What do you think?
Rate this book
Reframing Organizations: Artistry, Choice, and Leadership
In this updated version of their best-selling classic, the authors explain how the powerful tool of reframing --appraising situations from diverse perspectives--can be used to build high-performing, responsive organizations.
448 pages, Paperback
First published December 31, 1990
391 people are currently reading
1425 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 146 reviews
December 13, 2010
It is a great book that looks at the need to change your perception of things. It teaches you how to break your mental frames and construct new ones. It mainly talks about organizations, yet the techniques can be useful in personal life.
Although organizations start with a simple idea, they are complex and there is not one direct cause to a problem. People interpret different situations differently because there are different languages, different perspectives (frames), and different alternative ways to reading what is going on and we would be missing the insights each one generates if we do not acknowledge them and try to benefit from them. To be able to deal with situations effectively, we should be able to form sophisticated interpretations of them through looking at them from different perspectives through REFRAMING. It will enable us to generate different insights and discover new layers of meanings that will help us develop comprehensive understanding of the situations.
A frame is defined as a mental model: a set of ideas and assumptions that you carry in your head to help you comprehend and negotiate a particular "territory". It is a coherent set of ideas forming a prism or lens that enable us to see and understand more clearly what goes on from day to day. A good frame makes it easier to know what you are up against and, ultimately, what you can do about it. We use different frames when dealing with friends, parents and managers. Managers who are polite with their boss might be harsh with their subordinates and become very nice and kind when playing with their children!
Bolman and Deal argue that framing involves matching mental maps to circumstances and reframing requires another skill: THE ABILITY TO BREAK FRAMES. They also argue that they have consolidated major schools of organizational thoughts into a comprehensive framework encompassing four perspectives. They introduce those perspectives as four frames: structural, human resource, political and symbolic.
The structural frame describes how to organize and structure teams and groups to get results. It is assumed that organizations are most effective when rationality prevails over subjective perspectives. Metaphorically, the organization is a systematic machine in which the various parts fit together to work smoothly.
The human resource frame looks at how to tailor organizations to satisfy human needs, improve human resources management, and build positive interpersonal and group dynamics. Metaphorically, the organization can be thought of as a family.
The political frame looks at how to deal with power and conflict, build coalitions, have political skills and deal with internal and external politics. Power is one of the central features of this frame. It is assumed that different interests occur naturally within the organization. Metaphorically, the organization can be thought of as a jungle.
The symbolic frame is about how to shape a culture that gives purpose and meaning to work, stage organization drama for internal and external audience, and build team spirit through rituals, ceremonies and stories. It is associated with the culture of the organization. Metaphorically, the organization can be thought of as a theatre or temple.
The four frames are powerful because of their ability to spur imagination and generate new insights and options. But each frame has limits as well strengths and each can be applied well or poorly. The structural frame risks ignoring anything that falls outside logic and written rules. Overreliance on the human resource frame results in romanticizing the relationship between the organization and the employees and ignores the harsh realities of symbols, rules, power and politics. The political frame imprisons people and causes conflicts along the way as any action could be viewed as a threat to one's position. The symbolic frame needs a deep understanding of culture and perceptions; its implementation needs high artistry skills. If wrongly implemented, it could result in embarrassments rather than boosting energy.
The book is written in an enjoyable narrative style. With the examples provided, you will be able to understand and interpret different events at your organizations that you have probably wondered about.
Although organizations start with a simple idea, they are complex and there is not one direct cause to a problem. People interpret different situations differently because there are different languages, different perspectives (frames), and different alternative ways to reading what is going on and we would be missing the insights each one generates if we do not acknowledge them and try to benefit from them. To be able to deal with situations effectively, we should be able to form sophisticated interpretations of them through looking at them from different perspectives through REFRAMING. It will enable us to generate different insights and discover new layers of meanings that will help us develop comprehensive understanding of the situations.
A frame is defined as a mental model: a set of ideas and assumptions that you carry in your head to help you comprehend and negotiate a particular "territory". It is a coherent set of ideas forming a prism or lens that enable us to see and understand more clearly what goes on from day to day. A good frame makes it easier to know what you are up against and, ultimately, what you can do about it. We use different frames when dealing with friends, parents and managers. Managers who are polite with their boss might be harsh with their subordinates and become very nice and kind when playing with their children!
Bolman and Deal argue that framing involves matching mental maps to circumstances and reframing requires another skill: THE ABILITY TO BREAK FRAMES. They also argue that they have consolidated major schools of organizational thoughts into a comprehensive framework encompassing four perspectives. They introduce those perspectives as four frames: structural, human resource, political and symbolic.
The structural frame describes how to organize and structure teams and groups to get results. It is assumed that organizations are most effective when rationality prevails over subjective perspectives. Metaphorically, the organization is a systematic machine in which the various parts fit together to work smoothly.
The human resource frame looks at how to tailor organizations to satisfy human needs, improve human resources management, and build positive interpersonal and group dynamics. Metaphorically, the organization can be thought of as a family.
The political frame looks at how to deal with power and conflict, build coalitions, have political skills and deal with internal and external politics. Power is one of the central features of this frame. It is assumed that different interests occur naturally within the organization. Metaphorically, the organization can be thought of as a jungle.
The symbolic frame is about how to shape a culture that gives purpose and meaning to work, stage organization drama for internal and external audience, and build team spirit through rituals, ceremonies and stories. It is associated with the culture of the organization. Metaphorically, the organization can be thought of as a theatre or temple.
The four frames are powerful because of their ability to spur imagination and generate new insights and options. But each frame has limits as well strengths and each can be applied well or poorly. The structural frame risks ignoring anything that falls outside logic and written rules. Overreliance on the human resource frame results in romanticizing the relationship between the organization and the employees and ignores the harsh realities of symbols, rules, power and politics. The political frame imprisons people and causes conflicts along the way as any action could be viewed as a threat to one's position. The symbolic frame needs a deep understanding of culture and perceptions; its implementation needs high artistry skills. If wrongly implemented, it could result in embarrassments rather than boosting energy.
