Résumés
Abstract
This paper discusses a case study in the domain of water management and nature conservation from the perspective of boundary dynamics. Multiparty collaboration is proposed as an organizational strategy to manage natural resources. This approach acknowledges the multiple perspectives of stakeholders, the differences in interest and power, and it provides a strategy for change in a domain with a high potential for conflict (Buckles, 1999). The first part of the paper outlines the theoretical insights and frames that underpin the case analysis. Then it discusses boundary issues in a project set up to design a plan for a river valley to solve problems of flooding and deterioration of nature. With this in-depth case study in a complex organizational setting we aim to contribute to empirical research on the perceptions of boundaries in processes of organizing (Paulsen & Hernes, 2003).
Résumé
Privilégiant la perspective théorique de la dynamique des frontières, ce texte se penche sur une étude de cas dans le domaine de la gestion de l’eau et de la conservation de la nature. La collaboration multipartite est proposée comme stratégie organisationnelle de gestion des ressources naturelles, notamment parce qu’elle permet de reconnaître : (a) la multiplicité de perspectives des différentes « parties prenantes » ; (b) l’hétérogénéité des intérêts et des influences en présence; (c) tout autant qu’elle propose une stratégie de changement pour un secteur dont les probabilités de conflit demeurent particulièrement élevées (Buckles, 1999). La première partie du texte présente le cadre théorique sur lequel repose l’étude de cas, alors que la seconde partie discute des enjeux de frontières d’un projet mis en oeuvre pour élaborer un plan permettant de résoudre les problèmes liés à l’inondation et la détérioration d’un milieu naturel. En définitive, cette étude de cas détaillée d’un milieu organisationnel complexe permet d’enrichir la recherche empirique sur les perceptions individuelles et collectives des frontières dans le cadre d’un processus de gestion et d’organisation (Paulsen & Hernes, 2003).
Veuillez télécharger l’article en PDF pour le lire.
Télécharger
Parties annexes
Bibliography
- Alderfer, C. P. (1987). “An intergroup perspective on group dynamics.” In Lorsch, J. (Ed.), Handbook of organizational behavior. NJ: Englewood Cliffs, pp. 199-222 .
- Anderson, D.K. and White, J.D. (2003). “Organizational psychoanalysis in public administration.” American Review of Public Administration, 33 (2), June, 189-208.
- Berg, D. N. and Smith, K. K. (1995). “Paradox and Groups.” In Gillette, J. and McCollom, M. (Eds.), Groups in context. A new perspective on group dynamics. Lanham: University Press of America.
- Bouwen, R. (2001). “Developing Relational Practices for Knowledge Intensive Organizational Contexts.” Career Development, 6/7, 361-369.
- Buckles, D. (Ed.) (1999). “Cultivating peace.” Conflict and collaboration in natural resource management. IDCR/World Bank.
- Chrislip, D. and C. Larson (1994). Collaborative leadership: How citizens and civic leaders can make a difference. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
- Diamond, M., Allcorn, S. and Stein, H. (2004). “The surface of organizational boundaries: a view from psychoanalytic object relations theory.” Human Relations, 57 (1), 31-53.
- Ehrlich, H.S. (2001). “Enemies within and without: paranoia and regression in groups and organizations.” In Gould, L.G., Stapley, L.F. and Stein, M. (Eds.). The systems psychodynamics of organizations. Integrating the group relations approach, psychoanalytic, and open systems perspectives. London: Karnac, pp. 115-131.
- Finn, C.B. (1996). “Utilizing stakeholders strategies for positive collaborative outcomes.” In Huxham, C. (Ed.). Creating collaborative advantage. London: Sage, 152-164.
- Geertz, C. (1973). The interpretation of cultures. New York: Basic Books.
- Gemmill, G. (1986). “The dynamics of the group shadow in intergroup relations.” Small Group Behavior, 17 (2), 229-240.
- Gemmill, G. (1993). “Mirror, mask, and shadow. Psychodynamic aspects of intergroup relations.”Journal of Management Inquiry, 2 (1), March, 43-51.
- Gould, L.J., Ebers, R. and Mc Vicker Clinchy, R. (1999). “The systems psychodynamics of a joint venture: anxiety, social defenses and the management of mutual dependence.” Human Relations, 52 (6), 697-722.
- Gould, L.G., Stapley, L.F. and Stein, M. (Eds.) (2001). The systems psychodynamics of organizations. Integrating the group relations approach, psychoanalytic, and open systems perspectives. London: Karnac.
- Gray, B (1989). Collaborating: finding common ground for multiparty problems. San Francisco: Jossey Bass.
