# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
See all the wonderful things pricejen has made

# data[].attributes.headline
Leadership Preferences Study in a school

# data[].attributes.subject
Leadership Preferences Study in a school

# data[].attributes.body
The Human Resource Frame was the preferred frame again in this study.

# data[].attributes.headline
The Four Frames explained and how as a leader we would approach different problems with different frames. 

# data[].attributes.subject
The Four Frames explained and how as a leader we would approach different problems with different frames. 

# data[].attributes.body
As leader facing different problems every day we have to think about different ways to approach them as this video explains Bolman and Deal's 4 Frames of Thinking in a very quick and concise way.

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

# data[].attributes.headline
The Four Frames--Which is the most critical for school organizations?  

# data[].attributes.subject
The Four Frames--Which is the most critical for school organizations?  

# data[].attributes.body
This piece talks about how the Human Resource Frame is the most important component in the educational field because having the right people in place leads to the success of learning.

# data[].attributes.body
Here is a quick inventory that you can do to determine your strengths and areas to grow in regards to the Bolman and Deal's 4 Frames.

# data[].attributes.body
The chapter notes for "Reframing Organizations" provided some background behind the need for the four frames. Leaders of organizations had a limited cognitive perspective, thinking their way was the only way to solve problems. Bolman and Deal recognized that successful leaders needed more comprehensive perspectives, which led to developing the four frames of thinking and reframing. There are activities for classroom use as well.

# data[].attributes.body
Outlines how the four frames can be integrated into Professional Learning Communities (PLCs)

# data[].attributes.body
Although many of the films are for older students, there was mention of using the story of "The True Story of the Three Little Pigs by A. Wolf" to teach younger audiences about exploring a situation from multiple perspectives.

# data[].attributes.body
http://www.cic.edu/News-and-Publications/Multimedia-Library/CICConferencePresentations/2012%20CAO%20Institute/Plenary%20Sessions/2%20-%20Bolman.pdf
I could not get this PDF to attach, but hopefully the provided link will work.

# data[].attributes.body
The Four Frames

# data[].attributes.headline
Learning Activity for Bolman and Deal's Four Framework Approach to Leadership

# data[].attributes.subject
Learning Activity for Bolman and Deal's Four Framework Approach to Leadership

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Learning Activity for Bolman and Deal's Four Framework Approach to Leadership

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
A learning activity for training leaders to operate out of Bolman and Deal's Four Framework Approach to Leadership

# data[].attributes.body
Slides 8-16 focus on the strengths and limitations of each of Bolman and Deal's Frames.

# data[].attributes.headline
The Leader Within (using 4 frames in the school)

# data[].attributes.subject
The Leader Within (using 4 frames in the school)

# data[].attributes.body
Even though this is about counselors in the school specifically, it could be transferrable to other positions in the school too.

# data[].attributes.headline
Framing and Reframing Concept Explained 

# data[].attributes.subject
Framing and Reframing Concept Explained 

# 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.headline
What is the history or backstory of this decision-making theory?

# data[].attributes.subject
What is the history or backstory of this decision-making theory?

# data[].attributes.headline
What are some salient characteristics or information about Bolman And Deal's 4 Frames Thinking? 

# data[].attributes.subject
What are some salient characteristics or information about Bolman And Deal's 4 Frames Thinking? 

# data[].attributes.headline
How could this theory be used in schools? 

# data[].attributes.subject
How could this theory be used in schools? 

# data[].attributes.body
Here are some ways to get started!

# data[].attributes.body
Watch this first! This gives you a background about the author's 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
Here are the basic four of Bolman!

# data[].attributes.headline
What are the pros/cons of using this decision-making theory?

# data[].attributes.subject
What are the pros/cons of using this decision-making theory?

# data[].attributes.body
Many times schools make changes quickly based only on the structural frame.  'We'll create a new program' or 'we'll reorganize ourselves' or 'we'll buy some technology to help' neglecting the other 3 important frames.

# 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:

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.

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.

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.

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.

on Bolman & Deal's four frames

]

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.headline
The role of the principal in each of the frames 

# data[].attributes.subject
The role of the principal in each of the frames 

# data[].attributes.body
This piece describes what principals are doing in each of the 4 frames. Could be translated to teacher leaders doing similar tasks.

