There is side to managing relationships that is less thought about but really important. This is the art of framing. The process by which you can lead someone from a style that seems natural and comfortable to him or her rather than in a way that feels awkward or uncomfortable. Like any parent who has to lead their children, they will understand that you cannot adopt a ‘one size fits all’ approach. I know this with the trouble I have in trying to get Lucy to do her chores or keep her bedroom tidy. Each child will have a preferred style or way of engaging with you and you will be far more successful if you are able to adopt and deliver your message in their preferred frame or style.

As a corporate leader, think of ten people who you lead, either directly or through a peer basis. There might be three people who you are able to work really well with and you have an effective working relationship. There might be four you get along with and generally have an OK relationship. And there might be three you really struggle to get to grips with. You give instructions and they don’t understand them; they seem to dissent with your views or just directly contravene what you ask for. The easy way out is to just assume that these people are difficult and that the easiest solution is to move them into someone else’s area as soon as possible. But just maybe the problem is that you see the world different from them. Just maybe you both think, feel and act in different ways and the conflict is more a result of differing views rather than any real desire to upset or disobey you.

For example, imagine two people, one an avid vegetarian and the other a passionate meat eater, cooking a meal together. If their personal viewpoints are understood, then it will be possible to cook a meal that satisfies both their needs. However, if their views remain unspoken, then at best preparation of the meal will turn into a fiasco. At worst there will be a fight as they both strive to assert their frame of reference.

This mis-alignment happens because people often do not understand how they map the world, let alone how other people build their own maps. All people filter the world according to their experiences, values and beliefs. These perceptual filters are invisible to the owner and are only made visible by a process of comparison, feedback or reflection. We use filtersa because we need to selectively sift out certain elements of information that hits us from the environment because we can only physically process so much data.

It is important to manage how your filters impact upon your leadership style. First, understand and calibrate your own perceptual filters. Second, develop the capacity to quickly diagnose other people’s filters. This diagnoses and calibration often has to take place over a coffee or game of golf, since the socialization phase of a new relationship is relatively short. You must become adept at listening to verbal clues, spotting visual indicators and monitoring the other person’s environment so as to take initial stabs at their perceptual filters. This data is then used in the ongoing relationship to verify your judgments.

The MPH framework is designed to help you build a relationship bridge. This bridge will allow you to step outside your frame of reference and walk across it to see how others see the world. The bridge building concept is absolutely critical because we have to work on the principal that we all live on different banks of the river and as such have different views of the landscape. Where we try to work with someone who has a different frame of the world then we are generally doomed to fall into a relationship driven by conflict and confusion unless we are prepared to reframe how we present ourselves to them.

MPH Filters

Three of the more common filters we use to make sense of the world are:

	Magnitude - or how we use information to make sense of life, some will prefer to spend time looking at the detail of a situation whereas others will seek to climb up to a conceptual or strategic level.
	Period – some people will start to consider a situation using the question ‘what has happened’ and tend to start from the past or history as a basis to understand something. Others will want to consider what is going to happen and work from a future perspective
	Holistic – We all tend to have a base preference for dealing with the world in relationship to the Heart, Head or Hand model. Some people take the emotional angle, others will look for the logic and others will want to deal with the pragmatic issues.

No one filter is right or wrong. They are just indications of the preferences that people have in the way they make sense of things. If we are to build a bridge with someone it is important that we understand his or her preference and have a clear strategy or process or approach to help us across the bridge to see his or her worldview.

One simple way to undertake the bridging process is to use the MPH model. This is a simple framework that will rapidly allow you to map how someone views the world and how you can see the world they see and help him or her to see yours.

For each of the three filters (Magnitude, Period and Holistic) there are three possible biases or favoured preferences that an individual might use.

Magnitude filters

This filter describes how people take information in from the outside world. It defines what size of information they like to take in. Do they chunk up to look at the big picture or if they chunk down to consider the detail of a situation.

	*Meta*- This person will tend to look at high level information. Rather than focus on the detail and will chunk up to look for the high level view. So imagine you have just met someone at a conference and you are talking about the last speaker. Their conversation will be focused on how the person ideas might fit with the industry view or they might be relating it to a general economic or academic theory.
	*Macro* – This filter is more focused on the mid-point view of the world. They don’t want to climb into the stratosphere of concept and don’t want to get into the detail of a problem. They might be pragmatic and look for just enough information to form a view but not too much to get bogged down in the detail. If you were talking with someone at a conference they might talk about the general aspects of the last speaker, not to climb into the grand concepts or pick out the specific detail, just to take the whole presentation at the level it was offered.
	*Micro* – The micro person is more concerned with the detail of a situation, they will seek out the particular item within a situation because they want to really understand what is going on. Again if you were to meet someone at a conference with this filter they might reflect on the previous speaker and climb inside one core aspect of the presentation. They would focus on the detail from one slide and really want to question and build an opinion based on the fine detail.

