Comparison between Articles Example

Differences and Similarities

Differences

There are glaring differences between mainstream and scholarly articles that stem from both authors, purpose, and audience. While both serve the main purpose of informing, the differences emerge in the format and structure as realized in the two articles; one in Harvard Business Review and the other a scholarly article published in the Journal of Management Studies. When analyzing the contents of the articles, I realized that Baron & Lachenauer (2021) had simplified language and concepts which a wider audience could easily understand. This is because the main objective of mainstream media is to communicate to the largest audience possible, hence the necessity to open possibilities for everyone to engage with their writings. On the other hand, Ramirez-Pasillas et al. (2021) use more technical jargon, requiring thoughtful analysis of the jargon to understand the topic at hand fully. Scholarly articles set the stage for an informed audience, specifically academic enthusiasts, for research purposes and to achieve positive peer reviews. Indeed, mainstream media try to serve the general public, which results in a thin line between enhancing sales and informing the audience.

The article in Harvard Business Review tends to inform the readers from a popular culture point of view. From the title, “How to Build and Sustain a Successful, Enduring Enterprise”, it is clear that the article is designed to increase clicks and hence its popularity. It focuses on conducting family business by implementing current trends and culture. Indeed, reading through discloses “comprehensive advice for owners” and insights for non-family executives”. This is merely the author’s opinion, which may not be exclusively relevant to other professionals in the same field. The article does not follow provisions of economic theories, hence can be misleading in certain societies and economies. However, the scholarly article by Ramirez et al. (2021) indulges in peer-reviewed research facilitated by a study that follows actual philosophy and theories such as guiding theory. This makes it dependable and approvable by different interested professionals and mostly informative. Publications by scholars are original research that stems from emerging topics and gaps in knowledge, while those by mainstream authors are facilitated by trending topics or topics that would spark interest and lead to more clicks.

Another difference that emerges between the articles is the authorship and the format followed in the separate articles. Indeed, Baron and Lachenauer are certified journalists contracted to Harvard Business Review magazine. This means that they understand economic and financial concepts, thus qualified to write on related topics. However, journalists are mostly influenced by the need to write populist papers that would attract public interest. This is one of the reasons why magazines cannot be used in research, as they do not feature a broad view of the topic at hand. On the contrary, Ramirez-Pasillas and co are academicians and scholars interested in exploiting academic topics, and in the article, “Next generation external venturing practices in family-owned businesses,”. They use related scholarly articles and bibliographies to accentuate their arguments to validate their research.

Similarities

However, despite the differences in these articles, there are some notable similarities. For example, they are topic specific. The scholarly article tests theories related to successful management which can be applied in such businesses. Therefore, anyone accessing the article will be informed about what they should do to realize profitability and progression amidst challenges with family members managing an entity. The corporate article on the other hand provides opinions on how to efficiently drive profitability in family-owned businesses. Therefore, both articles address challenges with businesses managed by the family, except one uses tested theories and researched works while the other uses an expert’s opinions to address the same.

Another similarity is that both articles source information and concepts from other sources, which enlarges their information base. Writing informative articles requires using extraneous materials, making the information shared more dependable and reliable. The article in Harvard Business Review provides links to external sources so that if one develops an interest in other topics, they are guided on where to source more information. The topics within the article include: “FAMILY-owned business enterprises, FAMILY-owned business enterprises – Management, FAMILY business succession and CORPORATE governance”, all of which are hyperlinked to give readers a wider spectrum of information. On the other hand, researched information relies on other published materials cited within the published material. An author can’t come up with a new idea that has never been thought of or mentioned before, therefore the scholarly borrowing of ideas in the scholarly world.

When I would Choose Mainstream Article

Mainstream articles are mostly informative, using seamless and simplified language that makes it easy for the general public to understand and digest the concepts written. The writing goes directly to the point, where the author shares their opinion with their audience and gives the relevant reasons for such opinions. I would therefore use such an article to relay layman’s knowledge about a particular topic. I would also use the article when sharing information with an investor because investors do not go deep into the details of write-ups. They only look for valid reasons that are convincing enough to make them invest in a particular project.

Further, such an audience does not involve themselves with references and the theoretical backgrounds of the studies published. I would also choose mainstream articles to influence thoughts among friends or family members who may desire to open up a business. The articles provide comparative knowledge that provides clear perspectives about different scenarios, therefore, can influence positive decision making.

When I Would Choose Scholarly Article

I would only choose a scholarly article when researching a similar or relative topic. The fact that the scholarly topic is peer-reviewed means that other scholars have verified the findings; hence, the article would provide a good theoretical background to base one’s research. Elements such as research topic, thesis, methodology, and research findings would be instrumental when choosing an article as a point of reference for one’s topic. Developing credible research means that the instruments used are from relevant sources, which would be acceptable in the scholarly world. I would also choose a scholarly article when I want to investigate the application of different research philosophies and how they apply to the scholarship. Further, I would use scholarly articles when looking for vocabulary relevant to the research topic. Articulating research content gives the audience the confidence that the author is aware and cognizant of the topic under discussion and that they know what they are talking about.

When I would use Both

Despite differences in the nature and structure of both types of articles, I would be compelled to use both when developing my article, which would be majorly non-scholarly. I would require concepts from both articles since both articles are complimentary. The mainstream article reveals different ideas that would help in coming up with discussions and arguments for my paper and attract the interest of both the scholarly community and the general public. When conducting my further reading, I would get different perspectives and approaches applied in both articles, developing a better understanding of the topic. Despite being conclusive and direct to the point, using a scholarly article to make business-related decisions requires applying experts with the skills and experience in the real world rather than just hypothetical situations synonymous with scholarship. Therefore, I would use both articles to make informed decisions if I want to make a concrete decision pertaining family-owned business.

What I learned from the Two Articles

Reading both articles gave me an insight into the application of writing formats in mainstream and scholarly articles. I learned about the approaches used to develop communicative articles that can be understood by all audiences and enhance interactivity. One of the things that stood out for me was that in writing for mainstream media, an author should be able to attract the audience’s attention while remaining relevant. The media house relies on the populism of the write-up to attract clicks, enabling advertising. Therefore, writing for a media house means that one knows how to prompt sales to increase profitability and remain relevant to the topic under discussion. In scholarly articles, I learned that an author must use a strict outline and format to produce articles that can be acceptable to peers in the scholarly world. One must be able to integrate research findings with previously researched work, which are the main elements of scholarship. These articles, therefore, require actual studies which would open up new knowledge and attempt to fill gaps in knowledge while maintaining strict adherence to acceptable practices in scholarship.

References

Baron, J., & Lachenauer, R. (2021). Harvard Business Review Family Business Handbook. Harvard Business Review Family Business Handbook: How to Build & Sustain a Successful, Enduring Enterprise, 1–6. https://essentials.ebsco.com/search/eds/details/harvard-business-review-family-business-handbook?query=harvard%20business%20review%20so%20source&db=edb&an=154132821&isbn=9781633699052 

Ramírez?Pasillas, M., Lundberg, H., & Nordqvist, M. (2021). Next generation external venturing practices in family-owned businesses. Journal of Management Studies, 58(1), 63-103. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/joms.12566