In his new book, Leading at Light Speed, Eric Douglas discusses the importance of understanding frames – patterns of assumptions that are often invisible, but that influence how people think about an issue or problem.  According to Douglas,

Douglas goes on to argue that systems thinking enables one to understand, and get past the limitations of frames.

I find the concept of frames to be useful because in my own work, I have seen evidence that conflicts and disagreements about specific issues often stem from deeper beliefs and worldviews.  Earlier this year I was asked to work with a leadership team that was divided over several change initiatives.  On the surface, the conversation was about ERP systems, performance management, and compensation.  As I spoke with each leader individually though, it became apparent that the team was actually dividing into two “camps”.  One camp represented the more tenured group that had been with the company for decades and who all shared the underlying belief that the company existed to provide opportunities for its people.  The second camp was largely made up of newcomers with experience in other firms and industries and who often shared a belief that the bottom-line mattered most.  The newcomers perceived the tenured group as “resistant to change” and “stuck in the old way of doing things.”  They kept wanting to “sell” the idea of a new compensation system and the more they pressed, the more resistance they encountered.  Yet no one understood that it wasn’t a system change that people were resisting – it was making decisions that could negatively impact people .

In his book, Why Don’t You Want What I Want, Rick Maurer discusses the fact that paradoxes (such as profit vs. people) contain a tension that, when explored, allows us to find mutual wins.  He has discovered that a useful template for initiating conversation is “How can we do A while ensuring B?”

The leadership team I described above was able to have more productive conversations once we identified and surfaced their frames.  For example, we started one conversation with the question,  “How can we adjust our compensation system so that our people feel valued and we ensure our ability to remain profitable?”  Finding workable answers was not easy, yet people we far more engaged and willing to work through the tough issues because they were able to talk about what really mattered to them.