Running Head: FOUR-FRAME MODEL 1 FOUR-FRAME MODEL 7 Four Frame Model Rubin Wilkins Module 5 Assignment 2 Argosy University Los Angeles Professor: Dale Mancini February 15, 2017 Four-frame Model Introduction Bolman and Deal synthesized the foregoing leadership theory into four contemporary cognitive perspectives which they further organized into frames to assist leaders in the decision-making process in relation to each individual situation. It was their understanding that the use of such frames would assist leaders in analyzing respective events in a different manner and perspective. In essence, they provide ‘windows’ that enhance the leaders’ to have a broader understanding of the challenges being faced by the organization and solutions that are potentially available. This insightful piece therefore proceeds to help in understanding the frames. The Four-Frame Model of leadership is a creation stemming from the meshing of various organizational theories to form a wide-encompassing one. These consolidated theories include; the trait theory, power and influence theory, situational and contingency theory, and the behavioral theory (Bateman, 2007). They have been developed over a span of many years. The multiple perspectives emanating from the various theoretical underpinnings are the ones termed as frames by the two theorists; through which an organization is viewed by the leaders and other related persons. These ‘windows’ further operate to bring an organization into focus and subsequently serve as filters which offer the leaders order and assist them in making decisions. Furthermore, the frames comprise of the structural frame, human resource frame, political frame and the symbolic frame. Each individual frame represents a perspective accompanied by its own assumptions and attributes. The structural frame is used in viewing the world from an orderly point of view furnished with a multiplicity of rules and procedures. The human resource frame then comes in to assume that goals are best achieved through the meeting of organization members’ needs and fully appreciating the workforce as fundamental part of the organization. The political frame appertains to the conflicts, alliances and bartering of respective parties to properly use and allocate the scares resources owned by and charged to the organization. Finally, symbolic frame relates to the issues of culture, symbols and rituals of an organization as opposed to the established rules and procedures. Theme among articles Song, Kim and Kolb (2009) set out to research on the effect of learning an organization’s culture and the established linkage between interpersonal trust and the general commitment to an organization. The sample used in this study was primarily obtained from various employees working to conglomerate entities of Korea. Resultantly, it was established that learning an organization’s culture worked as a mediating factor in the explanation of associations betwe ...

1. Running Head: FOUR-FRAME MODEL
1
FOUR-FRAME MODEL
7
Four Frame Model
Rubin Wilkins
Module 5 Assignment 2
Argosy University Los Angeles
Professor: Dale Mancini
February 15, 2017
Four-frame Model
Introduction
Bolman and Deal synthesized the foregoing leadership theory
into four contemporary cognitive perspectives which they
further organized into frames to assist leaders in the decision-
making process in relation to each individual situation. It was
their understanding that the use of such frames would assist
leaders in analyzing respective events in a different manner and
perspective. In essence, they provide ‘windows’ that enhance
the leaders’ to have a broader understanding of the challenges
being faced by the organization and solutions that are
potentially available. This insightful piece therefore proceeds to
help in understanding the frames.
The Four-Frame Model of leadership is a creation stemming
from the meshing of various organizational theories to form a
wide-encompassing one. These consolidated theories include;
the trait theory, power and influence theory, situational and

2. contingency theory, and the behavioral theory (Bateman, 2007).
They have been developed over a span of many years. The
multiple perspectives emanating from the various theoretical
underpinnings are the ones termed as frames by the two
theorists; through which an organization is viewed by the
leaders and other related persons. These ‘windows’ further
operate to bring an organization into focus and subsequently
serve as filters which offer the leaders order and assist them in
making decisions. Furthermore, the frames comprise of the
structural frame, human resource frame, political frame and the
symbolic frame. Each individual frame represents a perspective
accompanied by its own assumptions and attributes.
The structural frame is used in viewing the world from an
orderly point of view furnished with a multiplicity of rules and
procedures. The human resource frame then comes in to assume
that goals are best achieved through the meeting of organization
members’ needs and fully appreciating the workforce as
fundamental part of the organization. The political frame
appertains to the conflicts, alliances and bartering of respective
parties to properly use and allocate the scares resources owned
by and charged to the organization. Finally, symbolic frame
relates to the issues of culture, symbols and rituals of an
organization as opposed to the established rules and procedures.
Theme among articles
Song, Kim and Kolb (2009) set out to research on the effect of
learning an organization’s culture and the established linkage
between interpersonal trust and the general commitment to an
organization. The sample used in this study was primarily
obtained from various employees working to conglomerate
entities of Korea. Resultantly, it was established that learning
an organization’s culture worked as a mediating factor in the

