Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Boundary Challenges and the Work of Boundary Spanners

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Reimagining the Future Public Service Workforce

Part of the book series: SpringerBriefs in Political Science ((BRIEFSPOLITICAL))

Abstract

In sketching out a vision for the future public service, Dickinson and Sullivan (2014) argued that we were at the frontier of significant change. These changes, they suggested, would pose challenges to the way in which we think about what the public service workforce does and how it goes about doing it. A key part of the discussion of the future public service workforce is the centrality of cross-boundary working. This chapter explains the imperatives for crossing boundaries. It identifies the characteristic and skill requirements of the workforce required to cross boundaries. It argues that the persistent need to work across boundaries highlights the necessity of supporting boundary spanners and boundary spanning activity. It then outlines the key aspects of the supportive architecture required to support boundary spanning skill development.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 49.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 64.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Akkerman, S. F., & Bakker, A. (2011). Boundary crossing and boundary objects. Review of Educational Research 81(2), 132–169. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654311404435.

  • Aldrich, H., & Herker, D. (1977). Boundary spanning roles and organization structure. Academy of Management Review 2(2), 217–230. http://www.jstor.org/stable/257905.

  • Aryee, S., Chay, Y., & Chew, J. (1994). An investigation of the predictors and outcomes of career commitment in three career stages. Journal of Vocational Behavior 44(1), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1006/jvbe.1994.1001.

  • Bakvis, H., & Juillet, L. (2004a). The strategic management of horizontal issues: Lessons in interdepartmental coordination in the Canadian government. Paper presented to the “Smart Practices Toward Innovation in Public Management” organized jointly by the Structure and Organization of Government Research Committee of the International Political Science Association and the Canada School of Public Service, U.S. Studies Program, University of British Columbia, 16–17 June. Vancouver: Canada.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bakvis, H., & Juillet, L. (2004b). The horizontal challenge: Line departments, central agencies and leadership. Canada: Canada School of Public Service.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baldwin, T. T., & Ford, J. K. (1988). Transfer of training: A review and directions for future research. Personnel Psychology, 41(1), 63–105. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.1988.tb00632.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Balogun, J. (2003). From blaming the middle to harnessing its potential: Creating change intermediaries. British Journal of Management, 14(1), 69–83. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8551.00266.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bardach, E. (1998). Getting agencies to work together: The practice and theory of managerial craftsmanship. Washington DC: Brookings Institution Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bardach, E. (2001). Developmental dynamics: Interagency collaboration as an emergent phenomenon. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 11(2), 149–164. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.jpart.a003497.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Becker, T., Billings, R., Eveleth, D., & Gilbert, N. (1996). Foci and bases of employee commitment: Implications for job performance. Academy of Management Journal, 39(2), 464–482. https://doi.org/10.2307/256788.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Broussine, M. (2003). Leading and managing at the boundary: Perspectives created by joined up working. Local Government Studies, 29(3), 128–138. https://doi.org/10.1080/03003930308559383.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Buick, F. (2012). Organisational culture as the panacea for joined-up working: The rhetoric and reality gap (Ph. D. thesis). Canberra, Australia: University of Canberra.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buick, F. (2014a). Boundary spanning to address Indigenous disadvantage in Australia. In J. Langan-Fox & C. L. Cooper (Eds.), Boundary-spanning in organizations: Network, influence, and conflict (pp. 143–159). New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buick, F. (2014b). The culture solution? Culture and common purpose in Australia. In J. O’Flynn, D. Blackman, & J. Halligan (Eds.), Crossing Boundaries in Public Management and Policy. The International Experience, 78–91. Oxon: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carey, G., & Crammond, B. (2015). What works in joined-up government? An evidence synthesis. International Journal of Public Administration, 38(13–14), 1020–1029. https://doi.org/10.1080/01900692.2014.982292.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Christensen, T., & Lægreid, P. (2007). The whole-of-government approach to public sector reform. Public Administration Review, 67(6), 1059–1066. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6210.2007.00797.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Conway, E., & Monks, K. (2009). Unravelling the complexities of high commitment: An employee-level analysis. Human Resource Management Journal, 19(2), 140–158. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1748-8583.2009.00090.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cross, R., & Parker, A. (2004). The hidden power of social networks: Understanding how work really gets done in organizations. Boston, Massachusetts: Harvard Business School Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dickinson, H., & Sullivan, H. (2014). Imagining the 21st century public service workforce. Melbourne: School of Government, University of Melbourne.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dunham, B., Grube, A., & Castaneda, B. (1994). Organizational commitment: The utility of an integrative definition. Journal of Applied Psychology 79(3), 370–380. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.79.3.370.

