Former Community – We Moved

🆕 Coached community here, for posts & feedback public community here.

ForumPublic Forum: Power DynamicsIs Having Good Frame Control Duri …

Please or Register to create posts and topics.

Is Having Good Frame Control During Meetings Important to Maintain Status?

#1 · February 6, 2021, 8:44 am

Quote from Matthew Whitewood on February 6, 2021, 8:44 am
I feel that I am losing status during meetings despite bringing the most tangible plans and value to the table.
It seems that being dominant and having good frame control during meetings could be more important for power negotiation rather than the actual value, preparation and planning.
Sometimes, a person can take my idea and reshape the idea to come across as more experienced or dominant.
Ideas should be open and fluid, but the status and credit should be shared equally among the team.
One of the partners is wittier and thinks faster during the meetings.
As such, even though I bring more actual preparation and value to the meetings, he comes across as more powerful and experienced.
I feel that it is in a gamey manner instead of actual value brought to the table.
In a way, he seems experienced because he spins what people bring to the table, uses the philosopher's frame, and then summarises the discussions.
The problem is that this not necessarily moves the team forward.
It looks powerful for him.
Because I am much more prepared, I can sometimes rebuke his frame and move the other partner onto my side through solid, logical premises.
The issue is that there are many grey areas to figure out, and I am unable to push through the more prepared, logical plans.
I'm thinking that, if I bring this up directly to him, it may not be the best way to resolve this.
I'm not sure if this is something I should be concerned about.
In the sense, whether this perception of power during meetings is important among business partners.
I think if other board members come into play in the future, this would get even more important.
Power Scalping in Humorous Situations
One thing I realised is that he sometimes does power scalping.
In the sense, we are joking around.
I make a joke, and he gives a comment that it's time to be serious.
Him: I'm not sure if it's safe to have these conversations on these video conferencing platforms.
Me: Yeah man, these monopolies are controlling our data.
Sometimes I don't like these monopolies.
It's good that we have these other smaller companies giving us options.
Him: Matthew, now it's not the time for revolutionary talk.
(Then quickly moves on to talk about grants.)
Philosopher's Frame Control
He does a lot of subtle frame control which makes it hard to point out directly.
And he also employs the philosopher's frame quite a bit.
When I talk about concrete marketing techniques that we could test out for example.
Here is an example:
Me: (shows an example of what we can do while talking about it)
Him: This is something we need to think about for the long term.
We can't just make one instance of it.
There needs to be a consistent effort.
Me: Yeah, that's why I'm presenting several options for us to test and then decide upon which one to go for in the long term.
It's also not something that we can solely draw a conclusion from a logical discussion.
Him: What do you think (other person's name)?
I think that we should spend some time thinking through this.
Other Person: Yeah, I'm not sure as well.
We need something that resonates with the local audience.
The issue here is that we don't have anything in place, and no one is proposing or testing out something better.
So we need to start somewhere and test out which is best.
We cannot have 100 YouTube videos right from the start.
Then the conversation keeps dying, nothing is being tested, and things are not progressing.
But he looks powerful because he "carefully considers" our options.
Possible Options
I generally don't like to force my frames during meetings and give people the chance to have other perspectives.
In this case, I feel that it may be necessary for me to actively employ frame control techniques to keep the meeting productive and defend my own authority.
Be more dominant: talk over, interrupt, focus more on talking with the other partner

I feel that I am losing status during meetings despite bringing the most tangible plans and value to the table.
It seems that being dominant and having good frame control during meetings could be more important for power negotiation rather than the actual value, preparation and planning.

Sometimes, a person can take my idea and reshape the idea to come across as more experienced or dominant.
Ideas should be open and fluid, but the status and credit should be shared equally among the team.

One of the partners is wittier and thinks faster during the meetings.
As such, even though I bring more actual preparation and value to the meetings, he comes across as more powerful and experienced.
I feel that it is in a gamey manner instead of actual value brought to the table.

