IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/ororsc/v33y2022i1p311-331.html

Managing Boundaries in Multiteam Structures: From Parochialism to Integrated Pluralism

Author

Listed:
  • Thomas A. de Vries

    (Department of Human Resource Management and Organizational Behavior, University of Groningen, 9747AE Groningen, Netherlands)

  • Gerben S. van der Vegt

    (Department of Human Resource Management and Organizational Behavior, University of Groningen, 9747AE Groningen, Netherlands)

  • J. Stuart Bunderson

    (John M. Olin Business School, Washington University in St. Louis, St. Louis, Missouri 63130)

  • Frank Walter

    (Department of Organization and Human Resources, Justus-Liebig-University Giessen, 35394 Giessen, Germany)

  • Peter J. M. D. Essens

    (Department of Human Resource Management and Organizational Behavior, University of Groningen, 9747AE Groningen, Netherlands)

Abstract

Multiteam structures are increasingly used to coordinate complex tasks between different groups. To realize this potential, however, the members of a multiteam structure must manage a complex set of boundary relations within, between, and beyond the various constituent teams—boundary relations that can be cooperative, competitive, or some combination of both at the same time. This multimethod study provides insight into how multiteam structures can meet this challenge. Specifically, we examined how the different organizations that utilize and support the Dutch railway system learned to manage boundaries as they transitioned from a centralized, arms-length structure to a colocated, multiteam structure for coordinating disruption responses (i.e., the Rail Operations Control Center (ROCC)). In part 1 of our study, qualitative analyses of interview, observational, and archival data suggested that learning to manage boundaries within the ROCC was not simple or linear but evolved through trial and error during various phases. Ultimately, the ROCC developed an approach we call “integrated pluralism,” establishing a dynamic balance that combines both collaborative and competitive approaches to boundary management. In this manner, the ROCC teams were able to attain integrated solutions and coordinated task accomplishment while simultaneously defending internal team operations and home organization interests. In part 2, we employed an interrupted time series analysis to demonstrate that the implementation of the ROCC resulted in significant performance improvements. Consistent with the results of part 1, we found that these improvements emerged gradually over time as teams learned to work out their boundary relations and transitioned to integrated pluralism. These findings provide new insights into how individuals and teams can work together to tackle the unique boundary management challenges presented by multiteam structures and illuminate the dynamic trial and error process by which component teams can learn to both cooperate and compete.

