I’ve heard of frames and framing before reading Chapter 8 of the Wharton text. Yet, I struggled a bit with challenging myself to actually define both terms. I think there is a certain abstract quality that prevented me from fully grasping the subject. The text validated my thought by describing frames as a “stable, coherent cognitive structure” (Hoch, Kunreuther, & Gunther, 2001, p. 134) and provided me a much better understanding of frames and the framing tools to improve decisions. Hoch, et al., (2001) concluded that “effective leaders challenge old frames, envision bold new ones, and contrast the two very clearly” (p. 155).
Shoemaker and Russo discuss three framing traps that may distort our decisions. These traps include frame blindness, the illusion of completeness, and overconfidence. On a positive note, they identify the following steps to combat these traps and take charge of our frames: see the frame by conducting a frame audit, identify and change inadequate frames, and master techniques for reframing. I have utilized each of these steps throughout out my life. For example, I conducted a frame audit by understanding the frames of others after recently starting a new position in my organization. I went from being on the back end of the procurement process as a contract specialist to the front end as an acquisition specialist assisting the end user. The basic flow of the procurement process starts with the end user submitting necessary documentation to contracting, the requirement gets awarded by contracting, and the contract is closed out upon completion. That is a very oversimplified version and of course, there are a lot of deadlines, challenges, and communication that takes place in the process. There tends to be an us vs. them mentality and Contracting likes to blame the customer and vice versa. However, I noticed nobody tried to understand what the other is experiencing or examine the frames of different stakeholders (Hoch et al., 2001). After all, we are all on the same team. I see an opportunity in my new position to bridge a gap between Contracting and all stakeholders involved in the acquisition process. The primary risks will be implementing new processes that everyone embraces and changing the culture.
Another example of using one of the aforementioned steps to avoid framing traps was when I identified and changed inadequate frames by questioning my reference points. For example, my reference points are the identical positions as mine at other VA facilities. The good news here is that I have the luxury of choosing my reference points to gauge my success. While other similar programs exist at other VA Medical Centers, I am essentially building a new program how I believe it should be created. Furthermore, I trust I possess enough self-awareness not to be overconfident and see an opportunity to put together one of the best, if not the best, programs in the VA. The risk with such a complex endeavor is understanding it will take time.
My third example of avoiding framing traps was mastering techniques for reframing by using multiple frames. I am fortunate to have already built relationships with most departments in my organization. In the first week in my new position, I thought about placing myself in a new environment to get a better perspective. I scheduled to sit with two different employees to go through their processes and understand exactly what they do. In turn, this will provide an opportunity for me to identify and solve problem areas. However, I must avoid risking the illusion of completeness after solving these problems as “no frame is complete; each one highlights and hides different aspects of the situation at hand” (Hoch, et al., 2001, p. 140).
This exercise has taught me to be balanced in my decision-making process. I must understand my frame as well as everyone else’s frame, question and challenge reference points, and be confident but not overconfident. I also learned I need to challenge myself more at how I perceive situations. For example, Hoch et al., (2001) use the analogy of how managers often “look out at the world through one mental window and fail to notice the views offered by other windows” (p. 139). This was a powerful illustration and reminded me of looking out different windows of a building in a literal sense. I could look out the window from the first floor of the building and think I see everything at ground level. However, when I look out the window from a higher floor, I now see numerous things not visible from the window at ground level. This clearly demonstrates how I must constantly shift my view for every situation to find optimal solutions.
Reference:
Hoch, S., Kunreuther, H., & Gunther, R. (2001). Wharton on making decisions. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons Inc.
No comments:
Post a Comment