The book is written in an enjoyable narrative style. With the examples provided, you will be able to understand and interpret different events at your organizations that you have probably wondered about.
March 14, 2013
This is one of my grad school texts that I kept and still go back to. I find org theory fascinating, and likewise this book. It is accessible, interesting, and relevant to what we all do every day.
April 22, 2020
This is the most accessible textbook I've had the pleasure to be assigned. The contemporary organizational examples and reflections (from Wells Fargo to the 2016 Election) are refreshing and informative. After reading this, I'm seeing organizational theory in everything and I think this will be an indispensable text in the long run career-wise. I borrowed this copy from GU, but when I get a full-time librarian position, I will be picking up my own copy of this as a gift to myself.
October 24, 2025
this is a grad school pull leave me alone
July 30, 2012
This is a great book not only because contains an extremely useful model to understand organizations but because in the process of explain how it works, summarizes many of the best business books on organizational behavior, change and leadership. So you are reading one book but referring to many other excellent literature on this topic as you advance.
The four frames (structural, human resources, political and symbolic) are a great resource to understand organizational "reality" from very different but complementary views.
Highly recommended.
The four frames (structural, human resources, political and symbolic) are a great resource to understand organizational "reality" from very different but complementary views.
Highly recommended.
February 26, 2014
This was a school text, however, it is a keeper. If you forget how to put things into perspective at work or in other organizations, this will help guide you to broaden your view.
April 18, 2021
Kinda ok, kinda whack
Läs om du inte har nåt liv
Läs om du inte har nåt liv
February 12, 2024
Loved the examples! Really puts everything in perspective!
February 21, 2025
School book!
July 8, 2018
This is a lovely postmodern take on management and leadership. They have tried and succeeded to create a fun resource that presents relevant useful information clearly and simply, without being simplistic. They deliberately integrate major organizational theories, focusing on practical implications. Their perception is that each major theoretical tradition of organizational leadership is true and helpful. Each has blind spots. The ability to shift from one viewpoint to another helps make organizations understandable and manageable. Managers who are blind to messy organizational realities progress inexorably from frustration to failure.
The Four Frames
Smart people often do dumb things. The authors begin by explaining that this is often because managers who always read their organization through the same lens frequently misread situations, so they respond inappropriately. When smart people who have power, position or influence do dumb things they can hurt a lot of people and cripple or even kill the organization they are helping to lead. Organizations are complex and unpredictable, as we learn by examining some common management fallacies before exploring the characteristics of effective approaches to leadership and management. This leads into a discussion of four different frames or lenses through which organizations can be viewed. The bulk of the volume is an analysis of these four frames.
STRUCTURAL FRAME
This frame is based on sociology, economics and management science, and sees the organization as a factory or machine. Rules, policies, procedures, systems and hierarchies organize different activities toward one purpose. The leader is a social architect who attunes the structure of the organization to task, technology and environment. Social architecture plays an important role in shaping the behaviors of organizations. Different environments require different structures if organizations are going to succeed.
Leading from a structural perspective focuses on dividing work according to different types of tasks, then coordinating the efforts of the divisions. The design of the organization is based on goals, technology and the environment. Putting people in the right roles and relationships leads to success. This is accomplished by the creation of job descriptions, procedures, routines, protocols and rules. Changes, whether driven by inside forces or outside forces, require structural adaptation. Unfortunately, structural adaptation always produces confusion and resistance, which must be managed.
The manager who focuses exclusively on these aspects of the organization might make the mistake of viewing people in the organization only as parts of a machine or as raw material. She might overlook important aspects of their personhood and only see the ways they are directly relevant to the organization and its mission. Some problems can be solved this way, but sometimes the solutions produced by this kind of analysis create bigger problems and end up weakening the organization.
HUMAN RESOURCE FRAME
This frame is rooted in psychology, and tends to view the organization as a family. Recognition of each individual’s needs, feelings, prejudices, skills and limitations is paramount. This frame challenges us to help people feel good about themselves and their work while they get the job done. Managers affect people positively or negatively depending on what the managers believe and do. Organizations benefit when individuals find satisfaction and meaning in work and organizations effectively use the talent and energy of each individual. Examples of practices that motivate people include participative management, job enrichment, self-managing workgroups, management of diversity, and organization development. Organizations and groups are more effective when members attend to group processes such as informal norms and roles, interpersonal conflict, leadership, and decision making.
Unfortunately managers and leaders who focus exclusively on the health and happiness of the people in the organization are sometimes distracted from the mission and purpose of the organization. They may also neglect the other responsibilities and obligations of their position. This frame must be balanced by the perspective of the other three frames.
POLITICAL FRAME
Politics is defined as the realistic process of making decisions and allocating resources in a context of scarcity and divergent interests. This frame is rooted in political science and sees the organization as a jungle, arena, or contest. Power and resources are scarce and must be won competitively, so conflict is normal, healthy and necessary. Bargaining, negotiating, coercing and compromising are all key skills. This theory assumes that organizations are coalitions; that values, beliefs, information, interests and perceptions differ; that resources are scarce; that conflict is central; and that decisions result from bargaining and negotiating. In this environment the manager must have skills to complete four tasks: diagnose political realities, set agendas, build networks, and make effective ethical choices.
This perspective also has its limitations. Politics is an exhilarating intoxicating game for many people. Participants easily lose sight of the big picture. They can become obsessed with their own personal or department objectives. They may fiddle around with succeeding as individuals or even leading their department to glory while the organization goes down in flames around them.
SYMBOLIC FRAME
The symbolic frame is based on social and cultural anthropology and views the organization as a temple, tribe, theater or carnival where rituals, ceremonies, stories, heroes and myths fuel the culture. Culture, symbols and spirit are the keys to success. Initiation rituals, specialized language, group stories, humor and play and ceremonies all help form people into a team.
