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

Theoretical background
task, and boundary spanners act as negotiators between organizations
(Perry & Angle, 1979). This negotiator and representative role may
contribute to maintaining or improving the organizational legitimacy and
image (Aldrich & Herker, 1977).
The information processing perspective has been criticized of viewing
organizational members as instrumental in their information transfer
behavior, and of regarding knowledge as objective, external and explicit
(Kellogg et al., 2006). While the study of boundary spanning has been
dominated by the information processing perspective, more recent research
has taken alternative standpoints. Boundary spanning has been examined
as communication (Katz, 1982; Manev & Stevenson, 2001), coordination
(Kellogg et al., 2006), and knowledge integration (Teigland & Wasko,
2003). In recent studies, boundary activities have been analyzed from
knowledge-based and practice-based views (Carlile, 2004; Kellogg et al.,
2006; Levina & Vaast, 2005). Recent research has also emphasized the
cultural aspects of boundary spanning, and the political aspects of
knowledge (Kellogg et al. 2006). These studies highlight how boundary
spanning is not only about information processing, but involves a wider set
of purposes and activities.
While many organizational positions involve interaction with elements
external to the unit or the organization, certain positions involve intensive
interaction with the environment (Aldrich & Herker, 1977). People in such
positions have been given a wide range of names in the literature. They
have been called boundary spanners (Leifer & Delbecq, 1978), boundary
role persons (Perry & Angle, 1979), boundary spanning individuals
(Tushman & Scanlan, 1981a, 1981b), gatekeepers (Allen & Cohen, 1969;
Tushman & Katz, 1980), and boundary spanners (Levina & Vaast, 2005;
Nochur & Allen, 1992). Previous research has acknowledged how project
and program managers are in an important boundary spanning position
(Wilemon & Cicero, 1970; Wilemon & Gemmill, 1971). Especially in a
matrix organization, project managers need to balance between the
requirements of the project and those of the functional organization.
Indeed, many of the core responsibilities of project and program managers
are essentially boundary spanning activities (Wilemon & Cicero, 1970).
Being in a boundary spanning position can have both positive and
negative consequences for the individual. Boundary spanners make
decisions on what information passes through the boundary, to whom,
when, and in which form. They may become powerful within the
organization, as the organization relies on their expertise and discretion
(Aldrich & Herker, 1977; Spekman, 1979). Being in a boundary role permits
individuals to improve their bargaining position and thus increase their job
63