Search results

The purpose of this paper is to understand the character of activities performed by project managers (PMs) in the early phases of product development in an interorganizational, multi‐project setting. The aim is to contribute to the extant literature on boundary work in projects by providing a typology of boundary activities and by presenting a conceptual model in which the relationship between these boundary activities is established.

This study is based on an explorative, in‐depth case study of a multi‐project setting where PMs assigned to three projects developed new products while simultaneously competing and collaborating. Each project's concept phase was followed by participative observations and ongoing interviews over a 15‐week period at two sites and in two countries.

It is understood that PMs in organizations collaborate and perform balancing activities. These balancing activities are part of a refinement process, which is created through three intertwined dimensions of boundary activities: administrative, sharing, and tuning. These, in turn, are constructed through complementary micro activities. These micro activities are politically colored and do not necessarily follow a prescribed and orderly path; instead, they are situation contingent and iterative in their character.

The character of boundary activities in coopetitive project settings should be further studied to better understand the early phases of product development.

The political dimension of product development activities in the early phases of product development should be acknowledged. By acknowledging the presence of politics, PMs will be more prepared to deal with the complexity and ambiguity that follows when trying to collaborate and compete simultaneously.

This paper takes a practice perspective and focuses on what people do in interorganizational new product development in situations characterised by coopetition.

The purpose of this paper is an examination of the literature on team boundary activity to trace how team boundary activity has evolved as a construct and examine the dimensions of team boundary activity and their relationships. It highlights the need for a deeper examination of the dimensions of buffering and reinforcement, and why buffering and reinforcement are required. It presents the case of why it is important to study this topic and maps out areas for future research.

The paper reviews conceptual and empirical papers published on team boundary activity in reputed journals between the years 1984 and 2016.

The focus of research in team boundary activity has been on external interactions of the team (boundary spanning), and very few papers have studied the activities through which the team defines and defends its borders (boundary strengthening). These boundary-strengthening activities can be equally important for innovation and learning in externally dependent teams. Further, there is a need to clearly distinguish these constructs from other variables like team identification. Another area that has here-to not been researched is the relationships between the dimensions of team boundary activity. Last, there is a need to consider a wider range of antecedents, outcomes and moderators of team boundary activity.

This paper is based on past empirical and conceptual papers, identified using search terms such as team boundary activity, team boundary spanning and external communication. Other related areas can also be explored for identifying variables of interest.

As opposed to previous reviews which focused mainly on team boundary spanning, this paper considers all dimensions of team boundary activity, with special focus on buffering and reinforcement. It proposes a 2 × 2 framework to explain the effect of boundary-spanning and boundary-strengthening activities on the achievement of team objectives. It examines the cyclical nature of relationship between team boundary activity and team performance. It highlights measurement issues in the area of team boundary activity.

The interest of scholars to study microfoundations of dynamic capability has increased. Literatures associated with them are rapidly and diversely developing. This study aims to investigate whether both boundary spanning activities and resource orchestration are the microfoundations of dynamic capability.

A systematic literature review using preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) guideline is applied to extract 263 studies from Scopus and 12 studies from other online sources. Some studies investigate some of the relationships but only one investigates all relationships examined.

Further discussion suggests that boundary spanning activities and resource orchestration are microfoundations of dynamic capability. The first and second groups of boundary spanning activities (scout and ambassador) and the first stage of resource orchestration (structuring/search/selection) are microfoundations of sensing/shaping. Third group, task coordinator, with some elements of the second stage, leveraging and all elements of third stage, bundling, are microfoundations of seizing. Meanwhile, some other elements of second stage, leveraging, are microfoundations of reconfiguring. Guard, the fourth group of boundary spanning activities, is excluded from microfoundations of dynamic capability because of its nature of internal activities to keep things from the environment.

This study is an original review of literatures about both boundary spanning activities and resource orchestration as microfoundations of dynamic capability. The paper starts with a systematic literature review on four relationships examined and ends up with deep further analysis on the elements of activities groups of boundary spanning, stages of resource orchestration and process groups of dynamic capability.

More collaborative and open learning models are suggested as part of the paradigm shift in the way knowledge is produced, distributed, and used. The purpose of this paper is to explore a work-based learning (WBL) model, based on systemic negotiations between actors from the three parties: the academy, the industry, and the students. The purpose is to investigate how teachers, supervisors, and students value negotiated WBL as a boundary activity and to enhance the understanding of the learning potential at the boundary.

Activity theory is used as a lens to analyse the results from a survey to the three stakeholder groups and interviews of students. The four learning mechanisms are used to explore learning at the boundary between the two activity systems.

Diversity and mobility in education and work addressed by the notion of boundary crossing are associated with both challenges and a learning potential. There is a constant dynamic between structure and agency, where structure, the negotiated model, influence the individual agency. When gradually removing scaffolding students can as boundary crossers engage behaviourally, emotionally, and cognitively and have agency to handle contradictions at a local level. However, they did not seem to prioritise both systems equally but instead they were gradually socialised into the activity system of the industry.

When WBL is framed by a negotiated partnership it can manage and customise inherent conflicts of interest and enhance individual learning opportunities at the boundary and can be conceptualised as an open learning practice.

Boundary setting is identified as an important and highly useful factor, both in management practice and in dealing with phenomena in management research. It has significant implications for how circumstances and phenomena will be analysed and interpreted. Change – moving or change in nature – is a key factor in all attempts to strategise and economise. The authors argue that boundary setting is critical in analysing and interpreting business problems, both in the practice of management and in business research. The nature and function of boundaries vary. It can be exemplified with two archetypes of organisation – the integrated hierarchy and the connected company. In the first, the basic principle for boundary setting is buffering to protect the company from external variations. In the second type, it is bridging – connecting the company with specific changing factors. One important consequence is that when analysing and handling boundaries, both location and permeability become the central aspects to consider.