This frame is based on five assumptions. Events are not as important as our interpretation of them. Events and actions have multiple interpretations. Symbols help people resolve confusion and find direction, and also anchor hope and faith. What is expressed is more important than what is produced. Culture bonds an organization together, unites people, and helps an organization accomplish its purpose.
This frame highlights the tribal aspects of organizations and the power of symbols to mediate meaning. It centers on complexity and ambiguity. This frame focuses on how human beings make sense of the world. Meaning, belief and faith are central concerns. Meaning is something we create, and we build meaning systems out of symbols, including myth, vision, story, heroes and heroines, and ceremony.
This frame ceases to be effective when the symbols and culture of the organization no longer advance the goals and purpose of the organization. It can be a temptation for leaders to focus on this frame when they have no idea how to actually accomplish the task at hand.
The final section of the book applies reframing to the issues of leadership, change and ethics. In each case, leaders can discover new options and increase effectiveness by considering several alternative solutions. The four frames open our eyes to see leaders as architects, servants, advocates, and prophets. Reframing helps us to see that issues like individual needs and abilities, structural realignment, political conflict, and existential loss are always a part of implementing any new policies or ideas. The ethical mandates of excellence, caring, justice and faith compel leaders to become a source of authorship, love, power and significance. As the authors close with a look to the future, they explain the importance of both spiritual and intellectual development so that tomorrow’s leaders possess both conceptual flexibility and commitment to core values.
The power of breaking free from the prison of an impoverished palette of ideas.
This book is powerful because it presents information that is relevant and useful. It provides tools and methods instead of just a list of rules. The information presented is often provocative, and a little unsettling, providing a fresh perspective that helps leaders and managers to see past the status quo and challenge business as usual. Integration of major theoretical traditions helps insure a balanced thoughtful approach.
The authors assume what almost every thoughtful leader already intuits: There is more than one way to solve a problem. Reframers report that the practice gives them a sense of choice and power. Managers who can only see things one way are “imprisoned by an impoverished palette of ideas” (page 19.) Reframing empowers managers and leaders by providing them with alternative approaches to solving organizational difficulties. Managers who can only see things one way are “imprisoned by an impoverished palette of ideas” (page 19.) Reframers have enough imagination to generate multiple stories, and wisdom to select the right one to tell themselves and their organization in each situation. Lack of imagination, on the other hand, creates a chasm between noble aspirations and actual results.
Reframing is a powerful way to clarify, balance, brainstorm and strategize. Reframing helps leaders see the excitement and possibility each situation contains.
One possible criticism involves the metaphor of frames and reframing. It is a little hard to visualize an organization as having multiple frames simultaneously. I think the idea of looking at organizations through different lenses is much more helpful and easier to visualize. I also found some of the charts and diagrams a bit tedious.
I would love someday to see these ideas creatively and specifically applied to families and churches. I feel like many parents could benefit if they learned to analyze their family from different angles and viewpoints. Few pastors have skills and training to do this kind of beneficial organizational analysis. It might also be helpful to explore in what ways, if any, the church is different from other organizations and might not be amenable to some aspects of this kind of analysis.
Relevance for Church Leadership and Ministry
I think that we are more effective problem solvers when we have selected a possible solution from a list instead of just doing the first or only thing that comes to mind. Also, we are much more able and willing to make necessary midcourse corrections when we have a handful of tools in our toolbox instead of just one great big hammer.
An awareness of the four frames helps managers and leaders become aware of their weaknesses and blind spots. A consistent reluctance to approach problems from a specific frame is a red flag that we are weak, untrained, or unskilled in that area.
An awareness of the four frames can validate and normalize some aspects of the organization with which a leader or manager might not normally be that comfortable. Structure, culture, relationships and politics all matter, and are all a part of every flourishing organization.
Three specific areas that I thought might be helpful to pastors and churches were the sections on self-protective behavior, conflict, and story. These are three issues that are ignored, undervalued, or often handled poorly in churches.
Self-protective models of interpersonal behavior are discussed on pages 165-167. This material can help us to think constructively about church staff relations, and church unity in general. We need to think and talk about how often we blame, ignore, entrench, escalate and hold ourselves blameless when we conflict with others. We need to work on skills like open communication, public testing of our beliefs, combining advocacy with inquiry, and finding and strengthening common goals and mutual influence.
The idea of conflict is explored during the discussion of the political frame. Ongoing conflict is one of the ways we can tell that the church is not built around a charismatic personality. Lack of opportunity for expression of dissent is not a sign of a healthy church. Managing conflict so that it is healthy and productive is the key. A church where everyone is marching in lockstep with the preacher is unhealthy.
Church growth inevitably involves conflict, because new people have new ideas. It is unrealistic to imagine that the church will grow by adding new people just like the people we already have, people who will enjoy and appreciate everything about our organization.
A church without conflict is a church that is not changing. A church that is not changing is a church that is not improving. In a healthy church the leadership allows ongoing civil dissent, always listening for the voice of the Holy Spirit. In a healthy church the leadership can always identify areas of unresolved tension that are pregnant with the possibility of new initiatives that can move the church in new directions. Conflict is inevitable, and can be productive.
In the section describing the symbolic frame we learn that stories are essential for building organizational culture. One of the tragedies of the Reformation is the devaluation of ritual and story in western churches. Our gospel is so sterile, one dimensional, single-faceted, and inflexible. Our suspicion of complexity and ambiguity pressures us to accept easy but inadequate answers to hard questions. We inherit the most powerful stories in the history of the world, and we trade them for a stew composed of simplistic lentils.
The church includes many supernatural elements. However, it seems to me that most of the time it functions like other organizations. These ideas and concepts would probably prove helpful to the vast majority of ministry leaders.
