REFLECTIONS ON THE THEORY–ACTION DEBATE Albert J. Mills and Jean Helms Mills INTRODUCTION The chapters in this AU :1 section pose some interesting and varied questions about the relationship between theory and practice in Critical Management Studies (CMS). Sticking momentarily with the idea of a particular intellectual community, each of the four chapters identifies with a particular strand of that community. Cukier et al. identify with an ecological and (less stated) feminist position; Faria and Faria et al. with a postcolonial position and Jammulamadaka with a distinctly Habermasian position. The specifics of the positions are not as crucial as the fact that there are different stated positions and this will become clear later. Not surprisingly each author, or set of authors, sees some kind of resolve in theory–practice disconnects through their chosen lens viz. ecological, postcolonial, or Habermasian. However, we are not setting off to adjudicate between the different perspectives – they all offer different and interesting insights – so much as reflect on the different issues they raise. INSIGHTS There are a number of insights offered by each of the four chapter that challenge us to reflect on the central role of CMS – each chapter has, at its 1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31 33 35 37 39 Getting Things Done Dialogues in Critical Management Studies, Volume 2, 309–315 Copyright r 2013 by Emerald Group Publishing Limited All rights of reproduction in any form reserved ISSN: 2046-6072/doi:10.1108/S2046-6072(2013)0000002019 309