# data[].attributes.headline
Brought to you by the following scholars:

# data[].attributes.subject
Brought to you by the following scholars:

# data[].attributes.body
Andrea Brunn
Kelsey Loughran
Kirstin Lovell
Mr. John H Niesen
Emily Oliver
Kasey Pomeroy

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Buried deep within their book, Reframing Organizations, Lee Bolman and Terrence Deal come to the heart of the problem of management:"Control is an illusion and rationality an afterthought....Organizational life is always full of simultaneous events that can be interpreted in a variety of ways" (p.

# data[].attributes.body
"Agents of change"

# 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.body
of each framework

# data[].attributes.body
Bolman and Deal take a few minutes to talk about their book.

# data[].attributes.headline
History and Backstory of The Four Frame Model

# data[].attributes.subject
History and Backstory of The Four Frame Model

# data[].attributes.body
The Four Frame Model by Bolman and Deal can help those interested in better understanding and approaching issues about organizational diagnosis, development, and change.

These 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 to 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.

taken from:
http://www.psycholawlogy.com/2013/05/31/understanding-organizations-using-the-four-frame-model-factories-or-machines-structure-family-human-resources-jungle-politics-and-theatres-temples-or-carnivals-symbols/

# data[].attributes.body
Authored by Bolman & Deal

# data[].attributes.body
from: http://www.azquotes.com/quote/1033010

# data[].attributes.body
from: http://www.azquotes.com/author/39340-Lee_Bolman

# data[].attributes.body
Read and scroll through to take a leadership inventory to find "the shape of your kite".

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
As a teacher, author and speaker, my goal is to help managers and leaders get a better handle on what's going on, see more possibilities, and achieve the goals they care about.

# data[].attributes.headline
Educational Implications for Bolman and Deal's Four Frames Model

# data[].attributes.subject
Educational Implications for Bolman and Deal's Four Frames Model

# data[].attributes.headline
Pros and Cons to Four Frames Model by Bolman and Deal:

# data[].attributes.subject
Pros and Cons to Four Frames Model by Bolman and Deal:

# data[].attributes.body
Applications of Four Frames Model

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
One stream of research using concepts from the frames is represented in a body of work from Dick Heimovics, Bob Herman, and colleagues. They developed frame measures through content-analysis of critical incidents provided by respondents:

# data[].attributes.headline
From Lee Bolman and Terrance Deal themselves:

# data[].attributes.subject
From Lee Bolman and Terrance Deal themselves:

# data[].attributes.body
(Focus on using Bolman & Deal Frames for change)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
This manuscript describes how two school administrators, now educational leadership professors, successfully reframed leadership to create change. Bolman and Deal's (1984; 2003) reframing of pedagogy provided the theory for understanding this complex change process and the chool administrator's role. As a conceptual framework, reframing theory provides a research design for examining educational leadership.

# data[].attributes.body
Review of Bolman and Deal's book

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
I'm reposting a beautifully written review by Michael Salesof an excellent and important book by two widely recognized consultants, researchers, and theorists in the Organizational Learning Field.
As F. Scott Fitzgerald noted, "The test of a first-rate intelligence is the ability to hold two opposed ideas in mind at the same time and still retain the ability to function," and this is very much the frame of reference on this 2014 book on leadership. While so many, many books and theories propound the exclusive prominence of a particular set of ideas, Bolman and Deal have long been comfortable with the reality of ambiguity. For almost 40 years, they have explored the facets of the alternative lenses through which the data of organizational life can be viewed.

I believe that the authors' Reframing Organizations: Artistry, Choice and Leadership (Jossey-Bass, 1991) is the best-selling organizational behavior textbook of all time. Here they laid out their central thesis that virtually anything that happens (or doesn't happen) in organizational contexts can be seen in several different frames simultaneously. Let's take the example of a promotion:

The Structural Frame would look at a promotion through the lens of goals, roles, rules, policies, order in relationships, and procedures. It is the stuff of thoughtful analysis and bureaucracy, which is not a negative term in this context. Policies developed over a long period of time might require decisions to be made about the viability of every associate in an organization on at least a three year basis. Vetting structures are needed to determine the criteria against which promotion should occur and measurements would needed to assess outcomes against goals. Promotions are part of the natural order of things: when people produce results, they are promoted. When organizations are in various stages of their life-cycle, as determined by product mix, markets, degree of innovation, etc., they need different types of people in the positions that are available. Salary should be based on the degree to which abstract and long term thinking are required. These are the sorts of considerations that go into structural thinking.

The Human Resources Frame would look at a promotion in terms of what it shows about how people are cared for in an organization. The focus is on how people feel. People who do good work are highly valued in an organization that emphasizes the human resources frame. People aren't overlooked. Sometimes, people are promoted because it will stretch them, be good for them in some way. Promoting some people and not promoting others can have a huge impact on team dynamics. Teamwork is essential to an organization dedicated to human resources development. Great relationships make for great organizations! You want great people to work for your organization, treat 'em right! Look at Google's perks!

The Political Frame would focus on what a promotion says about what agenda gets ahead in an organization. Which coalition of constituencies is on top? Is it Sales, Manufacturing, Research, Administration? What sort of "team of rivals" needs to be brought together to turn the conflicting demands of organizational chieftains into a successful governing coalition? How does a promotion make for peace or war within an organization or between an organization and its competitors? What organization wins over the best talent? How do they do it? Once that talent is there, what does it need to know about negotiation to be successful in a specific environment? How should promotions be used to motivate appropriate political behavior?