In a way, he seems experienced because he spins what people bring to the table, uses the philosopher's frame, and then summarises the discussions.
The problem is that this not necessarily moves the team forward.
It looks powerful for him.

Because I am much more prepared, I can sometimes rebuke his frame and move the other partner onto my side through solid, logical premises.
The issue is that there are many grey areas to figure out, and I am unable to push through the more prepared, logical plans.

I'm thinking that, if I bring this up directly to him, it may not be the best way to resolve this.

I'm not sure if this is something I should be concerned about.
In the sense, whether this perception of power during meetings is important among business partners.
I think if other board members come into play in the future, this would get even more important.

Power Scalping in Humorous Situations

One thing I realised is that he sometimes does power scalping.
In the sense, we are joking around.
I make a joke, and he gives a comment that it's time to be serious.

Him: I'm not sure if it's safe to have these conversations on these video conferencing platforms.
Me: Yeah man, these monopolies are controlling our data.
Sometimes I don't like these monopolies.
It's good that we have these other smaller companies giving us options.
Him: Matthew, now it's not the time for revolutionary talk.
(Then quickly moves on to talk about grants.)

Philosopher's Frame Control

He does a lot of subtle frame control which makes it hard to point out directly.
And he also employs the philosopher's frame quite a bit.

When I talk about concrete marketing techniques that we could test out for example.
Here is an example:

Me: (shows an example of what we can do while talking about it)
Him: This is something we need to think about for the long term.
We can't just make one instance of it.
There needs to be a consistent effort.
Me: Yeah, that's why I'm presenting several options for us to test and then decide upon which one to go for in the long term.
It's also not something that we can solely draw a conclusion from a logical discussion.
Him: What do you think (other person's name)?
I think that we should spend some time thinking through this.
Other Person: Yeah, I'm not sure as well.
We need something that resonates with the local audience.

The issue here is that we don't have anything in place, and no one is proposing or testing out something better.
So we need to start somewhere and test out which is best.

We cannot have 100 YouTube videos right from the start.
Then the conversation keeps dying, nothing is being tested, and things are not progressing.
But he looks powerful because he "carefully considers" our options.

Possible Options

I generally don't like to force my frames during meetings and give people the chance to have other perspectives.
In this case, I feel that it may be necessary for me to actively employ frame control techniques to keep the meeting productive and defend my own authority.
Be more dominant: talk over, interrupt, focus more on talking with the other partner

#2 · March 12, 2021, 7:06 pm

Hey Matthew,

To answer your questions:

Yes, it's absolutely important.
Not so much "frame control" in the specific, but "power dynamics" in general. Who gets listened to is 30% who has great ideas and inputs, and 70% who comes across as the leader.

Even if there is an expert, if that expert is not the leader, he only gets listened to as the "tech expert" for the leader to make the final decision (see the entry lesson in the career module).

In the sense, whether this perception of power during meetings is important among business partners.

I think it asbolutely is.

Especially going forward, if the business goes well, you'd eventually have to decide who becomes CEO (and who gets the biggest share of the revenues if you haven't decided yet).

For those frame examples, feel free to open a new thread for each (maybe give it some time gap between the two so they don't get lost).

In the first one, I wouldn't necessarily disagree with the dominant guy: its' best to keep things factual if it's a business meeting.

In the second one, there seems to be a lack of leadership.

Overall, it feels like this group needs a stronger leader to drive things forward.
That dominant guy is not helping, but it takes someone to step up, reach decisions, assign tasks, do things.

John Freeman has reacted to this post.

Community, new content and Confidence University now available here.

#3 · March 12, 2021, 11:29 pm

Haven't read the whole post yet. However I agree with Lucio's diagnosis: big power vacuum with nobody stepping up. You could be this person with work but you need to have a plan to develop your skills. It takes time but it's worth it. And even if you don't reach leadership in this situation, you will learn a lot for the next situation. A leader with a will to lead and a will to learn how to lead is what is needed in this situation. It's a matter of time frame, it takes months to years to acquire those skills not a few weeks. So I would start with the basics (social skills) and build my skills up. At least that is what I'm doing. Maybe do what I do: focus on mastering PU (first 5 modules).

