# data[].attributes.body
Bolman & Deal's 4 Frame Theory (By Charles Albert)

# data[].attributes.body
This is a great graphic organizer that breaks each frame down into further detail and allows you to see all frames at once.

# data[].attributes.body
This article discusses tips for administrators who would like to use the four frame model for leadership in their building.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Most educational administration graduate students can tell you about Bolman & Deal's leadership frameworks. The frames help change agents conceptualize different approaches to an issue. Depending on the circumstances, one approach may be more appropriate than another. Or, most likely, several approaches in combination will be most successful. Bolman & Deal's four frames are as follows:

1. Structural. Leaders who make change using this approach focus on structural elements within the organization as well as strategy, implementation, and adaptation. Changing institutional structures works well when goals are clear, when cause-and-effect relationships are well understood, and when there is little conflict, uncertainty, or ambiguity.

2. Human resource. Leaders who approach change from a human resource frame focus on people. This approach emphasizes support, empowerment (perhaps through distributed leadership mechanisms), staff development, and responsiveness to employee needs. A focus on people works well when employee morale is a consideration and when there is relatively little conflict.

3. Political. Leaders who use a political approach to facilitate change focus on the political realities that exist within and outside organizations. This approach emphasizes dealing with interest groups (and their varying agendas), building power bases, coalition-building, negotiating conflicts over limited resources, and creating compromises. The political approach is appropriate when resources are scarce or diminishing as well as when goals or values are in conflict.

4. Symbolic. Leaders who make change using a symbolic approach focus on vision and inspiration. Symbolic leaders feel that people need to believe that their personal work, and the work of the organization, is important and meaningful. Traditions, ceremonies, and rituals are very important to the symbolic approach, which is most appropriate when goals and/or cause-and-effect relationships are unclear.

Bolman & Deal's frames can be used at the planning stage of a change initiative to help diagnose organizational needs, to identify institutional challenges and contexts, and to devise appopriate actions (e.g., ' For this initiative, we need to be sure to address the political aspects because...'). The frames also can be used to rethink and reframe unsuccessful change initiatives (e.g., ' This initiative failed because we didn't appropriately address the human resource frame. ').

A combination of the four perspectives is nearly always warranted when implementing a change initiative. Unfortunately, I think most educators would agree that the structural aspects of change initiatives tend to be emphasized quite strongly (e.g., 'We'll create a new program' or 'we'll reorganize ourselves' or 'we'll buy some technology to help') with a concurrent neglect of the other three frames. Because school leaders often may be strong in one or two of these frames but not all four, it is important to get others on board to adequately conceptualize and address all needed aspects of the change initiative.

I'm sure most of you can identify a situation where an emphasis, or lack of emphasis, on one of these frames led to a change initiative's success or failure.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Most educational administration graduate students can tell you about Bolman & Deal's leadership frameworks. The frames help change agents conceptualize different approaches to an issue. Depending on the circumstances, one approach may be more appropriate than another. Or, most likely, several approaches in combination will be most successful.

# data[].attributes.body
This article discusses the benefits of using the four frames in schools to help aid in leadership.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
image found at http://ronaldwbrownassociatesllc.wordpress.com/2010/05/17/

When talking about the leadership orientations of educational leaders, discussion often centers around supporting faculty, developing programs, and implementing policies and procedures. Trying to understand how leaders think and the impact of that thinking sheds light on the potential effectiveness of that leader. I have written in other posts about the multi-frame leadership orientations described by Bolman and Deal (2003), specifically the structural frame, the human resource frame, and the symbolic frame. The remaining frame is the one that educational leaders have been least likely to admit using. Although less frequently espoused, there may be a connection between effective leadership and the use of this final frame, especially in independent school settings. This final frame is the political frame, which has roots in the power and political organizational theory.

The Power and Politics Organizational Theory

Shafritz, Ott, and Jang (2005) offer a definition of power: "Power is the ability to get things done the way one wants them done; it is the latent ability to influence people" (p. 284).