The Four Frames
Smart people often do dumb things. The authors begin by explaining that this is often because managers who always read their organization through the same lens frequently misread situations, so they respond inappropriately. When smart people who have power, position or influence do dumb things they can hurt a lot of people and cripple or even kill the organization they are helping to lead. Organizations are complex and unpredictable, as we learn by examining some common management fallacies before exploring the characteristics of effective approaches to leadership and management. This leads into a discussion of four different frames or lenses through which organizations can be viewed. The bulk of the volume is an analysis of these four frames.
STRUCTURAL FRAME
This frame is based on sociology, economics and management science, and sees the organization as a factory or machine. Rules, policies, procedures, systems and hierarchies organize different activities toward one purpose. The leader is a social architect who attunes the structure of the organization to task, technology and environment. Social architecture plays an important role in shaping the behaviors of organizations. Different environments require different structures if organizations are going to succeed.
Leading from a structural perspective focuses on dividing work according to different types of tasks, then coordinating the efforts of the divisions. The design of the organization is based on goals, technology and the environment. Putting people in the right roles and relationships leads to success. This is accomplished by the creation of job descriptions, procedures, routines, protocols and rules. Changes, whether driven by inside forces or outside forces, require structural adaptation. Unfortunately, structural adaptation always produces confusion and resistance, which must be managed.
The manager who focuses exclusively on these aspects of the organization might make the mistake of viewing people in the organization only as parts of a machine or as raw material. She might overlook important aspects of their personhood and only see the ways they are directly relevant to the organization and its mission. Some problems can be solved this way, but sometimes the solutions produced by this kind of analysis create bigger problems and end up weakening the organization.
HUMAN RESOURCE FRAME
This frame is rooted in psychology, and tends to view the organization as a family. Recognition of each individual’s needs, feelings, prejudices, skills and limitations is paramount. This frame challenges us to help people feel good about themselves and their work while they get the job done. Managers affect people positively or negatively depending on what the managers believe and do. Organizations benefit when individuals find satisfaction and meaning in work and organizations effectively use the talent and energy of each individual. Examples of practices that motivate people include participative management, job enrichment, self-managing workgroups, management of diversity, and organization development. Organizations and groups are more effective when members attend to group processes such as informal norms and roles, interpersonal conflict, leadership, and decision making.
Unfortunately managers and leaders who focus exclusively on the health and happiness of the people in the organization are sometimes distracted from the mission and purpose of the organization. They may also neglect the other responsibilities and obligations of their position. This frame must be balanced by the perspective of the other three frames.
POLITICAL FRAME
Politics is defined as the realistic process of making decisions and allocating resources in a context of scarcity and divergent interests. This frame is rooted in political science and sees the organization as a jungle, arena, or contest. Power and resources are scarce and must be won competitively, so conflict is normal, healthy and necessary. Bargaining, negotiating, coercing and compromising are all key skills. This theory assumes that organizations are coalitions; that values, beliefs, information, interests and perceptions differ; that resources are scarce; that conflict is central; and that decisions result from bargaining and negotiating. In this environment the manager must have skills to complete four tasks: diagnose political realities, set agendas, build networks, and make effective ethical choices.
This perspective also has its limitations. Politics is an exhilarating intoxicating game for many people. Participants easily lose sight of the big picture. They can become obsessed with their own personal or department objectives. They may fiddle around with succeeding as individuals or even leading their department to glory while the organization goes down in flames around them.
SYMBOLIC FRAME
The symbolic frame is based on social and cultural anthropology and views the organization as a temple, tribe, theater or carnival where rituals, ceremonies, stories, heroes and myths fuel the culture. Culture, symbols and spirit are the keys to success. Initiation rituals, specialized language, group stories, humor and play and ceremonies all help form people into a team.
This frame is based on five assumptions. Events are not as important as our interpretation of them. Events and actions have multiple interpretations. Symbols help people resolve confusion and find direction, and also anchor hope and faith. What is expressed is more important than what is produced. Culture bonds an organization together, unites people, and helps an organization accomplish its purpose.
This frame highlights the tribal aspects of organizations and the power of symbols to mediate meaning. It centers on complexity and ambiguity. This frame focuses on how human beings make sense of the world. Meaning, belief and faith are central concerns. Meaning is something we create, and we build meaning systems out of symbols, including myth, vision, story, heroes and heroines, and ceremony.
This frame ceases to be effective when the symbols and culture of the organization no longer advance the goals and purpose of the organization. It can be a temptation for leaders to focus on this frame when they have no idea how to actually accomplish the task at hand.
The final section of the book applies reframing to the issues of leadership, change and ethics. In each case, leaders can discover new options and increase effectiveness by considering several alternative solutions. The four frames open our eyes to see leaders as architects, servants, advocates, and prophets. Reframing helps us to see that issues like individual needs and abilities, structural realignment, political conflict, and existential loss are always a part of implementing any new policies or ideas. The ethical mandates of excellence, caring, justice and faith compel leaders to become a source of authorship, love, power and significance. As the authors close with a look to the future, they explain the importance of both spiritual and intellectual development so that tomorrow’s leaders possess both conceptual flexibility and commitment to core values.
The power of breaking free from the prison of an impoverished palette of ideas.
This book is powerful because it presents information that is relevant and useful. It provides tools and methods instead of just a list of rules. The information presented is often provocative, and a little unsettling, providing a fresh perspective that helps leaders and managers to see past the status quo and challenge business as usual. Integration of major theoretical traditions helps insure a balanced thoughtful approach.
The authors assume what almost every thoughtful leader already intuits: There is more than one way to solve a problem. Reframers report that the practice gives them a sense of choice and power. Managers who can only see things one way are “imprisoned by an impoverished palette of ideas” (page 19.) Reframing empowers managers and leaders by providing them with alternative approaches to solving organizational difficulties. Managers who can only see things one way are “imprisoned by an impoverished palette of ideas” (page 19.) Reframers have enough imagination to generate multiple stories, and wisdom to select the right one to tell themselves and their organization in each situation. Lack of imagination, on the other hand, creates a chasm between noble aspirations and actual results.
