weLEAD Online Magazine
Copyright 2002 ã weLEAD, Inc.
Have
you ever heard the common expression of those who do many different tasks but have
reached their limit? It goes something like…”yes, I will do that, but I don’t do
windows”. What is usually meant by this expression is there are many things the
person is willing to do, but there are also some limitations to what
they will do. There is an old story about a dwelling in New England where the
owner built an interesting tower. The tower has four walls and each has a
window with specially colored glass. As one surveys the inside of the room the
different colors of the glass become apparent. The colors are green, red,
brown, and blue. Even though the outside landscape scenery around the tower is
exactly the same from any angle, the perspective from inside the tower
immediately changes the view. Looking out the green window one is struck with the
perception of springtime with fresh living flora. The view from the red colored
window glass gives the distinct impression of the hot rays of summer sunshine.
When one peers out the brown window the view appears to generate the soft
melancholy of the fall season. Finally, gazing out the blue colored glass gives
the impression of witnessing an icy and cold winter scene. What is the meaning
behind this tower with colored windows? The real scenery outside the tower is
exactly the same in all directions but depending on which window one chooses to
look out from, the perceptions of the same scenery can differ greatly.
This example provides an
important understanding for leaders in both our professional and personal
lives. We will first discuss how we can choose to look out of different
windows to change our perception or view of the workplace. In 1997 two
innovative organizational scholars published a book entitled Reframing
Organizations. The authors of this outstanding book are Lee Bolman and Terrence Deal. Today it is used as a textbook in
some major universities in their management and leadership classes. They
encourage leaders to step back and re-examine the operation of their
organization through the use of frames or windows. These different lenses can bring
organizational life into focus. They allow the leader to view the workplace
from different images to make judgments, gather information and get things
done. These four windows are called the structural, human resource, political
and symbolic frames. We will briefly examine the elements and advantages of the
four frames presented by Bolman & Deal. I may not
personally appreciate or endorse the process of each of these four
frames! However, they can teach us of the importance of stepping back and
looking at a situation from more than one single pane of glass. Most of us have
the tendency to look at situations or problems from a limited single
perspective. This hinders our ability to be effective and visionary leaders.
1.
The
Elements of the Structural Frame.
Structure is the
pattern for internal exchanges and expectations within an organization. This
structural form can either constrain or enhance the ability of the organization
to accomplish objectives. Bolman & Deal list six
assumptions behind the Structural Frame. 1) Organizations exist to
achieve established goals and objectives. 2) Organizations work best when
rationality prevails over personal preferences and external pressures. 3)
Structures must be designed to fit organizational circumstances. 4) Organizations
increase efficiency and enhance performance through specialization and division
of labor. 5) Appropriate forms of coordination and control are essential to
ensuring that individuals and units work together in the service of
organizational goals. 6) Problems and performance gaps arise from structural
deficiencies and can be remedied through restructuring (Bolman
& Deal, p. 40).
The Structural Frame
attempts to look at the social context of work and not simply at the
individual. Once an organization designates specific roles for employees, the
next decision is to form or group them into working units. Coordination
and control of these various groups are achieved either vertically or
laterally. The best structure depends on the organization's environment, goals
and strategies.
Organizational
structure naturally creates tensions between individuals and groups. The goal
of a leader is to achieve "High-performing" teams. Katzenbach and Smith (1993) identify six characteristics of
High-performing teams. They contend that High-performing teams
shape a "purpose" in response to a demand. They translate a common
purpose into specific, measurable performance goals. High-performing teams are
most effective when they are of manageable size. They develop the right mix of
expertise. High-performing teams develop a common commitment to working
relationships. Finally, High-performing teams hold themselves' collectively accountable
for their performance (Katzenbach and Smith, 1993, p.
113-115).
