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

Theoretical background
satisfaction and even help them advance in their careers (Aldrich & Herker,
1977). On the other hand, the multiple roles of boundary spanners can
come into conflict and the position of boundary spanners may cause role
pressure and stress (Aldrich & Herker, 1977; Levina & Vaast, 2005;
Marrone, Tesluk, & Carson, 2007), especially if the goals of the
organizations being spanned are incompatible and the expectations
towards the boundary spanners are conflicting (Keller & Holland, 1975).
The current study focuses on the activities of boundary spanners in the
context of change programs. Next, attention is turned to the literature on
different types of boundary activities.
2.4.3 Boundary activities in organizations
Probably due to the strong information processing perspective as the
theoretical background, early empirical studies on boundary spanning
typically did not distinguish between different types of boundary activities,
but examined boundary spanning through the frequency of communication
(e.g. Keller & Holland, 1975; Tushman, 1977; Tushman & Scanlan, 1981a,
1981b). More recent research has acknowledged that there is a wide variety
of boundary activities that have different aims and consequences.
Especially Deborah (Gladstein) Ancona and David Caldwell (Ancona, 1990;
Ancona & Caldwell, 1988, 1990, 1992a; Gladstein, 1984; Gladstein &
Caldwell, 1985) have in their seminal work examined boundary activities,
their role in organizations, and relations with organizational performance.
Although some studies examine organizational boundary spanning at the
firm level (Jemison, 1984), most empirical studies have analyzed boundary
activities of smaller organizational entities such as work groups or teams
(e.g. Ancona, 1990; Cross, Yan, & Louis, 2000; Druskat & Wheeler, 2003;
Levina & Vaast, 2005). Even though not explicitly examining temporary
organizations, several studies have drawn empirical evidence from a
temporary organization context, typically examining boundary activities of
product development projects (Ancona & Caldwell, 1988, 1992a; Katz,
1982). Earlier studies have not explicitly addressed the change programs’
boundary activities. In a related study, Balogun and her colleagues (2005)
examined boundary-shaking practices of change agents in managing
change initiatives that cross intra-organizational boundaries. By boundaryshaking
practices they referred to the practices that change agents utilize
when they attempt to enroll others to the change cause. While
demonstrating the importance of boundary spanning behavior in the
context of organizational change, Balogun et al. did not explicitly identify
the boundary surrounding a change program and did not examine activities
concerning this boundary, but instead studied change initiation activities
that aim at shaping an organization’s established boundaries.
64