Boundary activities and readiness for ... - Projekti-Instituutti

Discussion
a legitimate position, a shared intent regarding the goals, and initial
resources, more detailed planning may begin.
In successful change program initiation, after the initial basis has been
established and program planning begins, information seeking activities are
conducted to gather the required input for planning. Informing activities
and task coordinating activities are simultaneously performed to
communicate the program’s status to the stakeholders and to coordinate
the daily work across the program’s boundaries. Also, isolative activities of
guarding and enclosing are performed upon need to skillfully protect the
emerging program from the harmful external influences, thus establishing
autonomy for the program. As the program proceeds, early achievements
such as results from pilot implementations and other quick wins are
communicated to the stakeholders. They further legitimate the change
effort and sustain the momentum and pace of the program.
On the above described virtuous path of program initiation, the initial
resources of an emerging program are utilized in performing boundary
activities, which support the further establishment of readiness for change
program implementation. In line with previous research (Akkermans & van
Helden, 2002), along the virtuous path the different elements of readiness
for change start to reinforce each other. The current study proposes that
with the help of skilled and balanced boundary activity, early program
activities result in a shared intent for the change program’s goals, content
and structure, committed resources across the organization to implement
the program, and a requisite autonomy for the program to deliver the
changes.
5.3 Evaluation of the study
This section provides an assessment of the study in terms of validity and
reliability. The generalizability of the findings is discussed and the
limitations of the study are examined.
Research needs to demonstrate rigor in order to have value and utility
(Morse, Barrett, Mayan, Olson, & Spiers, 2002). The evaluation of
qualitative research is not a straightforward task. There has been active
debate about whether the criteria traditionally used in quantitativelyoriented
research, those of validity and reliability, are appropriate for
evaluating qualitative research (Miles & Huberman, 1994; Morse et al.,
2002; Seale, 1999), and alternative criteria specifically designed for
assessing the trustworthiness of qualitative research have been suggested
(e.g. Lincoln & Guba, 1985). On the other hand, the prevailing criteria of
reliability and validity have been described to remain appropriate and
relevant also within the qualitative paradigm (Morse et al., 2002; Yin,
206