The Symbolic Frame would question the role that a promotion plays in an organization's narrative about itself. Does the selection of a person for a job resonate with a particular organizational myth, e.g., visit virtually any Apple retail store and you'll observe a higher level of racial and stylistic diversity than you'll find in almost any other complex private sector enterprise in the United States. It's a statement about who Apple is that's almost as powerful as Tim Cook's essay, " I'm Proud to Be Gay." This is a company that wants everyone to know that it values "thinking different." Its promotional practices are going to reflect those sorts of deeply held values.

For Bolman and Deal, leaders need to know their default frame, i.e., how they are instinctually drawn to view data and take action. Are they big believers in job descriptions? Do they "know" that associates will be intrinsically motivated under the right conditions? Are they confident in their intuition about what their competitors inside and outside the organization are going to do next? Are they ready to display their passion in a great speech because this is what always moves people to listen to the higher angels of their human nature?

And, perhaps, even more important, great leaders have to be able to move fluidly between and among frames when conditions require it and, maybe, even some times when they do not. Leadership is invested in results. If a leader isn't getting any hits with his/her most trusted approach, it's time to change up one's stance.

To do this, Bolman and Deal invent dialogs throughout the book to demonstrate how leaders from the four frames would handle differing situations. While they critique the limitations of being stuck in over doing one frame and not seeing the complexities and the opportunities of the everyday organizational situations they are presenting to leaders, they do not judge the rightness or the wrongness of one frame versus another. They simply show that leaders in one frame will see different possibilities than the leader grounded in another one. And, they emphasize that all the frames can be utilized to create solutions, strategies and tactics that engage the full breadth of personal profiles and organizational realities.

"Images of Leadership: Can Crooked Kites Fly" and "Leadership and Change" were particularly impactful chapters for me.

In "Kites" they posit the leadership configurations of executives like Jeff Bezos, Ursula Burns, and Steve Jobs using the four frames perspective. They point out that "If you recognize your blind spots, you can work on expanding your vision or collaborating with others who complement your worldview because they are attuned to things you might miss."

Alan Mulally's masterful "resurrection" of Ford demonstrates how a great leader drew on each of the frames to achieve change in and save a large industrial enterprise that was teetering on the abyss of a death spiral shortly before the outbreak of the Great Recession. Mulally may not have used their language, but the authors do an excellent job of showing how good theory can be applied to the comprehension of skillful practice.

The graphic below provides an overview to the framework:

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
How Great Leaders Think: The Art of Reframing by Lee Bolman and Terry Deal

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
I'm reposting a beautifully written review by Michael Salesof an excellent and important book by two widely recognized consultants, researchers, and theorists in the Organizational Learning Field. As F.

# data[].attributes.headline
Definitions of Bolman and Deal Four Frames Leadership Model

# data[].attributes.subject
Definitions of Bolman and Deal Four Frames Leadership Model

# data[].attributes.body
Information and application of Four Frames

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

# data[].attributes.body
(educational point of view)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Over the long term, there is one education book to which I keep returning, Reframing Organizations, by Lee Bolman and Terrance Deal. The main idea of the book is that school leaders need to look at situations and decisions through four separate frames each time. Those frames are Structural, Human Resources, Symbolic, and Political. I keep this graphic of the four frames above my desk as a reminder.

The ideas here are not that different from many other treatises on education leadership. I guess that I am a relatively visual learner and the frames stuck with me easily.

Cover via Amazon If you haven't read the book, I recommend you do.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Over the long term, there is one education book to which I keep returning, Reframing Organizations, by Lee Bolman and Terrance Deal. The main idea of the book is that school leaders need to look at situations and decisions through four separate frames each time. Those frames are Structural, Human Resources, Symbolic, and Political.

# data[].attributes.body
*There needs to be a strong and clear leader to facilitate the change.

*Impersonal approaches

*Political and Symbolic Frame leaders are viewed as the better leaders

*In order for change to sustain an organization it can take time.  "Quick Fixes" do not last.

# data[].attributes.body
*Structures supports work that teachers do

*Efficient and easy to understand

*Objective and logical

*Frames lead to achievement

*Action orientated

*Beneficial for the visual learner

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Ram Bhagat uses the drum as a metaphor to discuss the four frames of leadership from Bolman and Deal with fellow doctoral students in the EdD program metro cohort at Virginia Commonwealth University.

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tQDJfYPG5Ho

# 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
*Schools can use the 4 frames as a pathway to understand the structure of staff within their schools.

*Schools can break into small chunks for leadership (PLC's, Environmental Steering committees, PBIS teams)

*Teachers networking with other teachers to gain ideas and different perspectives

*Relationships with colleagues, families etc.

http://www.nwlink.com/~donclark/leader/framwork.html

Structures of Schools:
http://www.wholechildeducation.org/blog/four-frames-for-principals-new-and-experienced

# data[].attributes.body
Four Frames are like a dance floor

# 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
gives a concise way of comparing the four ways of seeing organizations

taken from https://www.slideshare.net/WSU/bolman-and-deal-1-and-2