This dissertation demonstrates that business executives and management scholars worked together to advance practice and scholarship during only two periods, the 1950s when American business was recast in the structural analysis paradigm, and the 1980--1990s when corporate cultures changed and bureaucracies blew apart. It does not find evidence in the publication record of partnership or influence at other times. It demonstrates that while both business practice and management scholarship are influenced by the societal contexts in which they operate, each sphere isolated itself from some societal trends and historical events for long periods. This research is conducted in the traditions of history and social science. It uses narratives and content analysis to understand the shifting focus of articles in Fortune and the publications of the Academy of Management, examining the publications in the context of societal trends and historical events as suggested by Bendix, and as expressions of managerial paradigms, following Guillen's work. Findings support the cautions of Hambrick, Pfeffer and Fong to scholars about isolating themselves in the academy. The dissertation describes the impact of partnerships between executives at GE and scholars Drucker in the 1950s and Tichy, Ulrich and Kerr in 1980s, which fueled published scholarship as well as corporate practice. In contrast, GE's internally-driven destruction of classic strategic planning in the early 1980s initiated the decline of the practice elsewhere, but did not reduce scholarly publication on the topic.