Engaged yet excluded: The processual, dispersed, and political dynamics of boundary work

Ludo Glimmerveen*, Sierk Ybema, Henk Nies

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to JournalArticleAcademicpeer-review

121 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

What happens when people try to ‘transcend’ organizational boundaries and engage with so-called outsiders? Current boundary-work literature does not fully account for the processual, dispersed, and political dynamics triggered by such efforts. To address this shortcoming, this article builds on an ethnographic study of a professional care provider’s attempts to engage local citizens within one of its care homes. We analyze how actors negotiate the parameters of outsider engagement – that is, how they interactively (re-)erect and (re-)efface boundaries between actors (Who is engaged?), issues (What is their engagement about?), and positions of authority (Does local engagement affect central decision-making?). We contribute to extant theorizing by, first, explicitly scrutinizing boundary work’s temporal and spatial dynamics. Testifying to the importance of analyzing temporal sequences, we show how attempts at transcending boundaries intensified boundary work on multiple organizational platforms. Paradoxically, inclusionary efforts evoked exclusionary effects (and vice versa) as actors came to contest and, eventually, redefine ‘appropriate’ insider–outsider relations. Second, our analysis highlights how the political effectiveness of an inclusive and non-hierarchical approach still, ironically, depends on ongoing hierarchical support and managerial enforcement. Third, our article makes a case for the adoption of long-term, multi-sited methodologies when studying the everyday dynamics of boundary-work processes.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1504-1536
Number of pages33
JournalHuman Relations
Volume73
Issue number11
Early online date23 Oct 2019
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1 Sept 2020

Funding

https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4015-0025 Glimmerveen Ludo Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Netherlands, [email protected] Ybema Sierk Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Netherlands and Anglia Ruskin University, UK, [email protected] Nies Henk Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam & Vilans, Netherlands, [email protected] Ludo Glimmerveen, Department of Organization Sciences, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, De Boelelaan 1105, Amsterdam, 1018HV, the Netherlands. Email: [email protected] 10 2019 0018726719875494 © The Author(s) 2019 2019 The Tavistock Institute This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 License ( http://www.creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ ) which permits non-commercial use, reproduction and distribution of the work without further permission provided the original work is attributed as specified on the SAGE and Open Access pages ( https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/open-access-at-sage ). What happens when people try to ‘transcend’ organizational boundaries and engage with so-called outsiders? Current boundary-work literature does not fully account for the processual, dispersed, and political dynamics triggered by such efforts. To address this shortcoming, this article builds on an ethnographic study of a professional care provider’s attempts to engage local citizens within one of its care homes. We analyze how actors negotiate the parameters of outsider engagement – that is, how they interactively (re-)erect and (re-)efface boundaries between actors (Who is engaged?), issues (What is their engagement about?), and positions of authority (Does local engagement affect central decision-making?). We contribute to extant theorizing by, first, explicitly scrutinizing boundary work’s temporal and spatial dynamics. Testifying to the importance of analyzing temporal sequences, we show how attempts at transcending boundaries intensified boundary work on multiple organizational platforms. Paradoxically, inclusionary efforts evoked exclusionary effects (and vice versa) as actors came to contest and, eventually, redefine ‘appropriate’ insider–outsider relations. Second, our analysis highlights how the political effectiveness of an inclusive and non-hierarchical approach still, ironically, depends on ongoing hierarchical support and managerial enforcement. Third, our article makes a case for the adoption of long-term, multi-sited methodologies when studying the everyday dynamics of boundary-work processes. Boundaryless organization boundary work organizational boundaries organization-environment stakeholder engagement Jo Visser Fund edited-state corrected-proof We would like to express our sincere gratitude to all of the CareOrg employees and local citizens who participated in this study, to the Jo Visser Fund for financially supporting our research project, to Arjen Schmidt for commenting on an early draft of this manuscript, and to Lilli Turner for her meticulous editing. Funding The authors disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: This research project was funded by the Jo Visser Fund. ORCID iD Ludo Glimmerveen https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4015-0025

Keywords

  • boundary work
  • boundaryless organization
  • organization-environment
  • organizational boundaries
  • stakeholder engagement

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Engaged yet excluded: The processual, dispersed, and political dynamics of boundary work'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this