Period Filters

The time filter indicates where people initially go to gather data or present a view of the world:

	*Past* – This person will prefer to focus initially on what has happened previously and then move into what is happening and might then ask what is going into happen. They are more comfortable talking about the things that have occurred, bring their learning from previous experiences, possibly because they believe the past is a good predictor of the future
	*Present* – Will have a preference to focus on what is going on at the moment. What is happening here and now will be their primary concern. They might be happy to talk about what has happened and where they are going, but it isn’t quite as sexy for them as what is going on now
	*Projected*- Very much a vision or futures person. Will try to link what is being talked about with their projections for the next stage in their life. Will be happy to look at past and present actions but might tend to measure them against how they fit into the future view.

Holistic Filters

If we consider any action that we take then it can be broken into three aspects, how we think, feel and behave - otherwise know as heart, head and hands. In a perfect world then we would use all three in harmony, however, we often have a preference for one of the three filters.

	*Heart* - The heart dimension includes our emotions, beliefs, values and general sense of what we are here for and is the emotional nucleus of our personal style. It's the belief system that helps us make vocational choices that affect the rest of our lives. People who prefer this dimension will tend to focus on how people feel, what their motivation is or the softer aspects of a situation.
	*Head* - The head dimension offers a rational view of the world and is the guiding voice of calm and reason. People who have a preference for this dimension will tend to look for the facts of a situation rather than getting tied up in emotional factors. This is not to say that they cannot be emotional, just that they will tend to be practical about an emotional situation and use good common sense.
	Hand - The hand dimension is concerned with doing or action. When talking about a situation a person with this preference will talk about doing things, asking what is going to happen and who will be involved, They want to focus on the pragmatic and action based issues and are less worried about the emotions or logic of a situation, just what needs to happen

MPH Framework

If we put these three filters together we end up with the MPH framework. This is a 9-block matrix that represents all the possible variations that one person can use to frame their world seen in Figure 1 .

Figure 1 - MPH Frame

Like the ramblers setting out on a Sunday afternoon walk - they will each use a frame to pick the route for the afternoon. One rambler might have certain preferences that mean they don’t want to plan any specific route (meta), want to take the choice of routes as they come to the options (present) and like to ramble for the emotional buzz it gives them (heart). Their partner might want to plan the specific route in detail (micro), want to talk about previous routes they have taken to pick the best one (past) and is concerned with the equipment they are going to take (hand). If both ramblers are used to the differences then they will probably have a great afternoon. However, if they are meeting for the first time – then watch out because an argument is about to explode as they each try to manage the event according to their frame preference.

The MPH model is build on the premise that we all use different frames of the world and these ‘Frames’ are driven by differing ‘Filters’, each of which contains our ‘Favoured’ way of operating.

Thus we have three parameters that combine to drive how we make sense of the world:

Frame: We use a particular frame of reference that is made up of a number of filters.

Filters: The MPH frame contains three filters, magnitude, periodicity, and holism.

Favoured: Within each of these filters we have a preferred way that we interpret external data.

Hence, the art of leadership is to first accept that people see the world using their favoured frames and filters. Secondly be prepared to step outside your favoured approach and see the world from someone else’s perspective. Once you understand and can manage both perspectives then it becomes possible to move people in a way that make sense to them and not from a purely coercive form of leadership.