Boundary spanners link their internal organization with its external environment. In the present research, the authors study supply managers who build a bridge between a large original equipment manufacturer (OEM) and its network of suppliers. The purpose of this paper is to explore how boundary spanners mediate between internal (buyer) and external (supplier) managers in supplier development (SD) initiatives.

This paper adopts a qualitative case method to study an OEM pursuing multiple SD initiatives with multiple suppliers simultaneously. Data consist of interviews and non-participant observations conducted over a period of 14 months.

The findings of this paper highlight the mediation tasks that emerge at the organizational interface in advanced SD undertakings. Based on the analysis, this paper demonstrates how the nature of three core boundary-spanning activities, information mediation, reaching compromises and strategic communication, differ in four general SD conditions.

The present paper advances the understanding of individual-level buyer–supplier tensions in SD. It makes a theoretical contribution that sits in the intersection between boundary spanning and SD.

This paper increases managers’ knowledge of a range of required SD mediation activities and provides an overview of where they unfold.

This paper breaks new ground by creating knowledge that extends beyond four dominant trends in SD research: SD as organizational-level behavior, SD as a generic set of activities, SD as a single performance improvement area and SD as a dyadic management task.

Sustainable development requires multiple stakeholders to work and learn across practices, in other words, it requires boundary crossing competence. To prepare students for their future sustainability professions, higher education should facilitate the development of boundary crossing competence in its curricula. This study aims to confirm whether boundary crossing learning can be stimulated by workshop-based support in multi-stakeholder projects.

This quasi-experimental intervention study (N = 122) investigates the effect of a series of supporting workshops on students’ boundary crossing learning in multi-stakeholder projects. The workshops allowed students to adopt four learning mechanisms (identification, coordination, reflection and transformation) theorised to stimulate learning across boundaries between practices. Students followed zero, one, or two workshops. By analysing the student learning reports, the study examines the effect of the workshop intervention on students’ self-efficacy for stakeholder collaboration, the number of reported student-stakeholder collaborative activities and the reported boundary crossing learning mechanisms.

The results show that a series of two workshops increase the number of reported collaborative activities and activates the students’ boundary crossing learning in terms of reflection and transformation.

These findings support the evidence-based design of multi-stakeholder learning environments for sustainable development and contribute to the body of knowledge regarding learning across practices.

Boundary crossing competence receives increasing attention as an asset for sustainable development. The added value of this study lies in its confirmation that the boundary crossing theory can be translated into directed educational support that can stimulate students’ boundary crossing learning.

The purpose of this paper is to advance a firm boundary perspective of operations strategy linking strategic management and business process management.

Relevant operations strategy, business process management and boundary perspective literature is reviewed and critically assessed in order to advance a firm boundary-based approach to operations strategy. Within this perspective, a multi-disciplinary and cross-functional framework is provided with the objective of supporting the process of operations strategy formulation and implementation.

The boundary perspective has the potential to inform a wide range of operations strategies. Strategic management of operations should be increasingly based on boundary operations. The proposed framework clarifies that the adoption of a spanning boundary perspective should improve the operations strategy process and content.

This paper offers implications of interest to managers, noting that the adoption of a new perspective in operations strategy should contribute to innovation in operations strategy development and implementation. Specifically, the framework suggests models and tools useful to support the spanning boundary perspective.

This paper allows operations and process management scholars to focus on key phenomena, such as boundary management. At the same time, the framework responds to the needs of managers who are engaged in operations management for a new perspective that can assist in the strategic management of operations.

The aim of this article is to examine whether the boundary between the separate worlds of evaluation and frontline work in a hospital can be overcome. The study provides an example of a rare, innovative creation process of an assessment tool in which the tool users and the tool producer participated. The article aims to widen the understanding of employee initiated organizational change efforts, co‐creation of boundary objects and organizational boundary breaking, which may lead to expansive learning.

The article takes an activity‐theoretical approach to organizational boundaries, viewing them as tension‐laden triggers for learning and change. The analysis of expansive learning actions is based on longitudinal ethnographic field data on a collaboration effort between nurses and evaluation professionals in a Finnish hospital.

The collaboration effort between two organizational worlds led to boundary breaking. Initially, expansive learning actions were taken, but then obstacles started to emerge, and the collaboration between the two worlds was not sustained. To be sustainable, the collaboration would have required both a shared assessment tool (i.e. a boundary object) and management support. In this case the latter was missing.

The study analyzes a solid boundary, which delimited organizational learning and development. Rather than boundary crossing, as understood in the current literature, the challenging collaboration effort took the shape of conflictual boundary breaking. The study contributes to the literature on organizational boundaries and learning and has implications on management of employee initiated change efforts, collective tool creation processes and development of quality work in the public sector.

This paper aims to present exploratory, empirical data from an ethnographic study into workplace humour and fun. It explores the notion that workplace humour and fun are influenced by the creation of boundaries that either enable or constrain activities.

Qualitative data were gathered from four New Zealand companies within different industries. Mixed methods were used and included semi‐structured interviews, participant observation and document collection.

The findings suggest that organisational culture is influential in boundary creation. In three formal companies, boundaries for humour and fun activities were narrower, and this constrained humour activities. In an informal company, wider boundaries resulted in humour activities that were unrestrained which created an unusual and idiosyncratic company identity.

It would be useful to replicate this exploratory research in different workplace sectors and environments.

Boundaries constructed through social processes are assuming greater importance in modern organisations. However, research has not investigated boundaries around workplace humour and fun. Understanding boundaries may assist work groups when creating (and promoting) fun. This original research considers both managerial and employee concerns, and findings extend theory on workplace fun and humour.