Boundary Spanner in Multinational Teams

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1 Introduction

2 Literature Review
2.1 The Role of Boundary Spanner
2.2 The impacts of boundary spanning leadership on the team success
2.2.1 Boundary Spanning Leadership towards Enhanced Team Performance
2.2.2 Establishing social bridges to improve team success
2.2.2.1 Create a third Space
2.2.2.2 Activate a Shared Identity
2.2.2.3 Embed Groups within Larger Organizational Whole
2.2.2.4 Weave: Cross-Cut Roles and Identity
2.3 Boundary spanning Behaviours of leaders
2.3.1 Buffering
2.3.2 Collaborating
2.3.3 Representing
2.3.4 Negotiating
2.3.5 External Monitoring
2.3.6 Personal characteristics of Boundary Spanner Leaders
2.4 Good Communication in Boundary Spanning

3 Discussion

4 Conclusion

5 References

ABSTRACT

Increasing dynamicity of global business environment necessitates the adoption of boundary spanning in order for an organization to survive global competitiveness. This thesis aimed to identify personal characteristics that an invidividual should bring in order to realize a successful boundary spanner in a multinational team. In the study, it was noted that the task for boundary spanners is to bridge intergroup challenges facing organizations by establishing sharing ties between different groups in order to enable the flow of knowledge, information, resources and people. The boundary spanning activities thus enables an organization to achieve a common team spirit and hence ensures efficient and effective work flow. To effectively achieve boundary spanners‘ role, an individual should possess negotiation skills, mediation skills, assimilation skills, coaching and institutional engagement skills. The person should further possess personal qualities of imagination, empathy, optimism and modesty are more likely to be successful at acquiring the skill sets required for a successful boundary spanning. Tactics for boundary spanning leadership that needs to be considered for a successful boundary spanning include: boundary suspending, boundary reframing, boundary nesting, and weaving tactic. The leadership behaviour for boundary spanning should create and maintain favourable relationships with not only the peers but also with the superiors and outsiders who provide information, political support, and resources. The leaders need to be influential to get essential resources and support from key management. They need to have good negotiation skills. The leaders should further be sensitive to changes in the external environment by analysing information concerning relevant events and changes within the external surroundings of an organization. The study noted that one of the key sources of information exchange and communication is boundary spanners, which usually find much relevance in culturally distant marketplaces. However, one of the challenges is that their performance may be hard to measure, and the process may need much time and resources. At times, the boundary spanners from opposite ends may fail to reach a consensus after long time engagements in networking, external watching, and representing.

1 Introduction

Boundary spanning finds relevance with increasing dynamicity of global business environment (Eisenhardt and Tabrizi, 1995, p.86). The authors linked it to a flat world that has led to a different forms of boundaries influencing intergroup relations (p.88). Globally, organization leaders face challenges with bridging explicit and implicit gaps in social identity boundaries amongst people with different perspectives, histories, cultures, and values (Eisenhardt and Tabrizi, 1995, p.92). With the advent of globalization, there has also been deep-rooted social tensions amongst different socially and culturally different stakeholders (Aldrich and Herker, 1977, p. 219). Boundaries refer to basic aspect of organizational life while social identity boundaries are aspects of identities in various demographic groups including: gender, nationality, religion, ethnicity, and age (Aldrich and Herker, 1977, p. 223). In view of changing cultures and contexts, social identity group can be expressed in terms of: generational differences, educational background, physical disability, function, sexual orientation, tribe, caste, and job level (Hackman, 1990, p.149; Ang and Inkpen, 2008, p. 341).

Boundaries in social identity groups are always present, and they always create various frictions and collisions a workplace (Ibarra and Hunter, 2007, p. 41). Thus, the challenge for organizational leaders to effectively bridge gaps in social identity is troubled with at least three ways. First, the leaders often pull in multiple directions when they encounter conflicting values, beliefs and viewpoints (Ibarra and Hunter, 2007, p. 43). Second, the leaders commonly push to one side. Despite best efforts that a leader can put to remain fair and impartial, the social groups may hold perceptions based on the social identity of the leader (Ibarra and Hunter, 2007, p. 44). Third, the leaders are caught out of the loop partly due to lack of information as it trends up the organizational hierarchy (Ibarra and Hunter, 2007, p.45). Conventionally, leaders more often than not, tend to be representatives of the dominant and advantaged social groups. Thus, the leaders tend to lack critical awareness of the challenges and inequities facing the minority and less advantaged social groups.