MPH Patterns

We can use the MPH framework to build a map that indicates our favoured frame of reference. For example consider the three frames shown below:

	Mick Cope’ s Frame - My personal pattern tends to be a Meta-Projected-Heart. People who know me will hopefully support that fact that I pay little attention to detail (noticed the first typo yet) and generally favour a Meta filter. This is why I am useless at proof-reading my books and have to get other people to pick up my multitude of mistakes. I also have very little interest in what has gone on or what is happening now – whenever I have a spare few minutes I tend to look at my diary to see what I need to do in 2 months time rather than considering what I should be doing now. Finally, give me a problem and I tend to go for the emotional or gut feel solution. I have to force myself to look at the logic of a problem and have even less interest in working on what has to be done in a practical way.
	Mary’s Frame – Mary pays great attention to detail. She loves nothing more than to spend hours and hours poring over a financial report that shows what the company has been up to in the past year. This is a terrific strength as she will be the one who spots the person who is embezzling funds or can reflect on what has happened and help the MD understand what problems need to be rectified. However, she might be less comfortable if the MD asked her to come up with practical solution to help resolve the problems.
	Peter’s Frame – Peter is the office commando. He can deal with operational problems the moment they surface. He doesn’t worry so much about what has happened or what will happen once resolved, instead he will deal with operational issues right here and right now. The downside with this filter is that he might be re-fixing the same problems over and over again or resolve problems that create issues for other teams downstream.

The message is that we all have a favoured frame. They are not right or wrong they just are. The trick is to understand the up and downside of the frame that we prefer to follow and then learn how to optimise them for ourselves and in our relationship with other people.

MPH Reframe

The MPH model can be used in a variety of ways to help manage relationships. However, in this context it can be used as a tool to understand the other person’s perspective so that you can get across the bridge and see their world. Once you understand how they view all nine areas you can begin to develop a powerful sense of rapport with them. To do this you must be able to change the state or frame that the person is operating from and help them step into other frame states.

There are four primary steps to enable this bridging process:

1. Map your frame

2. Map their frame

3. Shift your frame

4. Shift their frame

The purpose of these four steps is to enable you to understand their total world view and not just the one they prefer to offer to you. For example you meet with someone who has a preference for Meta-Past-Head. Their conversation will be centered on the logic of what has happened in their background. They will talk about the programme they ran, the strategic benefit it offered to their customer and the general background to their business and where it came from. What you might find difficult to get is how they felt about what happened (heart), what they actually did (hand), what they are doing now (Present), what they what to do (Projected) or the specific detail of what they do (Micro). Without these other factors you are getting only a small window on their life and as such it is difficult to really find any hooks on which to build a relationship and so get across the bridge with them.

Figure 2 - MPH Framing

The MPH reframe process will allow you to open up the relationship and move the other person from a limited frame of Meta-Past-Head’ to a position where you understand much more about all aspects of the way they process their life as seen in Figure 2 . The process of opening up another person’s frame of reference can be seen in the following four steps.

1) Map your frame

The first step in any bridging process is to understand the foundations that you are starting from. Before you can form a view of the other person’s world you have to understand what frame that view is being taken from. Anyone who offers a judgment on a food they have never tried or a country they have never been to will look foolish. To avoid such a situation the commenter much be able to understand and state what their limitations are, what biases they have and how any such bias will impact upon the view they form of the thing they are critiquing. In the same way, it is important that you are able to clearly map what preferences you have within the MPH framework. Do you prefer to see things from a conceptual level or a small chunk; talk about what you are doing or what you want to do; or always tend to look at the emotional aspects or do you favour the logical factors. Now, don’t lets kid ourselves here, in the same way that fish are the last to see the water they are in it will be difficult for you to see the filters you use. It can be difficult to step outside yourself and form a judgment about how you make sense of the world. It is often easier to get other people involved. Ask a few friends where they think you prefer to operate from. Get as many as possible involved in the process because their view will be clouded by their frame references pints. So once four or more of your friends or colleagues have all said that you really seem like a Micro, Future, Heart person then it is s pretty safe bet that that is your preferred frame. Note… this is not to say that you can’t step into the other areas, just that this is the frame that you prefer to operate from.

2) Map their frame

Once you understand your favored frame the next step is to map the other person’s favoured frame. Now, if step one seemed difficult, then although this is conceptually easier, practically it is really difficult. Rule 1 – you can’t ever ‘know’ what frame they are coming from, in the same way that body language never tells you really what people are feeling. All you can ever do is form an informed opinion of the frame that they are operating from and test and validate this by posing questions and listening to the responses.

The secret to this stage is to ‘fere la bouch’ (as my old French teacher used to say to me every lesson) – keep the mouth shut and the eyes and ears open. Use every technique you have ever been taught to really tune into what people are saying and try to assign it to one of the MPH frames. For example, if someone tends to always ask for the big picture, talk about concepts, use sentences with few details or they get bored when you ask detailed questions, then the suspicion is that they have a Meta preference. If however they always get to the point quickly, use a lot of descriptive language or use words like ‘detail’ or ‘list’, then you might guess that they come form a micro perspective. If they don’t seem to follow either pattern or use them both to the same degree then maybe assume that they come from a macro perspective. Once you have the first cut guess then test it out. Ask them a question from a different frame point and see how they respond. If you think they are micro then ask a Meta type question and watch their response. Do they drag you back to he detail again or do they step up to the Meta level. If they drag you down to Micro then the odds are that that is their preference, if not then keep listening and carry our further tests.

