Divided we stand? Occupational boundary work among human resource managers and external organization development practitioners

Abstract

Purpose Understanding occupational boundaries is vital in the contemporary economy, in which knowledge-based work is a central feature. The purpose of this paper is to identify and decipher boundary work which affects the cooperation and demarcation between human resource (HR) managers and external organization development (OD) practitioners during organization change processes. Design/methodology/approach Data are based on in-depth interviews with HR managers and external OD practitioners in the Israeli business sector. Findings Encounters between HR managers and external OD practitioners are potentially volatile given mutual experiences of occupational threat. Three distinct patterns of boundary work for negotiating OD-HR jurisdiction are identified. These yield differential occupational and organizational outcomes. Research limitations/implications This study is based on a medium-sized sample of practitioners of HRM and OD in the Israeli business sector. The data focused on one-sided descriptions of occupational relations. Practical implications The findings shed light on boundary work associated with fruitful HRM-OD partnerships. This may greatly advance the success of costly organization change and development interventions which demand the collaboration of both parties. Implications are offered regarding the academic education and practical daily management of both groups of practitioners. Originality/value Despite their growing relevance, empirical investigations of daily HRM-OD interfaces are scarce. This exploratory research addresses this gap in the literature and offers theoretical and practical insights.

Perceptions of organization development in South Korea: the use of a sensemaking approach

“…These findings draw attention to the need for clarity surrounding the nature and purpose of OD interventions when used in specific organizational contexts particularly given the wide range of approaches to change management, which now fall under the umbrella of OD (Kuna and Nadiv, 2018). Some of these approaches may draw heavily upon the humanistic philosophy, which has traditionally been associated with OD but other approaches are more closely associated with performance and efficiency and what Pasmore (2014, 33) terms "immediate bottom-line results".…”

“…Traditionally, OD has its roots in humanistic philosophy based in the behavioral sciences though, over more recent times, OD theory and practice has widened to include some approaches, which espouse interventions primarily designed to improve the efficiency and financial profitability of organizations (Pasmore 2014;Ruona and Gibson 2008). The existence of a wide range of approaches, which are now labelled as OD (Gillon et al 2014;Kuna and Nadiv 2018) may be seen to create the potential for paradoxes. For example, there may be situations where certain business-driven organizational change initiatives are presented within organizations using the label and vocabulary traditionally associated with OD as occurred in the case study organization, which is central to this study.…”

The Working Culture of Legal Aid Lawyers: Developing a ‘Shared Orientation Model’

“…For some, working alongside others can be tense and unnecessary, and for others it can be productive and necessary. Occupational boundaries can be defined as, ‘the process of setting and negotiating boundaries which differentiate between fields of knowledge and expertise’ (Kuna and Nadiv, 2018: 849). Legal aid lawyers face a very multi-faceted working environment in the sense that they sit on the peripheries of the legal profession yet uphold a dual responsibility to act on behalf of both their clients as well as the state, which means they have to negotiate both boundaries.…”

The emotional mechanics of maintaining occupational boundaries between change professionals

“…The review is based on “Divided we stand? Occupational boundary work among human resource managers and external organization development practitioners” by Kuna and Nadiv (2018), published in Employee Relations . This research paper concentrates on patterns of behavior exhibited by HRMs and EODPs to retain their occupational boundaries.…”

“…A research paper by Kuna and Nadiv (2018) focuses on the impact of occupational boundaries on the working relationship between HRMs and EODPs and aims to answer two questions. First, how both practitioners experience the dynamic of working on organizational change.…”