3. explanation of associations between organizational commitment
and interpersonal trust. A number of recommendations were
therefore put forward in regard to the implications towards the
development of human resource and the inherent practice.
Additionally, the team led by Padma (2009) set out to ascertain
the existence of a relationship between organizational culture
and organizational commitment in private and public
organizations. This saw the use of a sample comprising of 100
employees chosen from different organizations. The study led to
the finding that a better understanding of the resultant impact of
various cultures on similarly different types of commitment
(Padman & Nair, 2009). These suggestions have with them a
serious implication for organization managers and researchers
alike; to create an organizational culture in which employees
become more committed.
A further study was conducted to impute that it is necessary for
organizations to understand, predict and influence the behavior
of others that it has relations. Such influences are theorized by
Bolman and Deal could either be of a conflicting nature or
mutual understanding (APA, 2002). This theory on
organizational behavior serves to address the reciprocal effect
of social organization in terms of aspirations, attitude and
general behavior of the organization. In addition to this, the
study indicated and offered in-depth explanations of the
relationship between an organization and the exiting economic,
social, political and environmental factors; commonly referred
to as PESTEL. The study was largely focused on denoting
exactly how organizations can work towards shaping and
influencing their relationship in a positive and beneficial
manner. This takes one back to the initially mentioned issue of
organizational behavior as influences by the various
organization members and the need to look into their
mannerism. More importantly however, is the mannerism of

4. decision makers within the organization. The organization’s
challenges, problems and opportunities will only be addressed
appropriately if such organization decision makers have the
right mindset in developing the most appropriate strategies.
The advent of social responsibility among corporate entities has
brought about a new phenomenal in the business world. As
studies, have shown, this is a responsibility that is not only
socially expected by equally imbued in the rules, procedures
and work ethics of existing entities (Mathis, 2008).
Organizations are today expected to conform to the relatively
new business dispensation requiring them to undertake their
endeavors in a manner that is conventionally acceptable and
also give back to the community that has ensured its sustained
existence. The study undertaken by Mathis. A delved into the
concept of corporate social responsibility and its relation to the
rules and procedures set out by each individual organization and
the larger business industry.
Similarities and differences in theme presentation
The studies discussed above have several similarities and
differences. The main similarity among all the studies discussed
herein is the acknowledgment and indication of decision-makers
playing a vital role in eventual undertakings and perspective of
an organizations. It is upon these organization leaders to have a
proper understanding of the prevailing state of affairs in
relation to the pertinent issue mentioned above in order to
properly strategize their way forward. Failure to do have
sufficient understanding of the imperative aspects only works in
organization’s detriment and possible failure in certain areas of
concern. This then leads to the second similarity among the
various themes; reiterating the importance of approaching the
inherent issues with utmost diligence. On the other hand, the
themes are seen to have been presented differently in terms of
data collection methods and used samples. While other themes

5. were solely based on the findings received from samples made
up of several employees; others had their focus on the actual
organization leaders. The specific aspects of concern that
eventually affect organizations were also looked into differently
among the various studies, hence the different manner of
presenting the findings.
Importance of applying four-frame model
Application of the four-frame model is imperative due to a
myriad of reasons. The most apparent reason for its application
is the wide-encompassing effect and approach that it is
attributed with. Rather than deal with each theoretical
understanding individually, the four-frame model offers one a
wide scope through which the constituent issues of an
organization are assessed and analyzed. Bolman and Deal came
out clearly by stating that this model offered the various pivotal
frames which essentially served as windows through which
individual perspectives are formed. The model offers one a
proper insight into fundamental aspects of any organizations-
political, cultural, human resource, structural and symbolic.
These four factors form the very basis of any organization and
their understanding enables one to address the inherent issues
appropriately. When applied, it is almost impossible for an
organization to remain lacking or wanting in the pivotal aspects
of its existence and operations. The model caters for the
procedural aspect of an organization, its cultural identity,
business interaction with other parties of interest and
importance of the workforce.
Impact on successful management and leadership
Following the detailed explanation of the model’s importance,
one then wonders what the eventual impact of its application is.
A whole set of empirical studies have also been commissioned
towards the established of the model’s subsequent impact; with
the brunt of these studies concluding that organization leaders
become better placed to make the most appropriate decisions

6. with the application of this model. The theory itself was
espoused after decades of research and studies; hence its
thorough nature. Consequently, it offers the leaders an in-depth
understanding of their organizations and how best to strategize
their operations. In this regard, the leaders know have a better
understanding of which cultures to hold onto or not, the best
way to treat and relate with their workforce, the
accomplishment of tasks being undertaken and general relations
with other parties of interest (Song, Kim & Kolb, 2009). With
such successful management of organizations through the
application of the four-frame model, leaders develop a great
reputation in their respective fields due their tendency to have
impeccable careers in the organizations that they work for.
References
Association, A. P. (2002). Ethical principles of psychologists
and code of conduct: AmericanPsychological Association.
Bateman, T. (2007). Management Leading and Collaborating in
a Competitive World. Business101. 7(12). 1.
Charan, R. (2006). Home Depot’s blueprint for culture change.
Harvard Business Review, 84(4), 60–70.
Castilla, E. J., & Benard, S. (2010). The paradox of meritocracy
in organizations. Administrative Science Quarterly, 55(4), 543–
576.
Mathis, A. (2008). Corporate social responsibility and public
policy-making: perspectives, instruments, and consequences:
University of Twente.
Song, J. H., Kim, H. M., & Kolb, J. A. (2009). The effect of
learning organization culture on the relationship between
interpersonal trust and organizational commitment. Human
Resource Development Quarterly, 20(2), 147-167.
Padma, R. N., & Nair, V. (2009). Organizational culture and its

7. impact on organizational commitment in public and private
organizations. Global Management Review, 4(1), 32–39.