Search results

We demonstrate the role of regulatory fit and moral emotions, that is, contempt and anger, in influencing conflict resolution between the headquarters and subsidiary boundary spanners. We develop a theoretical framework, which integrates literature on international business and headquarters-subsidiary relationships with regulatory focus, moral emotions, and conflict resolution. The chapter outlines the relationships between the regulatory focus of a headquarters’ boundary spanner, and his or her manner of engagement, conflict sensitivity, violation of code, moral emotions, and the way conflicts are resolved. The theoretical framework developed here provides a starting point for future research on bargaining processes between boundary spanners of a multinational corporation (MNC). This chapter is the first one to discuss regulatory focus, and moral emotions, in the contexts of a MNC headquarters-subsidiary relationship.

Interorganizational dependence is considered as a liability for each firm and needs to be managed properly. Rather than exploring the opportunistic outcome of dependence, the authors focus on the moderating role of supply chain boundary spanners' guanxi. This study tends to uncover the way and the conditions under which boundary spanners' guanxi influences dependence-opportunism relationships.

Using a survey of 380 buyer–supplier exchanges in China, this study first examines the relationship between dependence and opportunism, then assesses the contingent role of boundary spanners' guanxi and further tests how unfairness perception and legal inefficiency alter the role of guanxi in managing dependence.

This study finds that buyer dependence increases supplier opportunism while supplier dependence lowers supplier opportunism. Boundary spanners' guanxi weakens the opportunism-facilitating impact of buyer dependence and mitigates the opportunism-restricting effect of supplier dependence. However, unfairness perception would attenuate the value of guanxi in restricting depended sides' opportunism but strengthen the value of guanxi in motivating depending sides' opportunism; legal inefficiency would amplify the value of guanxi in facilitating depending suppliers' opportunism.

First, the study enriches supply chain dependence studies by incorporating interpersonal guanxi into the investigation of dependence-opportunism relationships. Second, the study adds to the supply chain management literature by uncovering a contrasting role of guanxi in influencing the dependence-opportunism relationship. Third, the study incorporates an agency view to uncover two boundary conditions under which guanxi is mobilized for personal interest seeking or for organizational purposes.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the types of justice that affect knowledge acquisition and opportunism in strategic alliances and how these justice mechanisms function.

Data were collected from both top-level and operating-level boundary spanners in 295 strategic alliances in China (a total of 590 boundary spanners). A structural equation model (SEM) with bias-corrected bootstrap method was used to test the hypotheses.

The results show that although both procedural justice and distributive justice are important in deterring opportunism, procedural justice is more effective at enhancing knowledge acquisition than distributive justice is. The results also demonstrate that boundary spanners' helping behaviors are more effective at fostering knowledge acquisition, whereas boundary spanners' voice behaviors have more impact on mitigating opportunism. In addition, boundary spanners' citizenship behaviors partially mediate the relationship between justice and interfirm-level performance.

This study adds a boundary-spanning lens to justice literature by uncovering the missing link between justice and alliance outcomes.

The aim of this paper is to discuss the roles and competencies of boundary spanners in the context of collaboration. It aims to examine the problematic nature of these roles, and to consider the communalities between different types of boundary spanner. It then seeks to interrogate the extent to then seeks which managing in collaboration is different from managing in single organizations, and to question whether it should be undertaken by a dedicated cadre of actors or mainstreamed into all professional, leadership and management practice.

This is an exploratory paper that draws both on a critical review of the literature and contemporary research by the author.

The paper suggests that there are different types of boundary spanner pursuing different roles, but argues that there is a considerable degree of communality between them and the competencies required to undertake them especially in relation to reticulism, communication, co-ordination and entrepreneurial skill. Boundary spanners face considerable challenges in dealing with tensions and ambiguities arising from complexity, multiple accountabilities and governance forms. The question of whether managing in collaboration is different to managing in hierarchies remains contested.

The paper has direct implications for the training and development of boundary spanners either as dedicated actors or as an integral part of professional, managerial and leadership roles.

The value of this paper lies in its focus on the role of agency within collaboration, its identification of different types of boundary spanner, and its critical analysis of the competencies and challenges they face in contemporary public management.

Megaprojects present an intricated pattern of leadership activities, which evolve over their planning and delivery and comprises several stakeholders. A framework is useful to navigate this complexity; it allows to identify and cluster the key elements. This paper aims to introduce a novel framework based on boundary spanners to describe the structural pattern of shared leadership in megaprojects.

A systematic literature review about boundary spanning and shared leadership is used to identify and cluster the key elements of shared leadership in megaprojects. The systematic literature review provides a rich theoretical background to develop the novel shared leadership framework based on boundary spanners.

There are three key dimensions characterizing shared leadership topology in megaprojects: stakeholders, boundary spanning leadership roles and project phases. The novel framework shows how project leadership dynamically transfers among different stakeholders, showing the importance of shared leadership as a leadership paradigm in megaprojects.