# 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.attachment_link.readable_text
0:00 / 10:53•Watch full video

# data[].attributes.headline
Understanding Organizations--using the 4 Frames

# data[].attributes.subject
Understanding Organizations--using the 4 Frames

# data[].attributes.body
I like how this piece defines the setting of each of the frames in an organization.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
This post begins a new series on Psycholawlogy about understanding organizations. A team of leading organization science scholars has developed a very useful model to understand the ambiguity and complexity of and influence the behavior of organizations. The Four Frame Model of Bolman and Deal (2003) can help those interested to better understand and approach issues about organizational diagnosis, development, and change. Those authors have synthesized management insight and wisdom and years of social science research from the disciplines of sociology, psychology, political science, and anthropology into a model which views organizations in four (4) images, i.e. frames captured by distinct [metaphors]: structural [factories or machines], human resource [families], political [jungles], and symbolic [temples or carnivals, theatres]. Each frame equates to a mental model. A frame, as imaged under this model, consists of ideas and assumptions which help the seeker of understanding register and assemble information into a coherent pattern. This enables one to decipher those clues by getting a more comprehensive picture of what is happening and what to do. It helps here to think of a frame as having several potential functions: map, tool, lens, orientation, filter, prism, or perspective. How does this relate to lawyers?

Most lawyers' work involves organizations and their virtues and drawbacks in one way or another. Organizations present concerns or challenges with issues involving complexity, surprise, deception, and ambiguity. The Four Frame Model, often used by organizational development practitioners, can help attorneys and their clients decipher and clarify, focus, understand, and navigate legal matters which involve the usually complex and often ambiguous organizational landscape. This post provides a basic introduction to a very useful model. This model can help lawyers gain a more comprehensive picture and better understand organizations, how they work, how they should work, identify development opportunities, and assist in evaluating the success or failure of change efforts. Future posts on Psycholawlogy will build on this introduction and hopefully provide useful information and insight. Why should we want to better understand organizations?

Organizations exist because we build them. Organizations do many good things for us which we can not do for ourselves. Most of us breathe our first air in a hospital. Many last breaths occur there, too. Schools educate us and universities train us for careers. Many of us participate in community organizations or clubs. Sports teams often play a part in our lives. Business and government organizations affect us and we depend on them in many ways. Organizations offer and provide goods, services, social services, health care, entertainment, and just about anything that we need, use, and enjoy. We can call these things the "bright" side of organizations.

Organizations can have a "dark" side, too. People get exploited and frustrated by organizations. Patients suffer harm. Products injure or kill users or innocent third parties. Food and drugs sicken. Water, air, and the ground can become tainted or polluted by chemicals. Corporate greed and insensitivity happen sometimes, too. On and on. One goal of organization and management science has a simple premise: manage organizations so that their virtues outweigh their vices. Sometimes, though, organizations need a nudge or a push, either from within or from the outside. Often, lawyers, whether as advisors or advocates or both, must appear and enter this arena. Armed with better understanding and insight into how organizations work, from learning the basics of and applying the Four Frame Model, their efforts might more efficiently and effectively hit closer to the target. Each frame captures an important piece of organizational life. Each frame contributes to the entire picture. In order to complete the picture, consideration of each of the four frames must occur. Each of the four suggests areas or issues for attention and intervention. The model's design depends upon multi-frame thinking and application. Only then - comprehensive framework encompassing four perspectives - can appreciation deepen and understanding increase. The bright side can continue to shine and keep the dark side in the shadows.

The next part introduces each of the four frames and briefly discusses its associated metaphor, central concepts, and leadership challenges:

The structural frame focuses on the architecture of the organization. This includes goals, structure, technology, roles and relationships and coordination of them. Think organization chart here. Responsibilities, division of labor, rules, policies, procedures, systems, and hierarchies which coordinate an organization's diverse activities into a unified effort relate to this frame. The challenge for organizations and their leaders involves designing, maintaining, and aligning structural forms with current circumstances, tasks, technology, the environment, and goals. When structure does not line up, problems arise. Reorganization or redesign may help remedy the structural misalignment. Rational analysis leads to the development and implementation of work roles and tasks and the appropriate coordination and integration of individual and group efforts. The metaphor for the structural frame: factory or machine.

