Chapter 8: Boundary Setting and Boudary Spanning


Boundary Setting
A collectivity is a "bounded network of social relations governed by a normative order applicable to the participants linked by the network" (Scott p. 181). But it is often extremely difficult to define the boundary of an organization, as it is both diffuse and dynamic. Even Hannan and Freeman (1989) now admit that the boundary definition of organizations is itself a variable that changes as technology and other environmental forces affect it. Determining how to exactly classify a particular organization is becoming increasingly more difficult.

Boundary definition can be based on criteria that is spatial, temporal, or the outcome of interaction frequencies. But most organizations define their boundaries through differentiation of members from non-members via some criteria of recruitment. Recruitment policies can have a impact on organizational structure and behavior.

"The strategic question facing all organizations is how to recruit participants and harness their roles and resources in the service of organizational goals (whether goal attainment or survival), while avoiding or minimizing the danger of becoming captive to participant's external interests or personal agendas." (Scott p. 186). Organizations can be too loose and suffer from corruption or nepotism, or be too strict and overly control the social lives of their workers.

The internal labor market has become increasingly important to understand social boundaries in organizations. Internal labor markets and the "corporate ladder" provide stability of expertise to organizations, though Marxists would contend it's just a more refined form of labor control. There also continue to be inequities in labor markets due to gender and race differences. Also, companies are experimenting with other labor markets to reduce the costs of internal labor (contracting, temps, etc.).

Managing Task Environments

The task environment is those features relevant to the production system of the organization (Scott p. 193). Resource dependency theorists and competitive strategists as well as transaction cost and population ecologists both examine how organizations build exchanges with their environments to maxmize environmental control yet ensure survival.

Organizations must define their domain and negotiate with others in their organization set to gain legitimacy and conduct transactions (Scott p. 193). Product differentiation and defining the target consumer are key competitive strategies (Porter 1980). Organizations also must determine the scope of their activities and degree of vertical integration -- these "make or buy" decisions determine the technical boundary of the firm (Williamson 1975).

Resource depedency theorists argue that organizations engage in two broad strategies to manage their task environments. First, they protect their technical core from environmental disturbances through buffering strategies and also to flex their boundaries to encompass and control more or less of the environment through bridging strategies between organizations, exchange partners, competitors, and regulators (Scott p. 194).


Managing Institutional Environments


Ideas about institutional environments are more recent and less developed than with technical environments. But there are key differences between the two. Most importantly, "whereas organizations exchange elements with their technical environments, they are constituted by elements drawn from their institutional environments" (Scott p. 208). Technical elements are often secured, modified, combined and transformed in organizations, while institutional elements are secured, utilized, and copied without much transformation (because it's often important for these institutional elements to be visible to external constituencies).

Organizations also engage in buffering strategies and bridging strategies to address their institutional environment. Often these make organizations in the same environment structurally similar (isomorphic).

Change in Organizations

Theorists at the organizational set level (resource dependency, contingency, transaction cost) assume that organizational structures can adapt (Scott p. 215) through the actions of decision makers. In contrast, population ecologists argue that most structural change at the population level is done through selection. Though organizations do adapt their structures, it is often too slow to successfully react to environmental changes (Hannan & Freeman, 1984).

s
Change in Organizational Fields
Adaptation also occurs at the level of the organizational field through the collective actions of groups of organizations (some deliberate and some emergent and unwitting) -- Scott . 219. Local communities or industries often work together in times of mutual need or crises.