Boundary Work and Boundary Objects: Synthesizing Two Concepts for Moments of Controversy

Jessica R. Houf Louisiana Tech University

Abstract

There are two boundary concepts utilized in technical and professional communication (TPC) scholarship: boundary work and, to a lesser degree, boundary objects. Boundary work functions to demarcate, incorporate, and expel particular ideas, groups, and practices from a field or profession. Boundary objects enhance the capacity of ideas, practices, and theories to translate across different groups. Together, these concepts are useful to TPC scholars interested in moments of controversy. In this essay, I explore the dialectical relationship between these two concepts and apply the resulting synthesis to a contemporary case study, the use of fecal microbiota transplants. I argue that the human microbiome functions as a boundary object and opens space within medicine’s own boundary work for the inclusion of fecal microbiota transplants. Together, the dialectical concepts of boundary work and boundary object create a new kind of analytic that allows TPC scholars to map boundary transformations, recognize moments for intervention, and create strategies for collaboration.

Journal
Journal of Technical Writing and Communication
Published
2021-07-01
DOI
10.1177/0047281620947355
Open Access
Closed
Topics

Citation Context

Cited by in this index (2)

  1. Rhetoric Society Quarterly
  2. Journal of Technical Writing and Communication

Cites in this index (6)

  1. Journal of Technical Writing and Communication
  2. Journal of Technical Writing and Communication
  3. Journal of Technical Writing and Communication
  4. Technical Communication Quarterly
  5. Journal of Business and Technical Communication
Show all 6 →
  1. Journal of Business and Technical Communication
Also cites 47 works outside this index ↓
  1. 10.1086/342334
  2. 10.1016/j.anaerobe.2009.09.007
  3. 10.1016/j.cgh.2011.08.014
  4. 10.1111/j.1468-2958.2012.01430.x
  5. 10.1016/B978-0-12-341280-5.50023-9
  6. 10.1093/clinids/12.Supplement_2.S243
  7. 10.1093/clinids/18.Supplement_4.S265
  8. 10.1086/521865
  9. 10.2307/30146855
  10. 10.1287/orsc.6.4.350
  11. 10.7551/mitpress/6352.001.0001
  12. 10.1093/cid/cis812
  13. 10.1016/j.gie.2013.03.1329
  14. 10.1111/j.1467-954X.1984.tb00113.x
  15. 10.1111/comt.12088
  16. Clark W. C., Tomich T. P., Van Noordwijk M., Dickson N. M., Catacutan D., Guston D., McNie E. C. (2010). Towa…
  17. 10.1136/jech.2007.062380
  18. 10.1177/0897190013499521
  19. 10.1080/00909882.2016.1225160
  20. 10.1111/j.1540-6210.2006.00669.x
  21. 10.1177/0038038510387196
  22. 10.1586/eri.10.14
  23. 10.1016/0016-5085(80)90156-0
  24. 10.2307/2095325
  25. 10.1177/016224399101600402
  26. 10.1007/BF00173966
  27. 10.1002/asi.21639
  28. 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2012.04.017
  29. 10.1007/978-90-481-2611-8_10
  30. 10.1056/NEJMra0707500
  31. 10.7551/mitpress/8303.001.0001
  32. 10.1177/1363459308099681
  33. 10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2010.02.002
  34. 10.1108/13673270510610369
  35. 10.1080/03637751.2013.788253
  36. 10.3390/su5104195
  37. 10.1101/gr.096651.109
  38. 10.1186/gb-2005-6-8-229
  39. 10.1177/0162243910377624
  40. 10.1177/030631289019003001
  41. 10.1177/0306312706075330
  42. 10.1126/science.aav6870
  43. 10.1111/j.1753-4887.2012.00493.x
  44. 10.1111/j.1467-9566.2006.00539.x
  45. 10.1038/ajg.2012.251
  46. 10.1093/cid/cis809
  47. 10.1155/2014/403828
CrossRef global citation count: 7 View in citation network →