papers, in the collection of prior
research. All articles used in the study have been cited at least ten times by other researchers,
which we considered to be sufficient in order to validate the articles.
Since the concept of reflective practice mainly was developed within medicine and nursing, we
acknowledged the potential risk of adopting the concept from another fields. However, we
argued that it fitted as a framework for this study, since reflective practice aimed to prepare
practitioners, in general, to be better prepared for a critical approach to their practice, and be
able to adapt to conditions that challenge their general perceptions of the world. Reflective
practice thus, would not necessarily have to be limited to certain fields.
Since the informants were strategically selected, through a purposeful collection strategy, we
were aware of the risk, that our judgment of the informants’ reliability and competence, could
affect the outcome of this study (Tongco 2007). In order to avoid this, we made sure to evaluate
the informants’ background, and knowledge of marketing, through research and screening
questions prior the interviews.
Before committing to the autoethnographic method we considered the criticism it had been
given within the literature. Delamont (2007) describes the method as “essentially lazy – literally
lazy and also intellectually lazy” (p. 2). However, Hammersley (2010) highlighted the
importance of appropriate application: “I do not dismiss the use of […] dialogues or poems […]
what is essential, though, is that these forms are used in ways that are appropriate to the task
involved […] and must be subordinated to the purpose of developing arguments supported by
evidence, that provide convincing answers to factual questions about the world (p. 6). We
extensively kept in mind Hamersley’s note of caution and made sure that our arguments where
supported by evidence other than our own experience.
3.8 Research ethical reflection
Due to our choice, of conducting qualitative interviews, it was necessary to consider ethical
aspects of our interview process. These aspects were, for example, how we published the
results, how we managed anonymity and how we handled company insights, which was
revealed during the interviews. In order to manage these issues, we gave the informants the
opportunity to stay anonymous and we informed them that they could notify us if they wanted
their statements of the road.
Before conducting the interviews, we notified the informants about the consent requirement,
the information requirement and the use requirement (Bryman & Bell 2005). In other words,
we notified the informants’, prior to each interview, which we intended to record the interview

27. 27
but that each informant had the opportunity to refuse the recording. They were also informed
that the interviews were voluntarily and that the collected data only would be used for the
purpose of the study.
4.0 Empirical presentation, Analysis and Findings
From our final empirical summary, we compared and contrasted our findings with the
theoretical framework, aiming to answer our research questions. Since this was an
autoethnographic study, we put the analysis into context by incorporating the authors’ personal
experience, whenever they were of relevance with the findings. By understanding the patterns
of how, and especially why, the informants reacted to our questions and propositions; we were
able to find interesting discrepancies that later on constituted the foundation for our discussion.
4.1 The Gap
All our interviews started out in a general discussion of how the informants viewed the
relationship between academia and the business world. The general consensus was that there
is a gap between theory and practice. Most of the informants, especially the managers, defined
the gap in terms of academia and the business world working on different levels, rather than
on different continents. The manager at Company 2 (2015) said:
"Researchers are working on a high theoretical level, but since we (i.e. the practitioners) work
with clients, we work on a very practical level".
From the literature we saw that the authors, who addressed benefits with a disconnection
between academy and practice, (e.g. Gummesson 2002; Thomson & Thomson 2008) also
viewed the gap as being defined by different levels of responsibility (i.e. more theoretical vs.
more practical). The informants, who shared this view of the gap, did not discuss the gap in
itself as a problem. However, most of the novice informants had the tendency to be more
radical in their view of the gap, arguing that the business world should be seen as the ‘real
world’ and the academy as its own remote world. From the literature we could see that the
authors criticizing the gap, (e.g. Hunt 2002) would lean more towards the novice practitioners’
view of the gap, arguing that the academy and the business world live in two separate worlds.
The novices thus shared the view with the critical authors about the gap being a problem.
From the discussions of the relationship between academia and the business world, we noticed
three recurring themes. The first theme was the general interpretation of the meaning of
theoretical knowledge. The second theme was the general discussion of how theoretical
knowledge was communicated into practice. And the last theme was the integration of
theoretical knowledge in practice. As the interviews progressed, and we began the discussion
of theoretical and practical knowledge, we understood why managers and novices viewed the
gap differently: their interpretation and understanding of theoretical knowledge seemed to
affect the view of the gap.

