Engaging the front line: The important role of practitioner papers in health marketing and practical guidance to facilitate publication

Introduction

“What do you get when you bring together a practitioner, a couple of pracademics and an academic? A call for practitioner papers in Health Marketing Quarterly and some guidance to help practitioners publish in academic journals.”

At its core, health marketing strives to inform, educate, and support individuals and communities through the development of products and services to adopt healthier behaviors and routines (Parkinson & Davey, 2023). Health marketing’s importance lies in its capacity to bridge the gap between clinical expertise and community understanding, promoting health literacy and the capability to participate in health decisions, and driving positive health outcomes (Schulz & Nakamoto, 2013). In the field of health marketing, the exchange of knowledge between academia and practitioners is vital for fostering innovation, improving healthcare outcomes, and driving positive societal impact as called for in the literature (Hammedi et al., 2024). One powerful avenue for this knowledge exchange is through the publication of practitioner papers—insights and experiences directly from the front lines of health marketing that appear in the public domain. However, to date, there is limited publication of practitioner papers in health marketing, social marketing and other behavior change disciplines (Sherring & Foote, 2023). While increasing the number of practitioner papers is important, numerous challenges exist, for example, finding trained reviewers who can balance academic rigor with real world relevance, the current focus in marketing journals on theoretical contribution that often limits practitioners’ ability to publish, and the requirement to include lengthy literature reviews which is often outside the scope of practitioners’ skill sets. In this editorial, we highlight the significance of practitioner papers in shaping the discourse on health marketing, explore how academics, including journal editors and reviewers, can actively contribute to facilitating their publication, and provide guidance for practitioners to publish their work. Finally, this editorial introduces Volume 41, Issue 1, highlighting two practitioner collaboration papers.

The unique value of practitioner papers

Practitioner papers offer a unique and invaluable perspective that academics often find challenging to capture within the confines of traditional research methodologies. However, such papers provide a real-world lens into the challenges, successes, failures, and nuances of health marketing strategies, offering insights grounded in practical experiences. By sharing firsthand accounts, practitioners contribute a wealth of contextual knowledge that enriches the academic understanding of health marketing dynamics.

Why practitioner papers matter

There are many benefits of practitioners publishing their research and program results. To understand why practitioner papers are important to advance fields such as health marketing, we must first start with unpacking their relevance to current issues. Health marketing is rapidly evolving, and practitioners are often the first to encounter emerging challenges. Practitioner papers allow for the timely dissemination of strategies that address current issues, consequently fostering a more agile and responsive approach to healthcare marketing.

Although translating theory into practice is essential, the use of language and terminology needs to transcend academia (Crosier, 2004). Academics develop theories and models shaping the theoretical landscape of health marketing. However, practitioner papers serve as a bridge, demonstrating how these theories are applied in real-world scenarios, aiding in the translation of academic knowledge into actionable practices. Furthermore, practitioner papers provide opportunities for enhanced learning for all stakeholders. The inclusion of practitioner papers in academic journals benefits not only researchers and practitioners but also students and policymakers. These papers provide tangible examples that enhance the educational experience for students and offer policymakers practical insights to inform evidence-based decision-making.

Barriers and enablers to practitioners publishing

Unfortunately, motivating factors for practitioners to publish are generally lacking in the professional space. Most practitioners “often have little time and encouragement to develop journal articles” (Posner, 2009), including from the practitioners’ own organizations that typically do not encourage or incentivise the writing and publishing of case studies and program results. This is despite many practitioners knowing the benefits listed above.

While time and encouragement are likely to be the most significant barriers to publishing for practitioners, another to be seriously considered is the lack of access to journals to reference when writing a journal submission. One of the author’s own experiences as a practitioner bear this out, having to rely on ‘friendly’ academics he had met and connected with via conferences and networking to supply relevant marketing journal articles and theory papers to complete papers. Academic journals and resources being more widely available to practitioners (such as more open access of important papers for practitioners) would assist with this.

On the flipside there are ways forward that could assist practitioners into publishing and counter the above barriers. The first and possibly most important is collaboration between practitioners and academics to publish real world studies in academic literature (Foote et al., 2023). Under this approach, a first step could be academics reviewing practitioners’ completed project reports and together reformatting and submitting as case studies or research articles (Sherring & Foote, 2023). This would achieve more practice-oriented work appearing in published literature, help practitioners gain an understanding of the process of writing and journal submissions, and, of course, share the load while providing academics with more publications for their resumes. This could in future lead to practitioners and academics developing long lasting relationships and collaborating from the initiation stages of projects through to publication. Thus, ensuring theory to practice translation in programs, additional research rigor, academics meeting societal impacts, and enhancing reflexivity in both sides’ work.

