Comments on: Theory versus Practice?…Or, Is “theory” a dirty word?

By: Carlos Serrano

Carlos Serrano — Wed, 25 May 2011 12:52:41 +0000

I have observed that it is common to reject theory in companies. What I see is that people leading companies believe that theoretical argues are a waste of time. Sometime I hear that someone fall on paralysis by analysis. From my point of view, the root of the problem (and here is my theory), is the kind of knowledge you manage in companies. Unlike universities, the knowledge managed in companies is a kind of “Know how to” while in universities is a “Know what to”. And my hypothesis is that leader that manage a good balance between know how and know what, make it better for one simple reason: they build sense to the action, they know why they are doing what they do, they can explain and communicate reason, they relate their proposals with the net of the organization, they are not acting like automats.
Unfortunately, the most common is doing by doing which, I guess, makes companies to loose a lot of money. There is just one suggestion to overcome this: teach people to think, show them that they are not wasting time while thinking and let them find out how revenues increase when thinking takes part of their time.
I just want to finish with a reflection on e-learning programs. It is truth that most of them lack the practical component, it is also truth that this is bad e-learning. THere are a lot of e-learning courses including huge space for application where learners get used to the new skill and consequently improve their practice. These usually are more expensive programs.

By: Dr. Shamim Anwar

Dr. Shamim Anwar — Mon, 17 Jan 2011 03:05:35 +0000

What do you say about the e-learning programs that lack in practical component? Companies are spending a significant percentage of their total expenditure on e-learning for their employees. Do you think e-learning while on one side ensures the documentatory proof of a company’s employees, it actually lacks the practical aspect? I just want to know the rate of success of online training programs. I mean if you read the techniques of ‘how to swim’ online, can you be called as trained swimmer without stepping into a swimming pool?

By: Abdullah

Abdullah — Wed, 15 Sep 2010 01:54:32 +0000

we could say then that theory build by experince and it is only approved statment of examined experince

By: mkizilos

mkizilos — Fri, 11 Sep 2009 19:54:29 +0000

Thanks for the comment, Eric. I agree with you that theory is no substitute for experience. My point was simply that it should not be an either–or … We should acknowledge the importance of both theoretical and experiential foundations. You correctly note that most people can recall a professor somewhere along the way who did not have any experience base to draw from. While there can be role for this type of pure theory, it must be carefully placed within a curriculum that balances it with the practical as well.

Having worked as a consultant fir many years, I got more used to seeing people lacking a foundation for what they did. That can actually make them dangerous, as I allude to in my post about “coaches” practicing psychology…

Mark

By: Eric Rudolf

Eric Rudolf — Fri, 11 Sep 2009 19:21:29 +0000

The problem with Theory is, it takes a huge leap of faith for some people (like me) to accept theory as a substitute for Experience. Anyone with an undergraduate or graduate degree–even at a Top 10 program–had at least one professor who spent their entire life in the classroom, and never actually did what they were teaching others to do. In the real business world Theory is helpful at times, but is ultimately a poor substitute for Practice when given a choice between the two.