Lucio Buffalmano has reacted to this post.

#4 · March 13, 2021, 3:57 am

Quote from Matthew Whitewood on March 13, 2021, 3:57 am
Thanks Lucio and John for the feedback.
And for re-surfacing this thread after it got lost for a while.
This was quite sometime back.
The main issues that I reflected upon the time between and based on your feedback are
Spending too much time coming out with ideas for the team.
As you said, this is only 30%.
The main responsibility of a leader is to get people to contribute towards a common direction and objective.
I was not spending enough time on how each person in the team can contribute to the team.
Failing to talk to each person individually even if the core group is 3 people.
Understanding each person individually and getting buy-in separately from each person would allow me to find the "fit" for each person in the group better.
Meetings should not be the only point where decisions are made and things move forward.
It is often too "messy" to get buy-in during a meeting because it is a group dynamic and everyone has their own perspectives, preferences & agenda.
Getting boiled down in tasks.
And, as such, not having enough time to think for the team.
This goes hand-in-hand with the failure to delegate properly to others.
It becomes a vicious cycle.
I lose sight of the team dynamics and have less & less time to plan for the team.
I have been distracted by the power moves of the dominant person.
I need to keep myself and the team focused on the goals.
Quote from Lucio Buffalmano on March 12, 2021, 7:06 pm
Yes, it's absolutely important.
Not so much "frame control" in the specific, but "power dynamics" in general. Who gets listened to is 30% who has great ideas and inputs, and 70% who comes across as the leader.
I am thinking about this further.
Would coming across as the leader be as important as leading well?
I'm thinking that it's possible to drive the team forward without having a solid impression of being a leader.
A more under the radar approach.
Maybe this would hurt the general team.
Because, if you are genuinely good at leading in a specific circumstance, it's good to be seen as being the leader.
Other Points - Maybe to Expand in Other Threads
Quote from Lucio Buffalmano on March 12, 2021, 7:06 pm
In the sense, whether this perception of power during meetings is important among business partners.
I think it asbolutely is.
Especially going forward, if the business goes well, you'd eventually have to decide who becomes CEO (and who gets the biggest share of the revenues if you haven't decided yet).
Should the CEO get the biggest share of the business and the revenues?
We were planning to split equally.
Maybe this is not optimal.
John's Points on Leadership and Learning to Lead
Quote from John Freeman on March 12, 2021, 11:29 pm
A leader with a will to lead and a will to learn how to lead is what is needed in this situation.
I very much want to lead in this circumstance.
I think that I'm not doing this right as Lucio and John have advised and based on my reflected points.
Quote from John Freeman on March 12, 2021, 11:29 pm
It's a matter of time frame, it takes months to years to acquire those skills not a few weeks. So I would start with the basics (social skills) and build my skills up. At least that is what I'm doing. Maybe do what I do: focus on mastering PU (first 5 modules).
Thanks for the advice, John. I agree.
I have been doing the same as you since we have been chatting on the forum.
Every time I go through the first 5 modules, I find something new because there's something new that I experienced, reflected upon and analysed.
I think it will take many years as you said to get better at leadership.
I have previous experience in leadership positions, but I can still see many areas in which I need to improve.
Previously, I was unsure how to get better at leadership.
I was taking courses, working on vocals & communication and analysing.
But I didn't have any framework to work with, so sometimes I don't even progress in the right direction.
Power University does help a lot.

Thanks Lucio and John for the feedback.
And for re-surfacing this thread after it got lost for a while.