A final enabler could be how information is presented for practitioners. For starters looking at the use of simpler language. Articles are rarely written in plain language (Crosier, 2004) which is off-putting to practitioners and as a result makes the papers deemed irrelevant (McKenzie et al., 2002). Note the authors have taken care in their use of language in this editorial in an attempt to practice what we preach. In addition, looking at other more practitioner friendly ways key information from articles can be published, meeting the needs of time poor professionals; including (but not limited to) infographics, plain language summaries, brief videos, and podcasts.

How Academics/pracademics can support practitioner papers

An increased focus on academic/practitioner collaborative publishing supports ‘theory to practice’ and vice versa. Academics (and pracademics, i.e., those with experience in both academic and practitioner settings) can actively assist practitioners in identifying appropriate theoretical models and frameworks that apply to their programmes, with an eye toward publishing the results.

However, this is easier said than done, and just as language and accessibility serve as barriers to practitioner publishing, so does theory and how it is approached and conceptualized. We suggest an emphasis be placed on demystifying theory and adopting more versatile and pragmatic ways of viewing theory use and application (Foote et al., 2023; Sherring & Foote, 2023). For example, practitioners rarely develop programmes with theory in mind nor do they typically reference theory in their project reports, but many academics versed in the social sciences will readily identify multiple theoretical constructs underpinning that same work. Practitioners should be reassured in knowing they are oftentimes already working with theory in a real-world sense, and that both practitioners and academics struggle with theory use. Academics in turn might be well-served to acknowledge that theory can be equally fussy and messy in academic settings. Accordingly, this realization about the true nature of theory should be top of mind when conducting editorial- and peer-review of practitioner papers.

The inherent – if not always overtly apparent – existence of theory in practice provides a basis for not only the writing up of case study publications that retrospectively identify theory within completed projects, but for further collaborations with academics serving as partners or advisors to guide theory use from the project conceptualization stage. The result will be more theoretically informed interventions applied and evaluated in practice settings that meet the necessary rigor and relevance for publication in any journal or media channel.

Practitioner papers can also play a role in driving much-needed reform toward the adoption of more meaningful performance metrics within academic systems. Shifts are underway within universities and grant provider organizations to elevate and measure the impact of societal value as an important research output (Baines et al., 2009; Conduit et al., 2022; Foote et al., 2023), and to similarly consider this in tenure and promotion decisions (Woolston, 2021). Government agencies are increasingly incorporating societal impact measures as a requirement for grant funding, highlighting the importance of impact for research. We encourage academics and pracademics to support this sea change. Moving away from a sole focus on journal rankings and output volume and instead partnering wiith practitioners to publish project outcomes is a practical first step for researchers and academics to apply a more social and practical lens to their work.

Practitioner papers also have direct applications within educational settings, as they can be included in course curricula to provide practical case studies for students to learn from. They also can build ongoing relationships between instructors and practitioners, who may be invited to guest lecture for the courses. This exact scenario was the case for the practitioner author of this editorial, whose published work (Sherring, 2019, 2021) has been used by lecturers in marketing courses in both New Zealand and Australia. Further, these relationships can lead to more robust collaborations, with practitioners offering internships or service-learning opportunities for students, or with instructors and practitioners teaming up on new projects together (which in turn spawn further publication opportunities). Such outcomes can be documented and should be increasingly valued by academic institutions seeking to demonstrate societal impact. Furthermore, this highlights the important nexus between practice and teaching/education, which increasingly is a focus of many universities’ strategy and pedagogical approaches.

We acknowledge that traditional academic publishing metrics such as the volume of citations in highly ranked journals are likely to remain, unfortunately continuing to thwart academic/practitioner publishing collaborations. However, considering universities are increasingly branding themselves by their societal impact and partnerships with practice (Lindgreen et al., 2021), practitioner papers can reinforce the value of these collaborations and amplify the changing norms around what metrics are meaningful. Further, these collaborations can serve as examples of engagement and impact, that is research engagement that is part of a planned approach to engagement and impact and co-created with end-users of the research. With increasing calls to develop new metrics and evaluation frameworks (Hammedi et al., 2024) academics and practitioners should incorporate measures of impact into their work (Parkinson & Naidu, 2022).

