Bolman and Deal's Four-Frame Analysis : Case Study
BOLMAN AND DEAL'S FOUR-FRAME ANALYSIS : CASE STUDY by Dr. P. McCabe, January 2003
Four-Frame Theory
There are volumes written on leadership theory in nearly every discipline. Bolman and Deal sifted through the complex theories and literature and combined with their own analyses, theories and experience devised a four-frame model as a way of understanding organizations and leadership within organizations. Frames are described as being the lens through which anyone sees the world and places that world in order (University of Melbourne). Frames help individuals to filter out the things in the world they do not want to see, thus, frames are inherently inaccurate and skewed in terms of reality (University of Melbourne). But, people need frames in order to make sense of the world and any experience in it; frames help people determine and guide their actions (University of Melbourne).
Bolman and Deal suggest that every individual has personal and preferred frames that they use to gather information, make judgments, determine behavior and explain behavior (University of Melbourne). Each frame provides one version of organizational life and each frame also provides a specific albeit narrow range of ideas, techniques, processes that may be used to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the organization (University of Melbourne).
The four frameworks proposed by Bolman and Deal are the Structural, the Human Resource, the Political and the Symbolic. Each is described in the following illustration. It is important to note that leaders may use any framework and may even use a combination at the same time in their daily work (1991).
1. The Structural Framework
The "structural" manager tries to design and implement a process or structure that will be appropriate to the problem and the circumstances. Steps would include:
• Clarifying organizational goals
• Managing the external environment
• Developing a clear structure appropriate to task, and environment
•
Four-Frame Theory
There are volumes written on leadership theory in nearly every discipline. Bolman and Deal sifted through the complex theories and literature and combined with their own analyses, theories and experience devised a four-frame model as a way of understanding organizations and leadership within organizations. Frames are described as being the lens through which anyone sees the world and places that world in order (University of Melbourne). Frames help individuals to filter out the things in the world they do not want to see, thus, frames are inherently inaccurate and skewed in terms of reality (University of Melbourne). But, people need frames in order to make sense of the world and any experience in it; frames help people determine and guide their actions (University of Melbourne).
Bolman and Deal suggest that every individual has personal and preferred frames that they use to gather information, make judgments, determine behavior and explain behavior (University of Melbourne). Each frame provides one version of organizational life and each frame also provides a specific albeit narrow range of ideas, techniques, processes that may be used to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the organization (University of Melbourne).
The four frameworks proposed by Bolman and Deal are the Structural, the Human Resource, the Political and the Symbolic. Each is described in the following illustration. It is important to note that leaders may use any framework and may even use a combination at the same time in their daily work (1991).
1. The Structural Framework
The "structural" manager tries to design and implement a process or structure that will be appropriate to the problem and the circumstances. Steps would include:
• Clarifying organizational goals
• Managing the external environment
• Developing a clear structure appropriate to task, and environment
•
Cited: Bolman, L. and T. Deal. Reframing Organisations: Artistry, Choice and Leadership. San Francisco: Jossey Bass, 1991 Spaulding, Angela. "Micropolitical Behavior of Second Graders: A Qualitative Study of Student Resistance in the Classroom." The Qualitative Report 4(1-2) (2000): January. University of Melbourne. Managing the Educational Organisation. 27 February 2003.