28. 28
4.1.1 Theoretical knowledge
From the interviews, we understood that the novice practitioners found it difficult to see the
value of theoretical knowledge. The novice practitioner at Company 4 (2015), even stated:
"I can’t see any purpose or value of theoretical knowledge".
The novice practitioner at Company 1 (2015) implied that the research and theoretical
knowledge would be more valuable if it was contextual and anchored in reality, stating:
"Research must focus on how to get bang for the buck".
The novice practitioners felt that practical knowledge was more relevant and perceived it to be
more valuable, if they could contribute with practical knowledge to the organization. This notion
followed Grundvåg Ottesen and Grønhaug’s (2004) reasoning, where they argue that practical
knowledge is perceived by practitioners to be more relevant because it leads directly to actions.
However, the novice practitioner at Company 2 (2015) had a different view, arguing that
practical tasks are based on theoretical perspectives and insights; hence she saw some value
of theoretical knowledge. This interpretation of theoretical knowledge was more in line with
how the managers perceived knowledge from academia. The manager at Company 2 (2015)
said that one can:
“Benefit from the academic world by gaining new perspectives and evaluate the job”.
The manager at Company 3 (2015) followed this reasoning as he discussed the bigger
questions in business:
“I think that the purpose of theoretical knowledge is to try to understand reality better”.
Grundvåg Ottesen and Grønhaug (2004) stated that practitioners understand both theoretical
and practical knowledge, i.e. understand the concepts of theoretical knowledge in particular,
and academic language in general. Initially, this was true regarding our informants: they
understood and were aware of the research itself. What came across, as a general consensus,
was that the interviewed practitioners did not quite seem to understand the concept, and thus
the true purpose of theoretical knowledge, even less how to implement it. Theory does not
have to be a direct applicable answer, rather it constitutes of concepts and views that build up
a framework, in order to make sense of our world (Thomson & Thomson 2008). The informants
argued that theoretical knowledge would be more valuable if it was directly applicable to
practice, thus missing the point that Thomson and Thomson (2008) made above. If
practitioners do not understand the purpose of theoretical knowledge, it is hard to integrate
theoretical insights into practical context. Thomson and Thomson (2008) also discussed that
it is the key to be able to integrate theory to a wider knowledge base, before it can be used in
practice. This idea, of general theoretical knowledge, is important and necessary in order to
achieve progress in practice, as it enhances our ability to understand major changes in market
conditions (Gummesson 2002). If novice practitioners do not understand this purpose of
theoretical knowledge it is safe to assume they will not see the value of theory and because of
that, may not focus on implementation of theory in practice.

29. 29
We started out our own education with the frustration that theoretical knowledge, retrieved from
the university, seemed irrelevant. The frustration came from the lack of understanding of how
theory, taught at the university, could be used and be of relevance in the business world: hence
we questioned the value of our education. In order to justify the time spent studying, we figured
that our degree would at least be ‘a ticket to our first job interview’. During our interviews, the
novice practitioners shared our view:
“The most important function of my education has been to have the degree on paper when
seeking jobs” (Novice Company 2 2015).
While hired at our first job we additionally believed that everything we needed to know in the
business world, had to be learned from scratch anyway, and that theories taught in school
would not be useful. This view was also shared among the novice in the interviews:
"You learn how to write reports and how work is done when you start at a new job” (Novice
Company 3 2015).
The novice practitioner at Company 4 (2015) even told us that the manager at his first job said;
“The first thing they told me when I started at Carnegie was to forget all that I had learned in
school”.
4.1.1.1 Understanding the purpose of theoretical knowledge
However, we both thought that studying five years at the university just to get a ticket to the
first job seemed pointless and stupid. We thought that there had to be a higher purpose with
our education, so we decided to investigate this further during the first year of our masters. By
studying the literature on the gap in marketing, and interviewing people in the business world,
we got the insight that theoretical knowledge had to be understood differently than practical
knowledge. Theoretical knowledge answered the question ‘why’ and practical knowledge
answered the question ‘how’. Understanding the difference between having knowledge about,
and truly understanding the meaning of theoretical knowledge, made theoretical knowledge
more valuable for us. Viewing the definition of theory, as concepts that create a framework to
make sense of the world (Thomson & Thomson 2008), we felt more confident in understanding
what context knowledge became relevant. The manager at Company 1 (2015) shared this view
and was clear about that theory was the most relevant for novice practitioners as well, even if
they do more practical tasks, such as, conducting presentations:
"Behind every communication, every idea to translate, there is a deeper thinking" (Manager
Company 1 2015).
Proposing this view during the interviews, the novice practitioners could eventually see
theoretical knowledge from a different light and supported our proposition.

