2012Human Communication ResearchRequires access

Engineering Objects for Collaboration: Strategies of Ambiguity and Clarity at Knowledge Boundaries

William C. Barley, Paul M. Leonardi, Diane E. Bailey

Open publisher page 115 citations

Abstract

Prior research suggests that boundary objects gain meaning through group interaction. Drawing from the literature on strategic ambiguity, we explore the possibility that individuals strategically create potential boundary objects in an attempt to shape the meanings that groups develop. From ethnographic observations of automotive engineers, we identify 2 creation strategies: ambiguity (to create objects that support multiple meanings) and clarity (to create objects that permit a particular meaning). We detail design activities that engineers undertook to create objects under each strategy. We find that, when creating objects, engineers favored a strategy of ambiguity, which they believed would foster healthy long-term group interactions, over a strategy of clarity, which they tended to employ only when they expected resistance to their ideas.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

Prior research suggests that boundary objects gain meaning through group interaction. Drawing from the literature on strategic ambiguity, we explore the possibility that individuals strategically create potential boundary objects in an attempt to shape the meanings that groups develop. From ethnographic observations of automotive engineers, we identify 2 creation strategies: ambiguity (to create objects that support multiple meanings) and clarity (to create objects that permit a particular meaning). We detail design activities that engineers undertook to create objects under each strategy. We find that, when creating objects, engineers favored a strategy of ambiguity, which they believed would foster healthy long-term group interactions, over a strategy of clarity, which they tended to employ only when they expected resistance to their ideas.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 115 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

Prior research suggests that boundary objects gain meaning through group interaction. Drawing from the literature on strategic ambiguity, we explore the possibility that individuals strategically create potential boundary objects in an attempt to shape the meanings that groups develop. From ethnographic observations of automotive engineers, we identify 2 creation strategies: ambiguity (to create objects that support multiple meanings) and clarity (to create objects that permit a particular meaning). We detail design activities that engineers undertook to create objects under each strategy. We find that, when creating objects, engineers favored a strategy of ambiguity, which they believed would foster healthy long-term group interactions, over a strategy of clarity, which they tended to employ only when they expected resistance to their ideas.

Key concepts: CLARITY, Ambiguity, Boundary object, Meaning (existential), Boundary (topology), Ethnography, Perspective (graphical), Psychology

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Engineering Objects for Collaboration: Strategies of Ambiguity and Clarity at Knowledge Boundaries — Research Paper | ScholarLens