3) Shift your frame

Easy one this! The quickest way to build rapport with someone else is to mirror and match the language frame they are using. In the same way the easiest way to get close to an Arsenal football supported into wear the same football top (I guarantee that wearing a Tottenham shirt will have the opposite effect). So once step 2 is complete then follow their patterns, think how they are thinking and use the same type of words they are using.

Warning – be careful you don’t fake this step. Just think of all the people you know who have been on the latest ‘thank-you’ course. The week before the course they behave in their normal belligerent way, shouting at the office junior and slagging off the boss – one week later they come back from the course only to be full of love for everyone. They make coffee for the junior and praise the boss. The trouble is that it doesn’t look right. Like your 50 year old dad hitting the menopause and bleaching his hair blond, the shift is clearly a fake and all it does is make the person look silly. In the same way if you are going to shift your state to their frame then make sure you can do it and mean it, otherwise you will blow the relationship. If you are going to shift from you natural state of Micro-Past-Heart to their state of Macro-Projected-Head then you need to mean it, You must want to be in the frame and love it to death.

4) Shift their frame

Now, once you understand their frame and can step into their world you can start to carry out state shifts. It becomes possible to move from mirroring the other person to shifting their state; to take them from Micro-Past-Head into Micro-Past-Heart, and then into Micro-Past-Hand. You can do this simply by the careful use of state shift questions. For example you meet some who comes from a Micro-Past-Head frame. They start to tell you in detail about the job they did last year describing the project plan, how it was constructed and who was involved. This helps you to understand them but you are keen to understand what they want to do in the future and how they feel about making changes in their life. To do this you might use the following pattern:

THEIR FRAME	THEY SAY	YOU SAY	YOUR FRAME
Micro-Past-Head	Let me tell you about the details of the project plan I managed last year.	Great – what did you actually do?	Micro-Past-Hand
Micro-Past-Hand	Well I did x, y and Z	How did you feel about that?	Micro-Past-Heart
Micro-Past-Heart	Well – I felt uncomfortable, but it was ok eventually.	Have you done any work like that recently	Micro-Present-Hand
Micro-Present-Hand	Yea- I am working with another firm at present on a similar type of thing.	Have you any plans to do a similar thing in the future	Micro-Projected-Hand
Micro-Projected-Hand	I hadn’t really thought about that – I guess I might be a bit anxious, but looking forward to it.	Thanks, that helps me to understand how I can help.	Micro-Projected-Heart

Table 1 - MPH State Shift Questions

The table shows how the person has been taken from a Micro-Past-Head state to a Micro-Projected-Heart state. This shift has been managed without making the person feel uncomfortable during the process and where they are at the end of the state shift.. The end result is that the person is taken through the rapid MPH process shown in Figure 3 .

Figure 3 - MPH State Shift

Imagine what the response might have been had the first question been “so what will it feel like when you do this the next time’. It would have no bearing on the language frame the person is operating from and might feel like a real jolt, to the point that the conversation could stall. Whereas in the example the person has been shifted through a series of state shifts without being made to feel uncomfortable.

As you start to feel comfortable with building the questions and managing the state shifts, so you can draw upon a range of questions to open up the entire MPH frame. Where you want to gather a total understanding of the personal MPH frame then a total of 27 questions can be used (3*3*3). Now, you might think this feels over the top and somewhat clinical. I would argue that if you care enough to build a synergistic relationship with a colleague then you should care enough to take the time to truly understand their world. You have a choice, ask 27 question that are biased by your frame and their frame, the end result is that you only tap into a limited percentage of the worldview, or you learn how to ‘care-fully’ question. First you care enough to understand the whole person and second you fully explore their worldview.

The whole essence of the MPH frame is to manage state changes in the other person, but in away that feels comfortable for them. The measure is that the conversation should flow naturally, with you as a guide rather than a coercive force driving the direction that they don’t wish to go. If at any point the question starts to feel uncomfortable then shift back to the state where it felt comfortable.

MPH - Rapid Bridge Building