Scenario Building for Successful
Organizational Change
MPA 8002
The Structure and Theory of Human
Organization
Richard M. Jacobs, OSA, Ph.D.
For Bolman & Deal (1997)...

managing and leading organizations
is a matter of utilizing four frames to
diagnose organizational functioning
Structurally, managers and leaders...
1. set goals and policies under
conditions of uncertainty
2. achieve a “delicate balance” in
allocating scarce resources
across organizational entities
3. motivate, coordinate, and control
large, diverse group of subordinates
From a human resources view,
managers and leaders...
1. help individuals and groups develop
a shared sense of direction and
purpose
2. balance task and process goals
3. endeavor to make group work both
satisfying and efficient
Politically, managers and leaders...
1. confront workplace politics
2. apply ethics in the decision-making
process
3. wield power effectively
4. act with authority
Using symbols, managers and
leaders...
1. attend carefully to socializing new
members into the organization
2. emphasize diversity in ideas and
approaches to problem solving
3. manage and lead by example
4. develop and use code language to
communicate organizational
purpose
For Bolman & Deal, the goal is...

for managers and leaders to give
appropriate emphasis to the
positives associated with each
frame…
Strengths of the structural frame...
…is rational and objective, data driven
…uses logic to shape policies, procedures,
division of labor, and span of control
…is action oriented
…provides for accountability
Strengths of the human resources
frame...
…personal
…practical
…addresses fundamental human needs
and interests
Strengths of the political frame...
…realistic
…practical
…addresses the reality of mixed motives,
conflict, and power struggles present in
the workplace
…highlights the need for principled
reflection and ethical action
Strengths of the symbolic frame...
…personal
…illuminates the importance of creating and
sustaining belief and meaning
…inspiring, meaningful, motivational
…focuses on the bonds uniting individuals
into cohesive groups that pursue a shared
purpose
While simultaneously...

managers and leaders to avoid each
frame’s limitations…
Structural frame limitations...
…impersonal and bureaucratic: views
workers as functionaries
…overly simplistic
…pessimistic about human nature
…inflexible and rigid for decision making
…overestimates the power of authority
…neglects fundamental human, political,
and cultural variables
Human resources frame limitations...
…naïve in its assessment of human nature
…overly optimistic about integrating
people, process, and technology
…not realistic for a fast-changing
environment
…neglects the power of structure
…neglects the realities of conflict and
scarce resources
Political frame limitations ...
…impersonal in dealing with people
…cynical view of human nature
…assumes conflict and power struggles
…reinforces conflict and mistrust
…sacrifices opportunities for rational
discourse, collaboration toward shared
goals, and hope in a positive future
Symbolic frame limitations...
…an overly abstract, vague, and elusive
concept
…impractical for use in the workplace
…can easily be manipulated
Using frame analysis positively...

effective managers and leaders
engage in activities…
…focused by their primary concerns
Using the structural frame...
effective managers and leaders are
whose primary concerns are
…scientists
…planners
…social architects
…good data
…honest analysis
…creative designs
…the best process
Using human resources theory...
effective managers and leaders are
whose primary concerns are
…personable and warm
…thoughtful and kind
…servants
…catalysts for growth
…challenging growth
…providing support
…expanding roles
…engendering and
sustaining good
will
Using political theory...
effective managers and leaders are
whose primary concerns are
…savvy and smart
…polished
…clear-headed
…advocates
…coalition-building
…negotiating gray
areas
…upholding the
common good
Using symbolic theory...
effective managers and leaders are
whose primary concerns are
…prophets
…poets
…priests
…substance
…framing experience
…inspiring
…pointing a way
Using frame analysis negatively...