This was quite sometime back.
The main issues that I reflected upon the time between and based on your feedback are

Spending too much time coming out with ideas for the team.
As you said, this is only 30%.
The main responsibility of a leader is to get people to contribute towards a common direction and objective.
I was not spending enough time on how each person in the team can contribute to the team.
Failing to talk to each person individually even if the core group is 3 people.
Understanding each person individually and getting buy-in separately from each person would allow me to find the "fit" for each person in the group better.
Meetings should not be the only point where decisions are made and things move forward.
It is often too "messy" to get buy-in during a meeting because it is a group dynamic and everyone has their own perspectives, preferences & agenda.
Getting boiled down in tasks.
And, as such, not having enough time to think for the team.
This goes hand-in-hand with the failure to delegate properly to others.
It becomes a vicious cycle.
I lose sight of the team dynamics and have less & less time to plan for the team.
I have been distracted by the power moves of the dominant person.
I need to keep myself and the team focused on the goals.

Quote from Lucio Buffalmano on March 12, 2021, 7:06 pm
Yes, it's absolutely important.
Not so much "frame control" in the specific, but "power dynamics" in general. Who gets listened to is 30% who has great ideas and inputs, and 70% who comes across as the leader.

I am thinking about this further.
Would coming across as the leader be as important as leading well?

I'm thinking that it's possible to drive the team forward without having a solid impression of being a leader.
A more under the radar approach.
Maybe this would hurt the general team.
Because, if you are genuinely good at leading in a specific circumstance, it's good to be seen as being the leader.

Other Points - Maybe to Expand in Other Threads

Quote from Lucio Buffalmano on March 12, 2021, 7:06 pm
In the sense, whether this perception of power during meetings is important among business partners.
I think it asbolutely is.
Especially going forward, if the business goes well, you'd eventually have to decide who becomes CEO (and who gets the biggest share of the revenues if you haven't decided yet).

Should the CEO get the biggest share of the business and the revenues?
We were planning to split equally.
Maybe this is not optimal.

John's Points on Leadership and Learning to Lead

Quote from John Freeman on March 12, 2021, 11:29 pm
A leader with a will to lead and a will to learn how to lead is what is needed in this situation.

I very much want to lead in this circumstance.
I think that I'm not doing this right as Lucio and John have advised and based on my reflected points.

Quote from John Freeman on March 12, 2021, 11:29 pm
It's a matter of time frame, it takes months to years to acquire those skills not a few weeks. So I would start with the basics (social skills) and build my skills up. At least that is what I'm doing. Maybe do what I do: focus on mastering PU (first 5 modules).

Thanks for the advice, John. I agree.
I have been doing the same as you since we have been chatting on the forum.
Every time I go through the first 5 modules, I find something new because there's something new that I experienced, reflected upon and analysed.

I think it will take many years as you said to get better at leadership.
I have previous experience in leadership positions, but I can still see many areas in which I need to improve.

Previously, I was unsure how to get better at leadership.
I was taking courses, working on vocals & communication and analysing.
But I didn't have any framework to work with, so sometimes I don't even progress in the right direction.
Power University does help a lot.

John Freeman has reacted to this post.

#5 · March 13, 2021, 5:00 am

Matthew,

I think a lot of the chips falls automatically into place when:

You want to make things happen
You want to make those things happen quickly
You take responsibility for making those things happen
Everything else is in service of making those things happen

I'm looking at it from the outside, so I might be very wrong.

But it sounds like right now those meetings are dangerously close to chats.
I've been in several groups where I felt like "these people are just chatting here".

You want to avoid those at all costs -OK, maybe just one, just once, to learn the dynamics-.

It takes someone who craves to build a buisness, and who takes the leadership to make it happen. Let it be you.
That means that the next meeting you want clear tasks assigned, with timelines. At the meeting after that, you check what came out of it, what results, if any.

If those people are not able or willing to make things happen, ditch them: they're wasting your time.

Matthew Whitewood and John Freeman have reacted to this post.

Community, new content and Confidence University now available here.

#6 · March 13, 2021, 6:45 am

Quote from Lucio Buffalmano on March 13, 2021, 5:00 am
I'm looking at it from the outside, so I might be very wrong.
But it sounds like right now those meetings are dangerously close to chats.
I've been in several groups where I felt like "these people are just chatting here".
You want to avoid those at all costs -OK, maybe just one, just once, to learn the dynamics-.

