Boundary Objects and the Technical Culture Divide: Successful Practices for Voluntary Innovation Teams Crossing Scientific and Professional Fields

Abstract

This paper examines the creation and stabilization of early-stage boundary objects by voluntary teams spanning divergent professional and scientific fields. Cross-disciplinary collaborators can share similar goals, yet nonetheless face frictions from differences in professional expertise, practices and technical systems. Yet if boundary objects help to span disciplinary divides, the same challenges are likely to hinder initial boundary object development. Comparative ethnography of three projects adapting Grid computing technology to fields of science highlights challenges for boundary object creation, including a "mindset shift" before the technology could stabilize. Enriching our knowledge of boundary object beginnings, we find successful stabilization requires both appropriate localization and further resources, which enable the simultaneously global-local nature of boundary objects. This essential feature is understudied in management research. Developing the boundary object concept on its own terms enhances empirical and theoretical application, particularly when researchers prefer one main theory of objects, rather than a "pluralist" approach.

Sociocognitive Relationships for Innovation under Institutional Constraints

“…Communication technologies are advancing rapidly—increasingly allowing people to better use inter-person, inter-team, and inter-organization relationships for innovation (Bundy, 2002). The complexity of organizational work is increasing too, making it difficult, even for the most competent, to pursue innovation without the involvement of other organizational actors (Chen, 2008; Gubbins & Dooley, 2014; Kertcher & Coslor, 2020). To develop relationship-focused theory, a generic fourfold typology of sociocognitive relationships (civil, inspiring, integrating, and synergizing) along the individualistic–relational continuum was developed.…”

“…Innovation of organizational actors is defined as their ability to create novel and useful solutions. The complexity of organizational work makes it difficult—even for the most competent—to undertake innovative pursuits without the aid of other organizational actors (Chen, 2008; Gubbins & Dooley, 2014; Kertcher & Coslor, 2020). The role of relationships among organizational actors is therefore an important area that needs investigation.…”

Green Health in Guatemala: How can we build mutual trust and partnerships to develop an evidence-base for local medicines and realize their potential?

“…This includes reflexive dialogues in a multi-epistemological setting addressing differing knowledge systems, values, and institutional organization styles. For this reason, patients and plants can be considered 'boundary mechanisms' (Kertcher and Coslor, 2020), tangibly bridging mutual learning opportunities across societal divides through becoming the focus of common interest.…”

Digital competence across boundaries - beyond a common Nordic model of the digitalisation of K-12 schools?

“…In this sense, they are n-dimensional" (Star, 2010, p. 603). Kertcher and Coslor (2020) acknowledge that thus far, research has often discussed boundary objects' power to connect different practices -from global to local practices -and facilitate the creation of joint understandings within each practice. In this paper, the relations Star and Griesemer (1989) laid out, depicted in Figure 1, are used as an analytical lens to discuss the question of translation in Nordic educational policy on digital competence.…”