30. 30
4.1.2 Communication
A prerequisite, for the use of theoretical knowledge in practice, is that theoretical knowledge is
communicated to the business world in the first place. We understood, from the interviews,
that the informants stayed updated on theoretical knowledge, by reading magazines, books,
attending seminars etc. However, none of them read marketing journals, with a few exceptions
for when strengthening a thesis, or understanding a new market. This correlates with Hughes,
Tapp and Hughes (2008) who argue that a significant amount of practitioners do not read
marketing journals. However, most of the latest research and theoretical knowledge is
communicated through marketing journals (Hunt 2002).
All the informants believed that a reason for this, was that new research was hard to find, and
difficult to process, in a time-pressed schedule. Both Razzaque (1998) and Brannick and
Coghlan (2006) discussed this as well, and argued that the practitioners had limited time since
they were affected by a need to act. The informants also expressed difficulties to understand
research, due to the complex language and formulations.
4.1.2.1 A comprehensive academic language
All of the interviewed practitioners agreed that if the marketing journals had been more
accessible and packaged in a better way, they would be more likely to read and process them.
However, the manager at Company 1 (2015) raised a note of caution to ‘popular science’ and
criticized its methodology and anchoring in reality. By this, he meant that it is important that
research is made in a professional and objective way, not drawing conclusions on loose facts.
Most of the informants however, wanted academic research to be presented in a more
comprehensive manner: easy to understand and easy to apply in a practical example:
“Theory just have to be so lined up, pompous and inaccessible that in an extremely time-
pressed world you have no time to take it in unless it’s presented in a ‘Omni title’ in paragraph
text (Novice Company 1 2015).
Above all else they suggested case-based research since they believed this to be of more
value to the business world and easier to pin down and make use of. The manager at Company
1 (2015), however, argued that case-based research potentially was biased and not focusing
on exploring new ways of thinking.
From our perspective, we felt that marketing journals were too stilted and difficult to interpret,
making it easier to look for knowledge where it was more accessible (e.g. executive summaries
or white papers). The problem however, is that if you do not read academic journals, you miss
out on theoretical knowledge, the development of the field slows down and potentially,
knowledge get lost (Razzaque 1998). Since the practitioner compare industry magazines and
books, with marketing journals, there is a risk that they do not understand the purpose of the
journals, compared to the magazines.

31. 31
4.1.3 Interplay
When discussing how to create interplay between theoretical and practical knowledge, all
informants expressed difficulties integrating theory into practical use. As discussed above, this
was partly because the academic language itself was difficult to interpret, and also because of
the theoretical level of the knowledge.
Even if some informants could see the opportunities of integrating theory in practice, they
highlighted another issue. The manager at Company 4 (2015) said:
"The biggest difficulty is not the integration itself, but it is to bring new knowledge into the rest
of the organization".
Thomson and Thomson (2008) discuss the importance of an open knowledge-base,
understanding what information that is used and be open to question its relevance, not having
preconceived ideas of what is true. This notion is most relevant in regards to our world-view:
how we view our markets and for the broader questions in general. The manager at Company
1 (2015) develops this even further and discusses that:
“CEO’s and senior decision makers are very much more executive than you ever dream about.
There are not so many CEO’s who sit down and think the really great visionary thoughts, rather
they are very operational”.
The novice informants recognize these issues as well, highlighting practical knowledge to be
perceived more valuable among their managers. They feel pressured to deliver immediate
results rather than ideas and insights of more visionary character, and found it easier to
integrate more hands-on knowledge such as case-studies, best practices etc.
4.1.3.1 Transforming theoretical knowledge to practical use
With experience from being novice practitioners early in the career, we have both felt the same
frustration discussed in the interviews. Before releasing the purpose of theoretical knowledge
we both searched for more direct applicable knowledge from school, which could solve our
problems or help approach a task. At the same time, it was difficult to introduce a new idea to
a manager if you could not provide immediate results. The novice practitioner at Company 4
(2015) perceived this problem similarly:
“If I had been playing more with the theories in a practical way, then I had been able to say
more in a project. The questions are always; what is relevant here; can you take an example
of that, do you have a case on that; has it worked elsewhere?”
Turning back to the literature, Cheraghi, Salasli and Ahmadi (2007) address the integration of
theory in practice, within the field of medicine. Instead of blaming universities to be theoretical
and teaching non-practical knowledge, they argue that the school should teach the student
how to transfer theoretical knowledge into practical use. We agreed on this notion as well.
Even if practitioners understand the purpose of theoretical knowledge they still need to
understand how to capitalize on it. However, during our education we have found this learning
point (of how to transfer and put theories and concept into context) to be absent.