  • Enos, M. D., Kehrhahn, M. T., & Bell, A. (2003). Informal learning and the transfer of learning: How managers develop proficiency. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 14(4), 369–387. https://doi.org/10.1002/hrdq.1074.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Floyd, S. W., & Wooldridge, B. (1994). Dinosaurs or dynamos? Recognizing middle management’s strategic role. The Academy of Management Executive, 8(4), 47–57. https://doi.org/10.5465/AME.1994.9412071702.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Frederickson, G. (1999). The repositioning of American public administration. Political Science and Politics, 32(4), 701–712. https://doi.org/10.2307/420159.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Friedman, R. A., & Podolny, J. (1992). Differentiation of boundary spanning roles: Labor negotiations and implications for role conflict. Administrative Science Quarterly, 37(1), 28–47. https://doi.org/10.2307/2393532.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Graen, G., & Cashman, J. (1975). A role making model of leadership in formal organizations: A developmental approach. In J. O’Flynn, D. Blackman, & J. Halligan (Eds.), Leadership frontiers (pp. 143–165). Kent, OH: Kent State University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Head, B. W., & O’Flynn, J. (2015). Australia: Building policy capacity for managing wicked policy problems. In A. Massey & K. Johnston (Eds.), The International handbook of public administration and governance. (Edward Elgar, Cheltenham).

    Google Scholar 

  • Heracleous, L. (2004). Boundaries in the study of organization. Human Relations, 57(1), 95–103. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018726704042716.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hopkins, M., Couture, C., & Moore, E. (2001). Moving from the heroic to the everyday: Lessons learned from leading horizontal projects (CCMD Roundtable on the Management of Horizontal Initiatives). Ottawa: Canadian Centre for Management Development.

    Google Scholar 

  • Huxham, C., & Vangen, S. (2004). Doing things collaboratively: Realizing the advantage or succumbing to inertia? IEEE Engineering Management Review, 32(4), 11–20.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johlke, M. C., Stamper, C. L., & Shoemaker, M. E. (2002). Antecedents to boundary spanner perceived organizational support. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 17(2), 116–128. https://doi.org/10.1108/02683940210417049.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Katz, D., & Kahn, R. (1966). Social psychology of organizations. New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keast, R. (2011). Joined-up governance in Australia: How the past can inform the future. International Journal of Public Administration, 34(4), 221–231. https://doi.org/10.1080/01900692.2010.549799.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leifer, R., & Huber, G. P. (1977). Relations among perceived environmental uncertainty, organization structure, and boundary-spanning behavior. Administrative Science Quarterly, 22(2), 235–247. https://doi.org/10.2307/2391958.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lim, D. H., & Morris, M. L. (2006). Influence of trainee characteristics, instructional satisfaction, and organizational climate on perceived learning and training transfer. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 17(1), 85–115. https://doi.org/10.1002/hrdq.1162.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ling, T. (2002). Delivering joined-up government in the UK: Dimensions, issues and problems. Public Administration, 80(4), 615–642. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9299.00321.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lodge, M., & Gill, D. (2011). Toward a new era of administrative reform? The myth of post-NPM in New Zealand. Governance: An International Journal of Policy, Administration, and Institutions 24(1), 141–166. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0491.2010.01508.x.

  • Martin, H. J. (2010). Workplace climate and peer support as determinants of training transfer. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 21(1), 87–104. https://doi.org/10.1002/hrdq.20038.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • O’Flynn, J. (2014). Crossing boundaries: The fundamental questions in public management and policy. In J. O’Flynn, D. Blackman, & J. Halligan (Eds.), Crossing boundaries in public management and policy: The international experience (pp. 11–44). Oxon, England: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • O’Flynn, J., Buick, F., Blackman, D., & Halligan, J. (2011). You win some, you lose some: Experiments with joined-up government. International Journal of Public Administration, 34(4), 244–254. https://doi.org/10.1080/01900692.2010.540703.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • O’Flynn, J., Blackman, D., & Halligan, J. (2014). Crossing boundaries in public management and policy: Conclusion and future issues. In J. O’Flynn, D. Blackman, & J. Halligan (Eds.), Crossing boundaries in public management and policy: The international experience (pp. 297–305). Oxon, England: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Painter, C. (2011). State, markets and society—Big society joins the fray. Public Money and Management, 31(1), 71–74. https://doi.org/10.1080/09540962.2011.545550.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Performance and Innovation Unit [PIU]. (2000). Wiring it up: Whitehall’s management of cross-cutting policies and services. London: Cabinet Office.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pollitt, C. (2003). Joined up government: A survey. Political Studies Review, 1(1), 34–49. https://doi.org/10.1111/1478-9299.00004.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • PwC. (2013). Future of government: Tomorrow’s leading public body. https://www.pwc.com/gx/en/psrc/publications/assets/pwc_future_of_government_pdf.pdf. Accessed 14 December 2017.