ineffective managers and leaders
engage in activities…
…focused by their primary concerns
Abusing the structural frame...
ineffective managers and leaders are
…petty tyrants
…self-absorbed
…self-interested
whose primary concerns are
…micro-managing
…“snoopervising”
…fault finding
…ruling by fiat
…issuing memos
Abusing human resources frame...
ineffective managers and leaders are
whose primary concerns are
…linguini-spined
…wimps
…pushovers
…how people feel
…avoiding conflict
…letting others decide
…allowing events to
take their course
Abusing the political frame...
ineffective managers and leaders are
whose primary concerns are
…poker-faced
…con-artists
…hustlers
…self-interest
…plausible alibis
…masking fraud
…deception
Abusing the symbolic frame...
ineffective managers and leaders are
whose primary concerns are
…fanatics
…fools
…full of “b.s.”
…self-preservation
…style
…images
…propagandizing
The strength of “reframing”...
…is its focus upon the multiple uses
of organizational processes
 strategic planning
 decision making
 reorganizing
 evaluating
 goal setting
 communicating
 meetings
 motivating
PROCESS
strategic
planning
FRAME:
Structural
Human
Resources
strategies to gatherings to
set objectives promote
and
participation
coordinate
resources
Political
Symbolic
arenas to air
conflicts and
realign
power
rituals to
signal
responsibility,
produce
symbols, and
negotiate
meanings
PROCESS
decision
making
FRAME:
Structural
a rational
sequence to
produce right
decisions
Human
Resources
Political
Symbolic
an open
process to
produce
commitment
an
opportunity
to gain or
exercise
power
a ritual to
confirm values
and provide
opportunities
for bonding
PROCESS
reorganizing
FRAME:
Structural
realigning roles
and
responsibilities
to fit task and
environment
Human
Resources
Political
Symbolic
maintaining
balance
between
human
needs and
formal roles
redistributing
power and
form new
coalitions
a ritual
confirming core
values and
providing
opportunities
for bonding
PROCESS
evaluating
FRAME:
Structural
a way to
distribute
rewards or
penalties and
to control
performance
Human
Resources
Political
Symbolic
a process for
helping
individuals
to grow and
improve
an
opportunity
to exercise
power
an occasion to
play roles in a
shared ritual
PROCESS
approaching
conflict
FRAME:
Structural
to maintain
organizational
goals by
having
authorities
resolve conflict
Human
Resources
Political
Symbolic
to develop
relationships
by having
individuals
confront
conflict
to develop
power by
bargaining,
forcing, or
manipulating
others to win
to develop
shared values
and use
conflict to
negotiate
meaning
PROCESS
goal setting
FRAME:
Structural
to keep the
organization
headed in the
right
direction
Human
Resources
Political
Symbolic
to keep people
involved and
communication
open
to provide
opportunities
for individuals
and groups to
make their
interests
known
to develop
symbols and
shared
values
PROCESS
communicating
FRAME:
Structural
Human
Resources
transmitting exchanging
facts and
information,
information needs, and
feelings
Political
Symbolic
influencing or
manipulating
others
telling
stories
PROCESS
meetings
FRAME:
Structural
formal
occasions for
decision
making
Human
Resources
Political
informal
competitive
occasions for occasions to
involvement win points
and sharing
feelings
Symbolic
sacred
occasions to
celebrate and
transform
organizational
culture
PROCESS
motivation
FRAME:
Structural
economic
incentives
Human
Resources
Political
Symbolic
growth and
selfactualization
coercion,
symbols and
manipulation, celebrations
and seduction
However...

these frames, as well as the
interpretations they offer, imply that...
…control is a fact...when it is an illusion
…sensemaking is prospective…
when it is retrospective
…understanding is predictable…
not confusion (Weick, 1995)
The managerial/leadership reality...
 the
facts associated with life in
human organizations...
…run contrary to common
perceptions and opinion...
• First:
turbulence, not stability,
characterizes
organizational life.
• Second:
people in organizations
possess pluralistic, not
unitary, views about
organizations.
• Third:
intuition, not rationality,
proves to be of greater value
in the decision-making
process.
• Fourth:
managers/leaders make
few, not many, decisions.

the consequence of this organizational
reality is that managing and leading
human organizations is more like...
…“white-water rafting” (Sergiovanni, 1992)
…“muddling through” mazes of
messes (Lindblom, 1979)
…“garbage can decision making”
(Cohen, March, & Olsen, 1992)
MANAGING/LEADING ORGANIZATIONAL CHANGE
“...it should be considered that nothing is more
difficult to handle, more doubtful of success,
or more dangerous to manage, than to put
oneself at the head of introducing new orders.
For the introducer has all those who benefit
from the old orders as enemies, and he has
lukewarm defenders in all those who might
benefit from the new orders.”
Machiavelli, The Prince, 1985, p. 23
The question, then, is...
What does successful
and
involve and require?
A lesson to remember...
 successful
managers and leaders...
 successful
managers and leaders...
For managers and leaders...