To clarify this point while I spend time reflecting upon the others, it feels like 80% business talk and 20% chatting.
I included more "chatting" portions because I felt frustrated by those.
I feel that you are right. It's not good.
I find that to build a business, founders need to have a crazy zeal to make things happen.
Especially at the start when there's nothing.
It cannot be too casual.

Quote from Lucio Buffalmano on March 13, 2021, 5:00 am
I think a lot of the chips falls automatically into place when:
You want to make things happen
You want to make those things happen quickly
You take responsibility for making those things happen
Everything else is in service of making those things happen

Thanks, this framework helps.
Individually, I have been doing this 4.
I'm going to step up to make these 4 points on the team level.

Quote from Lucio Buffalmano on March 13, 2021, 5:00 am
It takes someone who craves to build a buisness, and who takes the leadership to make it happen. Let it be you.
That means that the next meeting you want clear tasks assigned, with timelines. At the meeting after that, you check what came out of it, what results, if any.

I'm going to do that for today's meeting.
I appreciate the advice.

Lucio Buffalmano has reacted to this post.

#7 · March 13, 2021, 7:44 am

Yes, you guys are on the money.

Leadership is 80% about recruitment. I’m making up this number but you see my point. If your team is made up of driven, benevolent, humble and hard-working individual: how hard do you think it will be to work together towards a common goal? Exactly.

That’s why I left my band in the past and I’m working so hard to get rid of the two value-takers in my board game groups. It changes everything. Before Lucio’s message I was not aware that you had the option to change the members of the group or simply stop collaborating with them.

If things are not moving forward despite your best efforts then I would also conclude to a recruitment problem.

Matthew Whitewood has reacted to this post.

#8 · March 13, 2021, 8:01 am

Quote from John Freeman on March 13, 2021, 7:44 am
Leadership is 80% about recruitment. I’m making up this number but you see my point. If your team is made up of driven, benevolent, humble and hard-working individual: how hard do you think it will be to work together towards a common goal? Exactly.
That’s why I left my band in the past and I’m working so hard to get rid of the two value-takers in my board game groups. It changes everything. Before Lucio’s message I was not aware that you had the option to change the members of the group or simply stop collaborating with them.
If things are not moving forward despite your best efforts then I would also conclude to a recruitment problem.

Thanks John, I appreciate the advice.
Recruitment is very important.
As you say, getting the right people in place is half the battle won.

You don't need to "motivate" driven, high-quality people.
In fact, stepping away and giving more space could be better.

Lucio: If those people are not able or willing to make things happen, ditch them: they're wasting your time.
John: If things are not moving forward despite your best efforts then I would also conclude to a recruitment problem.

Thanks for this advice.
Sometimes you have to stop working with a person.
Your best efforts can only extend so far.

#9 · March 13, 2021, 10:23 am

Definitely. Soar with the eagles! That is why there is the expression « leaders create leaders not followers ». Pro-social leaders pull up others and empower them. They understand that the group is only as strong as the weakest individual. So if the weakest individual become stronger the group as a whole becomes stronger.

However (character disturbance), there is a difference between helping and enabling. Helping means to give a hand to someone who’s willing to be helped. If they’re not, then we’re wasting our time and energy.

This is where strategy and machiavellianism comes into play: as a pro-social leader, where does your energy yields the best ROI for the goals you have for the group/organization?

Answering this question might help you.

However, be aware that we have a hardwired negative response to loss (loss aversion), so it’s emotionally difficult for people to cut their losses and move on.

Matthew Whitewood has reacted to this post.

