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

Theoretical background
As can be seen from the list of studies in Table 7, the presented
categorizations of boundary activities are diverse. Presumably, some
differences across the categorizations are caused by the different theoretical
backgrounds and perspectives adopted by the authors. For example,
Kellogg et al. (2006) relate to the knowledge-based view of an organization,
whereas Levina and Vaast (2005) base their study on practice theory. Some
authors have categorized boundary activities based on the type of behavior
(Kellogg et al., 2006), while others have used the direction of information
and the resource flow (Ancona & Caldwell, 1988) or the aim of each activity
(e.g. Druskat & Wheeler, 2003) as the basis for categorization. Despite
these differences in perspectives and the observation that boundary
spanning behavior may vary from context to context (Aldrich & Herker,
1977), common patterns concerning the boundary activities and their
functions can be distinguished across the studies listed in Table 7.
Firstly, a central part of an organization’s external activity focuses on
searching for information in the organization’s environment (Ancona &
Caldwell, 1992a; Druskat & Wheeler, 2003; Jemison, 1984). Such
information scouting activities aim at acquiring relevant external
information that is useful for the focal organization in fulfilling its tasks. As
an example, Ancona and Caldwell (1992a) found that scout activities in the
context of product development teams involve general scanning for ideas
and information about the competition, markets, and technology, and
include mapping, information gathering, and scanning activities. Secondly,
some studies highlight the transfer of information from the focal
organization to its environment (e.g. Ancona, 1990). These informing
activities aim at making the organization’s environment aware of its
activities. Thirdly, boundary spanners often serve as external
representatives or ambassadors of the organization, lobbying for more
resources, persuading others to support their organization, and managing
its image (Jemison, 1984; Ancona & Caldwell, 1992a). Such ambassadorial
activities include opening up communication channels, “selling” ideas and
plans to others, persuading, negotiating, and influencing the external
environment (Ancona & Caldwell, 1988, 1992a; Druskat & Wheeler, 2003).
Information about the focal organization’s activities and about external
activities may have to be traded in order to coordinate work with external
parties (Ancona & Caldwell, 1992a). According to Ancona and Caldwell
(1988, 1992a), such task coordinator activities aim at coordinating
technical or design issues and include discussing design problems,
obtaining feedback on the design, and coordinating work with the
outsiders. Task coordinator activities are often targeted at actors that are
tightly coupled with the focal organization, and there may be a high degree
66