Tips for increasing practitioner papers

Practitioners and academics establish collaborative networks:

Academics can actively engage with practitioners by establishing collaborative networks and fostering partnerships. By building relationships with professionals in the field, academics can create an environment that encourages the sharing of practical knowledge. Dialogical conferences provide a useful means of achieving this (Parkinson & Davey, 2021).

Academics provide mentorship and guidance to practitioners:

Many practitioners may be unfamiliar with the academic publishing process. Academics can play a pivotal role by offering mentorship and guidance, helping practitioners navigate the submission process and adhere to academic publishing standards (Sherring & Foote, 2023). Academics can also assist practitioners to access relevant literature to guide and support their papers.

Journal editors and editorial boards recognize the value of diverse perspectives and approaches:

Academic journals should actively seek practitioner papers, recognizing the diversity of perspectives and insights they bring. Journals can establish dedicated sections or special issues to showcase practitioner contributions, signaling the importance of these voices within the broader academic community (Parkinson & Davey, 2023).

Guidance for publishing practitioner papers

To enable and empower practitioners to write for academic journal outlets, it is important to provide detailed guidelines to support them in this process. Figure 1 provides an overview which is followed by an in-depth explanation.

Figure 1. Guidance for publishing practitioner papers.

Clarity and relevance:

When preparing a practitioner paper for publication, focus on clarity and relevance. Clearly articulate the problem or issue you are addressing and why it matters to practitioners in your field. Use language that is accessible and avoid jargon whenever possible. Ensure that your paper offers practical insights or solutions that practitioners can apply in their work.

Evidence-informed approach:

While practitioners’ experiences and insights are valuable, it is essential to support your arguments with evidence. Draw on relevant research, case studies, or data to confirm your claims and strengthen the credibility of your paper. Incorporating evidence not only enhances the persuasiveness of your arguments but also demonstrates your commitment to rigor and professionalism.

Engage with the literature:

Familiarise yourself with the existing literature related to your topic before writing your paper. Identify key theories, concepts, and debates relevant to your area of practice and consider how your work contributes to or challenges existing knowledge. By engaging with the literature, you can situate your paper within the broader scholarly context and demonstrate its significance to the field.

Practical implications:

Highlight the practical implications of your research or insights for practitioners. Clearly articulate how your findings or recommendations can inform decision-making, improve practice, or address challenges faced by professionals in your field. Provide concrete examples or case studies to illustrate the real-world applicability of your work and help practitioners understand its relevance to their daily work.

Collaboration and networking:

Consider collaborating with academic researchers or other practitioners to strengthen the quality and impact of your paper. Collaborative partnerships can provide access to additional expertise, resources, and data, enhancing the rigor and scope of your research. Additionally, networking with peers in your field can help you stay informed about publishing opportunities, receive feedback on your work, and establish connections within the practitioner community.

Review and revision:

Before submitting your paper for publication, carefully review and revise it to ensure clarity, coherence, and accuracy. Consider seeking feedback from colleagues, mentors, or professional associations to identify areas for improvement and refine your arguments. Pay attention to formatting guidelines and submission requirements specified by the target journal or publication outlet to increase your chances of acceptance.

Persistence and resilience:

Publishing practitioner papers can be a competitive and challenging process, so it’s essential to remain persistent and resilient. Be prepared to receive feedback from reviewers and editors and view it as an opportunity for learning and improvement rather than as criticism. Stay committed to your research goals and continue to refine your writing and research skills over time. With perseverance and dedication, you can successfully contribute valuable insights to your field through publication.

Reporting the research:

There are additional sections that should be included when publishing practitioner papers; these could replace traditional journal article sections, for example, literature review, and should not be considered as any less important or valuable to the contribution of the paper. Table 1 offers some guidance and suggestions on the section headings to include (this list is not exhaustive, nor is there a requirement to include every suggestion):

Table 1. Guidance on sections for practitioner publications.

