MICHAEL DEMPSEY - Cranfield University

Boundaries
A word mentioned frequently in the discussion above was ‘boundaries’.
In many ways, the role of the trade union manager in managing
stakeholders seems to involve managing boundaries. This will have
been clear in reading the case studies where boundaries of different
types were discussed. Exhibit 9.11 summarises some of the boundary
management issues that arose in the four case study unions.
The Exhibit contains some issues that would be applicable to more or
less any form of boundary. But this summary makes it possible to
discuss the following boundaries:-
• Boundaries related to conflictual relations
These are personal boundaries. Although arguably not
boundaries in themselves, they are included because good
personal relations between stakeholders facilitate effective
stakeholder management whilst poor personal relations set up
human boundaries which have to be managed before there is
any realistic hope of any such managerial processes taking
place. In the CWU, the conflictual relations between
stakeholders ‘battling’ with each other effectively prevent
managers from rationally addressing the issues. Conference, for
example, makes an (ultra vires) decision about substitution of
lay negotiators and energy sapping conflict commences about
how to respond to it. In PCS, lay members pounce on ideas
concerning call centre access to the union and they are
consequently put on hold. In UNiFI, an early atmosphere of low
trust between lay members and managers leads to managers
being apprehensive that they will be exposed at committees. In
UNISON, perceptions that lay members are organising against
senior management inhibits dialogue, though one manager was
adamant that good ‘caring’ relationships were vital to her
relationships with lay activists.
• Constitutional boundaries
These are boundaries that have some reference to the Rule
Book. In CWU, legal advice was eventually taken to establish
the boundary between senior management and activist
structures on staffing matters, so that the General Secretary
could resist ultra vires decisions. In UNiFI, the overriding
importance of the principle of autonomy for company
committees is set out in the Rule Book and is used by managers
to resist activist initiatives designed to transgress those
boundaries. In UNISON, financial regulations are used to
regulate the use of funds contained in lay activist budget heads
and ensure management oversight of them. In UNISON, too, the
issue is raised of the boundaries between governance and
management. In PCS the ideal is expressed that lay members
make policy and managers report to committee. Although this
may be implied in the Rule Book, it is not sufficiently clear to
374