Reframing is a powerful way to clarify, balance, brainstorm and strategize. Reframing helps leaders see the excitement and possibility each situation contains.
One possible criticism involves the metaphor of frames and reframing. It is a little hard to visualize an organization as having multiple frames simultaneously. I think the idea of looking at organizations through different lenses is much more helpful and easier to visualize. I also found some of the charts and diagrams a bit tedious.
I would love someday to see these ideas creatively and specifically applied to families and churches. I feel like many parents could benefit if they learned to analyze their family from different angles and viewpoints. Few pastors have skills and training to do this kind of beneficial organizational analysis. It might also be helpful to explore in what ways, if any, the church is different from other organizations and might not be amenable to some aspects of this kind of analysis.
Relevance for Church Leadership and Ministry
I think that we are more effective problem solvers when we have selected a possible solution from a list instead of just doing the first or only thing that comes to mind. Also, we are much more able and willing to make necessary midcourse corrections when we have a handful of tools in our toolbox instead of just one great big hammer.
An awareness of the four frames helps managers and leaders become aware of their weaknesses and blind spots. A consistent reluctance to approach problems from a specific frame is a red flag that we are weak, untrained, or unskilled in that area.
An awareness of the four frames can validate and normalize some aspects of the organization with which a leader or manager might not normally be that comfortable. Structure, culture, relationships and politics all matter, and are all a part of every flourishing organization.
Three specific areas that I thought might be helpful to pastors and churches were the sections on self-protective behavior, conflict, and story. These are three issues that are ignored, undervalued, or often handled poorly in churches.
Self-protective models of interpersonal behavior are discussed on pages 165-167. This material can help us to think constructively about church staff relations, and church unity in general. We need to think and talk about how often we blame, ignore, entrench, escalate and hold ourselves blameless when we conflict with others. We need to work on skills like open communication, public testing of our beliefs, combining advocacy with inquiry, and finding and strengthening common goals and mutual influence.
The idea of conflict is explored during the discussion of the political frame. Ongoing conflict is one of the ways we can tell that the church is not built around a charismatic personality. Lack of opportunity for expression of dissent is not a sign of a healthy church. Managing conflict so that it is healthy and productive is the key. A church where everyone is marching in lockstep with the preacher is unhealthy.
Church growth inevitably involves conflict, because new people have new ideas. It is unrealistic to imagine that the church will grow by adding new people just like the people we already have, people who will enjoy and appreciate everything about our organization.
A church without conflict is a church that is not changing. A church that is not changing is a church that is not improving. In a healthy church the leadership allows ongoing civil dissent, always listening for the voice of the Holy Spirit. In a healthy church the leadership can always identify areas of unresolved tension that are pregnant with the possibility of new initiatives that can move the church in new directions. Conflict is inevitable, and can be productive.
In the section describing the symbolic frame we learn that stories are essential for building organizational culture. One of the tragedies of the Reformation is the devaluation of ritual and story in western churches. Our gospel is so sterile, one dimensional, single-faceted, and inflexible. Our suspicion of complexity and ambiguity pressures us to accept easy but inadequate answers to hard questions. We inherit the most powerful stories in the history of the world, and we trade them for a stew composed of simplistic lentils.
The church includes many supernatural elements. However, it seems to me that most of the time it functions like other organizations. These ideas and concepts would probably prove helpful to the vast majority of ministry leaders.
April 13, 2021
Sjuk bok, pro tip är att skriva 4 uppsatsen om den inom 2 dagar om ni vill speedrunna alla fyra perspektiv. Skulle också påstå att HR perspektivet är en weak mindset.
August 27, 2014
This is a great book for anyone in a leadership position. It is current with today's issues and industry. The book is presented in a more narrative style using relevant examples. This is not a technical how-to book, but rather a presentation of tools to help facilitate change, implement vision, and be a diverse leader.
May 26, 2011
Enjoyed the #Leadership steps!
May 25, 2017
Very dense, but it had excellent stories that made it quite entertaining.
February 18, 2018
Great concepts, way too long
May 31, 2010
Why am I reading books on organizational theory and leadership? Well, the convenient answer is that they are required for a class at Fuller. But to be frank, I'm faced with leadership and organizational challenges in my work just like everyone else. Honestly, I was bit surprised at how helpful I found this one in particular. It's a whopper of a book at almost 500 pages long. But below I'd like to do my best to offer a review of this tome and how I found it beneficial to my work in Christian ministry.
Reframing Organizations amalgamates the full breadth of respected research on organization and leadership. The authors summarize good leadership as that which is able to view an organization through four distinct “frames,” use these frames to assess the condition of the organization and determine how to actuate the measures necessary for achieving its goals.
The four frames offered by Bolman and Deal are structural, human resource, political and symbolic. I found the term "frame" to be a bit problematic when trying to explain this. The frames are meant to address how we perceive the organizations we work with. And not one frame will suffice. As chapter twenty illustrates well, reflecting on an organization through all four provides a more complete perception of a particular scenario allowing an increasingly creative and thorough response. With this in mind, I will often refer to the frames as "lenses."
The structural lens (Part Two) is concerned with organization, structure, hierarchy and division of labor. The human resource lens (Part Three) is concerned with the needs of those inside, and influenced by, the organization. The political lens (Part Four) looks at negotiating and leveraging power and influence to meet the goals of the organization. The symbolic lens (Part Five) assesses opportunities to create symbolism and ritual that will cast vision and raise spirits of those within the organization.
At first glance, we either automatically pigeon-hole our organization or just write off this approach as simplistic, modernistic or just plain un-churchy. But the book does offer a balanced analysis of what it means to be a thoughtful, creative leader within any organization, even a church. Their research looks at a broad spectrum of people gathered together for a particular purpose (an organization) in different arenas. The trouble is that several of the authors' lenses imply a metaphor that will make us uncomfortable in reference to the church. For some the political lens makes us uneasy. For others, the structural or human resource lens. So, would this information be helpful to a church?
