Reframing Organizations

Bolman, Lee G. and Terrence E. Deal, 2008. Reframing Organizations: Artistry, Choice, and Leadership, fourth edition. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Scholar, consultant and speaker, Lee G. Bolman (website: http://www.leebolman.com/) has a Ph.D. from Yale University in Organizational Behavior is currently the Marion Bloch Missouri Chair in Leadership at the University of Missouri-Kansas City. Bolman is a prolific writer and has co-written at least seven books with Terrence Deal.

Dr. Deal is the Irving R. Melbo Professor at University of Southern California’s Rossier School. He is an internationally known lecturer and author who has written numerous books on leadership and organizations. Deal has a Ph.D. in Educational Administration and Sociology from Stanford University.

Bolman and Deal’s purpose in writing Reframing Organizations is broad and encompassing, outlined as follows:

“Our purpose in this book is to sort through the multiple voices competing for managers’ attention. In doing so, we consolidate major schools of organizational thought into four perspectives…we have chosen the label frames. In describing frames, we deliberately mix metaphors, referring to them as windows, maps, mind-sets, tools, lenses, orientations, and perspectives because all these images capture part of the ecumenical idea we want to convey” (12),

with the expressed goal to offer “usable knowledge” to their readers (13). Bolman and Deal appear to be sensitive to the struggles of managers and leaders to tame “our wild and primitive workplaces” (9) and offer a way of allowing the creative response to flow in understanding and working with the dynamics of an organization.

The second purpose of Reframing Organizations is found in its subtitle, Artistry, Choice and Leadership. Bolman and Deal demonstrate how reframing and a four-frame approach to organizations, management, and good leadership work. The authors present many real-life cases and organizational examples from the four different perspectives. The writers basically ask four questions: What is going on structurally? What is going on from a human resource perspective? What is going on politically? What is going on symbolically? Throughout the book, the reader is challenged to cultivate good diagnostic habits and develop an appreciation for comprehensive views of organizational dynamics that require Artistry, Choice and Leadership.

By Reframing, which “is more art than science” (433), the authors mean looking at events, problems or decisions from different viewpoints in order to avoid self-protective biases and leadership blindness (169). Patience, clarity, and flexibility are huge requirements for reframing because organizations are complex and “wild.” The reframing process requires that the leader find out what is “really” going on and then using that information to inform action. Looking at events, problems or decisions through structural, human resource, political, and symbolic lenses lessens the likelihood of oversimplifying the challenge.

Reframing also expands Choice by developing options. Too often a leader feels trapped because he or she sees only one solution or locks into one of only two alternatives. Reframing with structural, human resource, political, and symbolic perspectives frees the leader to see a multitude of options. The four different ways to approach, define a problem, offer a diagnosis and match with corresponding implications for leadership leads to effective action. This systematic way of generating options and expanding choices is empowering for the leader. Reframing Organizations seems to be based on the belief that this kind of empowerment is critical for individual and organizational success.

Bolman and Deal’s concept of Artistry is based on a belief in the importance of using skills and imagination to create possibilities for beauty, enjoyment and satisfaction in organizational life. People within an organization can be overwhelmed by the mechanistic approach to things, the seemingly political falseness or the daunting mission, therefore the artistry of the leader to create an environment that is satisfying, enjoyable and to a large extent spiritually enhancing is a necessary dynamic for long term success.

Perhaps the greatest tool taken from Reframing Organizations as it applies to Leadership is the craft of reframing. One learns to examine the same situation from multiple vantage points with the goal of developing a holistic picture. Each Frame provides advantages, but also blind spots. The Structure frame has a tendency to ignore everything outside a particular jurisdiction or not within its rules, policies, or organizational charts. Reliance on structure alone would be to completely ignore the other frames’ influence. Relying wholly on the Human Resources frame may cause a leader to cling to a “romanticized view of human nature.” Not every member of the organization is looking for growth and collaboration. Holding tight to a Politics frame can create cynicism and mistrust – often judged to be amoral, scheming, and unconcerned about anything, but power. Finally, the Symbolic frame by itself can become mere “fluff or camouflage” (339).

As I apply the theories and ideas of reframing first to my organizational context and then to my local context, it is clear that the chief mode of operations are within the Symbolic frame followed by the Structure frame, then, the political and lastly the Human Resources, where by my analysis we are least effective.

The Salvation Army’s strength is in the story; The Salvation Army, as an organization, uses narratives, symbols, rituals, and myths to provide an explanatory context for their efforts. Heroes like William and Catherine Booth, Ash-Barrel Jimmy, Captain Tom (well known in Chicago as a derelict who went on to care for the souls of other derelicts), Joe the Turk and many, many others whose stories are repeated. I suspect every community where a Salvation Army has been established has a story of its origins. For example, in Grand Rapids, The Salvation Army opened-fire by the invitation of a wealthy merchant who had seen The Salvation Army at work in Canada, convinced a number of the city fathers that The Salvation Army was exactly what Grand Rapids needed. The merchant financed The Salvation Army’s opening. When the two young women officers who were assigned the duty of opening the work arrived, the drayman (a known drunk) who carried up their trunks was suddenly stricken with an overwhelming fear and fled without taking his pay. A few weeks later, the same man came to an Army meeting and was overwhelmed by the Spirit of God and wept at the altar. The story is he knew nothing about The Salvation Army when the women had arrived and he had fled in fear. The man became known in the community for the amazing change.

One of the core assumptions of the Symbolic Frame is that the most important aspect of any event is not what happened, but what it means. Activity and meaning are loosely coupled: events often have multiple meanings because people interpret experiences differently. The uncertainties of life —what happened, why it happened, or what will happen next are all puzzles that add adventure to the ongoing story. I have been in meetings where terrific ideas have been presented with factual analysis and excellent, strong arguments where people were apathetic and cool until a story was told; the people were animated with the story. High levels of ambiguity and uncertainty undercut rational analysis, problem solving, and decision making. In these same meetings, the budget can be in the red and the situation hopeless, but let someone cast a vision in the story and amazing things happen. In the face of uncertainty and ambiguity, people create symbols to resolve confusion, and anchor hope and faith. Many events are more important for what is expressed than what is produced. Such gatherings and activities form a cultural tapestry of myths, rituals, ceremonies, and stories that help people find meaning, purpose, and passion (216-17).

The real world application, however, is not to “glory” about the chief frame in which we operate, but recognizing it, we (my team and leadership) can operate creatively in all four frames. I recommend some time be taken to discover one’s personal frame orientation and then look for ways to be creative with the team in moving in and out of the various other frames. Immediately, I would recommend that something be accomplished to elevate the human resource arena by following several of the recommendations from Bolman and Deal:
• believe in people and communicate that belief in words and actions
• be visible and accessible
• empower others
will have some immediate affect on my local situation.