This definition is based on the definitions proposed by Gerald Salancik and Jeffrey Pfeffer (1977) and Robert Allen and Lyman Porter (1983). There are two basic benefits to understanding organizations through this definition. First, this definition emphasizes the relativity of power. Second, it reminds the reader that conflict and use of power are often not about outcomes, but rather methods, means, and approaches (Shafritz, Ott, & Jang, 2005). Therefore, organizations that control power, through the forming of alliances of people seeking organizational resources, determine the ability to achieve established organizational goals (Durocher, 1996).

The critical need to form alliances and establish external relations, then, becomes an increasingly important function of leadership. Thus, the direct involvement of top leaders in the political aspect of the organization takes on a new, more important role (Bennis, 1984). As a school of organizational theory, the power and politics theory rejects the previously held assumption that organizations are rational institutions whose purpose is to accomplish established goals. Instead, organizations are redefined as "complex systems of individuals and coalitions, each having its own interests, beliefs, values, preferences, perspectives, and perceptions" (Shafritz, Ott, & Jang, 2005, p. 283).

The political process involves two parties. One consists of recipients of influence and initiators of social control, and the other party is initiators of influence and recipients of social control (Gamson, 1968). The interactions of these two parties in the political process can be somewhat unclear. In schools, political activity is often found as a result of unclear goals and continuous activity (Campbell, Corbally, & Nystrand, 1983). As Sergiovanni (1984) writes, "The political perspective represents a recent and important development in the literature of educational administration" (p. 6).
The Political Frame
The political frame, as mentioned earlier, is rooted in the power and politics organizational theory which describes organizations as places where power is exercised in the allocation of scarce resources (Durocher, 1996). The source of this power is found through authority, expertise, controlling rewards, and personal power or characteristics (such as charisma, intelligence, communications skills, etc.) (Bolman & Deal, 1984). The political frame operates based on five basic assumptions (Bolman & Deal, 2003):

1. Organizations are coalitions of diverse individuals and interest groups.
2. There are enduring differences among coalition members in values, beliefs, information, interests, and perceptions of reality.
3. Most important decisions involve allocating scarce resources - who gets what.
4. Scarce resources and enduring differences make conflict central to organizational dynamics and underlie power as the most important asset.
5. Goals and decisions emerge from bargaining, negotiation, and jockeying for position among competing stakeholders. (p. 186)

Bolman and Deal (2003) conclude, "Organizations are both arenas for internal politics and political agents with their on agendas, resources, and strategies" (p. 238). They also state that organizational effectiveness depends on political skill and the ability to determine when to consider an open and collaborative approach or to use a more adversarial strategy. Understanding the political realities of a situation calls for the leader to consider the potential for "collaboration, the importance of long-term relationships, and most important their own values and ethical principles" (Bolman & Deal, 2003, p. 220).
Implications for Educational Leaders
Studies have been conducted to measure frame usage and to investigate possible relationships between leadership effectiveness and frame use. There have been a few studies that have found some connection that suggests a correlation between leadership effectiveness and the use of the political frame. These studies have involved mainly subjects in the United States. For example, Bolman and Deal (1991) found that in the United States, effective leadership was associated with use of the symbolic, political, and human resource frames. More recently, my research into leadership orientations of independent school heads suggested that self-reported leadership effectiveness was associated with use of the political frame (Roddy, 2010).

In light of the fact that the political frame is consistently reported as the least used frame by leaders, it is important to understand that using a multi-frame approach lends itself to the best chance at both leadership and managerial effectiveness. Though reported at used less often, the political frame is not less necessary, especially given the research suggesting its relationship to leadership effectiveness.

What does this possibly say about defining effective educational leadership? Can we flip these findings into an understanding that the ability to navigate the challenges associated with the conflict over limited resources in schools is an essential skill fro the successful educational leader? Resources, remember, do not necessarily have to be financial. Other resources can include time, space, faculty members, etc. Building coalitions of educators and supporters that are aligned with our vision is a potentially powerful step in making positive decisions when faced with a politically challenging issue. The challenge to many leaders is then to properly frame or reframe often unclear organizational challenges in a manner that allows these leaders to make the best possible decision for the faculty, students, and families in their respective school communities.
References
Allen, R. W., & Porter, L. W. (1983). Organizational influence processes. Glenview, IL: Scott, Foresman.