Reframing Church
The answer is, yes. The book is in great part concerned with reframing how we look at situations so that we can work together better. And what Christian community doesn't need to do that? But, I also found myself taking this question down a theological rabbit trail, potentially away from the practical side. In trying to answer this question from a theological vantage point, I began to look at a book I read a few years ago, John Driver's Images of the Church in Mission. In his preface, Driver states, "The Bible employs a rich variety of metaphors that illumine our understanding of the identity and the mission of the church." He goes on to categorize the metaphors for the Church on mission into four sections: Pilgrimage Images, New-Order Images, Peoplehood Images, and Images of Transformation. While I admit they are not a perfect fit for Bolman and Deal's "frames" the images are helpful in putting the tools these authors provide into the context of the church.
A Pilgrim People
Driver's pilgrimage set, relates to images such as "The Way," "Sojourners" and "The Poor." Here Driver looks at the Scriptural metaphors that direct how the church relates to both members and those outside of itself. Applying Bolman and Deal's human resource frame, the local church is concerned with the development of people within the congregation and those impacted by its ministry. Read alongside Driver's pilgrimage images, the church leadership might determine whether or not their members are truly sojourning–on a journey–or at a place of stagnation. The church might assess their relationship to the "stranger and alien." Do they embrace a biblical image, or have they adopted another for how to address those in their midst but not of them?
Symbols of a New Order
The symbolic frame is perceivably the easiest to find a correlation with the church. Driver's new-order images of "the Kingdom of God," "New Humanity and "New Creation" seem the most appropriate. The stories in Scripture that draw out these metaphors, give us many of our rituals and invigorate our imaginations for what is to come are what has animated Christians throughout the ages. While different theological intricacies are applied in many churches, it remains that these central symbols are what make what we do important. Bolman and Deal write that when these images are communicated in a manner that is aligned with our practices it will "... deepen faith; otherwise, they become cold, empty forms that people resent and avoid."
Politics of Transformation
Bolman and Deal's political frame is concerned with power. While Driver's new-order images may seem the obvious correlation, I believe his images of transformation provide the appropriate lens for understanding the political frame within the church. These images include "Salt," "Light," "City on a Hill," "House" and "Witnesses." It is within these images that we see how the church-as-organization negotiates with the world. As Bolman and Deal write, "The question is not whether organizations are political but what kind of politics they will encompass." The images of transformation inform the church of how it engages, influences and participates in the transformation of cultures. This might ring of colonialism for some. Let me simply ask, do images such as "salt" and "witnesses"–as understood in the early church (they all died)–call us to a particular kind of engagement?
Structuring a People
I end with the frame Bolman and Deal began with, the structural frame. Within the church, Driver's peoplehood images find correlation here. Images such as "flock," "people," "family" and "body" all allude to how the church ought to be organized. Within these metaphors we find our objectives and goals; we know Who is in charge and who is to follow and how to relate to each other. It is easy for the individual to get lost when the focus is simply on getting this frame "right." The challenge is that, as Driver points out, there are several images provided by Scripture that offer a vision for how we are organized. Not one alone works. Bolman and Deal speak about finding an "equilibrium" that, in our case would take the neighborhood, specific ministries and resources of the congregation into consideration.
When I first picked up Reframing Organizations, the size was daunting and the subject matter appeared intimidating, and possibly boring. Yet, when finished, I had a deep appreciation for the content. The four frames, paired with Driver's four image sets, provide a way to “listen” to a faith community in context, discerning what is out of place, what is needed and what you can participate in reframing things.
Reframing Organizations amalgamates the full breadth of respected research on organization and leadership. The authors summarize good leadership as that which is able to view an organization through four distinct “frames,” use these frames to assess the condition of the organization and determine how to actuate the measures necessary for achieving its goals.
The four frames offered by Bolman and Deal are structural, human resource, political and symbolic. I found the term "frame" to be a bit problematic when trying to explain this. The frames are meant to address how we perceive the organizations we work with. And not one frame will suffice. As chapter twenty illustrates well, reflecting on an organization through all four provides a more complete perception of a particular scenario allowing an increasingly creative and thorough response. With this in mind, I will often refer to the frames as "lenses."
The structural lens (Part Two) is concerned with organization, structure, hierarchy and division of labor. The human resource lens (Part Three) is concerned with the needs of those inside, and influenced by, the organization. The political lens (Part Four) looks at negotiating and leveraging power and influence to meet the goals of the organization. The symbolic lens (Part Five) assesses opportunities to create symbolism and ritual that will cast vision and raise spirits of those within the organization.
At first glance, we either automatically pigeon-hole our organization or just write off this approach as simplistic, modernistic or just plain un-churchy. But the book does offer a balanced analysis of what it means to be a thoughtful, creative leader within any organization, even a church. Their research looks at a broad spectrum of people gathered together for a particular purpose (an organization) in different arenas. The trouble is that several of the authors' lenses imply a metaphor that will make us uncomfortable in reference to the church. For some the political lens makes us uneasy. For others, the structural or human resource lens. So, would this information be helpful to a church?
Reframing Church
The answer is, yes. The book is in great part concerned with reframing how we look at situations so that we can work together better. And what Christian community doesn't need to do that? But, I also found myself taking this question down a theological rabbit trail, potentially away from the practical side. In trying to answer this question from a theological vantage point, I began to look at a book I read a few years ago, John Driver's Images of the Church in Mission. In his preface, Driver states, "The Bible employs a rich variety of metaphors that illumine our understanding of the identity and the mission of the church." He goes on to categorize the metaphors for the Church on mission into four sections: Pilgrimage Images, New-Order Images, Peoplehood Images, and Images of Transformation. While I admit they are not a perfect fit for Bolman and Deal's "frames" the images are helpful in putting the tools these authors provide into the context of the church.