The human resource frame emphasizes understanding people and their relationships. Individuals have needs, feelings, fears, prejudices, skills, and development opportunities. This lens enables one to focus on and understand the fit between the individual and the organization. By attending to people, the focus of this frame, the organization can meet individual needs and train the individual to meet organizational needs. The job gets done by persons who feel good about themselves and their work. The metaphor for the human resource frame: family.

The political frame sees organizations as jungles, arenas, or contests. This frame emphasizes power, competition, and winning scarce resources. Diverse values, beliefs, interests, behaviors, and skills provides the rich context for the allocation of power and resources. People set agenda, bargain, negotiate, build coalitions, compromise and coerce, and manage conflict. Think competing interests, struggles for power, and who gets what and how. Political skill and acumen craft solutions. Such realities of organizational life can be toxic or sources of creativity and innovation. Effective management and leadership guide the proper disbursement of power and influence and determine organizational effectiveness. The metaphor for the political frame: jungle.

The symbolic frame captures organizational life as drama and treats organizations as theatre, temples, or carnivals. This frame focuses on meaning and faith. This context engages the heart and head of the members and it focuses on ritual, ceremony, story, play and culture. Members' roles play out in the drama of everyday efforts of the organization. Meaning matters more than results. Events and processes have importance more for expression than production. The faith built up and meaning shared by members infuses passion, creativity, and soul. Rules, policies, and managerial authority matter less in this frame. Instead, culture, symbols, and spirit provide this frame's pathway to organizational effectiveness. The focus of this frame challenges leaders to create and maintain faith, beauty, and meaning. The metaphor for the symbolic frame: theatre, temple, or carnival.

The four frames identified and briefly discussed above pave the way for reframing. The Four Frame Model features reframing as a central theme. With each of the four frames, the interested organizational observer can view the same situation in at least four ways. Examples of situations include leadership, change, and ethics. The developers of the model suggest reframing as their "basic prescription for sizing things up". Their model captures the subtlety and complexity of organizational life, but in a simple, useful format and useable process.

So, for lawyers, whether dealing with situations like Enron, Katrina, the Columbia and Challenger disasters, or tainted Tylenol, misfeasance, malpractice, or harassment or discrimination, for examples, the Four Frame Model can provide a new way to organize thinking and decipher the messy, complicated, complex, and ambiguous world of organizations and discover and enjoy new possibilities for reframing, a "powerful tool for gaining clarity, regaining balance, generating new options, and finding strategies that make a difference." Psycholawlogy thinks that the Four Frame Model can provide lawyers a gateway to more effective lawyering. Hopefully, this brief introduction has sparked some interest. Read on see how the Four Frame Model can become a useful tool on your lawyer tool belt.

Source: Bolman, L, & Deal, T. (2003). Reframing organizations: Artistry, choice, and leadership (3rd ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass [Chapter 1.]. See also. Gallos, J. V. "Reframing Complexity: A Four-Dimensional Approach to Organizational Diagnosis, Development and Change." In Gallos, J. V. (Ed.). Organization Development. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 2006. Author Lee Bolman's webpage here.

Image Credit: The Jungle frame image courtesy of the wonderful travel blog Views Around The World - www.viewsaroundtheworld.com: Day 98: the king of the jungle. Access here.

Thank you. Please visit again soon. Dan DeFoe JD, MS - Adlitem Solutions | Organization Development for Professional Services Firms and the Legal Profession: People. Projects. Practices | www.adlitemsolutions.com | dan@adlitemsolutions.com | Blog www.psycholawlogy.com. See you next time.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Understanding Organizations Using the Four Frame Model: Factories or Machines [Structure], Family [Human Resources], Jungle [Politics], and Theatres, Temples or Carnivals [Symbols]

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
This post begins a new series on Psycholawlogy about understanding organizations. A team of leading organization science scholars has developed a very useful model to understand the ambiguity and complexity of and influence the behavior of organizations. The Four Frame Model of Bolman and Deal (2003) can help those interested to better understand and approach issues about organizational diagnosis, development, and change.