Bennis, W. (1984). The four competencies of leadership. Training and Development Journal, 38, 15-19.

Bolman, L. G., & Deal, T. E., (1991). Leadership and management effectiveness: A multi-frame, multi-sector analysis. Human Resource Management, 30, 509-534.

Bolman, L. G., & Deal, T. E. (2003). Reframing organizations: Artistry, choice, and leadership. (3 rd ed). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Campbell, R. F., Corbally, J. E., & Nystrand, R. o. (1983). Introduction to educational administration. Newton, MA: Allyn and Bacon.

Durocher, E. A. (1996). Leadership orientations of school administrators: A survey of nationally recognized school leaders. Dissertations Abstracts International, 57(02), 525A. (UMI No. 9620148)

Gamson, W. A. (1968). Power and Discontent. Florence, KY: Dorsey Press.

Roddy, T. (2010). Frame analysis of the self-perceived leadership orientations of headmasters of the Independent Schools Association of the Southwest, Southern Association of Independent Schools, and the Association of Independent Schools of Greater Washington member schools (Doctoral dissertation, University of New Orleans, 2010).

Salancik, G. R., & Pfeffer, J. (1977). Who gets power - and how they hold on to it: A strategic-contingency model of power. Organizational Dynamics, 5, 2-21.

Sergiovanni, T. J. (1984). Handbook for effective department leadership. (2 nd ed). Newton, MA: Allyn Bacon.

Shafritz, J. M., Ott, J. S., & Jang, Y. S. (2005). Classics of Organizational Theory. (6 th ed). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth /Thomson.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Political frame orientation and educational leadership

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
image found at http://ronaldwbrownassociatesllc.wordpress.com/2010/05/17/ When talking about the leadership orientations of educational leaders, discussion often centers around supporting faculty, developing programs, and implementing policies and procedures. Trying to understand how leaders think and the impact of that thinking sheds light on the potential effectiveness of that leader.

# data[].attributes.body
This video discussion goes through various situations or symbols that you see within schools and how it relates to Bolman and Deal's 4 Frames

# data[].attributes.body
as I looked over what we had and searched some more.  I have a major question....
Is there more that we could add?  As I search I am only finding things we have already posted or are not very illuminating?

--From Erin

# data[].attributes.body
Leadership Characteristics for the Four Frames

# data[].attributes.body
Slide Share on the 4 Frames, and the pros and cons of each frame.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Four-Frame Model - Reframing Organisations

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Bolman & Deal identify four distinctive 'frames' from which people view their world - Structural, Human Resources, Political, and Symbolic. Each frame comes wi...

# data[].attributes.body
Do we need to have some sort of discussion? Or is the links enough to cover the topics?

# data[].attributes.body
Symbolic Frame - Con
https://www.slideshare.net/PhilVincent1/fourframe-model

# data[].attributes.headline
What else do we need to do for the project for it to be complete?

# data[].attributes.subject
What else do we need to do for the project for it to be complete?

# data[].attributes.body
Political Frame - Con
https://www.slideshare.net/PhilVincent1/fourframe-model

# data[].attributes.body
Human Resources Frame - Con
https://www.slideshare.net/PhilVincent1/fourframe-model

# data[].attributes.body
Structural Frame - Con
https://www.slideshare.net/PhilVincent1/fourframe-model

# data[].attributes.headline
How can the Four Frames Model be used in schools?

# data[].attributes.subject
How can the Four Frames Model be used in schools?

# data[].attributes.headline
What are the characteristics of the Four Frame Model?

# data[].attributes.subject
What are the characteristics of the Four Frame Model?

# data[].attributes.headline
Group members ideas of Pros and Cons of the Frame Model

# data[].attributes.subject
Group members ideas of Pros and Cons of the Frame Model

# data[].attributes.body
Here is an intro to the Four Frames.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
This is the first of four videos looking at organizational frames.

