Practice-informed research

Abstract

Purpose – The purpose of the paper is to introduce a model for practice-informed research and to propose this as an alternative paradigm of enquiry, capable of satisfying the competing demands for research in the built environment to be both academically rigorous, and also relevant to practice. Design/methodology/approach – The model is defined in terms of research whose primary purpose addresses the immediate needs of professional practice, rather than theoretical, policy or other academic concerns, and which also utilizes the researcher's experientially gained knowledge as a methodological device. The extent to which this model is capable of demonstrating the required degree of rigour demanded by the academic world is then evaluated through a review of relevant theoretical and methodological literature. Findings – The model is seen to draw upon the Aristotlean notions of techne and phronesis, and to belong to a long epistemological and methodological tradition associated with the concept of knowledge in action. The relationship between this concept and that of tacit knowledge, as well as emic and ideographic approaches to research are demonstrated. The model is also seen to have particular resonances with recent developments in the arts and design disciplines, in qualitative social research and in aspects of the current discourse surrounding the emergence of the knowledge economy. Research limitations/implications – The paper demonstrates the academic legitimacy of the proposed model as an alternative research paradigm for use in a built environment context. Practical implications – The model presents an approach that has the potential to increase the relevance of research, and to generate an increased level dialogue between academics and practitioners in the built environment field. Originality/value – The paper places the concept of practice-informed research into the public domain for subsequent consideration and debate by members of the built environment research community. The concept's insider and practice-centric approaches distinguish it from earlier contributions to the relevance v. rigour debate. By drawing on a wide range of interdisciplinary sources the paper also offers new theoretical insights that have not previously been aired in a built environment context.