CROSSROADS—Designing Institutions for Applied Impact: Lessons from Engineering for Organizational Research

Organizational researchers increasingly call for applied impact, yet institutional structures continue to privilege theoretical novelty over practical relevance. In contrast, engineering fields have built mechanisms that legitimize rigorously validated, usable contributions—often publishing proven solutions before fully developed theories. Drawing on our experiences in both engineering and organizational research, we examine how institutional design—not just individual motivation—shapes what counts as legitimate scholarship. We identify structural levers that support applied impact across three institutional pillars: cognitive (what counts as knowledge), normative (what confers prestige), and regulative (what gets published and rewarded). By analyzing how engineering disciplines use diverse publication formats, evaluation rubrics, and inclusive authorship norms, we outline feasible reforms for organizational research. We propose a framework for institutional redesign that expands the definition of scholarly value while preserving rigor.