the challenge is not so much
“reframing” the problems impacting
organizational functioning (Bolman
& Deal, 1997)...
…and actingbased on calculations
and contingencieswhether to
manage/lead through participation,
delegation, selling, or telling
(Hersey & Blanchard, 1977)

instead, managing/leading human
organizations is a matter of the
human intellect and creative spirit…
…a process of “scenario building”
…in an overall effort directed at
improving organizational functioning
Scenario building...
a
methodology to assess
organizational functioning...
...by developing unitary solutions
(i.e., “scenarios”) designed from
an accurate diagnosis of the
situation (i.e., “framing”)
 then…
...evaluating the strengths and
weaknesses associated with
each scenario
...envisioning probable outcomes
associated with each scenario

forging a pathway…
...maximizing the positive
outcomes
…and minimizing the negative
limitations associated with each
scenario
 that
is...
...to formulate a principled plan of
action to guide organizational
decision making
…and acting courageously to
implement the plan in the face
of many obstacles (McWhinney,
1992)
and
require...
…women and men who:
 understand the organizational context
 exhibit an abiding concern for people
and task
 are ethical and virtuous in word and act

who possess attributes and
competencies:
task competence
intelligence
decisiveness
vision
commitment
passion
inspire trust
take risks
are flexible
self-confident
understanding
courageous
 these
innate and learned attributes
and competencies enable
managers and leaders...
...to engage in a process of self
change
…enabling them to influence
others by setting an example
With the desired outcome...
 that
people in organizations learn
and feel free to act...
 professionally
 cooperatively
 purposefully
 ethically
...by using their personal authority and power
to enact the organization’s purpose through
their individual projects.
Successful scenarios...

evidence structural thinking, as
managers and leaders...
1) do their homework
2) incessantly reconsider the
relationship of structure, strategy,
and environment
3) focus on implementation
4) experiment, evaluate, and adapt to
achieve best practice (Weber, 1911)

evidence managers considering
people and their needs...
1) believe in people and communicate
this belief
2) are visible and accessible
3) experience delight when others act
purposefully, that is, with authority
and power

reflect astute politics as managers
and leaders...
1) clarify what they want and what
they can get
2) assess the distribution of power
and interests
3) build linkages and relationships
with key stakeholders

all, the while...
…seeking to persuade, first;
…engaging in negotiations, second;
…using coercion, only if necessary.

demonstrate culture building, as
managers and leaders use symbols...
1) to attract the attention of others
2) to frame experience so others can
interpret it
3) to communicate a compelling vision
4) to tell meaningful stories that
motivate

thereby producing...
…a synergy of cooperative effort
(Barnard, 1938) through normative
compliance (Etzioni, 1975)

in the service of...
…organizational purpose (Barnard,
1938)
…and the ethics of both the leader and
the led (Aristotle, 1958; Barnard,
1938; Chaleff, 1995; DuPree, 1992,
Kelley, 1988)
This module has focused on...
scenario building
…and how managers and leaders use
their minds and spirit to foster
successful organizational change
efforts.
The next module will focus on...
improving leadership practice
...and how successful managers and
leaders integrate reflective practice,
conceptual pluralism, and ethical
decision making in practice episodes.
References

Aristotle. (1958). The Nicomachean ethics (W. D. Ross,
Trans.). In J. D. Kaplan (Ed.), The pocket Aristotle
(pp. 158-274). New York: Simon & Schuster.
 Barnard, C. I. (1938/1968). The functions of the
executive. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
 Bolman, L. G., & Deal, T. E. (1997). Reframing
organizations: Artistry, choice and leadership (2nd edition).
San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
 Chaleff, I. (1995). The courageous follower: Standing up
to and for our leaders. San Francisco, CA: BerrettKoehler Publishers.





Cohen, M. D., March, J. G., & Olsen, J. P. (1992). A
garbage can model of organizational choice.
Administrative Science Quarterly, 17(1), 1-25.
Etzioni, A. (1975). A comparative analysis of complex
organizations. New York: Free Press.
DePree, M. (1992). Leadership jazz. New York:
Currency Doubleday.
Hersey, P., & Blanchard, K. (1977). Management of
organization behavior: Utilizing human resources.
Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Kelley, R. E. (1988, Nov-Dec). In praise of followers.
Harvard Business Review, 66, 142-148.






Lindblom, C. E. (1979). Still muddling, not yet through.
Public Administration Review, 39, 517-526.
Machiavelli, N. (1985). The prince (H. C. Mansfield, Trans.).
Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
McWhinney, W. (1992). Paths of change: Strategic choices
for organizations and society. Newbury Park, CA: Sage
Publications.
Sergiovanni, T. J. (1992). Reflections on administrative
theory and practice in schools. Educational Administration
Quarterly, 28(3), 304-313.
Taylor, F. W. (1911/1967). The principles of scientific
management. New York: W. W. Norton.
Weick, K. E. (1995). Sensemaking in organizations.
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.