# data[].attributes.body
This powerpoint talks about strengths and weaknesses of the Four Frames.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.keywords[]
scenario building for successful organizational change mpa 8002 organization theory richard m. jacobs

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Scenario Building for Successful Organizational Change MPA 8002 Organization Theory Richard M. Jacobs, OSA, Ph.D. - ppt download

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Structurally, managers and leaders set goals and policies under conditions of uncertainty 2. achieve a "delicate balance" in allocating scarce resources across organizational entities 3. motivate, coordinate, and control large, diverse group of subordinates

# data[].attributes.body
This is a blog that focuses on the structural frame in schools.

# data[].attributes.body
A look at Leadership Characteristics within the Four Frames

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
How Can a Leader Be Flexible in Applying the Four Frames & Yet Still Be Considered Authentic?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The four frames approach to leadership analysis derives from the work of Lee G. Bolman and Terrence E. Deal, who outlined different lenses, or frames, through which leaders should view problematic ...

# data[].attributes.body
4th edition video of Lee Bolman sharing his thinking.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
First published in 1984, Lee Bolman and Terrence Deals best-selling book has become a classic in the field. Its four-frame model examines organizations as factories, families, jungles, and theaters or temples.

# data[].attributes.body
Reflective prompts for each frame are included in this Principals Entry Plan.

# data[].attributes.body
Explicit explanation of the four frames.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Four Frame Analysis Approach to Leadership

# data[].attributes.body
Meet Lee G. Bolman and Terrance E. Deal as they talk about the 5th edition of their book.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Bolman and Deal touch on organizational theory in respect to current issues

# data[].attributes.headline
What are the Pros and Cons of using  the Four Frames?

# data[].attributes.subject
What are the Pros and Cons of using  the Four Frames?

# data[].attributes.body
European Journal of Social Sciences study to determine preferred frames of leadership for teachers.

# data[].attributes.headline
Did we want to organize our Padlet at all? Here are some suggestions from Padlet. 

# data[].attributes.subject
Did we want to organize our Padlet at all? Here are some suggestions from Padlet. 

# data[].attributes.body
https://padlet.com/support/padlet_layouts

# data[].attributes.body
Chart that contains the barriers for each frame and strategies to overcome.

# data[].attributes.body
A little survey to help you learn about your function with in the four frames.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Leadership Orientations frame self score

# data[].attributes.headline
The Whole Child article about utilizing The Four Frames.

# data[].attributes.subject
The Whole Child article about utilizing The Four Frames.

# data[].attributes.body
http://www.wholechildeducation.org/blog/four-frames-for-principals-new-and-experienced

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Four Frames for Principals, New and Experienced

I was working with an elementary principal. One of the school's 3rd grade classes had given him a list of responsibilities they assumed formed his job. He showed me the list and chuckled, until he got to an item that he said made him shudder far more than smile: "You fix everything."

That overwhelming mandate contains a big piece of the truth: almost everything that happens in the school is ultimately the responsibility of the principal. What is equally valid is the reality that one person cannot know everything, be everywhere, prevent all problems, and fix everything.

One path through that psychosis-inducing dilemma is articulated in the excellent management book, Reframing Organizations (Bolman and Deal, 2003). The authors urge leaders to operate in four frames: structural, human resource, symbolic, political. I have found that most principals tend toward one or two frames of action. When they are coached to consider actions in all four frames, their options expand-but not to the point of overwhelm. They develop confidence that they are applying the energy they have available in the most efficient ways; they are also developing a school culture that is more resilient. Ultimately they move from having to "fix" problems in a flurry of reactive moves towards managing the environment. And when they have to apply a fix, their tool kit is well organized. Their tool kits have four sections:

1. Structural: Rules, procedures, and definitions are needed for safety and predictability. Principals have their hands on the gears needed to create reliable responses and to apply structural fixes (fire drill procedures, lunch coverage, who calls home when a student is suspended, how to order toner for the printer). In this frame, organizations are seen as machinery, with parts needing to be in place and well maintained.

