“Framing” is not only relevant to visual arts and photography. We will see that it is a natural aspect of being human. It has also a wide application to many sectors and professional fields, such as behavioural sciences, education, social sciences, politics and psychology. Additionally, framing is very important in business, for example for leadership, in crisis management, in communication, in priority-setting, problem-solving and decision-making etc.
I am not an expert in any of these fields, so my research has been wide-reaching, driven mostly by curiosity, not so rigorously structured, with serendipity. The objective was to explore the relevance for project management and to seek useful hints and leads, so that framing can be used skilfully by project management professionals.
In this first article I look at framing in its nature, definitions and general applications.
What do we mean by “framing”?
Here is where it may get specific and technical, depending on the professional field or sphere of interest. I read with interest an article by Sheril Mathews and this helped in introducing the concept to me, very simply.
Framing is a very natural aspect of our life as we are surrounded by moving and evolving realities (professional, societal, familiar), and we take an active part in these realities. Framing is about “establishing boundaries, understanding influences and connections in the various moving parts”, helping in our planning, decisions and actions.
“A frame is a set of assumptions and beliefs about a particular object or situation.”
Amy Edmondson
It is often automatic – I think it is important to state this.
I came up with this personal example. If I drive to work, I naturally set up the “driving frame” in my mind, which involves calculating the suitable time for departing, what I need to wear, planning the route, looking at the weather, thinking about the need for petrol and any conflicting needs with my wife (we have only one car). If I decide to go by bus, the frame will have to change. The timing is different, the logistics as well. The new frame will have different boundaries and connections. And finally, if I decide to run to work, this really needs a very different frame, in which the timing, the weather forecast and what I eat for breakfast take a different importance.
“Thinking” and “constructed” frames
Sheril mentioned the distinction made by Russo and Schoemaler between “thinking frames” and “constructed frames”.
The “thinking” frame has been called also “worldview”. It is like a primary lens through which we view the world or a situation. This is what we get as part of our upbringing, also influenced by the culture or social context. It is shaped by past experiences.
The “constructed frame” is what we learn or build around a specific situation, something we can be taught about. It is considered secondary, but it is also combined with the worldview in any decision. My understanding is that the “worldview” may be difficult to modify, but there is an influence by all the “constructed” frames (built on the different past situations we faced and experiences), and eventually the “thinking” frame might change.
I reflected on this and I came up with something that is applicable to me. I thought about the first time I ran to work. It wasn’t something that came naturally. I never considered this option of commuting before. Setting up this frame was difficult and a little bit stressful. I wasn’t a good runner at all. My runs were a real struggle. After a few runs to work, my attitude changed. My (constructed) running frame became more natural to me. The more often I ran, the deeper my newly “constructed” frame became and eventually it influenced my “worldview”. I started to appreciate and respect the runners more, questioning our dependency on the car, caring more about the environment, sensing the benefits to my health.
I hope this makes sense to you and that you can find examples that are applicable to you.
Frames in the workplace
“If a problem can’t be solved within the frame it was conceived, the solution lies in reframing the problem.”
Brian McGreevy
It is interesting to note how in the workplace or in our profession we are called to frame for various reasons and in a variety of contexts, often with a considerable level of stress and tension. Two are the examples of framing that interest me the most (apart from the example for project management, which will be specifically addressed later).
One is the framing of arguments. The workplace is riddled by arguments, with opposing frames. We have to advocate for one argument over the other or we are called to take a position about one or the other. Those involved in a discussion argue for their own proposition, encouraging their own interpretation, discouraging that of the counterpart, using reasons and data to support their own view and to discourage (or discredit!) the one put forward by the others. In facing a situation, in debating over a topic, in reviewing a set of data, in decision-making or in a general discussion with another person, we can detect the following contrasting frames (the list is not in order of importance or relevance):
- positive vs mediocre vs negative
- high vs intermediate vs low
- green vs amber vs red
- active vs neutral vs passive
- pro vs neutral vs against
- good vs mediocre vs bad
- linear vs non-linear
- major vs minor
- promotion vs demotion
- prevention vs correction
- growth vs stagnation vs shrinking
- threats vs opportunity
- optimistic vs pessimistic
- directing vs supporting
- win-lose vs win-win vs lose-lose
- competition vs cooperation
- cost vs investment
- gain vs loss
- global vs local
- mainstream vs niche
- past vs present vs future
- introvert vs extrovert
- task-oriented vs people-oriented
- over-performing vs under-performing
- open to change vs resistant to change
- individual vs team
- beneficial vs toxic
- innovator vs follower
- compliant vs non-compliant
- risk seeking vs risk aversion
- conservative vs progressive
- engaged vs disengaged
- right vs left side of the brain
- convergence vs divergence
- certainty vs uncertainty.
I am sure that if you have been in a job for long enough, you would have witnessed or experienced most of these. And you may have more to add to the list….
The other example is the framing in leadership and management. As framing is a building block in social science, economics, psychology and behavioural science, framing is also key for leadership and management in organisations. Organisations are complex integrations of diverse teams and individuals and operate in complex, and evolving contexts. The managers and leaders of an organisation have to use framing appropriately, to provide vision, clarity and direction. The leadership and management frames are drivers for the success of an organisation, the safety and growth of the staff. Effective leaders’ frames provide key focal points, assist in refocusing attention and efforts, align views, smooth disagreements, avoid and mitigate misunderstanding and conflicts, assist in decision-making and in crisis management, provide protection and reassurance. The framing in leadership and management integrates in a rather sophisticated manner with effective communication. This is really complex and it will not be explored further here.
What is important to note is that frames coexist and paradoxes are likely (remember Kuosa and the “dialectic” thinking). And we have many limitations with framing that we should be aware of.
How would this resonate with your experience with framing? Have a thought about the topic and read in the next article about the challenges with framing.
Marco Bottacini, Senior Portfolio Manager at GALVmed
The views and opinions expressed in this blog are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views and opinion of GALVmed.
Project Management Discussion Group 