The novel framework epitomizes shared leadership in megaprojects by exploring its antecedents with social network metrics. This paper stresses that shared leadership is the envisaged form of leadership in megaprojects. By modeling complex project leadership in a simple, yet effective way, the framework fosters critical thinking for future research. The modeling introduced by this framework would also benefit practitioners in charge of megaprojects.

The paper moves the project leadership research to the network-level by taking boundary spanners as shared leadership roles in megaprojects. It shows how shared leadership is a valuable management tool for planning and delivery megaprojects.

This study aims to explore the interactions between two different and potentially complementary boundary resources in coordinating solution networks in a digital platform context: boundary spanners (those individuals who span interorganizational boundaries) and boundary interfaces (the devices that help coordinate interfirm relationships, e.g. electronic data interchanges, algorithms or chatbots).

The authors conducted a multiple case study of three firms using digital platforms to coordinate solution networks in the information communication technology and lighting facility industries. Data were collected from 30 semi-structured interviews, which are complemented by secondary data.

As task complexity increases, smarter digital interfaces are adopted. When the intelligence level of interfaces is low or moderate, they are only used as tools by boundary spanners or to support boundary spanners’ functions. When the intelligence level of interfaces is high or very high, boundary spanners design the interfaces and let them perform tasks autonomously. They are also sometimes employed to complement interfaces’ technological limitations and customers’ limited user ability.

The industry contexts of the cases may influence the results. Qualitative case data has limited generalizability.

This study offers a practical tool for solution providers to effectively deploy boundary employees and digital technologies to offer diverse customized solutions simultaneously.

This study contributes to the solution business literature by putting forward a framework of boundary resource interactions in coordinating solution networks in a digital platform context. It contributes to the boundary spanning literature by revealing the shifting functions of boundary spanners and boundary interfaces.

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.

This paper aims to explain the effects of national and organizational cultures of boundary spanners on their choices of using three archetype power-based behaviors – dominance, egalitarian and submissive – with supply chain partners. Improved outcomes for global supply chain (GSC) partners are anticipated due to the ways that cultural intelligence affects these culturally guided decisions.

Drawing on multiple streams of literature and focusing on boundary spanners in GSCs, the authors build a conceptual framework that highlights cultural antecedents of predispositions toward power-based behaviors and explains the moderating role of cultural intelligence of boundary spanners on behaviors performed.

The authors propose that boundary spanners’ national and organizational cultural values influence predispositions toward applying and accepting power-based behaviors. They also discuss how cultural intelligence moderates the relationship between culturally determined predispositions and power-based behaviors applied by partners. The cultural intelligence of boundary spanners is argued to have a pivotal role in making power-based decisions, resulting in healthier cross-cultural buyer–supplier relationships.

This paper is the first paper to advance an understanding of the cultural antecedents of boundary spanners’ power-based behaviors that are exercised and interpreted by partners in GSCs. Furthermore, the potential role of cultural intelligence in inter-organizational power dynamics and power-based partner behaviors in supply chains has not previously been discussed.

This paper aims to contribute to defining the concepts of boundary spanner, gatekeeper and knowledge broker.

A review of the literature covering more than 100 sources.

A review of past research leads to proposing a set of new definitions and also to the detection of six research avenues.

The ability of organizations to recognize, source and integrate key information or knowledge is important for their strategy, innovation and performance over time. Three types of individuals have information gathering and knowledge dissemination roles at the frontier of organizations and groups: boundary spanners, gatekeepers and knowledge brokers. Although research on these individuals is well-developed, we found that in practice, the definitions of the concepts overlap and still need a clarification. So far, no systematic comparison of these roles has been undertaken.

Crisis management increasingly requires coordination and collaboration between multiple organizations. This means that inter-organizational boundaries have to be spanned by dedicated organizational members (i.e. boundary spanners). This paper aims to describe which features facilitate the work of boundary spanners in crisis management.

A case study, consisting of 26 interviews, has been conducted in the Netherlands to explore how civilian and military representatives effectively spanned inter-organizational boundaries.

Five features are identified that enable boundary spanners to improve crisis management coordination and collaboration. Boundary spanners are likely to be successful when they (1) serve long terms, (2) are sensitive to partners' concerns, (3) have considerable discretion, (4) are politically skilled and (5) prove influential in their own organization.

Crisis organizations can extend boundary spanners' term length, broaden their discretionary space and give them more influence to facilitate their work. Additionally, in the selection process, it would be well to choose organizational members who display a sensitivity to the interests of crisis partners and possess political skill.

Multiple studies have reiterated the key role of boundary spanners in enabling crisis management coordination and collaboration. Yet, this study is the first to provide a systematic analysis of key features that help boundary spanners to reach this goal.