weLEAD Online Magazine

leadingtoday.org

Why You Should Do Windows!

- One Leader's Perspective

By Greg L. Thomas

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 over 25 years of sales and marketing experience within the electrical manufacturing industry. Some of his positions have included being a National Sales Manager, National Marketing Manager and Regional Sales Manager. He also has an extensive 35 years experience in public speaking and has written articles for various publications. Greg has a Master of Arts degree in Leadership from Bellevue University, where he has served as an adjunct professor. He is the founder of weLEAD Incorporated, a nonprofit organization chartered to promote personal and organizational leadership. Greg's personal site is located at http://www.greglthomas.info

References:

Bolman, L. & Deal, T. (1997). Reframing Organizations. (2^nd 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