Based on the diverse intergroup challenges facing organizations (Fanelli and Misangyi, 2006, p.1050), the task is to identify the role of a boundary spanner as an important tool for an efficient and effective work flow in multinational teams (Fanelli and Misangyi, 2006, p.1052). The task is to establish and share ties between different groups in order to enable the flow of knowledge, information, resources and people (Fanelli and Misangyi, 2006, p.1055). Multinational teams typically carry out knowledge and information intensive work, and additionally they are confronted with differences in communication and interpersonal styles due to variety of cultural backgrounds of the team members (Hinds and Mortensen, 2005, p.290). In this context, boundary spanning activities is perceived to play an important role to achieve a common team spirit (Hinds and Mortensen, 2005, p.292). Hence, to ensure the efficient and effective work flow (Hinds and Mortensen, 2005, p.295). Therefore, this thesis aims to identify personal characteristics that an invidividual should bring in order to realize a successful boundary spanner in a multinational team.

2 Literature Review

2.1 The Role of Boundary Spanner

In the views of (Kim & Yukl, 1995, p. 362), boundary spanners serve strategic roles in organisations by gathering critical information, obtaining feedback and perceptions from the external environment through their stakeholder networks, and interpreting and translating information back into their organisation (Kim & Yukl, 1995, p. 363). Eventually, if the boundary spanner is effective, the process can lead to innovations in processes, products or strategy. In this (Dorfman et al., 1992, p. 399) argued that a person working towards a successful boundary spanning should be able to: create internal and external networks, identify potential issues to be addressed, translate the knowledge back into the organisational culture, influence and educate internal and external stakeholders, create buy-in and support, and identifying internal senior-level champions (Dorfman et al., 1992, p. 402).

The person should further have the ability to crunch a surplus of verbal and non-verbal communication and information as well as identify the critical and relevant information, the opportunities, and the risks associated with the potential collaboration (Dorfman et al., 1992, p. 406; Katz & Allen, 1985, p. 68). Furthermore, the person should be able to translate the information and influence internal audiences alongside creating a strategy for implementation (Katz & Allen, 1985, p. 69). The translated information helps the company evaluate threats and opportunities as well as create innovative and more sustainable and externally credible programmes than if developed solely internally (Dorfman et al., 1992, p. 408; Katz & Allen, 1985, p. 71).

However, Zalatan (2005, p.116) warns that engagement is not a solution in itself. Thus, any organisation or individual can engage in dialogue with their critics and external organisations but maintaining credible high-quality and value-added engagements is crucially important. Eventually, it is the organisations’ ‘actions not words’ that will deliver credibility and positive change in regard to boundary spanning (Zalatan, 2005, p.119). Identifying individuals for these roles internally or externally can be difficult. Thus, boundary spanners should be able to identify a few individuals in organisations that possess these skills (Zalatan, 2005, p.122). However, this corporate life may not be particularly friendly to the boundary spanner, especially if the spanner is has to spend a lot of time developing an external network for skills. On this note, (Zalatan (2005) assert that boundary spanners need a highly specialised skills set, as well as the ability to develop a new language, in order to be effective and successful at developing and implementing innovative partnerships (p.128).

According to Charan, Drotter and Noel (2000, p.32), the skills and capability that are needed in successful partnerships include: negotiation skills, mediation skills, assimilation skills, coaching and institutional engagement skills. Individuals who possess these personal qualities of imagination, empathy, optimism and modesty are more likely to be successful at acquiring the skill sets required for a successful boundary spanning (Charan, Drotter & Noel, 2000, p.37). These skills are also components of ‘emotional intelligence’ (EI), which is becoming more recognised, as a key factor in management success (Cross, Davenport & Cantrell, 2003, p. 22). Cross and his colleagues explain that emotional intelligence (EI) is a type of social intelligence that involves the ability to monitor one’s own and others’ emotions, to discriminate among them, and to use the information to guide one’s thinking and actions (Cross, Davenport & Cantrell, 2003, p.18). In their assertion, the authors explain that EI abilities can be categorised in five domains including: self-awareness, managing emotions, motivating oneself, empathy and handling relationships (p.31). It implies that a person working towards achieving successful boundary spanning should exhibit the five domains of EI. Besides, some of the key skills that seem to be associated with successful boundary spanners include: empathy, open-mindedness, active listening, strong communication skills, strong abilities to synthesise information, emotional maturity, and integrity (p.34).

Ernst and Yip (2009, p.89) highlight that the boundary spanner needs to be highly aware of the other partner’s differences and feelings. The individual should appreciate that their boundary spanning colleagues are also dealing with their own institutional cultures and external stakeholders in the process (p.92). Thus, the person should have good social skills, which play a large role in managing partnerships with multiple actors in order to keep the group moving beyond breakthrough issues, thereby realizing the partnership’s objectives(Ernst and Yip (2009, p.94). Here, a partnership practitioner who has strong soft skills needs to leverage the strengths of each partner and should be more effective at building strong and effective partnerships (p.97).

