The Scaffolding Activities of International Returnee Executives: A Learning Based Perspective of Global Boundary Spanning

Abstract

This study contributes to the literature on global boundary spanning by taking a learning perspective that positions the boundary spanner as an active change agent. Grounded in a practice‐based theory of knowledge, it considers boundary spanning as the negotiation of knowledge and relationships across fields of practice. We argue that global boundary spanning is a long‐term commitment to help internal members become aware of foreign knowledge practices, see these practices as valuable, and adopt them internally. We frame the activities of the boundary spanner within a scaffolding framework that theorizes boundary spanning as a combination of ability, persistent willingness, and opportunity. Here scaffolding refers to the cognitive, relational, and material supports enacted by boundary spanners that facilitate organization members’ engagement in practices that allow for the awareness, capacity building, and commitment to adoption of foreign practices. We draw on interviews from international returnee managers employed in large Korean financial firms.

‘Am I Still One of Them?’: Bicultural Immigrant Managers Navigating Social Identity Threats When Spanning Global Boundaries

“…Although there are significant career rewards associated with fulfilling boundaryspanning roles (Cross and Parker, 2004;Hong, 2010;Roberts and Beamish, 2017), actually fulfilling the requirements associated with each of the three criteria can be a very challenging task. Representing the multiple, sometimes contradictory, interests of diverse groups can be stressful (Dubinsky et al, 1992;Singh et al, 1996).…”

“…A focus on knowledge-based boundaries may point to new criteria for staffing employees to boundary spanning roles. For example, listening skills, the ability to teach missing business or professional competencies, and tolerance for mistakes may be more important than employees' cultural backgrounds (see also, Roberts and Beamish, 2017). It is challenging to anticipate key boundaries a priori, and new boundaries may emerge as knowledge is created and enacted in practice Vaast, 2005, 2008;Orlikowski, 2002).…”

Selective permeability of boundaries in a knowledge brokering team

“…While such contestation is often triggered by internal struggles for authority, domination and power, it often unfolds in response to external stimuli, such as technological innovation, organizational restructuring or policy change (Allen ; Burri ). The global policy trend towards interprofessional and inter‐organizational collaboration and network forms of governance creates the need for boundary spanning (van Meerkerk and Edelenbos ), that is, actions and behaviours aimed at connecting previously separated practices by negotiating the meaning and terms of the relationship between them, and facilitating the sharing of knowledge across social context (Kislov et al ; Levina and Vaast ; Roberts and Beamish ).…”

Japanese self‐initiated expatriates as boundary spanners in Chinese subsidiaries of Japanese MNEs: Antecedents, social capital, and HRM practices

“…Boundary spanners are defined as individuals who are perceived by other members of both their own in‐group and/or relevant out‐groups to engage in and facilitate significant interactions between the two groups (, p. 887). According to , p. 512), the goal of global boundary spanning is to help organizational members progressively learn from foreign knowledge practices and engage in meaningful ways with foreign stakeholders. Similarly, Schotter, Mudambi, Doz, and Gaur (2017, p. 404) recognize boundary spanning in MNEs as a set of communication and coordination activities performed by individuals within an organization and between organizations to integrate activities across multiple cultural, institutional, and organizational contexts.…”