2. Human Resources: Schools are not bricks and mortar, but primarily communities of people who need each other. In this frame, principals invest in the education of staff, and they build trust and caring. At the system level, we take care of human resources by securing benefits, raises, and providing professional development. At the school building level, principals seek initiatives that improve person-to-person understanding, learning, and communication. In this frame, schools are seen as a family, in which adult connections and affiliations are an essential prerequisite to taking care of children.

3. Symbolic: Principals are always communicating what matters to the organization, whether explicitly through their words, or implicitly by how they focus their attention. What principals prioritize on agendas, what they spend money on, and who and what they praise continually send messages about what is important. Since there is no way to micro-manage every action, the symbolic frame reinforces a shared culture that influences all decisions (i.e., this is how we do things around here). Meetings are as much about symbolism as they are about content-get the symbolism right as much as the details. Leaders are always working in the symbolic frame, no matter what other frame they are focusing on. In this frame, organizations are seen as temples, and principals as inspirational leaders.

4. Political: Getting things done requires finessing the various factions within an organization, because there are always factions, and there are always more needs than there are resources. In this frame, principals develop the voices of the staff who can influence the team; they consciously engage supporters and build cohorts who will hang tough through new initiatives. They know who to contact before presenting a plan to a large group. They keep in touch with influential members of the community. Interventions that apply pressure to the most powerful leverage points in a system are in the political frame.

The decisions principals make should be based on what helps them meet their goals, both in the moment and for the long-term functioning of the school. A quick fix in only one frame may not sustain, so it is useful to consider fixes in all of the frames. Principals needn't always address an issue in all four frames, but it's a good idea. Ask yourself: "Which frames am I in now? Can I touch all of them?"

In schools and other human service organizations, the political frame is the one least often embraced, the one people have the most internal conflicts applying. The authors are very clear about this, and remind the reader that politics and power exist in any organization (there are many types of power)-and to ignore their force is simply to be less effective in meeting the mission of the organization.

There is no way to predict the issues that will arise in a school year, whether you are a new principal or a seasoned veteran. But the chaos of the mundane and the extreme can be well contained and addressed by keeping these four frames in mind.

Jeffrey Benson is the author of ASCD's Hanging In-Strategies for Teaching the Students Who Challenge Us Most and the often cited Educational Leadership article, "100 Repetitions." His website with contact information, writing, and links is JeffreyBenson.org. Connect with Benson on Twitter @jeffreybenson61.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Four Frames for Principals, New and Experienced - Whole Child Education

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
I was working with an elementary principal. One of the school's 3rd grade classes had given him a list of responsibilities they assumed formed his job. He showed me the list and chuckled, until he got to an item that he said made him shudder far more than smile: "You fix everything."

# data[].attributes.body
A great slideshow on leading in schools using the 4 Frames

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The Four Frames of Decision-Making. - ppt video online download

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The Four Frames of Decision-Making Before the Presentation: Please do the problem solving survey in your binder After the Presentation: Please score and graph the results - see the problem solving orientation scoring in your binder

# data[].attributes.body
This article is about how the theory can be used in schools.

# data[].attributes.body
Here's a video describing Bolman and Deal's 4 Frames. It also gives some great analogies.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Learning Leadership:
Bolman and Deal
Four Frames

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
How you frame an idea will impact on your perception. Understanding your own frames of reference will help you choreograph change moves.http://leadinglearners.wordpress.com/2014/10/07/what-are-your-favourite-four-frames-of-leadership/ This video is part of a QUT online module that explores leadership as a dance with followers, and draws on the work of Ehrich and English (2012) and Bolman and Deal (2014) and is hosted by Dr Jill Willis from QUT Faculty of Education, Brisbane (http://staff.qut.edu.au/staff/willisje/).

# data[].attributes.body
I didn't know what a "padlet" was, so I started a board to begin this assignment.  Feel free to change things!

# data[].attributes.body
Introduction video of frames and how to apply them to your organization.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
0:00 / 10:53•Watch full video