Furthermore, Amabile et al. (2004, p.8) pointed out that boundary spanners must be effective at understanding the sensitivities of using a common language in their relationship building. Although it may seem a bit simplistic to some people, ensuring that word choices are acceptable to the other organisational culture is critical to success (Amabile et al., 2004, p.14). The person should be able to choose words that convey the right meaning in the context of the receiving end (Amabile et al., 2004, p.16). However, the meaning does not hold when it is used between non-profit making organizations. Understanding these differences, having the ability to build a new vocabulary and being sensitive to word choices can make or break a relationship (Edmondson, 2003, p.1419). These issues can be amplified when working with other partners from different cultural backgrounds and languages (Edmondson, 2003, p.1424). In assessing the importance of common language in cross-sector partnerships, (Katz & Tushman, 1983, p. 437) posit that that ‘partners need to be sensitive to how they are using language. The person needs to conscientiously and consciously speak in an appropriate, clear and concise language. Here, the authors stressed that a few words well selected and communicated are worth far more than many words that are obscure and confusing (Katz & Tushman, 1983, p. 442).

Even though common language is key when it comes to boundary spanning, finding a common language can be the biggest barrier to getting programmes start (Katz & Tushman, 1983, p. 446). On this note, it is advisable to for boundary spanners to understand the need for the required upfront investment of time. The parties involved needs to use a common language to reach a common understanding in line with the local organisation’s culture and capacity in regard to bridging the barriers between them (Katz & Tushman, 1983, p. 448). Translating the needs of partners involved in the negotiation with internal business colleagues and the legal department can be challenging since they are used to working with corporate profit-driven partners and typically enjoying the power in the relationship (Katz & Tushman, 1983, p.451). In the end, the critically important process is to strive to get all of the stakeholders to embrace the programme as equals (Katz & Tushman, 1983, p. 454).

2.2 The impacts of boundary spanning leadership on the team success

2.2.1 Boundary Spanning Leadership towards Enhanced Team Performance

The project team leaders’ behaviours are oriented towards sustaining the team coordination (Ernst & Chrobot-Mason, 2010, p.62), protecting the team from external disruptions (Ernst & Chrobot-Mason, 2011, p.63) and observing the team from a higher level to manage its effectiveness as a self-organizing agile team (Yip, Wong and Ernst, 2008, p.152). In order to enhance organization performance the boundary spanning leaders should be able to identify and analyse the practices that are not being followed and remove the obstacles to their implementation (Yip, Wong and Ernst, 2008, p.154). In contrast to the conventional boss-type leadership behaviour, agile leaders are expected to be the flag carrier of the team and they should act as a role model (Yip, Wong and Ernst, 2008, p.159). In Bradshaw (1999, p.39), it was found out that the use of transformational leadership behaviours are positively related to perceived team effectiveness (Bradshaw, 1999, p.42). In a transformative leadership, the possibility of success of project groups can increase when boundary spanning individuals understand (Bradshaw, 1999, p.43), and capitalize on different activity designs for characteristic and understanding the variations as well as developing ways that to enhance operating relationships and project success (Bradshaw, 1999, p.49).

2.2.2 Establishing social bridges to improve team success

Druskat and Wheeler (2003, p.436) explained that boundary spanning leadership needs to recognize the increasing importance and necessity of leaders’ role in bridging social identity boundaries in line with organizational goal, mission, or vision. In this view, the leaders should focus on creating the necessary linkages between different social groups so as to move people, ideas, information, and resources where they are needed (Druskat & Wheeler, 2003, p. 439). To achieve these, the literature based on research and evidence, presents a number of tactics that leaders can use to establish these bridges by altering the nature and composition of intergroup boundaries (Druskat & Wheeler, 2003, p. 440).

2.2.2.1 Create a third Space

The approach of boundary suspending strives to create a neutral zone where social interactions are person-based rather than identity group-based (Bourgeois, 1985, p.548). The suspending tactic is regarded as de-categorization due to the emphasis on individuals rather than social categories (Bourgeois, 1985, p.550). The tactic is meant to create a third space in the suspended neutral zone. In this zone, leaders should expect increased development of personal relationships, surfacing of assumptions, safe exploration of values, and emergence of new language. This space can be physical, virtual or mental (Bourgeois, 1985, p.551). In the physical context, it is important to establish office and encourage dispersed business space (Bourgeois, 1985, p.551). In the virtual context, suspending boundary requires leaders to establish interaction email and teleconference. The suspending space can be mental, which requires leaders to encourage exchange of shared experiences, ideals, and ideas (Bourgeois, 1985, p.554).

In the views of Ancona and Caldwell (1992, p.634), spanning entrenched social identity boundaries is something that few leaders have been trained to do and yet it is an integral aspect of their leadership role. Boundary suspending tactics allow leaders to create a third space where people can interact not as members of distinct groups but rather as unique individuals (Ancona andCaldwell, 1992, p.636).

[...]