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

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.

A research agenda on oral health care as a boundary object that unites the perspectives of patients and practitioners

“…Hence, our study showed that to unite perspectives of patients and practitioners, it is essential to be aware of possible boundaries that might be encountered to respond adequately. Our study acknowledged that boundary work is a process, dispersed and also political 36 . Identifying and addressing boundaries is a time‐consuming process: it is necessary to give stakeholders enough time to become familiar with research agenda setting and each other's perspectives.…”

“…We acknowledged that dynamics between insider‐outsider groups (patients versus practitioners) are shaped by multiple boundaries rather than by one single boundary, 36 , 37 and we therefore decided not to address single boundaries in isolation from each other. To illustrate this point, the research agenda setting served as a boundary object that unites the perspectives of patients and practitioners.…”

Unraveling the politics of ‘doing inclusion’ in transdisciplinarity for sustainable transformation

“…More in particular, we argue that balancing inclusion efforts with excluding effects they bring along forms an intrinsic political aspect of stakeholder engagement. This also raises questions on how facilitators of inclusion processes can engage in mitigating the trade-offs and dynamics of exclusion that participatory processes inevitably bring along, as well as the need to more explicitly specify which actors or institutions bear which accountabilities for which process in complexity (e.g., Glimmerveen et al 2020 ) and how responsibility for and political accountability of transdisciplinary processes and outcomes, can be embedded in transdisciplinary practice and design (see also De Campos et al 2017 ; Genus and Stirling 2018 ).…”

“…The balancing act thus is a tricky one: inclusion requires boundary construction to ensure autonomy and inclusion, while transformation requires boundaries to be deconstructed to engage and transform the complex ‘outer world’, adding an additional layer of complexity to the already highly political nature of boundary work (Brown and Dillard 2015 ; Glimmerveen et al 2020 ). Navigating these two critical functions simultaneously requires reflexive agency of coordinators to manage and enact multiple but, selectively permeable, boundaries of the Labs.…”

Professional boundaries in action: Using reflective spaces for boundary work to incorporate a new healthcare role

“…The ongoing negotiation and re-arrangement of professional boundaries, and hence social order, does not mean that 'everything goes' (Whittle and Housley, 2017 (Housley and Fitzgerald, 2002). Thus, an ethnomethodologically oriented boundary work perspective allows consideration of the complex combinations of divisiveness, permeability, rigidity and fluidity of professional boundaries, which warrant more attention (Glimmerveen et al, 2019).…”