Connecting+partners

Download a PDF of this file

** Connecting partners: Engagement boundary-spanning roles for community partners ** Katherine Adams, graduate student, The University of Georgia [ktswings@uga.edu]

Lorilee Sandmann, Professor, The University of Georgia [sandmann@uga.edu]


 * Keywords:** Boundary spanners, community partner perceptions, case study


 * Conference track:** Community partnerships and outcomes


 * Format:** Poster presentation

Despite their significance for engaged scholarship, community partners’ perceptions of successful partnerships are not being widely investigated (Cruz & Giles, 2000). Research is also lacking on boundary spanning by community members in university-community partnerships. Who are the boundary-spanning community leaders that emerge in university-community partnerships, and how can university partners better identify them?
 * Summary**

“Boundary spanners” are leaders within the institutions must emerge who can fluidly cross the boundaries of university and community understanding (Friedman and Podolny, 1992; Miller, 2008; Sandmann & Fear, 2001). They help create authentic partnerships composed of multiple stakeholders who recognize the social, cultural, and educational perspectives of the involved members.

Weerts and Sandmann (2010) investigated boundary spanners at public research universities and identified four roles of spanners based on task orientation and social closeness: (a) community-based problem solver, (b) technical expert, (c) internal engagement advocate, and (d) engagement champion.

To apply the Weerts and Sandmann framework from the community perspective, a qualitative instrumental multi-site case study (Stake, 1995) was utilized. Focus groups were held with institutional partners to provide context and identify community members in boundary-spanning roles. Interviews with these community members examined their perceived roles and motivations and their perspectives on the characteristics of community-based boundary spanners.

Data were examined for emergent themes. These findings were examined to ascertain potential for adaptation for community boundary spanners. By providing institutional boundary spanners with the tools and techniques to better locate and engage their community counterparts, this research will contribute to creating and sustaining effective university-community partnerships.

Chand, M., & Tung, R. L. (2011). Diaspora as the boundary-spanners: The role of trust in business facilitation. //Journal of Trust Research, 1//(1), 107-129.
 * References**

Cross, R., Davenport, T., & Cantrell, S. (2003). The social side of high performance. //Sloan Management Review//. //45//(1), 20-24.

Cruz, N., & Giles, D. E., Jr. (2000). Where’s the community in service-learning research [Special issue]? //Michigan Journal of Community Service Learning, Fall,// 28-34.

Friedman, R.A., & Podolny, J. (1992) Differentiation of boundary spanning roles: Labor negotiations and implications for role conflict. //Administrative Science Quarterly//, 37, 28–47.

Goldring, E., & Sims, P. (2005). Modeling creative and courageous school leadership through district-community-university partnerships. //Educational Policy//, //19//(1), 223-249.

Miller, P. M. (2008). Examining the work of boundary spanning leaders in community contexts. //International Journal of Leadership in Education, 11//(4), 353-377.

National Association of State Universities and Land-Grant Colleges. (1999). //Returning to our roots: The engaged institution. Report of the Kellogg Commission on the future of the state and land-grant universities.// Washington, DC: Authors. Retrieved from: http://www.nasulgc.org/publications/Kellogg/Kellogg1999_Engage.pdf

Sandmann, L. R., & Fear, F. A. (2001-02). The “new” scholarship: Implications for engagement and extension. //Journal of Higher Education Outreach and Engagement,// 7//(//1-2//),// 29-38.

Stake, R. (1995). //The art of case research//. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.

Weerts, D., & Sandmann, L. R. (2008). Building a two-way street: Challenges and opportunities for community engagement at research universities. //Review of Higher Education, 32//(1)//,// 73–106.

Weerts, D. J., & Sandmann, L. R. (2010). Community engagement and boundary-spanning roles at research universities. //The Journal of Higher Education// //81//(6) 702-727.

Williams, P. (2002). The competent boundary spanner. //Public Administration, 80//(1), 103-124.

Williams, P. (2011). The life and times of the boundary spanner. //Journal of Integrated Care, 19//(3), 26-33.


 * To access materials from this session please click on the file link(s) below:**

include component="comments" page="Connecting partners" limit="50"