Bolman & Deal define the
Structural Frame as a perspective that "emphasizes goals, specialized
roles and formal relationships" (Bolman &
Deal, p. 13). From this window, problems are seen to arise when the
organizational structure does not match the existing situation. When this
present situation is recognized, reorganization may be in order. The leader's
image of the Structural Frame is one of social analysis and architecture. It is
easier to restructure a team or organization than the personality of each
individual member. Bolman & Deal also
discuss the importance of structural leadership. This type of leader uses the
Structural Frame to develop the right design for the times and therefore
is able to achieve structural changes. These authors identify a number of valuable
characteristics that need to be possessed by the structural leader. These
include the ability of structural leaders to gather valid information and
really do their “homework”. They must be willing to rethink the relationship of
structure, strategy and environment. An effective structural leader must focus
on implementation. Finally, they need to be willing to experiment, evaluate and
adapt (Bolman & Deal, p. 307, 308).
Using the Structural
Frame can help a leader to initiate needed change. First, the leader
abandons a "people-blaming" perspective and realizes that most real
problems are usually systemic. In viewing the structure, the leader may see
that much conflict is the result of too little coordination rather than
the division of labor. Problems may be caused by ill-defined roles or a
structure that needs to change due to new environmental situations. The leader
may see the need to institute an "internal structural device" to
resolve and diagnose issues such as a task force. The leader may come to
understand that the organization lacks structure and boundaries. Perhaps it has
an overly rigid structure that constricts effectiveness. As an example
of using the Structural Frame, a leader may create a chart to examine each
individual's tasks and responsibilities. It may then become more obvious why
some conflict and tension occurs!
2.
The
Elements of the Human Resource Frame.
The Human Resource
Frame is another window to bring an organization into focus. It views an
organization like a large extended family. From this perspective, an
organization is inhabited by individuals. These individuals have needs,
prejudices, feelings, limitations and skills. The goal of the leader is to mold
the organization to meet the needs of people. The leader will seek to
merge the peoples’ need to feel good about what they are doing with the ability
to get the job done. Bolman & Deal state that the
key to this window is a "sensitive understanding of people and their
symbiotic relationship with organizations." They contend that the Human
Resource Frame has four core assumptions. 1) Organizations exist to serve
human needs rather than the reverse. 2) People and organizations need each
other: organizations need ideas, energy, and talent; while people need careers,
salaries, and opportunities. 3) When the fit between individual and system is
poor, one or both will suffer because either individuals
will be exploited, or they will exploit the organization. It is also possible
that both will become victims of exploitation. 4) A good fit benefits both:
individuals find meaningful satisfying work, and organizations get the talent
and energy they need to succeed (Bolman & Deal,
p. 102, 103).
Many theorists have
written about human needs. One area of agreement is that needs must be fulfilled
if an employee is to be content and highly productive. People are an important
asset in any organization. Many successful organizations have turned their
efforts toward investing in their people to create a highly skilled and motivated
workforce. A human resource leader develops a supportive human resource
philosophy. First, there is a commitment to invest in people, hire the right
people and reward them. Other important aspects of this commitment include
providing a sense of security, promotion from within, and sound training.
Secondly, the effective leader must understand that work itself must be
fulfilling and provide challenging opportunities for the employee. This can be
achieved by allowing autonomy, participation, job enrichment,
cross-utilization, and teaming.
Bolman & Deal also offer
other sound advice for the human resource leader. They take a cue from Robert
Greenleaf who believed that "the best test [of leadership] is: do those
served grow as persons; do they, while being served, become healthier,
wiser, freer, more autonomous, more likely themselves to become servants?"
(Greenleaf, 1973, p. 7). Toward this end, Bolman & Deal provide three leadership principles.
First, human resource leaders believe in people and communicate
their belief. Secondly, human resource leaders are visible and accessible.
Third, effective human resource leaders seek to empower others.
Using the Human
Resource Frame can help a leader to initiate change. The leader can
discover if basic human needs are truly being met. If not, frustration or fear
may occur within the organization. Does the organization have a clear human
resource philosophy? The leader can initiate a program to see that the various
needs of individuals are being met so they can become most productive. The
leader can also direct financial resources to insure that positive training and
education is available for workers at every level.
