Who Do We Write for? Strategies for Network Formation of a Research Program

No scholar is an Island: we are all networks and write for our networks. These networks, sometimes call research programs are scholarly communities kept together by a common interest. The work of these communities constitutes a polyphony, which constitutes the conversation we are joining. These communities are composed by different types of members with diverse types of interests. Some members constitute the hard core of the theory, the big names. This inner circle is complemented by the participants in the paradigm, people whose research conceptually and empirically tests and advances the theory, through confirmation and disconfirmation. Other participants are critics, who challenge the ideas. Without critics, the program will lose vitality, regardless of its “goodness”. Another, more external circle, is composed by those who conduct applied research, translating the theory to wider, managerial audiences. This circle exists only if the theory gained sufficient attention to “deserve” to be translated. Finally, some theories get the attention of some diffusers who popularize it to the general public. A vital ecosystem is composed by all these providers that target different audiences but that, as a collective, play important roles in the market for ideas.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Leadership Studies
Published
2026-01-19
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1002/jls.70024
Primary Topic
Information Systems Theories and Implementation
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Who Do We Write for? Strategies for Network Formation of a Research Program

Stewart Clegg, Miguel Pina e Cunha
Journal of Leadership Studies
Information Systems Theories and Implementation
article

Who Do We Write for? Strategies for Network Formation of a Research Program

Stewart Clegg, Miguel Pina e Cunha
article en

Abstract

No scholar is an Island: we are all networks and write for our networks. These networks, sometimes call research programs are scholarly communities kept together by a common interest. The work of these communities constitutes a polyphony, which constitutes the conversation we are joining. These communities are composed by different types of members with diverse types of interests. Some members constitute the hard core of the theory, the big names. This inner circle is complemented by the participants in the paradigm, people whose research conceptually and empirically tests and advances the theory, through confirmation and disconfirmation. Other participants are critics, who challenge the ideas. Without critics, the program will lose vitality, regardless of its “goodness”. Another, more external circle, is composed by those who conduct applied research, translating the theory to wider, managerial audiences. This circle exists only if the theory gained sufficient attention to “deserve” to be translated. Finally, some theories get the attention of some diffusers who popularize it to the general public. A vital ecosystem is composed by all these providers that target different audiences but that, as a collective, play important roles in the market for ideas.

Journal of Leadership StudiesVol. 19(4)
The University of Sydney (AU), Universidade Nova de Lisboa (PT)
Openalex Percentile: Top 87%
Information Systems Theories and Implementation
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.