#10 · March 13, 2021, 4:43 pm

Quote from Matthew Whitewood on March 13, 2021, 4:43 pm
Quote from Lucio Buffalmano on March 13, 2021, 5:00 am
It takes someone who craves to build a buisness, and who takes the leadership to make it happen. Let it be you.
That means that the next meeting you want clear tasks assigned, with timelines. At the meeting after that, you check what came out of it, what results, if any.
If those people are not able or willing to make things happen, ditch them: they're wasting your time.
Lucio, I stepped up deliberately today and consciously maintained the focus in the meeting.
I went in with a lot of preparation & intention to assign tasks and move things forward in a clear direction.
It was very productive.
We made a lot of productive decisions.
Now we are moving forward with much more clarity.
Quote from John Freeman on March 13, 2021, 10:23 am
However (character disturbance), there is a difference between helping and enabling. Helping means to give a hand to someone who’s willing to be helped. If they’re not, then we’re wasting our time and energy.
Stepped up in the meeting today.
Enabled the team by explaining the relevant objectives and how to achieve the objectives.
I drove some points repeatedly to ensure things are clear on how to move forward.
Thank you for your advice.
Quote from John Freeman on March 13, 2021, 10:23 am
This is where strategy and machiavellianism comes into play: as a pro-social leader, where does your energy yields the best ROI for the goals you have for the group/organization?
I talked about the time commitment.
And what we should prioritise to move things forward.
Thanks for this advice as well.
Key Takeaway
I think that the team is not the most optimal.
But when I step up to lead with preparation and clarity, things can move forward.
They seem to value my commitment to making things happen.
Today, I stepped up on discussing the bottlenecks to moving forward, get their inputs on how to move forward on their area of expertise, and provide the subsequent steps for each of us to move forward.
The issue seems that this group requires more deliberate leading because people would not initiate to explore and understand what is the best way forward.
My approach of assigning an area of responsibility like marketing campaign for the next 2 weeks does not work very well.
It seems that they would not know what to do.
However, they have certain knowledge in the country and industry that I do not have.
In the sense, they are experts.
As Lucio says, expertise does not automatically translate into taking initiative and having the drive to move things forward.
Thank you Lucio.
It looks like I'm the person who has to consciously step up and make things happen.
And sometimes break down tasks to the level where people are comfortable executing.

Quote from Lucio Buffalmano on March 13, 2021, 5:00 am
It takes someone who craves to build a buisness, and who takes the leadership to make it happen. Let it be you.
That means that the next meeting you want clear tasks assigned, with timelines. At the meeting after that, you check what came out of it, what results, if any.
If those people are not able or willing to make things happen, ditch them: they're wasting your time.

Lucio, I stepped up deliberately today and consciously maintained the focus in the meeting.
I went in with a lot of preparation & intention to assign tasks and move things forward in a clear direction.
It was very productive.

We made a lot of productive decisions.
Now we are moving forward with much more clarity.

Quote from John Freeman on March 13, 2021, 10:23 am
However (character disturbance), there is a difference between helping and enabling. Helping means to give a hand to someone who’s willing to be helped. If they’re not, then we’re wasting our time and energy.

Stepped up in the meeting today.
Enabled the team by explaining the relevant objectives and how to achieve the objectives.
I drove some points repeatedly to ensure things are clear on how to move forward.
Thank you for your advice.

Quote from John Freeman on March 13, 2021, 10:23 am
This is where strategy and machiavellianism comes into play: as a pro-social leader, where does your energy yields the best ROI for the goals you have for the group/organization?

I talked about the time commitment.
And what we should prioritise to move things forward.
Thanks for this advice as well.

Key Takeaway

I think that the team is not the most optimal.
But when I step up to lead with preparation and clarity, things can move forward.

They seem to value my commitment to making things happen.
Today, I stepped up on discussing the bottlenecks to moving forward, get their inputs on how to move forward on their area of expertise, and provide the subsequent steps for each of us to move forward.

The issue seems that this group requires more deliberate leading because people would not initiate to explore and understand what is the best way forward.
My approach of assigning an area of responsibility like marketing campaign for the next 2 weeks does not work very well.
It seems that they would not know what to do.

However, they have certain knowledge in the country and industry that I do not have.
In the sense, they are experts.
As Lucio says, expertise does not automatically translate into taking initiative and having the drive to move things forward.

Thank you Lucio.
It looks like I'm the person who has to consciously step up and make things happen.
And sometimes break down tasks to the level where people are comfortable executing.

Lucio Buffalmano and Transitioned have reacted to this post.