3.
The
Elements of the Political Frame.
The
Political Frame is a window that looks at the workplace as a jungle.
This may not sound pretty but the reality is that “it is a jungle out
there”. It is a competitive environment or contest in which different people
compete for power and limited resources. In an ideal world this situation would
not exist; however I personally have not found that world as of yet! The work
environment is one of rampant conflict immersed in negotiation, bargaining,
compromise and coercion. Bolman & Deal offer five
propositions as a summary of this frame. 1) Organizations are coalitions of
various 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 the allocation of
scarce resources and what gets done. 4) Scarce resources and enduring
differences give conflict a central role in organizational dynamics and
typically make power the most important resource. 5) Goals and decisions emerge
from bargaining, negotiation, and jockeying for position among different
stakeholders (Bolman & Deal, 1997, p. 163).
Sounds nasty doesn’t it? But this is truly the business and social world we all
live in.
An
important political issue in this frame is power. How power is
distributed and exercised is essential in understanding the Political Frame.
Social scientists have attempted to identify various elements of power. These
include authority, information, expertise, control of
rewards, coercion, alliances, control of agendas, defining myths/symbols and
personal power.
A
major focus of the Political Frame is not on the resolution of
conflict. Conflict is viewed as inevitable
in the organization. For example, horizontal conflict may exist between
divisions or departments. Vertical conflict may occur within levels and
cultural conflict may exist between groups with diverse values. The political
leader will not focus their efforts merely on resolution of conflict but on strategy
and tactics. Simply resolving the many conflicts that arise in an
organization only temporarily treat the effect of the conflict, and not
the cause. Bolman & Deal highlight the need for a
leader to have perceptive political skills to manage relations with both
opponents and allies. They emphasize four key political skills. These
are 1) agenda setting, 2) mapping the political terrain, 3) networking and
forming coalitions and 4) bargaining/negotiation. For the political leader,
this is a difficult balance between adopting open collaborative behavior
and more adversarial approaches when absolutely necessary.
The
Political Frame understands that the workplace is much like an arena.
There is an ongoing mixture of interests and agendas among differing
groups and individuals. The political leader can become an agent of the
political process and can use political skills as powerful tools to achieve a
desired purpose. Bolman & Deal provide an example
of this. When lower-level employees seek more influence in an
organization, a political leader can establish "self-managing teams"
to satisfy their legitimate needs. Yet, the leader can still control the
alternatives and information available to these teams. The Political Frame also
recognizes that organizations are much like an ecosystem with many shared
environments dynamically interacting with each other.
Using
the Political Frame can also help a leader to initiate change. For
example, a political leader may understand the certainty of an ongoing
political environment. As a unifier the leader may be able to focus on a
common "enemy" to bring competing forces together. Perhaps a
competitor is offering a similar or competitive product or service that
threatens your existence! The political leader realizes that power also gives
them the ability to get things done. Skillfully cultivating allies and advocates
can build coalitions and reshape the organization in a desired direction. To
accomplish this the political leader may create a
political map of the organization and arrange both groups and individuals into
their various power networks and interests. Personally, this is not my favorite
or desired frame or window in which to view a complex organization.
However, I must admit it accepts a stark reality in modern organizational life
and attempts to deal with it.
4. The
Elements of the Symbolic Frame.
The
Symbolic Frame is a powerful window that builds on cultural and social
anthropology. It views organizations as carnivals, theaters or tribes. An
organization is a unique culture driven by stories, ceremonies, rituals
and heroes. This is in contrast to an organization being driven by rules,
authority or policies. The organization is analogous to a theater. With this
theater, various actors play their respective roles in the drama and the
audience forms its own impressions of what is seen on the stage.
