Strategy as Framing Contests
Cognitive frameworks is the area of strategy that I'm particularly interested in and whilst it sounds a bit technical, it is simply the way you see the world. We all have mental models we use unconsciously to help us interpret the world, without these we would be forced to have to rethink the world for each situation we came across.
For example, confronted with a shop, we have a model in our heads about how these things called shops work and as long as the experience we have is in line with our model we can engage quickly and efficiently. Now go to a shop in a foreign country and things take much longer initially as you have to reinterpret the world to make sure your model works in this slightly altered situation.
It is the same when confronted with a problem that is strategic in nature. If the problem fits one of our existing models of how the world works (for example a new competitor opens nearby) we will try and solve the problem using what has worked for us in the past. The problem with strategic problems is that sometimes (lets make that usually or even always) they don't neatly fit our models but rather than adapting our model, we usually try and crush the problem so it fits with our model. This is another area cognitive simplification but lets not go there right now.
Sarah Kaplan researched and published a very interesting article in this area called 'Framing Contests: Strategy Making Under Uncertainty'. The paper showed that when there are differences between how people see a problem and its potential solution, they tend to try and exert their cognitive frame on others in order to make their view, the organisations view - hence the title framing contests. This is different than our traditional view of strategy as more of a joining of minds to develop a shared and agreed 'optimal' solution.
One of the very interesting aspects I noted was people were much more aware of the operation of other’s frames than that of their own.
I'll pick up on this point at an organisational level later as organisations tend to do the same.........
For example, confronted with a shop, we have a model in our heads about how these things called shops work and as long as the experience we have is in line with our model we can engage quickly and efficiently. Now go to a shop in a foreign country and things take much longer initially as you have to reinterpret the world to make sure your model works in this slightly altered situation.
It is the same when confronted with a problem that is strategic in nature. If the problem fits one of our existing models of how the world works (for example a new competitor opens nearby) we will try and solve the problem using what has worked for us in the past. The problem with strategic problems is that sometimes (lets make that usually or even always) they don't neatly fit our models but rather than adapting our model, we usually try and crush the problem so it fits with our model. This is another area cognitive simplification but lets not go there right now.
Sarah Kaplan researched and published a very interesting article in this area called 'Framing Contests: Strategy Making Under Uncertainty'. The paper showed that when there are differences between how people see a problem and its potential solution, they tend to try and exert their cognitive frame on others in order to make their view, the organisations view - hence the title framing contests. This is different than our traditional view of strategy as more of a joining of minds to develop a shared and agreed 'optimal' solution.
One of the very interesting aspects I noted was people were much more aware of the operation of other’s frames than that of their own.
“If they find facts to support their view, they grab it at face value. Anything that contradicts their view, they put through a micro-fine sieve.”This is in line with previous cognition research that indicates when we receive a piece of new information that concurs with our view of the world we tend to accept it whilst anything that contradicts our view, we tend to reject. Rather than have to change our minds, we simply filter the information.
I'll pick up on this point at an organisational level later as organisations tend to do the same.........
Comments
Post a Comment