![]() |
Focusing Attention within a Field of Meaning |
![]() |
Learn more: Articles | Books | Dictionary | Faq | Home | Leaders | Organizations | Search
|
FramingTversky and Kahneman |
Summary of Framing. Abstract |
Tversky, Kahneman (1981) G. Fairhurst, R. Sarr  (1996) S.A. Deetz, S.J. Tracy, J.L. Simpson (2000) |
Contrary to the central concept of of rational choice theory
(people always strive to make the most rational choices possible),
Framing theory suggests that how something is presented (the
“frame”) influences the choices people make.
F is a quality of communication that leads others to accept one meaning over another. It is the process by which a communication source defines and constructs a political issue or public controversy. F is an important topic since it can have a big influence on what people think! Try the first example on the right to test if you can withstand framing... Framing is not per se a bad thing and in fact is an unavoidable part of human communication. We find it in the media as events are presented within a field of meaning. We find it in politics as politicians attempt to characterize events as one thing or another; we find it in religion, and we find it in negotiating when one side tries to move another towards a desired outcome. Finally it can also be used by leaders of organizations with profound effects on how organizational members understand and respond to the world in which they live. It is a skill that most successful leaders possess, yet one that is not often taught. According to Fairhurst & Sarr (1996) F consists of three elements:
Language helps us to remember information and acts to transform the way in which we view situations. To use language, people must have thought and reflected on their own interpretive frameworks and those of others. Leaders can and should learn framing spontaneously in certain circumstances. Being able to do so has to do with having the forethought to predict framing opportunities. In other words, leaders must plan in order to be spontaneous. Fairhurst and Sarr (1996) described the following Framing Techniques:
Compare with Framing: Competing Values Framework | Leadership Continuum | Emotional Intelligence | Cultural Intelligence | Path-Goal Theory | Theory X Theory Y | Expectancy Theory | Herzberg Two Factor Theory | Core Groups | Theory of Planned Behavior | Groupthink | Spiral Dynamics |
About us | Advertise | Privacy | Support us | Terms of Service
©2023 Value Based Management.net - All names tm by their owners