Suggested headings and subheadings

Introduction Problem statement Formative research and approach (to guide development and implementation) Guiding theory/strategic approach Competitor analysis Consumer insights Value proposition/exchange Marketing and/or intervention mix Methodology: These should provide enough information for the reader to make an informed decision about the quality and rigor of the research/program implementation Sample size/number of participants Recruitment method Process of research/program/intervention Any inclusion/exclusion criteria Data collected and method of collection, source of measures Data analysis method/s Findings: This should provide information on the outputs and outcomes from the research/program Baseline demographics/characteristics of sample or participants Outputs from marketing activities Change in behaviour or drivers of behaviours Changes in practice or process Recommendations: This section should discuss what we know now that we didn’t know before, any interesting or unexpected findings and what should be done as a result of the research. Lessons learned: What worked well What did not work well What could be done differently Practical implications: This section should discuss how the findings and lessons learned help practitioners Policy implications: This section should discuss how the findings be used to inform policy. Conclusion: provide a brief summary of the problem, findings and recommendations

Guidance for editors and reviewers to support practitioner publishing

To support practitioners to publish their work, there are a range of considerations to enable publishing of academic/practitioner collaborations. These include providing constructive feedback, alignment with the audience, and balancing rigor and practicality as outlined:

Constructive feedback:

As reviewers, it’s important to provide constructive feedback that helps practitioners enhance their papers. Rather than focusing solely on identifying weaknesses, offer specific suggestions for improvement. Highlight areas where clarity or evidence could be strengthened and provide practical advice on how to address any gaps. By offering actionable feedback, reviewers can empower practitioners to refine their work and enhance its impact.

Alignment with audience:

Reviewers should assess whether practitioner papers effectively communicate their message to their intended audience. Consider the needs and perspectives of practitioners who may be less familiar with academic conventions. Encourage authors to use language and examples that resonate with their audience and ensure that the paper’s key insights are clear and accessible. By promoting alignment with the target audience, reviewers can help practitioners maximize the relevance and usefulness of their work.

Balancing rigor and practicality:

Practitioner papers often aim to bridge the gap between theory and practice, emphasizing real-world relevance and applicability. While maintaining academic rigor is important, in terms of contribution, reviewers should recognize the value of practical insights and solutions offered by practitioners. Encourage authors to strike a balance between theoretical frameworks and actionable recommendations, ensuring that their paper remains grounded in evidence while also addressing practical challenges faced by practitioners, including when an intervention or program did not work as intended. By acknowledging the importance of both rigor and practicality, reviewers can support practitioners in producing impactful and credible research.

Health marketing quarterly: commitment to publishing practitioner papers

To demonstrate Health Marketing Quarterly’s commitment to publishing practitioner papers, this issue (41:1) provides two examples of practitioner and practitioner/academic collaborations. In the paper authored by Parkinson (an academic), Clark, & McIntosh (allied health practitioners), (Parkinson et al., 2023) the Collaborative Service Design Playbook is introduced, offering a comprehensive guide for the planning, design, and implementation of co-created health services. While successful health service development benefits from theoretically informed approaches, organizations often struggle with the practical aspects of design and implementation. This paper enhances health service design and scalability by presenting a tool that navigates the entire process, integrating service design, co-design, and implementation science. The feasibility of this tool is explored to establish a sustainable service solution, developed collaboratively with participants and experts, that is both scalable and enduring. This paper holds significance for health marketing by offering a holistic, phased approach to guide the development, implementation, and scaling up of health services in the real world.

The paper, authored by Parsons, Payne (academics), Codling, and Murphy (practitioners), (Parsons et al., 2023) offers a reflection on a novel co-designed and whole-of-systems approach to the development of the “Medway Can campaign”. Addressing this public health challenge of obesity requires comprehensive strategies, and whole systems approaches, involving stakeholders and key partners. This paper outlines the co-design process employed for a social marketing campaign focused on obesity prevention, adopting a whole systems approach grounded in the COM-B model of behavior change. The fast turnaround and limited timeframes often encountered in the development of social marketing campaigns through agencies can pose challenges. The authors emphasize the importance of leveraging existing knowledge and engaging in co-design with beneficiaries to facilitate the design, delivery, and implementation of a social marketing behavior change campaign.

Conclusion

Practitioner papers are a vital component of the health marketing landscape, offering a direct link between theory and practice. As academics, we have a responsibility to foster an inclusive environment that values and facilitates the publication of practitioner papers. By actively supporting the contributions of practitioners, we can enrich the discourse, drive innovation, and ultimately contribute to more effective health marketing strategies with positive implications for public health. Health Marketing Quarterly will actively seek practitioner papers and support practitioners to get their papers through the editorial process to publication. Further guidance on topics and the aims and scope of Health Marketing Quarterly can be found in the Parkinson and Davey (2023) editorial.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Additional information

Funding

The author(s) reported there is no funding associated with the work featured in this article.