I have found the following papers helpful, in regards to the question

Vermeulen, F. 2007, ""I Shall Not Remain Insignificant": Adding a Second Loop to Matter More." Academy of Management Journal 50(4): 754-761.

Vicari, S. 2013, "Is the Problem Only Ours? A Question of Relevance in Management Research." European Management Review 10(4): 173-181.

Bansal, P., S. Bertels, T. Ewart, P. MacConnachie and J. O'Brien. 2012, "Bridging the Research-Practice Gap." Academy of Management Perspectives 26(1).

Dear Prof Mukul ,

You have raised an important question. Relevance Vs Rigor.

I may like to label it as R vs r !

In my view, both are needed and needed in right quantity ! At times , due to time pressures or due to business dynamics, one has to do research which may lack rigor BUT meets the need adequately. This could be followed up later by adding rigor. Initially,as an experienced management researcher, one may raise certain proportions or share certain insights. The next set of research may complement this by adding rigor and various tests of validity.

Sometimes sharing insights may lead to high quality research. Sometimes, rigorous may lead to attracting attention of researchers who may assess its relevance.

For example: economic meltdown attracted lot of relevant research which was later followed by mathematical models having sufficient rigor.

Indirectly, this debate also takes a shape of quantitative vs qualitative research !. Qualitative research may be high on relevance scale and quantitative research may be high on rigor scale. I call it as Q vs q dilemma. For the management research to progress both Q and q are indeed needed.

I also agree with Prof Bhakar's view that business and academic research may have differential requirements. I would add that both are needed for management education and research to progress !

Thanks for your participation in the effort to answer the question Prof Deshmukh