Ellen Nathues, Mark van Vuuren, Maaike D Endedijk, Matthias Wenzel
{"title":"变形:边界物体如何影响视觉、语言和具身模式的意义生成","authors":"Ellen Nathues, Mark van Vuuren, Maaike D Endedijk, Matthias Wenzel","doi":"10.1177/00187267241236111","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Boundary objects help collaborators create shared meaning and coordinate their work across differences. Acknowledging the complex dynamics of such processes, we propose a multimodal alternative to studies’ traditionally static view of boundary objects and ask: How do boundary objects “shape-shift”? How do they emerge in varying forms across visual, verbal, and embodied modes, and in what ways does this “shape-shifting” affect meaning-making? Adopting a “strong” multimodal lens, we show how boundary objects expand in form as collaborative work proceeds through shifting shapes both across and within modes. We also show how they contract over time, reemerging exclusively in some and not other shapes, often in simplified forms. These dynamics both enable and constrain meaning-making. Expanding shapes of the boundary object allow collaborators to develop rich shared understandings. Contracting shapes, in turn, condense meaning-making into efficient communication among those familiarized with the object, yet obscure meaning-making for newcomers who cannot make sense of its contracted shapes. Our study sheds new light on boundary objects’ multimodal nature and demonstrates how objects’ shifting shapes affect meaning-making. More generally, we offer a rich empirical account of how modes enmesh in practice, unveiling their processual and inseparable complexion.","PeriodicalId":48433,"journal":{"name":"Human Relations","volume":"78 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Shape-shifting: How boundary objects affect meaning-making across visual, verbal, and embodied modes\",\"authors\":\"Ellen Nathues, Mark van Vuuren, Maaike D Endedijk, Matthias Wenzel\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/00187267241236111\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Boundary objects help collaborators create shared meaning and coordinate their work across differences. Acknowledging the complex dynamics of such processes, we propose a multimodal alternative to studies’ traditionally static view of boundary objects and ask: How do boundary objects “shape-shift”? How do they emerge in varying forms across visual, verbal, and embodied modes, and in what ways does this “shape-shifting” affect meaning-making? Adopting a “strong” multimodal lens, we show how boundary objects expand in form as collaborative work proceeds through shifting shapes both across and within modes. We also show how they contract over time, reemerging exclusively in some and not other shapes, often in simplified forms. These dynamics both enable and constrain meaning-making. Expanding shapes of the boundary object allow collaborators to develop rich shared understandings. Contracting shapes, in turn, condense meaning-making into efficient communication among those familiarized with the object, yet obscure meaning-making for newcomers who cannot make sense of its contracted shapes. Our study sheds new light on boundary objects’ multimodal nature and demonstrates how objects’ shifting shapes affect meaning-making. More generally, we offer a rich empirical account of how modes enmesh in practice, unveiling their processual and inseparable complexion.\",\"PeriodicalId\":48433,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Human Relations\",\"volume\":\"78 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-03-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Human Relations\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"91\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/00187267241236111\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"管理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"MANAGEMENT\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Human Relations","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00187267241236111","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MANAGEMENT","Score":null,"Total":0}
Shape-shifting: How boundary objects affect meaning-making across visual, verbal, and embodied modes
Boundary objects help collaborators create shared meaning and coordinate their work across differences. Acknowledging the complex dynamics of such processes, we propose a multimodal alternative to studies’ traditionally static view of boundary objects and ask: How do boundary objects “shape-shift”? How do they emerge in varying forms across visual, verbal, and embodied modes, and in what ways does this “shape-shifting” affect meaning-making? Adopting a “strong” multimodal lens, we show how boundary objects expand in form as collaborative work proceeds through shifting shapes both across and within modes. We also show how they contract over time, reemerging exclusively in some and not other shapes, often in simplified forms. These dynamics both enable and constrain meaning-making. Expanding shapes of the boundary object allow collaborators to develop rich shared understandings. Contracting shapes, in turn, condense meaning-making into efficient communication among those familiarized with the object, yet obscure meaning-making for newcomers who cannot make sense of its contracted shapes. Our study sheds new light on boundary objects’ multimodal nature and demonstrates how objects’ shifting shapes affect meaning-making. More generally, we offer a rich empirical account of how modes enmesh in practice, unveiling their processual and inseparable complexion.
期刊介绍:
Human Relations is an international peer reviewed journal, which publishes the highest quality original research to advance our understanding of social relationships at and around work through theoretical development and empirical investigation. Scope Human Relations seeks high quality research papers that extend our knowledge of social relationships at work and organizational forms, practices and processes that affect the nature, structure and conditions of work and work organizations. Human Relations welcomes manuscripts that seek to cross disciplinary boundaries in order to develop new perspectives and insights into social relationships and relationships between people and organizations. Human Relations encourages strong empirical contributions that develop and extend theory as well as more conceptual papers that integrate, critique and expand existing theory. Human Relations welcomes critical reviews and essays: - Critical reviews advance a field through new theory, new methods, a novel synthesis of extant evidence, or a combination of two or three of these elements. Reviews that identify new research questions and that make links between management and organizations and the wider social sciences are particularly welcome. Surveys or overviews of a field are unlikely to meet these criteria. - Critical essays address contemporary scholarly issues and debates within the journal''s scope. They are more controversial than conventional papers or reviews, and can be shorter. They argue a point of view, but must meet standards of academic rigour. Anyone with an idea for a critical essay is particularly encouraged to discuss it at an early stage with the Editor-in-Chief. Human Relations encourages research that relates social theory to social practice and translates knowledge about human relations into prospects for social action and policy-making that aims to improve working lives.