Bolman & Deal distill the
symbolic frame into a number of core assumptions. These are as follows. 1) What
is most important about any event is not what happened but what it means. 2)
Activity and meaning are loosely coupled: events have multiple meanings
because people interpret experience differently. 3) Most of life is ambiguous
or uncertain for most people. What happened, why it happened, or what will
happen next are all puzzles. 4) High levels of
ambiguity and uncertainty undercut rational analysis, problem solving,
and decision making. 5) In the face of uncertainty and ambiguity, people create
symbols to resolve confusion, increase predictability, inspire a
direction, and as an anchor of hope and faith. 6) Many events and processes are
more important for what is expressed rather than what is produced. They
form a cultural tapestry of secular myths, rituals, ceremonies and stories that
help people find meaning, purpose and passion in their work (Bolman & Deal, p. 216, 217).
Symbols
clarify an organization's culture. This culture is a collection of values,
beliefs, and practices that define to its members who they are and how
they are expected to do things. An organization may possess a number of symbols
or symbolic activities to find meaning and direction. Some of these include
myths, stories/fairy tales, ritual, ceremony, metaphor, humor & play. Each
of these activities have distinctive elements as
symbolic. Furthermore, many activities of the organization are part of the theatrical
process. These activities include meetings, planning, evaluation, collective
bargaining, and power. The Symbolic Frame also looks at team building in
a different light. It views the development of high-performing teams as a spiritual
network also enhanced by rituals, ceremonies and myths. One does not need to
look far to discover these symbols. They exist from the proverbial “corner
office”, to corporate seals, to the camaraderie of military units.
From
the perspective of the Symbolic Frame, problems develop when symbols
begin to lose their meaning or the actors play their roles poorly. Using the
lens of this window, a symbolic leader may recognize the need to alter existing
practices. This allows the organization to stage a new drama called
"change." This is even true of the organization's structure. Viewed
through the Symbolic Frame, the existing structure is observed as a
stage design composed of lighting, props, costumes and drama to make the play
real and credible to the audience. The symbolic leader can use symbols or myths
to rebuild the spiritual aspect of the organization. If the organization
needs to produce the change drama, it can do so by requiring revisions in the
script, settings or actors. When this play is directed effectively by the
symbolic leader, this process will reduce anxiety, bewilderment and
uncertainty.
Using
the Symbolic Frame can be yet another way to help a leader to initiate
change. A symbolic leader, as a leading actor can "interpret and
reinterpret experience so as to provide meaning and purpose through phrases of
beauty and passion" ( Bolman
& Deal, p. 313). A new set of rules and practices can be used to motivate
others effectively. The leader can use symbols to capture the attention of
others. This can act as a signal that change is coming. The leader can
provide visionary meaning to experiences and use symbols to inspire hope of a
better future. The symbolic leader can tell stories that link the great
experiences of the past and the troubles of the moment to a brighter tomorrow.
If an organization is deficient in symbols or rituals, a symbolic leader will
create meaningful new symbols. These actions may help bridge the gap
that exists between various groups or individuals within the organization who
lack a common purpose.
The four windows or frames
presented by Bolman & Deal allow a leader to see
events in new ways and to shift perspective. The use of the multiple frames can
assist the leader to see and understand more broadly the problems and potential
solutions available. It encourages the leader to think flexibly about
their organization and opens various opportunities to the leader to view events
from multiple angles. Again, I may not personally appreciate or endorse the
process of each of the four frames. However, it does remind us of the importance
of stepping back and looking at a situation from more than one single pane of
glass.
As a leader we can choose
to look at coworkers and sense their possibilities. Rather than looking for the
flaws and faults of others, we can choose to focus on their strengths and
potential. Only then can we inspire and encourage them to achieve those
possibilities. I am not saying we should naively look at others with “rose
colored” glasses. But it is simply a matter of perspective and attitude. Step
back and view their worth and value from different perspectives rather than a
limited single window. Everyone has strengths and everyone also has
weaknesses. We have a choice to look primarily for one or the other. If
we look at individuals through a window of negativity and cynicism we limit the
vast potential of others and ourselves. If we are wise enough to look for the best
in other people we have an opportunity to stimulate a productive response to
our encouragement and wisdom. It can make a big difference when you look at
others through the right window! Now, a few words about
viewing our personal life through the right window.
