Understanding Organizations: Human Resource Frame – “Family”
The concept of leadership offered by Bolman and Deal (2013) is a unique examination of organizational theory. Bolman and Deal’s (2013) Four Frame Model provides critical insight to organizational leadership and sustainable change (Fullan, 2015). According to Bolman and Deal (2013) leaders perceive organizational experiences in the context of leadership styles or frames. The authors advocate viewing leadership through four perspectives “frames” identified as: (a) structural frame emphasizes specialized roles and formal relationships; (b) human resource frame considers the needs of the individuals; (c) political frame focuses on bargaining, negotiating, coercion, and compromise; and, …show more content…
Consequently, it is crucial for organizational leaders to understand similarities and differences of the four frames in order to successfully lead change within their organizations (Bolman & Deal, 2013). Today, terms such as human capital, people management and talent management are easily interchangeable with the human resource frame and its common theme of “people matter”.
The purpose of this paper is to discuss the human resource frame from the perspective of an organizational leader, including distinctive strengths, limitations, and usefulness of this frame in navigating an organization. The human resource frame depicts “family” as the image of the organization with a focus on the relationships between itself and its members (Bolman & Deal, 2013). This frame champions the possibility that “organizations can be energizing, productive, and mutually rewarding” experiences that can fully engage employee’s talents and energy, …show more content…
These frames are diverse enough for strategic leaders to function as architect (structural frame), catalyst (human relations frame), advocate (political frame), prophet and poet (symbolic frame) to respond to different situations (Bolman & Deal, 2013). Some frames may have more relevance in certain situations than others. However, leaders often have the inclination to employ one frame over another, thus not fully understanding the situation by doing so. Moreover, the human resource frame may often be
The concept of leadership offered by Bolman and Deal (2013) is a unique examination of organizational theory. Bolman and Deal’s (2013) Four Frame Model provides critical insight to organizational leadership and sustainable change (Fullan, 2015). According to Bolman and Deal (2013) leaders perceive organizational experiences in the context of leadership styles or frames. The authors advocate viewing leadership through four perspectives “frames” identified as: (a) structural frame emphasizes specialized roles and formal relationships; (b) human resource frame considers the needs of the individuals; (c) political frame focuses on bargaining, negotiating, coercion, and compromise; and, …show more content…
Consequently, it is crucial for organizational leaders to understand similarities and differences of the four frames in order to successfully lead change within their organizations (Bolman & Deal, 2013). Today, terms such as human capital, people management and talent management are easily interchangeable with the human resource frame and its common theme of “people matter”.
The purpose of this paper is to discuss the human resource frame from the perspective of an organizational leader, including distinctive strengths, limitations, and usefulness of this frame in navigating an organization. The human resource frame depicts “family” as the image of the organization with a focus on the relationships between itself and its members (Bolman & Deal, 2013). This frame champions the possibility that “organizations can be energizing, productive, and mutually rewarding” experiences that can fully engage employee’s talents and energy, …show more content…
These frames are diverse enough for strategic leaders to function as architect (structural frame), catalyst (human relations frame), advocate (political frame), prophet and poet (symbolic frame) to respond to different situations (Bolman & Deal, 2013). Some frames may have more relevance in certain situations than others. However, leaders often have the inclination to employ one frame over another, thus not fully understanding the situation by doing so. Moreover, the human resource frame may often be