For the Academy of Management annual 2000 meeting, I collaborated with a colleague to create a sculpture titled “Times on my Mind,” which we referred to by the working name “The Head.” This article reflects on this collaboration and, using this experience as a case study, offers a typology of individual collaborative frames. These frames—negotiation, power, and knowledge—each offer a different model of collaboration, with different implications for decision making, vision, ownership, and the role of inquiry.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Ancona, D.
, & Caldwell, D. (1998). Rethinking team composition from the outside in. In D. H. Gruenfeld (Ed.), Research on managing groups and teams (Vol. 1, pp. 21-37). Stamford, CT: JAI.
2.
Argyris, C.
, Putnam, R., & Smith, D. M. (1985). Action science. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
3.
Argyris, C.
, & Schon, D. (1978). Organizational learning: Atheory of action perspective. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
4.
Axelrod, R.
(1976). The structure of decision: The cognitive maps of political elites. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
5.
Barnett, J. E.
(1998). Time’s pendulum. San Diego, CA: Harcourt Brace.
6.
Bartunek, J.
, & Moch, M. K. (1987). First-order, second-order, and third-order change and organizational development: A cognitive approach. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 23(4), 483-501.
7.
Fisher, D.
, & Torbert, W. R. (1995). Personal and organizational transformations. London: McGraw-Hill.
8.
Gioia, D. A.
, & Manz, C. C. (1985). Linking cognition and behavior: A script processing interpretation of vicarious learning. Academy of Management Review, 10(3), 527-539.
9.
Goffman, E.
(1974). Frame analysis. Boston: Northeastern University Press.
10.
Greenhalgh, L.
, & Gilkey, R. W. (1993). The effect of relationship orientation on negotiators: Cognitions and tactics. Group Decision and Negotiation, 2(2), 167-167.
11.
Hare, A. P.
, Borgatta, E. F., & Bales, R. (Eds.). (1965). Small groups: Studies in social interaction. New York: Knopf.
12.
Jehn, K. A.
(1995). A multimethod examination of the benefits and detriments of intragroup conflict. Administrative Science Quarterly, 40(2), 256-283.
13.
Kahneman, D.
, & Tversky, A. (1979). Prospect theory: An analysis of decision under risk. Econometrica, 47, 263-291.
14.
March, J. G.
, & Simon, H. A. (1958). Organizations. New York: John Wiley.
15.
Nielsen, R.
, & Bartunek, J. (1996). Opening narrow, routinized schemata to ethical stakeholder consciousness and action. Business and Society, 35(4), 483-519.
16.
Pinkley, R. L.
(1990). Dimensions of conflict frames: Disputant interpretations of conflict. Journal of Applied Psychology, 75, 117-126.
17.
Pinkley, R. L.
, & Northcraft, G. B. (1994). Conflict frames of reference: Implications for dispute processes and outcomes. Academy of Management Journal, 37(1), 193-205.
18.
Schein, E.
(1985). Organizational culture and leadership. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
19.
Senge, P.
(1990). The fifth discipline. New York: Doubleday/Currency.
20.
Sondak, H.
, & Moore, M. C. (1993). Relationship frames and cooperation. Group Decision and Negotiation, 2, 103-118.
21.
Stogdill, R. M.
, & Coons, A. F. (Eds.). (1957). Leader behavior: Its description and measurement. Columbus: Ohio State University Bureau of Business Research.
22.
Torbert, W.
(2000). Transforming social science: Integrating quantitative, qualitative, and action research. In F. T. Sherman & W. R. Torbert (Eds.), Transforming social inquiry, transforming social action. Norwell, MA: Kluwer Academic.
23.
Tversky, A.
, & Kahneman, D. (1981). The framing of decisions and the psychology of choice. Science, 211, 453-458.
24.
Valley, K. L.
, Neale, M. A., & Mannix, E. A. (1995). Friends, lovers, colleagues, strangers: The effects of relationships on the process and outcome of dyadic relations. In R. J. Bies, R. J. Lewicki, & H. S. Blair (Eds.), Research on negotiation in organizations (pp. 65-93). Greenwich, CT: JAI.
25.
Weick, K.
, & Bougon, M. G. (1986). Organizations as cognitive maps: Charting ways to success and failure. In H. P. Sims & D. A. Gioia (Eds.), The thinking organization. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