When we choose to look out of
a positive mental window, it changes how we view life and those around
us. How we live every day must be viewed through a window of expectation,
enthusiasm and hope. Every problem can be viewed in one of two ways. We can
either choose to see problems as opportunities, or choose to look
through a window of despair. Many years ago while in college I had a close friend
who viewed many things in life from a window of personal despair. Most of the time he was unhappy, frustrated and cynical.
What caused these feelings? He perceived almost everything that occurred as a
major problem or burden. He felt overwhelmed and expected most things to become
a major obstacle. The end result of his perception was usually a complete
fulfillment of his level of despair. Since he was a close friend, I had a lot
of empathy for him, and tried to analyze what I could do to help him.
Then one day it hit me like a
“ton of bricks” falling from the sky. As I thought about his frustrations and
the exact nature of his problems I was suddenly struck with the answer. As
fellow undergraduate students we had virtually the same problems! Almost all of
them were exactly the same. The difference was in how we viewed these
difficulties. From his perception, everything that occurred differently from
what he wanted became a burden…a problem…a major obstacle and cause for
constant frustration. Primarily the mental window from which he chose to view
the world caused these feelings. He chose to view life only from the
perspective of a single limited window. On the other hand, I viewed the same
difficulties as simply a part of life. To me these difficulties were challenges
to be solved…opportunities to learn new skills and simply an expected
daily part of the living process. My feelings were different than his because
of a different mental window I chose to view the world from.
If
you are old enough you may remember a television commercial
played years ago about the Peace Corps. It simply showed a glass of
water with the actual level of water at about the mid-point of the glass. The
commercial asked the viewer what they saw. The closing line in the commercial
stated something like this, “you either believe this
glass is half empty or half full. If you believe it is half full, we could use
you in the Peace Corps.” When we demonstrate leadership in our personal lives
we realize that every circumstance, no matter how distressing, has unique
opportunities. When one door closes, another door opens! But, if we are viewing
life from a window of despair we will not discover these opportunities or
potential solutions to our problems. It may be time for you to change the
window of your life. Discover your real potential by looking for the strengths
that exist in yourself and in others. Here is a basic law of life that I
have learned…no one has everything to give, but everyone has something to give.
The next time you are challenged by a problem on the job or a personal
difficulty, take a step back and choose to view the situation from a different
angle and the right window. It’s a great view!
Comments
to: gthomas@leadingtoday.org
BACK TO weLEAD HOME PAGE
About the author:
Greg has an extensive thirty-five years experience in public
speaking and has spoken to hundreds of audiences worldwide. Greg has a Master
of Arts degree in Leadership from
Bellevue University, where he also has served as an adjunct professor teaching
courses in business management and leadership since 2002. His first book, 52 Leadership Tips
(That Will Change How You Lead Others) was published
in 2006 by WingSpan Press. His second book, Making
Life's Puzzle Pieces Fit was published in March 2009. Both are available at
amazon.com. Greg is also the president of Leadership
Excellence, Ltd and a Managing Partner of the Leadership Management
Institute. Leadership
Excellence, Ltd. effectively builds
individuals and organizations to reach their highest potential through enhanced
productivity and personal development using a number of proven programs. He is also the president and founder
of weLEAD Incorporated.
References:
Bolman,
L. & Deal, T. (1997). Reframing
Organizations. (2nd Ed.) San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
Greenleaf, R.K. (1973) The Servant as Leader. Newton Center, Mass:
Robert K. Greenleaf Center.
Katzenbach, J.R.
and Smith, D.K. (1993) The Wisdom of Teams:
Creating the High-Performance Organization. Boston: Harvard Business School
Press