  • Ranade, W., & Hudson, B. (2003). Conceptual issues in inter-agency collaboration. Local Government Studies, 29(3), 32–50. https://doi.org/10.1080/03003930308559378.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rhodes, R. A. W. (1996). The new governance: Governing without government. Political Studies, 44(4), 652–667. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9248.1996.tb01747.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rhodes, R. A. W. (1997). Understanding governance: Policy networks, governance, reflexivity and accountability. Buckingham, UK: Open University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rouiller, J. Z., & Goldstein, I. L. (1993). The relationship between organizational transfer climate and positive transfer of training. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 4(4), 377–390. https://doi.org/10.1002/hrdq.3920040408.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schein, E. H. (2017). Organizational culture and leadership (4th ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shergold, P. (2003). On leadership, management and the Australian Public Service. Canberra Bulletin of Public Administration, 110, 48–51.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sullivan, H. (2014). Collaboration as ‘the new normal’: Global trends, public policy and everyday practices. In Keynote address at the Policy & Politics Conference. September 16–17, Bristol: University of Bristol.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sullivan, H., & Skelcher, C. (2002). Working across boundaries: Collaboration in public services. Basingstoke: Palgrave.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Thompson, J. D. (1967). Organizations in action: Social science bases of administrative theory. New York: McGraw Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tushman, M. L., & Scanlan, T. J. (1981a). Characteristics and external orientations of boundary spanning individuals. Academy of Management Journal, 24(1), 83–98. https://doi.org/10.2307/255825.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tushman, M. L., & Scanlan, T. J. (1981b). Boundary spanning individuals: Their role in information transfer and their antecedents. Academy of Management Journal, 24(2), 89–305. https://doi.org/10.2307/255842.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Kerkhoff, L., & Lebel, L. (2015). Coproductive capacities: Rethinking science-governance relations in a diverse world. Ecology and Society, 20(1), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-07188-200114.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wayne, S. J., & Ferris, G. R. (1990). Influence tactics, affect, and exchange quality in supervisor-subordinate interactions: A laboratory experiment and field study. Journal of Applied Psychology, 75(5), 487–499. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.75.5.487.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Williams, P. (2002). The competent boundary spanner. Public Administration, 80(1), 103–124. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9299.00296.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Williams, P. (2010). Special agents: The nature and role of boundary spanners. In ESRC Research Seminar Series. Collaborative Futures: New Insights from Intra and Inter-Sectoral Collaboration. Birmingham: University Of Birmingham. http://www.download.bham.ac.uk/govsoc/pdfs/special-agents-paper.pdf. Accessed 20 March 2016.

  • Williams, P. (2013). We are all boundary spanners now? International Journal of Public Sector Management, 26(1), 17–32. https://doi.org/10.1108/09513551311293417.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Xiao, J. (1996). The relationship between organizational factors and the transfer of training in the electronics industry in Shenzhen, China. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 7(1), 55–73. https://doi.org/10.1002/hrdq.3920070107.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of New South Wales, Canberra, Australia

    Fiona Buick

  2. Public Management, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia

    Janine O’Flynn

  3. Public Service Research Group, University of New South Wales, Canberra, Australia

    Eleanor Malbon

Authors
  1. Fiona Buick
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Janine O’Flynn
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Eleanor Malbon
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Fiona Buick .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. University of New South Wales, Canberra, ACT, Australia

    Helen Dickinson

  2. University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK

    Catherine Needham

  3. University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK

    Catherine Mangan

  4. Australian National University, Canberra, ACT, Australia

    Helen Sullivan

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Buick, F., O’Flynn, J., Malbon, E. (2019). Boundary Challenges and the Work of Boundary Spanners. In: Dickinson, H., Needham, C., Mangan, C., Sullivan, H. (eds) Reimagining the Future Public Service Workforce. SpringerBriefs in Political Science. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-1480-3_2

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-1480-3_2

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore

  • Print ISBN: 978-981-13-1479-7

  • Online ISBN: 978-981-13-1480-3

  • eBook Packages: Social SciencesSocial Sciences (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation