This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Sturdy, A. Articles by Handley, K. Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Between Innovation and Legitimation— Boundaries and Knowledge Flow in Management Consultancy

Industrial Relations and Organisational Behaviour, Warwick Business School, University of Warwick, Coventry, UK, Andrew.Sturdy{at}wbs.ac.uk

Timothy Clark

Department of Organisational Behaviour, Durham Business School, Durham University, Durham, UK, timothy.clark{at}durham.ac.uk

Robin Fincham

Department of Management and Organisation, University of Stirling, Stirling, UK, robin.fincham{at}stir.ac.uk

Karen Handley

HRM and Organisational Behaviour, Oxford Brookes University Business School, Oxford, UK, khandley{at}brookes.ac.uk

Management consultancy is seen by many as a key agent in the adoption of new management ideas and practices in organizations. Two contrasting views are dominant—consultants as innovators, bringing new knowledge to their clients or as legitimating client knowledge. Those few studies which examine directly the flow of knowledge through consultancy in projects with clients favour the innovator view and highlight the important analytical and practical value of boundaries— consultants as both knowledge and organizational outsiders. Likewise, in the legitimator view, the consultants’ role is seen in terms of the primacy of the organizational boundary. By drawing on a wider social science literature on boundaries and studies of inter-organizational knowledge flow and management consultancy more generally, this polarity is seen as problematic, especially at the level of the consulting project. An alternative framework of boundary relations is developed and presented which incorporates their multiplicity, dynamism and situational specificity. This points to a greater complexity and variability in knowledge flow and its potential than is currently recognized. This is significant not only in terms of our understanding of management consultancy and inter-organizational knowledge dynamics and boundaries, but of a critical understanding of the role of management consultancy more generally.

Key Words: boundaries • innovation • knowledge • legitimation • management consultancy

Organization, Vol. 16, No. 5, 627-653 (2009)
DOI: 10.1177/1350508409338435


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?