A Pilgrim People
Driver's pilgrimage set, relates to images such as "The Way," "Sojourners" and "The Poor." Here Driver looks at the Scriptural metaphors that direct how the church relates to both members and those outside of itself. Applying Bolman and Deal's human resource frame, the local church is concerned with the development of people within the congregation and those impacted by its ministry. Read alongside Driver's pilgrimage images, the church leadership might determine whether or not their members are truly sojourning–on a journey–or at a place of stagnation. The church might assess their relationship to the "stranger and alien." Do they embrace a biblical image, or have they adopted another for how to address those in their midst but not of them?
Symbols of a New Order
The symbolic frame is perceivably the easiest to find a correlation with the church. Driver's new-order images of "the Kingdom of God," "New Humanity and "New Creation" seem the most appropriate. The stories in Scripture that draw out these metaphors, give us many of our rituals and invigorate our imaginations for what is to come are what has animated Christians throughout the ages. While different theological intricacies are applied in many churches, it remains that these central symbols are what make what we do important. Bolman and Deal write that when these images are communicated in a manner that is aligned with our practices it will "... deepen faith; otherwise, they become cold, empty forms that people resent and avoid."
Politics of Transformation
Bolman and Deal's political frame is concerned with power. While Driver's new-order images may seem the obvious correlation, I believe his images of transformation provide the appropriate lens for understanding the political frame within the church. These images include "Salt," "Light," "City on a Hill," "House" and "Witnesses." It is within these images that we see how the church-as-organization negotiates with the world. As Bolman and Deal write, "The question is not whether organizations are political but what kind of politics they will encompass." The images of transformation inform the church of how it engages, influences and participates in the transformation of cultures. This might ring of colonialism for some. Let me simply ask, do images such as "salt" and "witnesses"–as understood in the early church (they all died)–call us to a particular kind of engagement?
Structuring a People
I end with the frame Bolman and Deal began with, the structural frame. Within the church, Driver's peoplehood images find correlation here. Images such as "flock," "people," "family" and "body" all allude to how the church ought to be organized. Within these metaphors we find our objectives and goals; we know Who is in charge and who is to follow and how to relate to each other. It is easy for the individual to get lost when the focus is simply on getting this frame "right." The challenge is that, as Driver points out, there are several images provided by Scripture that offer a vision for how we are organized. Not one alone works. Bolman and Deal speak about finding an "equilibrium" that, in our case would take the neighborhood, specific ministries and resources of the congregation into consideration.
When I first picked up Reframing Organizations, the size was daunting and the subject matter appeared intimidating, and possibly boring. Yet, when finished, I had a deep appreciation for the content. The four frames, paired with Driver's four image sets, provide a way to “listen” to a faith community in context, discerning what is out of place, what is needed and what you can participate in reframing things.
November 27, 2022
Had to read this for an administrative leadership class along with “The Fifth Discipline” and I’m… exhausted. This book isn’t as annoyingly repetitive and wordy as TFD, but I feel like it should have been split into two books-one just discussing the four frame model (chapters 1-14) and then another whole book dedicated to part six: Improving Leadership Practice (chapters 15-22). The second book could be called something like “Improving Leadership Practice with The Four-Frame Model.” I mean, what is UP with these 500 page books chock full of abstract theory? Not exactly “light reading,” folks. It’s just too too TOO much info for one book-and I am not an unintelligent woman in the least-but I’m overwhelmed. It’s just too much crazy-heavy info. On a positive note, I did learn a lot about leadership reading this, and for the majority of the book, Bolman and Deal do a good job getting right to the point as well as illustrating their thoughts with real world situations. I do wish they used more educational-arena set situations instead of corporate-set situations, as I am going into educational leadership so the corporation vignettes didn’t mean that much to me. Honestly, I was pretty surprised to find out upon reading their bios after I read this book that both Bolman and Deal have education and not business backgrounds since they seem to know SO FRIGGIN MUCH about business! Toward the end of the book the language got to be a bit much, I have to say-WAAAY too flowery and “kumbaya” (and I’m a pretty liberal gal). It was just a bit, uh, “overkill.” I did like the political arena-set stories in the book - that resonated more with me than the corporation stories. Finally, on a somewhat-immature note, thank you for making all chapters less than 30 pages! Phew. Overall, a good read for leadership students and future managers, executives, and administrators, but could be cut into two books as well as use some language revisions especially throughout its second half. BUT-not too bad, B and D. I certainly couldn’t write anything like this!
October 20, 2017
This book was given to me by one of my mentors, when I asked what her favorite books on leadership were. We agree that a lot of leadership and business books are junk, but she felt that this book was really worth the time and had a dog-eared copy to prove it. It outlines four "frames" for looking at organization and its issues: structural, human resource, political, and symbolic. It then shows you the benefit of approaching each issue/organization with intentionality, looking through each of the frames for potential solutions.
At the initial meeting when she recommended the book, she gave me a brief rundown on the frames. We talked a bit about which of the four "frames" she tends to favor, and which she knows to be her least favorite. I read the book keeping those thoughts in mind. I also thought about my perception of how previous and current colleagues may approach view their work through the frames, and how I think I subconsciously apply them in my own work. (I waver between structural and political, I think.) Until last year I'd only worked in small organization teams. Now I'm part of a much larger structure, and there are a lot more personalities to consider. It's a lot to think about - this is a dense book, though an accessible read - and I'm looking forward to discussing it more.
At the initial meeting when she recommended the book, she gave me a brief rundown on the frames. We talked a bit about which of the four "frames" she tends to favor, and which she knows to be her least favorite. I read the book keeping those thoughts in mind. I also thought about my perception of how previous and current colleagues may approach view their work through the frames, and how I think I subconsciously apply them in my own work. (I waver between structural and political, I think.) Until last year I'd only worked in small organization teams. Now I'm part of a much larger structure, and there are a lot more personalities to consider. It's a lot to think about - this is a dense book, though an accessible read - and I'm looking forward to discussing it more.
