Frameworks
27 frameworks shown
Kotter
Management copes with complexity. Leadership copes with change.
| Management | Leadership |
|---|---|
| Planning and budgeting | Setting a direction |
| Organizing and staffing | Aligning people |
| Controlling and problem solving | Motivating and inspiring |
Goleman
Three manage yourself, two manage relationships.
| Self-awareness | Know your moods, drives and effect on others. Hallmarks: self-confidence, realistic self-assessment, self-deprecating humor. |
| Self-regulation | Control impulses, think before acting. Hallmarks: integrity, comfort with ambiguity, openness to change. |
| Motivation | Work for reasons beyond money or status. Hallmarks: drive to achieve, optimism after failure, commitment. |
| Empathy | Consider others’ feelings in decisions. Hallmarks: building talent, cross-cultural sensitivity, service. |
| Social skill | Friendliness with a purpose. Hallmarks: leading change, persuasiveness, building teams. |
Edmondson
A shared belief that the team is safe for interpersonal risk taking.
| Mix | Zone |
|---|---|
| Low safety, low standards | Apathy |
| High safety, low standards | Comfort |
| Low safety, high standards | Anxiety |
| High safety, high standards | Learning and high performance |
Dweck
Believing ability can grow changes how you respond to failure and feedback.
| Fixed | Ability is set. Failure is a verdict. Feedback is a threat. |
| Growth | Ability can grow. Failure is information. Feedback is useful. |
Goold and Campbell
Four fit tests, five good design tests.
| Market advantage | Does the design put enough attention on the sources of advantage in each market? |
| Parenting advantage | Does it help the corporate center add value? |
| People | Does it fit the strengths and limits of the people you have? |
| Feasibility | Does it work within your real constraints, like law, IT and stakeholders? |
| Specialist cultures | Does it protect units that need a culture different from the rest? |
| Difficult links | Does it give a clear answer for coordination that will not happen on its own? |
| Redundant hierarchy | Does every layer add value? |
| Accountability | Can each unit be held to clear measures? |
| Flexibility | Can it adapt and allow new strategies to emerge? |
Nadler and Tushman
Performance comes from fit between work, people, formal and informal organization.
| Inputs | Environment, resources, history |
| Strategy | Where and how to compete |
| Work | The tasks that must get done |
| People | Skills, needs, expectations |
| Formal organization | Structure, systems, processes |
| Informal organization | Culture, norms, relationships |
| Output | System, unit and individual performance |
Course videos
Each structure optimizes one thing and pays for it somewhere else.
| Functional | Grouped by expertise. Deep skill and efficiency. Slow across functions. |
| Divisional | Grouped by product, region or customer. Focus and speed per market. Duplicated work. |
| Matrix | Two bosses: function and product. Balances two priorities. Confusing, slow, political. |
| Flat or network | Few layers, teams form around work. Fast and adaptive. Unclear authority as it grows. |
Groysberg et al.
Two axes: independent to interdependent, flexible to stable.
| Caring | Relationships and mutual trust |
| Purpose | Idealism and altruism |
| Learning | Exploration, expansiveness, creativity |
| Enjoyment | Fun and excitement |
| Results | Achievement and winning |
| Authority | Strength, decisiveness, boldness |
| Safety | Planning, caution, preparedness |
| Order | Respect, structure, shared norms |
Kotter
In order. Each step has a matching error.
| 1 Establish urgency | Error: not enough urgency |
| 2 Form a guiding coalition | Error: coalition too weak |
| 3 Create a vision | Error: no clear vision |
| 4 Communicate the vision | Error: undercommunicating by a factor of ten |
| 5 Remove obstacles | Error: letting obstacles block the vision |
| 6 Plan short-term wins | Error: no visible wins |
| 7 Consolidate and keep going | Error: declaring victory too soon |
| 8 Anchor in culture | Error: not anchoring the change |
Conger
Persuasion is learning and negotiating, not selling.
| Establish credibility | Expertise plus relationships |
| Frame for common ground | Tie the goal to what they already care about |
| Provide vivid evidence | Stories, examples, metaphors, plus numbers |
| Connect emotionally | Read their mood and match your intensity |
Cialdini, outside reading
Shortcuts people use to say yes.
| Reciprocity | People return favors |
| Commitment and consistency | People act in line with what they said before |
| Social proof | People follow what others like them do |
| Liking | People say yes to people they like |
| Authority | People defer to credible experts |
| Scarcity | People want what is rare or ending |
Hill
Manage the balance; do not try to settle it once.
| Unity and diversity | Shared identity versus different views |
| Support and confrontation | Backing people versus challenging them |
| Performance and learning | Deliver now versus build capacity |
| Authority and discretion | Leader decides versus team decides |
Team conflict research
Encourage the first, defuse the second, settle the third early.
