joint learning and the shared exploration of resources ( Canhoto et al., 2016 ). Specific linkage and exchange activities that can positively influence knowledge translation include informal personal contacts, participation in committees, boundary spanning, scholar practitioners, and exchange of
Search Results
Hebe Schaillée, Ramón Spaaij, Ruth Jeanes, and Marc Theeboom
Jon Welty Peachey, Nico Schulenkorf, and Ramon Spaaij
, social, and cultural benefits ( Long & Sandle, 2019 ). How might such dialogue be promoted and supported in practice? As Schaillee et al. ( 2019 ) demonstrate in their contribution, there is a need for greater boundary spanning and crossing to further integrate theory and practice. In other words, the
Katie E. Misener, Kathy Babiak, Gareth Jones, and Iain Lindsey
amateur sport organizations. In fact, dense, locally redundant relations are not considered a particularly efficient network structure for organizations since they often provide access to similar information, knowledge, and resources ( Granovetter, 1985 ). More expansive boundary-spanning connections are
Mathew Dowling, Jonathan Robertson, Marvin Washington, Becca Leopkey, Dana Lee Ellis, Andie Riches, and Lee Smith
scholars were particularly adept in “boundary spanning” and working across both general management and sport management fields. These formative studies would lay the foundation for the application of institutional theory in sport management throughout the 1990s, with several academics (often doctoral
Stefan Walzel, Jonathan Robertson, and Christos Anagnostopoulos
meeting the specified search criteria. Boundary-spanning issues inevitably arise when attempting an integrative review of a concept such as CSR that has been described as “vague and ambiguous, both in theory and in practice” ( Coelho, McClure, & Spry, 2003 , p. 15). Consequently, it is important to