Suggested Citation

  • Thomas A. de Vries & Gerben S. van der Vegt & J. Stuart Bunderson & Frank Walter & Peter J. M. D. Essens, 2022. "Managing Boundaries in Multiteam Structures: From Parochialism to Integrated Pluralism," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 33(1), pages 311-331, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:inm:ororsc:v:33:y:2022:i:1:p:311-331
    DOI: 10.1287/orsc.2021.1436
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/orsc.2021.1436
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1287/orsc.2021.1436?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Beersma, Bianca & Hollenbeck, John R. & Conlon, Donald E. & Humphrey, Stephen E. & Moon, Henry & Ilgen, Daniel R., 2009. "Cutthroat cooperation: The effects of team role decisions on adaptation to alternative reward structures," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 108(1), pages 131-142, January.
    2. Tammy E. Beck & Donde Ashmos Plowman, 2014. "Temporary, Emergent Interorganizational Collaboration in Unexpected Circumstances: A Study of the Columbia Space Shuttle Response Effort," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 25(4), pages 1234-1252, August.
    3. Dave Luvison & Michelle A. Marks, 2013. "Team coordination in strategic alliances: identifying conditions that reduce team willingness to cooperate," International Journal of Human Rights and Constitutional Studies, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 3(1), pages 1-22.
    4. Cristina B. Gibson & Rebekah Dibble, 2013. "Excess May Do Harm: Investigating the Effect of Team External Environment on External Activities in Teams," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 24(3), pages 697-715, June.
    5. Martin Hoegl & Katharina Weinkauf & Hans Georg Gemuenden, 2004. "Interteam Coordination, Project Commitment, and Teamwork in Multiteam R&D Projects: A Longitudinal Study," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 15(1), pages 38-55, February.
    6. Nicholas S. Argyres & Janet Bercovitz & Kyle J. Mayer, 2007. "Complementarity and Evolution of Contractual Provisions: An Empirical Study of IT Services Contracts," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 18(1), pages 3-19, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Xi, Cunhu & Zhang, Yingqin & Qu, Xiaoqian, 2025. "Informational faultlines, team boundary work, and idea implementation: The moderating role of paradoxical leadership," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 192(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Xie, Xiao-Yun & Ling, Chu-Ding & Liu, Wu & Wei, Junjie, 2022. "Inter-team coordination, information elaboration, and performance in teams: The moderating effect of knowledge integration capability," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 149(C), pages 149-160.
    2. Olaisen, Johan & Revang, Oivind, 2017. "The dynamics of intellectual property rights for trust, knowledge sharing and innovation in project teams," International Journal of Information Management, Elsevier, vol. 37(6), pages 583-589.
    3. Gordon L Clark & Ashby H B Monk, 2014. "The Geography of Investment Management Contracts: The UK, Europe, and the Global Financial Services Industry," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 46(3), pages 531-549, March.
    4. repec:wsi:acsxxx:v:21:y:2019:i:08:n:s1363919619500130 is not listed on IDEAS
    5. Shahla Ghobadi & John Campbell & Stewart Clegg, 2017. "Pair programming teams and high-quality knowledge sharing: A comparative study of coopetitive reward structures," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 19(2), pages 397-409, April.
    6. Mayer, Kyle J. & Teece, David J., 2008. "Unpacking strategic alliances: The structure and purpose of alliance versus supplier relationships," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 66(1), pages 106-127, April.
    7. Thomas Mellewigt & Glenn Hoetker & Martina Lütkewitte, 2018. "Avoiding High Opportunism Is Easy, Achieving Low Opportunism Is Not: A QCA Study on Curbing Opportunism in Buyer–Supplier Relationships," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 29(6), pages 1208-1208, December.
    8. Wang, Liwen & Zhao, Jane Zheng & Zhou, Kevin Zheng, 2018. "How do incentives motivate absorptive capacity development? The mediating role of employee learning and relational contingencies," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 85(C), pages 226-237.
    9. Ralf Meinhardt & Sebastian Junge & Martin Weiss, 2018. "The organizational environment with its measures, antecedents, and consequences: a review and research agenda," Management Review Quarterly, Springer, vol. 68(2), pages 195-235, April.
    10. Yusuf Hassan & Jayesh Pandey & Shubh Majumdarr & Vijay Pereira & Abhishek Behl & Ofra Bazal-Shoham, 2025. "Examining the impact of e-leadership on strategic innovation at work: a moderated-mediation model," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 50(2), pages 469-487, April.
    11. Francesco Saverio Massari & Maria Teresa Riggio & Donato Calace, 2015. "Legal and Managerial Implications of the Italian ‘Contratto Di Rete’," Management, University of Primorska, Faculty of Management Koper, vol. 10(2), pages 131-148.
    12. Tessa Coffeng & Elianne F. van Steenbergen & Femke de Vries & Niklas K. Steffens & Naomi Ellemers, 2023. "Reflective and decisive supervision: The role of participative leadership and team climate in joint decision‐making," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 17(1), pages 290-309, January.
    13. Cristina B. Gibson & Rebekah Dibble, 2013. "Excess May Do Harm: Investigating the Effect of Team External Environment on External Activities in Teams," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 24(3), pages 697-715, June.
    14. Gilberto SERAVALLI, 2011. "Conflict, Contract, Leadership and Innovation: An Interdisciplinary View," Journal of Knowledge Management, Economics and Information Technology, ScientificPapers.org, vol. 1(6), pages 1-48, October.
    15. Umit Ozmel & Deniz Yavuz & Jeffrey J. Reuer & Todd Zenger, 2017. "Network Prominence, Bargaining Power, and the Allocation of Value Capturing Rights in High-Tech Alliance Contracts," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 28(5), pages 947-964, October.
    16. Bart S. Vanneste & Douglas H. Frank, 2014. "Forgiveness in Vertical Relationships: Incentive and Termination Effects," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 25(6), pages 1807-1822, December.
    17. Nathalie Lazaric & Alain Raybaut, 2014. "Do incentive systems spur work motivations of inventors in high-tech firms," Post-Print halshs-00930186, HAL.
    18. Nathalie Lazaric & Alain Raybaut, 2014. "Do incentive systems spur work motivation of inventors in high tech firms? A group-based perspective," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 24(1), pages 135-157, January.
    19. Liwen Wang, 2023. "The interplay of contracts and trust: untangling between- and within-dyad effects," Post-Print hal-03944358, HAL.
    20. Junwei Zheng & Guangdong Wu, 2018. "Work-Family Conflict, Perceived Organizational Support and Professional Commitment: A Mediation Mechanism for Chinese Project Professionals," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 15(2), pages 1-23, February.
    21. Vivian Zheng, Xu & Jenny Ji, Li & Su, Chenting, 2020. "Mitigating the Negative Effects of Regional Clustering in Franchising: The Roles of Governance Mechanisms," Journal of Retailing, Elsevier, vol. 96(3), pages 434-444.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:inm:ororsc:v:33:y:2022:i:1:p:311-331. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Asher (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/inforea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.