32. 32
4.2 Reflective Practice
All informants were positive to the concept of reflective practice and issued that reflection was
necessary for consultancy companies:
“Time for reflection and taking in new knowledge, are natural elements of being a consultant”
(Novice Company 4 2015).
However, the novice practitioners did not have as much faith as the managers; in regards to
how reflective practice enhance the integration of theory in practice. Most of the managers
thus agreed with Thomson and Thomson’s (2008) discussion of that the heart of the practice
is to “become aware of the knowledge that informs our practice – making it more visible” (p.
18). The managers also highlighted the importance of actually looking for the knowledge that
informs our practice:
“If the management had been looking for these ideas they would have found them earlier, but
they don’t. To a certain extent it has to do with that they are so preoccupied with coping,
because the pace is so high and they are so inflexible all the time. They are also to
operationally focus so they cannot think the great thoughts. But companies must have the
space to think the great thoughts. For today it is so easy to make the wrong turn” (Manager
Company 1 2015).
The manager at Company 1 (2015) so highlighted the importance of reflective practice, as he
believed a focus on this concept would emphasize the importance of looking forward, and
thinking the big questions through theoretical knowledge. The manager at Company 4 (2015)
agreed; however, he did not centralize theoretical knowledge in that regard:
“To be honest, running a consultant company does not require theoretical knowledge.
However, I think that the organization would do well incorporating it”.
The manager at Company 4 (2015) rather urged that ‘best practices’ could substitute
theoretical knowledge, and thus, function as their critical point of view.
4.2.1 Understanding critical depth vs. critical breadth
The importance of acknowledging the great questions and to challenge status quo was well
discussed among all informants. The manager at Company 3 (2015) said:
“It is not possible to be a follower in marketing as you constantly work with creative processes.
We must concentrate on constant innovation to be the market leader”.
Companies like Google, Uber and Apple were frequently highlighted as good examples of
rethinking industries and business models. These companies were also discussed in fear: as
worst-case scenarios, because they all had turned markets upside down, resulting in
eliminating many players. The informants highlighted the importance of constant development,
as the world in general, and markets in particular, change so quickly.
Even though there was a general consensus of the importance of staying ahead of the market,
theoretical knowledge was not at the center of this discussion for everyone. For example, the

33. 33
manager at Company 4 (2015) had a more narrow scope of reflection, compared to the
manager at Company 1 (2015); and we noticed that his scope of reflection was more related
to the literature on critical depth and analytical thinking. Critical reflection and analytical
thinking, in this sense, focus the scope of reflection to the circumstance of a given situation,
being contextual and thus by definition, do not incorporate the more holistic picture (Thomson
& Thomson 2008). The manager at Company 4 (2015) reinforced this hypothesis as he
discussed best practices as a source for developing knowledge. Using best practice in this
context, assumes that you play along with the rules of the game in your market, not being
proactive and changing them.
As a counter approach, the manager at Company 1 (2015) had a broader scope in his critical
reflection as he emphasized on the wider social context as the heart of reflection. As Thomson
and Thomson (2008) discussed, critical breadth and helicopter vision are equally important for
reflective practice to succeed, but perhaps even more important in order for theoretical
knowledge to be relevant as it focus on the ability to see how component parts, constituting
the situation, fit into the ‘big picture’. Remembering the definition of theoretical knowledge, how
it informs our practice, the manager at Company 1 (2015) agreed upon the connection, and
highlighted the importance of both critical breadth and helicopter vision in order for theoretical
knowledge to be relevant. He discussed how everyone could be reflective, and most probably
are, however, analytical thinking and critical depth only helps you improve what is already
established. It takes critical breadth and helicopter vision in order to look beyond and challenge
your worldview, and so, truly benefit from theoretical knowledge. He also linked this back to
the purpose of the company in question:
“Is the purpose to solely increasing EBITA? Or do you have a higher purpose?” (Manager
Company 1 2015).
This links back to the big question of what an organization is, if you live to optimize, or if you
live to develop.
4.2.2 Openness, the foundation for reflective practice
When it came to the discussion of facilitating reflective practice, all informants agreed that the
management team would have the overall obligation of facilitating for the practice. The novice
at Company 1 (2015) described his reality:
“There are many cases where you have a pressing deadline and you hardly have time to reflect
on what you deliver in the project, let alone one's own behavior, knowledge gathering etc.
Those pieces are always secondary to what you deliver”.
Thomson and Thomson (2008) highlight this issue by arguing that ‘throwing people in the deep
end of water’ will not teach them how to swim. In fact, they suggest that it is about what you
do with an experience that will determine what it teaches us. This will also affect the quality of
delivery, so time for reflection becomes crucial.
Initially, the novice informants discussed how clear structures and processes could facilitate
the reflective practice, assigning time for reflection. However, as we dug deeper in what they
actually wanted from their managers, it was rather a question of an organizational culture that