The Interplay of Inter- and Intraprofessional Boundary Work in Multidisciplinary Teams

Abstract

The challenges of managing interprofessional boundaries within multidisciplinary teams are well known. However, the role of intraprofessional relations in influencing the dynamics of interprofessional collaboration remain underexplored. Our qualitative study offers a fine-grained analysis of the interplay between inter- and intraprofessional boundary work among three professional groups in a multidisciplinary team over a period of two years. Our contribution to the literature is threefold. First, we identify various forms of “competitive” and “collaborative” boundary work that may occur simultaneously at both inter- and intraprofessional levels. Second, we reveal the dynamic interplay between inter- and intraprofessional boundary negotiations over time. Third, we theorize relationships between the social position of professional groups, and the uses and consequences of competitive and collaborative boundary work tactics at intra- and interprofessional levels. Specifically, we show how intraprofessional conflict within high-status groups may affect interprofessional dynamics, we reveal how intraprofessional and interprofessional boundaries may be mobilized positively to support collaborative relations, and we show how mobilization within lower-status groups around interprofessional boundary grievances can paradoxically lead to further marginalization.

Connectivity in and around Organizations: Waves, tensions and trade-offs

“…In their paper on the interplay of inter- and intraorganizational boundary work in multidisciplinary teams, Comeau-Vallee and Langley (2020) remind us that ‘collaborative boundary work’ inherently involves some form of social connectivity. As these authors suggest, ‘boundaries do not exist in an essentialist way, but emerge from interactions, supported by the efforts of institutions, organizations and individuals’ (Abbott (1995), cited in Comeau-Vallee and Langley, this issue).’ Comeau-Vallee and Langley observe that no matter how much we advocate flexibility and collaboration in organizations, such efforts are seldom conducted on an even playing field.…”

Duality and Social Position: Role expectations of people who combine outsider-ness and insider-ness in organizational change

“…Work on social position looks primarily at either organizational insiders or pure outsiders in change processes. The substantial work on organizational insiders theorizes that a person’s hierarchical position, network position, professional status and status within their own profession will structure and delimit the types of change that they will pursue, as well as their ability to mobilize diverse capital to accomplish change (Battilana, 2011; Battilana & Casciaro, 2012; Comeau-Vallée & Langley, 2020; Currie & Spyridonidis, 2016; Lockett et al, 2014). Research also highlights that management consultants’ elite positions in a field and access to external knowledge will structure their capitals and dispositions as pure outsiders in ways that define the types of change they might pursue, as well as the resources they can draw on (Mosonyi et al, 2020).…”

“…Much research has examined how a person’s hierarchical positions, as senior or middle managers, impacts their abilities to influence change (Gioia & Thomas, 1996; Huy, 2002; Maitlis, 2005). Extending this work, a growing body of research has drawn on Bourdieu (1977) to develop theory about the impact of a person’s social position in organizational change (Battilana, 2006, 2011; Comeau-Vallée & Langley, 2020; Ernst & Jensen Schleiter, 2021; Lockett, Currie, Finn, Martin, & Waring, 2014). This work develops the idea that a person’s social position is multi-dimensional – extending beyond hierarchical position – and shaped by their biography and career experiences (Gomez & Bouty, 2011; Lockett et al, 2014).…”

Training competences in smart cities: an online program for higher education students

“…There has almost always been unanimous agreement that the best and most creative way to work is based on teamwork and interdisciplinary teams. This type of teamwork offers numerous advantages (Parker, 2011; Nancarrow et al , 2013; Comeau-Vallée and Langley, 2020). First, there is the possibility that all the members of the team can learn; allowing greater learning for each one of the members, as they can listen to the points of view of other profiles, widening their perspectives, experiencing a greater performance of individual competences.…”