| Task | Disagreement about ideas and the work. Often helps. |
| Relationship | Personal friction. Usually hurts. |
| Process | Disagreement about who does what and how. Hurts if it drags on. |
Edmondson and Smith
Cool conflicts yield to data. Hot ones yield to reflection and inquiry.
| Cool | About facts, settled by analysis |
| Hot | About values, interests, identity. High stakes, strong feelings. |
| First move | Notice your own reaction and the story you tell |
| Then | Share your reasoning, and ask about theirs |
Thomas and Kilmann, outside reading
Assertiveness on one axis, cooperativeness on the other.
| Competing | Assertive, uncooperative |
| Collaborating | Assertive, cooperative |
| Compromising | Middle on both |
| Avoiding | Unassertive, uncooperative |
| Accommodating | Unassertive, cooperative |
Kahneman, Lovallo and Sibony
Check the team, the proposal and the assessment.
| Self-interest | Is there a reason to suspect motivated errors? |
| Affect heuristic | Has the team fallen in love with its proposal? |
| Groupthink | Were there dissenting opinions? |
| Saliency | Is the analysis overly influenced by an analogy? |
| Confirmation | Were credible alternatives considered? |
| Availability | If you made this decision again in a year, what information would you want? |
| Anchoring | Where are the numbers from? |
| Halo effect | Is the team assuming success in one area carries to another? |
| Sunk cost | Are recommenders too attached to past decisions? |
| Overconfidence | Is the base case overly optimistic? |
| Disaster neglect | Is the worst case bad enough? |
| Loss aversion | Is the team overly cautious? |
Course video
Common ways the mind tilts a decision.
| Anchoring | First number pulls later ones |
| Status quo | Favoring what already is |
| Sunk cost | Protecting past choices |
| Confirming evidence | Seeking support, ignoring disproof |
| Framing | The way it is posed shapes the answer |
| Estimating | Overconfidence and recall bias in forecasts |
Rogers and Roethlisberger
Restate their view to their satisfaction before you reply.
| Barrier | The urge to evaluate from your own frame |
| Gateway | Understand from their frame |
| Rule | Summarize until they agree you got it |
| Cost | You may be changed by what you hear |
Gilovich and colleagues
We think our inner state and meaning show more than they do.
| Tapping study | Tappers predicted 50% of songs named. Listeners got 2.5%. |
| At work | A clear message to you can land as noise to them. |
| Fix | Ask people to say back what they heard. |
Herzberg
Removing dissatisfaction is not the same as creating motivation.
| Hygiene factors | Pay, policy, supervision, conditions, security |
| Motivators | Achievement, recognition, the work itself, responsibility, growth |
Vroom
Motivation = expectancy x instrumentality x valence.
| Expectancy | If I try, can I perform? |
| Instrumentality | If I perform, will I get the outcome? |
| Valence | Do I value the outcome? |
Hackman and Oldham
MPS = ((variety + identity + significance) / 3) x autonomy x feedback.
| Skill variety | Range of skills used |
| Task identity | Doing a whole piece of work |
| Task significance | Impact on others |
| Autonomy | Freedom in how to do it |
| Feedback | Knowing how well you did |
Deci and Ryan
Three needs drive intrinsic motivation.
| Autonomy | Choice over how you work |
| Competence | Getting better at something |
| Relatedness | Connection to others |
Argyris, refined by Action Design
We climb from data to action in seconds without noticing.
| 6 Decide what to do | |
| 5 Explain or evaluate what is happening | |
| 4 Name what is happening | |
| 3 Paraphrase the data | |
| 2 Select data | |
| 1 Available data |
Cannon and Witherspoon
Check your feedback against all five.
| Attacks the person | Names a trait, not a behavior |
| Vague or abstract | Could mean many things |
| No illustrations | No example of what was seen |
| Ill-defined range | Unclear when it does and does not happen |
| Unclear impact | No consequence and no change asked for |
Cannon and Witherspoon
Help the giver walk down the ladder.
| Example | Could you give me an example of the behavior that concerns you? |
| Reasoning | Can you help me understand how you came to that conclusion? |
| Range and impact | In which situations have you seen it, and what was the impact? |
| Change | What would you like to see me do differently? |
Schwartz and McCarthy
Each is renewed by small rituals.
| Physical | Sleep, movement, food, breaks every 90 to 120 minutes |
| Emotional | Notice the story; use the reverse, long and wide lens |
| Mental | Focus on one important thing first, without interruptions |
| Spirit | Do what you do best, enjoy, and care about |