- Gray, B. (1996). “Cross-sectoral partners: collaborative alliances among business, government and communities.” In Huxham, C. (Ed.). Creating collaborative advantage. London: Sage, pp. 57-79.
- Hartman, J. J. and Gibbard, G. S. (1974). “A note on fantasy themes in the evolution of group culture.” In Gibbard, Hartman and Mann (Eds.) Analysis of groups. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
- Hernes, T. (2004). “Studying composite boundaries: a framework for analysis.” Human Relations, 57 (1), 9-29.
- Hirschhorn, L and Gilmore, T (1992). “The new boundaries of the “boundaryless” company.” Harvard Business Review, May/June, 70 (3), 104-115.
- Huffington, C., Armstrong, D., Halton, W., Hoyle, L. and Pooley, J. (Eds.) (2004). Working below the surface. The emotional life of contemporary organizations. London: Karnac.
- Huffington, C. and James K. (1999). Issues in management research, and the value of a psychoanalytic perspective. A case study in organisational stress in a Japanese multi-national company. Paper presented at the annual Symposium of the Psychoanalytic Society for the Study of Organizations, Toronto.
- Huxham, C. (Ed.). (1996). Creating collaborative advantage. London: Sage.
- Koppenjan, J. and Klijn, E.H. (Eds.) (2004). Managing uncertainties in networks. London: Routledge.
- Kramer, R. (1991). The more the merrier? Social psychological aspects of multiparty negotiations in organizations. Research on negotiation in organizations. Vol. 3, Greenwich, Connecticut: JAI Press.
- McCollom, M (1995a). “Group formation: boundaries, leadership, and culture.” In Gillette, J. and McCollom, M. (Eds.): Groups in context. A new perspective on group dynamics. Lanham: University Press of America, pp. 34-48.
- McCollom, M (1995b). “Reevaluating group development: a critique of the familiar models.” In Gillette, J. and McCollom, M. (Eds.): Groups in context. A new perspective on group dynamics. Lanham: University Press of America, pp. 133-154.
- Menzies, I. E. P. (1960). “A case study in the functioning of social systems as a defense against anxiety.” Human Relations, 13, 95-121.
- Merali, Y (2002). “The role of boundaries in knowledge processes.” European Journal of Information Systems, 11 (1), 47-60.
- Miller, E.J. and Rice, A.K. (1967). Systems of organization. The control of task and sentient boundaries. London: Tavistock Publications.
- Paulsen, N. and Hernes, T. (Eds.) (2003). Managing boundaries in organizations: Multiple perspectives. Basingstoke: Palgrave McMillan.
- Redlich, F.C. and Astrachan, B. (1975). “Group dynamics training.” In Colman, A.D. and Bexton, W.H. (Eds.), Group Relations reader. Sausalito: Grex.
- Schein, E.H. (1987). The clinical perspective in fieldwork, Newbury Park: Sage.
- Schneider, S.C. (1991). “Managing boundaries in organizations.” In Kets de Vries (Ed.), Organizations on the couch: clinical perspectives on organizational behavior and change. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, pp. 169-190.
- Stein, M. (2004). “Theories of experiential learning and the unconscious.” In Gould, L.J., Stapley, L.F. and Stein, M. (Eds.) Experiential learning in organizations. Applications of the Tavistock group relations approach. London: Karnac, pp. 19-36.
- Tajfel, H. (1978). (Ed.) Differentiation between social groups: Studies in the social psychology of intergroup relations. London: Academic Press.
- Vansina, L., Taillieu, T. and Schruijer, S. (1998). “’Managing’ multiparty issues: learning from experience.” In Pasmore, W. and Woodman, R. (Eds.), Research in Organizational Change and Development. (vol. 11). Greenwich, Connecticut: JAI Press Inc., pp. 159-181.
- Yin, R.K. Case study research. Design and methods. Second Edition. Applied Social Research Methods Series, Volume 5, Thousand Oaks, California: Sage Publications, 1994.
- Wells, L. (1995). “The group as a whole: a systemic socio-analytic perspective on interpersonal and group relations.” In Gillette, J. and McCollom, M. (Eds.). Groups in context. A new perspective on group dynamics. Lanham: University Press of America, pp. 49-85.
- Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice. Learning, meaning, and identity. Cambridge University Press.
- Winnicott, D.W. (1971). Playing and reality. London: Routledge Press.
- Zagier Roberts, V. (1994). “Conflict and collaboration. Managing intergroup relations.” In Obholzer, A. and Zagier Roberts, V. (Eds.), The unconscious at work. Individual and organizational stress in the human services. London: Routledge, pp. 187-196.