August 9, 2025
Donald Trump needs to read this book. :-D
I am quite certain he has never read anything of this kind. In the epilogue, it states that Americans “need leaders who can provide a durable sense of purpose and direction, rooted deeply in values and the human spirit.” I find it curious that so many good books are published in the US calling for humane values, yet majority of Americans still support a leader who openly displays egoism, a lack of ethics, and an obsession with money.
Putting jokes aside, I can say that overall this is a great book for leaders to read. Organizational problems are often difficult to tackle, and this book offers a sensible tool for examining issues from four different perspectives. Leaders are often too narrow-minded, and their attempts to solve a problem frequently create new ones.
I am quite certain he has never read anything of this kind. In the epilogue, it states that Americans “need leaders who can provide a durable sense of purpose and direction, rooted deeply in values and the human spirit.” I find it curious that so many good books are published in the US calling for humane values, yet majority of Americans still support a leader who openly displays egoism, a lack of ethics, and an obsession with money.
Putting jokes aside, I can say that overall this is a great book for leaders to read. Organizational problems are often difficult to tackle, and this book offers a sensible tool for examining issues from four different perspectives. Leaders are often too narrow-minded, and their attempts to solve a problem frequently create new ones.
November 7, 2021
I had been introduced to the four framework model at a PTC (Principal Training Center) course I had taken this past summer, so I had a basic understanding of the concept. Then at the start of the year, many head of school recommend I dive a bit deeper. I am glad I did. The flushed out version definitely offered more context and insight into the frames, however, I did find many of the corporate examples a bit tedious and not useful in an educational context.
I know this book is meant to cover a lot of ground and is meant to be applicable to many organizations, but I would love to read a school/ education only version. I wish I had my own copy to highlight and isolate key concepts for later use. I found the Reframing Kotter's Change Stages on pg382 particularly useful.
I know this book is meant to cover a lot of ground and is meant to be applicable to many organizations, but I would love to read a school/ education only version. I wish I had my own copy to highlight and isolate key concepts for later use. I found the Reframing Kotter's Change Stages on pg382 particularly useful.
January 29, 2026
Read this book as the primary textbook of a graduate education leadership course called Organizational Problem Analysis and Planning in Education. Despite being an assigned textbook, it’s not overly dry. The authors style reminds me of a somewhat more academic Malcolm Gladwell book, leveraging research-based theories but explaining with numerous interesting examples. Their overall approach is to lay out four frameworks for understanding organizations (ie, Structural, Human Resources, Political, and Symbolic) and to describe the origins, attributes, and nuances of each. They suggest that leaders can improve their management by using these frames to reflect on issues and actions in their work.
December 25, 2018
For a textbook in my Ed.D. program, this one was a decent read. There is strong voice in the descriptions and several interesting examples that span a variety of organizations. My favorite was the symbolic frame, especially the concept of dramaturgy. I recently worked in a public school for five years that was toxic and caused me PTSD when I left. Since it was the organization I "knew" the best, I had to analyze it for a course I was in this semester, and it brought forth a lot of negative emotions; however, looking back on it with a dramaturgical lens, where everything is a performative experience that can be satirical, my mind coped with it better. Thanks Bolman and Deal!
March 22, 2018
This is a really great textbook that I'm using for Communication Theory & Organizational Dynamics. The course focuses on understanding organizations from various perspectives and acting within those organizations using frameworks/theories. The text is perfect for this: it's well-researched, relevant, and interesting. I also listened to the audio version, and it held my attention from start to finish.
June 28, 2018
I'm reading this for a graduate class for educational leadership. It's more of an HR/business book for me, but I do see the applications. It's pretty dense material--let's be real, textbooks aren't a thrill a minute--but it had good formatting/organization and just enough narrative embedded to keep me awake! I actually liked reading about all the businesses and real life examples. Not too shabby for a textbook.
November 25, 2018
This is a fantastic book and the principles taught are applicable to all organizations, not just schools. The frameworks provide a clear and concise lens to consider change in organizations with. The new edition is full of detailed and up to date examples of the frameworks at play, including a look at the 2016 election. Although the book is in-depth and a deep read, the principles taught are logical and relatively easy to apply in real life organizations.
December 6, 2018
I read this book as the official text book for my first educational leadership class. Bolman and Deal have engaging relatable styles which make it easy to understand the text. This text has also been frequently updated and includes relevant, recent examples throughout the entire book. For anyone wanting to get a deeper understanding on the basics of organization both as a leader and as a subordinate, I recommend this book.
May 2, 2019
A book on how to structure organizations to simplify tasks, since companies are complex entities which often lead to hard decision-making. But by applying self-managing teams, and developing a strong company culture, companies can continue to grow. It is not always the fault of the employees but rather on the structures that cause the problems, because guidelines are not clear about tasks and positions.
October 17, 2019
This book is phenomenal. It was required reading for one of my classes in my graduate program, and I thoroughly enjoyed reading it. The way they discuss the four frames and tie them in with narrative examples really helps keep the reader interested. The information presented is extremely valuable and has helped me reframe how I see things! I highly recommend this book to anyone interested in leadership!
July 23, 2020
Useful as a general intro to how social science could be used in organizations, but honestly it mostly made me wish I were reading the primary sources Bolman and Deal use to make up their "four frames." Since I came to it in the context of it being used in education courses, too, I wish the language weren't so business/corporate.
September 9, 2024
Not the most exciting read but a great a great foundation for better understanding the challenges and solutions to organizational leadership. The four frames introduced- structural, human resource, political, and symbolic, definitely provides the diverse views needed to respond to problems and prepare an organization for success.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 146 reviews