1

Case Study: James Hanson

Case Study: James Hanson

Kiyana M. Douglas

LDST 470

Abstract

This paper will evaluate the case of James Hanson who was the entrepreneurial owner of

his company which had recently become acquired by a larger company. The purpose of this
2
Case Study: James Hanson
paper is to demonstrate conceptual understanding of the four frames that may serve to benefit

James and his in his current transition from a Christian leadership perspective. It centers on how

structural and human resources frames are dealt with in the case study of James Hanson, as well

as how the case study illustrates the practical meaning of the frames.

Introduction
3
Case Study: James Hanson
Understanding the positioning of an organization is paramount in developing solutions to

problems common that arise. Often many challenges derive from a lack of understanding of the

positioning of the organization. For this reason, the Four-Frame model introduced by Bolman

and Deal outlines the psychological framework necessary to successfully navigate such

organizational challenges. The four frames proposed by Bolman and Deal are structural, human

resources, political and symbolic-each define and navigate a specific territory (Bolman & Deal,

2017). Knowing how and when to apply each frame organizations can aide leaders in

understanding the issues from the most advantageous perspective. The four-frame model may

additionally serve to aide those pushing progress to delve deeper in finding appropriate

resolutions.

Case Study

James Hanson started his own company and was naturally the highest grossing producer

in his company. His company was bought out by a larger, more established organization. While

under his leadership the organization functioned as an impulsive firm which can be described as

“a fast-growing organization, controlled by one individual or a few top people, in which structure

and controls have become too primitive and the firm is increasingly out of control. Profits in

these types of organizations may fall precipitously, and survival may be at stake” (Bolman &

Deal, 2017). He is now in a situation where things are quite different from what he is accustom

to; he is in middle management. He previously had autonomy and total control of his day to day

functions and activities. James and his team are struggling to adapt to the new workload, sales

goals, culture and structure now that they are a part of this larger more mature organization and it

is cultivated tension within the workplace. In order for James to reach his sales goals he must
4
Case Study: James Hanson
find a way to lead his team through this transition, respond to the need for restructuring, and

develop a multi-framed leadership approach.

The Vicissitudes of Organizational Restructuring

Organizational restructuring can be likened to a cure that makes a patient worse before

they get better. An organization’s structure at any moment represents its best effort to align

internal activities with outside pressure and opportunities (Bolman & Deals, 2017). When the

need for restructuring becomes evident leaders need to account for strains specific to each type

of structural configuration. Factors that must be considered are differentiation versus integration,

gaps versus overlaps, underuse versus overload, lack of clarity versus lack of creativity, too

much autonomy versus too much independence, too loose versus too tight, diffusion of authority

versus over centralization, goalless vs goal-bound and irresponsible versus unresponsiveness

(Bolman and Deal, 2017). Balancing these opposing tensions Attempts to restructure must

acknowledge the natural tensions among these competing interests.

The Four Frames

Leaders should approach these types of issues within an organization using the four

frames as proposed by Bolman and Deal. The first of which is Structural (factory or machine);

which focuses on the strategic implications of change focusing on the “how” by setting attainable

goals, a chain of command, roles and responsibilities, and clear direction. Issues surface when

structure is not properly aligned as this frame serves as the “bones” of an organization. The

Human Resource (family) frame focuses on the needs of the people within an organization.

This frame puts more emphasis on empowering employees and providing opportunities for them

to demonstrate their ability to perform as well as meeting their intangible needs such as that of

human contact, personal growth, and job satisfaction. The Political (jungle) frame is more power
5
Case Study: James Hanson
oriented; it involves addressing and resolving issues-individual or collective. In this frame dwells

coalition building, conflict resolution initiatives, and power base building. Political prowess is

integral, but overdependence on this perspective makes organizational life an on-going game

rather than a goal-oriented activity (Harris, 1990)

The Symbolic (theatre, temple, or carnival) frame addresses the need for purpose and meaning in

their work. In the symbolic frame conflict is used to negotiate meaning and develop shared

values (Bolman & Deals, 2017). It is primarily focused on inspiring people by making the

organizations direction feel significant and distinctive (Bolman & Deals). It includes creating a

motivating vision, and recognizes superb performance through sacred occasions, celebrations

and ritual.

Applying the Frames

There is no exact science to spell out precisely which frame a leader should adopt. A

skillful leader will be able to recognize which frame needs to be employed when. Many

successful organizations at the impulsive stage tend to fall because they have failed to evolve

beyond this stage (Bolman & Deals, 2017). To effectively lead his team James would do well to

apply the four frames. The political, human resource, structural and symbolic frame would be

well applied due to the ambiguity and anxiety exhibited in his team about the future of the

organization. If the goals are clear, technology is well understood, and behavior reasonably

predictable, the structural and human resource approaches are applicable (Bolman & Deals,

2017). If allowed to go unchecked ambiguity will increase and the political and symbolic

perspectives become more relevant. Going through such a dynamic reorganization may cause

feelings of “us” versus “them” within reorganization. The political frame holds that’s the pursuit

of self-interest will cause confused and chaotic contest that require political intervention
6
Case Study: James Hanson
(Bolman & Deals, 2017). The discontent felt by his staff is typical of an adhocracy/simple

structure that is restructured into a machine bureaucracy. Managers often must be politicians and

politicians can often use their personal power to create symbols. The symbolic frame can be

applied to reinvigorate the disillusioned employees by renewing a sense of purpose and meaning

in their work. The word of God states that where there is no vision, the people perish (KJV).

James cannot accomplish his designated goals without his people. The structural frame should

shape James’ approach to dealing with the concerns his team has with new workload, sales goals,

and overall structure. Reiteration of their roles and responsibilities will also be beneficial to the

organization. Individual commitment and motivation are essential to success, so the Human

resource frame should also be applied. The human resource frame will help James recognize the

needs, biases and career development opportunities for his team members. The effective senior

manager will know how and when to employ multiple frames a consistent correlate of

effectiveness (Bolman & Deal, 2017).

References:
 7
Case Study: James Hanson
American Bible Society. (2010). Holy Bible: containing the Old and New Testaments: King James

Version. New York.

Bolman, L. G., & Deal, T. E. (2017). Reframing Organizations: Artistry, Choice, and

Leadership (6th ed.). Hoboken, NJ: Jossey-Bass.

Dvorak, N., & Pendell, R. (2020, January 24). Want to Change Your Culture? Listen to Your Best

People. Retrieved from https://www.gallup.com/workplace/247361/change-culture-listen-best-

people.aspx

Harris, T. E. (1990). UNDERSTANDING ORGANIZATIONAL COMMUNICATION: Applying

the Four Frame Approach. The Bulletin of the Association for Business Communication, 53(4),

50–54. doi: 10.1177/108056999005300414

Howard, J. L., & Frink, D. D. (1996). The Effects of Organizational Restructure on Employee

Satisfaction. Group & Organization Management, 21(3), 278–303. doi:

10.1177/1059601196213003

Stress in America: Paying with our health. (2015). PsycEXTRA Dataset. doi: 10.1037/e513292015-

001