Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Evaluates the ITIL framework to enhance curriculum design for scholar-practitioners, suggesting more effective learning strategies.
Professional doctorates in management and leadership are frequently justified by the promise of developing scholar-practitioners who can bridge research and practice and lead change in complex organizational systems. Yet this identity is often invoked as an attractive label rather than articulated as an operational developmental target, leaving programs unsure what scholar-practitioners actually do or how to design curricula, mentoring, and evaluation around those capabilities. This article introduces the Inquiry–Translation–Implementation–Leadership (ITIL) framework, a design and evaluation lens for management education developed through a critical interpretive synthesis of literatures on knowledge translation and doctoral identity development. ITIL conceptualizes scholar-practitioner work as four interconnected capacities – practice-based inquiry, context-to-fit translation, embedded change implementation, and impactful leadership – that together define how professionals generate practice-grounded knowledge, make multi-source evidence context-fit, move ideas into action, and orchestrate change in complex systems. The article outlines the ITIL model, specifies core dimensions of each capacity, and derives implications for curriculum mapping, culminating project design, mentoring, and program-level assessment. It offers management educators a coherent, actionable model for moving scholar-practitioner identity from label to logic and strengthening the practice-based contributions of professional doctoral education.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Rodney K. McCurdy (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: