LEARNING ISSUE FRAMING
for Deliberation of Complex Questions
in Public or Organizational Settings
By Sara Ross
Objectives
1. Understand and be able to apply the concepts of:
- Achieving tensions among and within framed approaches
- Listening for and distinguishing the perspectives or deep motivations underlying the things people hold valuable
- Listening for and including “who isn’t in the room”
- Formulating “trade-offs”
2. Learn and be able to produce the basic components of a written issue framework
Introduction
If we listen closely, we can notice that across a spectrum of issues, there are some recurring themes, types of concerns, or motivations. These become apparent when people are confronted with what is very valuable to them in a situation being at odds with what is valuable to others (or even themselves, sometimes) in that situation. This creates tensions within and among people. To work through those tensions and trade-offs, issues or questions can be framed to help people methodically sort through the costs and consequences of different priorities and approaches to them. Framing important and often complex questions this way depolarizes debates by revealing the complexity of the question while helping people work toward an integrated solution to it.
The following Issue Framing Template is an exercise to learn and use the concepts behind the idea of issue framing, provide practice with them, and develop capacities for issue framing. In the process, it also teaches the basic components of a deliberative framework. The results should be suitable for use as a short “issue booklet” for a group to deliberate through an issue or question important to resolve. Each approach developed during the exercise will comprise a minimum of one page. For many issues, only three approaches will need to be created. (See the sample issue framework at the end.) See the note at the end of the instructions for what kinds of issues may need a fourth approach.
Note: This tool assumes the issue to be addressed via framing has been carefully and appropriately identified. There is a separate process to accomplish that necessary first step.
Instructions
A. Beginning with the end in mind:
Before starting this exercise, review the sample framework attached at the end, so you have a clear idea of the “final form” issue frameworks can take.
Referring to the sample, notice that behind the introductory page, each approach has five components:
1. A descriptive title
2. A “best foot forward” description of the approach
3. Examples of actions that could be taken under the approach
4. Opposing “voices” expressing how the approach threatens something they hold valuable
5. Several real-world trade-offs diverse people and/or the community would have to make if the approach were implemented
B. Getting oriented to the deep motivations used in the template
Immediately following these instructions is a short set of descriptions of the perspectives that the template incorporates. These will be used during the exercise.
- Thoroughly digest each of the six general deep motivations.
- One of the best ways to assure each framer has a thorough understanding of each mindset is to use your responses to the following questions to discuss each one briefly.
Can you remember a time when you, or someone you know, felt or thought like this about a situation or issue? If not, can you imagine a situation when this mindset, or perspective, might come into play?
Note:
- Do not side-step this orientation to the perspectives.
- Issue framing requires framers’ personal preferences be set aside temporarily so an array of additional perspectives can also be reflected fairly in the framework.
- After framers have used this exercise a time or two, this orientation and the template will probably not be necessary.
C. Apply the issue-framing concepts by using the template to develop the approaches.
Each of the five components that make up an approach requires one step. Go through each of the following five (5) steps for one approach at a time, then repeat them for each subsequent approach.
- As you begin each step, refer to the sample issue framework again to see what you are working toward in that step.
Step 1 “Best foot forward” description of the approach. Write a paragraph (or two) that conveys a “best foot forward” description of the approach with the reasons why people would find it valuably important and effective for addressing the issue.
- This paragraph is the main communication of what the approach is about. It needs to fully convey what is valuable to the perspective in the context of the specific issue. It advocates a general or broad direction for action and why that is valuable. It needs to do this without including the very specific sorts of actions that will be listed in the next step. Describing the approach is similar to writing a general outline, which is filled in with specifics in the next step.
- “Walk in the shoes” of the perspective indicated at the top of the page and use it to stay focused. “Put on the voice” of people who would favor this approach, and write several brief, viable “best foot forward” statements favorably describing the approach and adequately conveying why it would be valuable and effective. (Refer to your sample again if needed.)
Step 2 Some actions we might take under this approach. In the form of bullet points, convey some brief examples of viable actions that individuals, entities, and the community as a whole could take, based on what is held valuable by the approach being developed. (Stay focused on the approach!)
- These need to be specific without being overly detailed. If they are too general, it will be hard to deliberate about them.
- The examples should include different “actors” in the community.
- The examples should suggest the different “scales” of action possible (e.g., an individual, a neighborhood, a collaboration of institutions, a change in local or state law, etc).
- Depending on the issue, examples should include both reactive and proactive sorts of actions.
- Note: Since these are examples, wording should be tentative (e.g., prefacing an action with the phrase “we could start to...“). This can help prevent users of the framework from jumping to conclusions about your examples being “the” way to implement the approach.
Stop and review your work in Steps 1 and 2: Could there be any question in a reader’s mind about what the approach is advocating? Do the actions clearly reflect what is valuable to this perspective on the issue?
Step 3 Some people who oppose this approach say. Write short statements of disagreement with the approach that reflect how things held valuable by other people and/or entities would be affected or threatened by it.
- Other perspectives on the issue that might oppose the approach are indicated by their abbreviations (P3, P4, etc.). Work on one perspective at a time, using the following steps. Before excluding any of them as irrelevant to the approach, consider the broad range of life experiences existing throughout the community so that all knowable perspectives are given voice even if they are not “in the room.”
- “Walk in the shoes” of each perspective indicated and imagine the various ways different people would express their concerns about the approach.
- Write brief, bulleted statements of concern that reflect what people would say if they were worried about how the proposed approach would impact what is valuable to them. (Refer to the sample issue.)
- The last part of this section (“They have other concerns about”) is for including any others that arise.
- Note: Take great care that the statements developed here are only expressions of concern as described above. Do not compose debate-type rebuttals to the approach, arguments, or side-tracking statements unrelated to the approach or the issue.
Step 4 Trade-offs required under this approach. Describe some real-world consequences that might be experienced by different people and/or entities if the approach were implemented.
- The purpose of writing trade-offs is to help bring the more “abstract” discussion of the approach into the real world of costs and consequences, where people need to deliberate.
- Trade-offs need to be worded in enough detail that “the realness hits home” for different people deliberating the issue.
ß Ideally (and space permitting), at least one trade-off should be developed for each of the perspectives reflected in the approach, and at minimum for the one in favor of the approach. (Refer to the sample issue.)
Step 5 Title. Give the approach a brief title that conveys the general description of how this approach advocates addressing the issue.
D. Review your work.
Use the following as “check points” to assure your framework development is thorough, neutral, and consistent within itself.
- Does each approach specifically respond to the problem described in the issue identification process?
- Does the title of each approach clearly reflect the general character of the approach, as it was finally developed?
- Are the several approaches presented “evenly?”
- Are all the descriptions written in a truly “best foot forward” manner, without biasing one over another?
- Are each of the sections of the approaches approximately the same length?
- Does the “problem statement,” or introduction to the issue, need to be revised or improved in any way?
- To convert your work to an issue booklet, consider adding a paragraph to the end of the “problem statement” to provide an overview of the several approaches presented in the framework (booklet).
- If there are some essential facts about the issue necessary for people to deliberate the issue effectively, consider including a “Facts We Need To Know” page after the introductory page and before the approach pages. (Keep in mind that while some facts might be interesting, only truly essential facts may affect what people hold valuable in the issue. People will generally have time to only scan a facts page, so include the barest minimum, if any.)
Note: When an issue might need a fourth approach in its framework.
The last page of the template provides for an optional approach to include. Issues for which this provides an appropriate presentation of perspectives can be generally categorized as issues of sense of place, identity, or imbalanced practices.
Through use of this additional approach, it is possible to present more adequately the perspectives driven by deep concerns that are central in issues around geographic, racial, and/or ethnic identity and certain imbalanced practices. Such concerns are often invoked in issues addressing governmental units’ merger or division, governmental eminent domain claims, certain land use issues, segregation/integration issues, ethnic tensions, and others where imbalances are at issue for portions of the population.
When such issues are framed using this exercise, consider treating this approach as the first one in the framework because of its possibly focal role in the issue, and re-number the other three approaches accordingly.
Motivations
Description of the Driving Motivations Used in this Exercise (For Reference)
All of the following perspectives are included throughout the exercise. Each approach in the template has one perspective as its driving motivation, and the other five perspectives are included in the voices that may oppose the approach. The first three, below, form the basis of the three approaches in a framework developed using this exercise. For some issues, the fourth perspective also drives a separate approach (see note below).
The pages of the template provide systematic practice at developing an “ear” for assuring the inclusion of all these perspectives (along with any others that arise) so natural tensions among and between them are realized in the issue framework. This method also “requires” framers to practice hearing and including perspectives of those who “aren’t in the room.”
These perspectives are referenced on the template pages by abbreviations: P1 for the first perspective listed here, P2 for the second perspective listed here, etc.
P1. Driving Motivation: Stability, Authority, Rules, Morals
Has primary concerns about creating, maintaining, and/or restoring an environment that feels stable and secure in providing orderly, disciplined, well-identified structures, roles, and norms. To maintain or achieve this environment, rules are important, as are consequences for breaking them. Authority must be established and respected, whether as head of family, group, business, government, etc. Authority figures have responsibilities for looking out for the common good, a form of paternalism preserving stability and unity as a people. To maintain such stability, things held valuable include traditions, duty, morals, honesty, hard work, responsibility, patriotism, and deferring satisfaction of self-interests when it’s the right thing to do.
P2. Driving Motivation: “American Individualism,” Progress, Free Enterprise
Has primary concerns about maintaining individual rights and privacy, freedom of expression, independence, positive or successful image, environments where inventive, creative and strategic thinking can address and solve problems. Ways to achieve, maintain, and/or preserve these preferred environments in connection with public issues include incentives as motivations for behavior change instead of regulations, seeking experts’ advice, trusting the market to self-correct, striving for excellence, progress, growth, and profit, the merits of free enterprise and competition, technological innovation to accomplish worthwhile goals, taking calculated risks.
P3. Driving Motivation: Equality, Fairness, Community
Has primary concerns of promoting the sense and responsibility of community, a “civilized society” in which people and social institutions are responsible and responsive for supporting and meeting social needs. This perspective values addressing underlying causes in the system rather than addressing and punishing their symptoms, seeking to aid in whatever way might help. Regarding everyone as equal, this view often seeks unity in diversity through transcending differences. Toward achieving this environment, inclusion is a high value, expressed in egalitarianism, efforts to share society’s resources equally among all, open communication and dialogue, and shared decision-making. Wants to act responsibly toward and care for the natural environment, conserve non-renewable resources, and find healthier alternatives for all, valuing these more than profit and growth.
P4. Driving Motivation: Sense of Identity
Has primary concerns about preserving, and sometimes regaining, a sense of identity, which may be associated with a geographical place, boundaries, and/or group of similar people. Ways to maintain this include keeping outside influences at a distance, consciously preserving cultural or local identity, and keeping existing bonds strong through various means. Such concerns are often invoked in issues addressing governmental units’ merger or division, governmental eminent domain claims, certain land use issues, segregation/integration issues, racial or ethnic tensions, and others where imbalanced practices are addressed.
Note: In addition to the three perspectives discussed above, the template also provides an optional fourth approach to reflect this perspective, often central in issues around geographic, racial, or ethnic identity, and/or imbalanced practices. When such issues are framed using the template, this approach should probably be treated as the first one in the framework because of its frequently focal role in the issue, and the other three approaches re-numbered accordingly. This results in a framework with four approaches.
P5. Driving Motivation: Controlling Own Destiny
Has primary concerns revolving around itself and its immediate needs and wants. Ways to maintain this are often egocentric, in-the-moment, spontaneously reacting to situations, resisting authority, taking revenge, often blaming others. This perspective is invoked in some but not all public issues, often where youth have a voice or role in the issue, and when including the perspectives of perpetrators of violent crime.
P6. Driving Motivation: Survival
Has primary concerns of, literally, survival. This perspective might pertain to physical, emotional, or financial survival. Ways to achieve or maintain survival usually take the form of asking others to help provide safety or security when it cannot be achieved independently. This perspective is invoked in some but not all public issues, often where basic social needs or violence are being addressed.
Example: VIOLENT KIDS How Do We Change the Trend?
Introduction to the Issue
While our community has never experienced “serious” violence by kids, such as the Columbine and other shootings, we would be smart to treat those events as “wake-up calls.” It is time for us to consider how to stop the trend of youth violence, however small it may seem to be here currently. Some residents, police, and school staff are aware of signs of kids with bullying and other possibly hostile, violent tendencies. We have not yet done anything to address these signs of potential future shocks. What can we do to be proactive, preventing violent acts by our youth that could turn our community upside down?
This booklet is a community discussion guide designed to foster public deliberation about this issue, so that we can take meaningful action on it. It presents three different approaches for changing the youth trends toward violence, and hopes to spark all community members’ diverse perspectives to deliberate about what we need to do.
The first approach in this booklet might be favored by those who most want to protect children from unsafe influences, including providing them more structured and disciplined environments at home, school, and the neighborhood. The second approach is based on the perspective that providing positive goals and incentives will attract kids away from damaging influences and behaviors that could lead to trouble. The last approach reflects the view that the more proactive we are right now about helping each other, seeing warning signs, and getting preventative treatment going, the more kids we can prevent from heading down the wrong path. To all of these perspectives, our local citizens will add their own, perhaps even creating a new approach everyone can live with and work on together.
Approach 1: Provide a Safer and More Disciplined Environment
“Best foot forward” description of the approach:
To keep youth from becoming violent, we must exercise our responsibility to provide a protective, disciplined, and secure environment for them at home, at school, and around the community. This means we need to protect them from harmful influences as well as set and enforce clear rules and boundaries for their behavior, entertainment media, and friends. When we thoroughly surround them at home, school, and in our neighborhoods with discipline, clear expectations and limits, and swift consequences for any wrong turns, we will be protecting and preventing them from developing violent tendencies. We’ll be sending the message that the right behavior is the only behavior we will tolerate from youth, and adults too. Then we will be able to rest easier knowing we have created a stable and more predictable community life and a safer future.
Some actions we might take under this approach:
- Make it the norm that adults and kids immediately report other kids’ behavior that is out of line or threatening to kids’ parents or guardians, police, and to school officials if it happens on school property.
- Deliver the message that unacceptable behavior won’t be tolerated in this community and it requires consequences and making amends, including kids and their parents.
- A uniformed police officer should meet with school bullies and their parents or guardians at the first report of bullying and sternly lay out the juvenile justice consequences for unruly children.
- Examine if state law’s definition of unruly children is strong enough for the juvenile justice system to nip problems in the bud, strengthen it if necessary, and beef up juvenile justice department staffing to get them talking at schools, faith communities, civic organizations.
- Start a group of parents who covenant with one another that their homes are free of guns and violent entertainment media, so parents will know which homes are safe for their children to visit.
- Start and maintain a community campaign on radio, TV, billboards, to advertise the community’s zero tolerance for disrespectful, aggressive behavior in anyone and provide phone numbers to report kids and adults who cross the line.
Some people who oppose this approach say:
- This is too oppressive, would turn us into informers, and make it hard to trust each other.
- The progress we’ve made developing a progressive business tax base will suffer if we go backwards like this, and attracting new development will be harder
- A harsh-toned media campaign is the wrong tactic instead, we need to advertise help hot-lines for parents who worry about the direction their kids are taking, and get them help.
- Violent tendencies in kids are usually hidden, so we need to test kids every year in school to diagnose who needs help and make sure they get it before it’s too late.
- This treats bullies as though they’re young criminals, when what they need is help.
- I teach my children to stand up for themselves, and I don’t want them turned into tattle-tales.
- We don’t need government agents knocking on our doors every time the kids get into a scuffle we can handle it ourselves.
- You adults act like we’re a bunch of wimps that are going to tattle rather than settle our scores our way. Our fights aren’t threatening like shooting people up with guns, so drop it.
- What if there isn’t enough support for taxes to pay for more police and juvenile authorities, and maybe more school personnel to monitor things?
Examples of some trade-offs that might be required if this approach is taken:
- Paying more in taxes for increased public staff even if we don’t think there are any kids who would cause major harm
- Being punished along with my child even if it’s the first time s/he ever pulled a stunt like that
- Parents not letting their kids play at our house because of the video games my kids enjoy
Approach 2: Attract Kids to Successful Behavior and Interests
“Best foot forward” description of the approach:
The way to keep kids from heading into violence is to involve them in things that are much more rewarding and satisfying to do. We need to get them motivated by giving them tastes of success and the rewards that come with it through jobs, competitions, awards, and incentives put some zest into their lives. If kids have been living in their fantasy world of video games and virtual reality as the only place in life they feel like a winner, let’s show them it’s a dead-end that can’t compete with being a winner in the real world. Show them the rewards of reaching goals they want and others respect, achieving social and monetary recognition for their successes, showing they are amounting to something in life. We need to emphasize achievement and success for these kids so they’re winners in the real world.
Some actions we might take under this approach:
- Buy our kids video games that teach them to strategize and compete to win instead of shoot ‘em ups.
- Reward our kids with something they want, when they choose non-violent movies and video games.
- Design our own neighborhood games that kids have to prepare for by teamwork and competitive skills, keep them interested in working toward public achievements instead of holed up with video games.
- Create an award competition for kids who keep their grades up in school, “log time” in worthwhile activities, and stay out of trouble.
- Create jobs for kids old enough for them by creating a one-stop “casual labor” job pool; homeowners, landlords, businesses, agencies would list what they need done
- Put age-appropriate conflict resolution, negotiating skills, and peer mediation programs in all the schools
Some people who oppose this approach say:
- This doesn’t do what we need, which is get violent entertainment media off the market and out of our homes.
- We need the culture of the community to look down on violence, and competition is often at the root of violence to begin with.
- This choice puts pressure on kids to conform rather than pursuing their own style and interests.
- The world of competition and striving for success is callous to whatever is troubling kids at risk of becoming violent, when what we need is to learn how to recognize which kids need our help most.
- Kids ought to be able to be kids with time for wholesome fun for the sake of fun.
- I need help keeping my kids at home, not having them be all over the place working
- This would put pressure on my kids to join in too many activities when I’d rather be controlling where they are and who they’re around that will influence them.
- What we need to be afraid of is all the homes with guns that kids can get their hands on, and this doesn’t do anything to remove the dangers.
- Things are fine the way they are, and we don’t need to change everything over the slim odds of some kids going nuts with a gun.
Examples of some trade-offs that might be required if this approach is taken:
- Businesses raising prices, risking sales volume, to cover more expenses of creating youth-level jobs and supervising them
- We would need to spend more time and effort creating alternatives for the kids and we’re already too busy.
- Teens getting more rebellious and angry with so much more adult control over their free time
Approach 3: Prevent, Recognize, and Treat Signs of Trouble
“Best foot forward” description of the approach:
We need to send the pervasive message through every part of our community homes, neighbors, schools, everywhere that kids of all ages have our love and concern and are valued, and we’re ready and willing to help them in ways that count for them. A credible way to deliver that message is to educate ourselves to identify signals kids send when they are heading toward trouble. We can prevent kids from heading into violent behavior by not treating them as though they are adults who can handle stress on their own. For them to be healthy and non-violent, we must meet their age-specific needs, not ignore them or offer distractions from unmet needs. The orientation of this community is toward meeting adults’ needs in every way; now we need to find ways to orient toward meeting the needs of our youth. We can’t afford to let kids turn to violence out of desperation or if adults have been blind, or unable to respond, to their problems.
Some actions we might take under this approach:
- Educate ourselves, via community speakers and workshops, about the warning signs of trouble
- Learn how to be more comfortable talking about our feelings so we can help our kids do it too.
- Be in closer contact with our kids’ teachers to know how they are doing and getting along with others
- Volunteer in our faith communities and schools to create scheduled supervised activities.
- Convert an empty storefront into a community youth center and hire a youth program director so kids have a healthy, supportive social environment.
- Ask our schools, faith communities, and neighbors when we need help with our kids.
- Get our kids used to talking about their problems from an early age by including “sharing circles” in every school day.
- Pass a levy to provide locally accessible and affordable counseling services to all who need them.
Some people who oppose this approach say:
- Touchy-feely permissiveness is one of the reasons kids head down the wrong path, it’s too weak to work because what they need are rules, limits, and consequences.
- I already work hard to stay home and raise my kids well, and I’m opposed to being a volunteer stand-in for youth activities for other parents who don’t.
- My kid is as private as I am, and we don’t need to talk about our feelings to know what’s going on
- We don’t need to talk about feelings to recognize when a kid isn’t acting normal, and we’re smart enough as parents to know if something’s wrong.
- Community youth centers mix too many kinds of kids; we need our own neighborhood activity centers so we know who our kids are with.
- You adults will supervise all the fun out of it and your ideas of what’s fun does not ‘get it’ for us.
- I don’t need to talk about my feelings in school or anywhere else; I’m just fine already.
- There’s nothing wrong with us to begin with, so save yourselves all that trouble.
- This is too soft I need to know sick kids aren’t on the loose and that they can’t get their hands on guns.
- This won’t get those weird kids out of school they scare me.
Examples of some trade-offs that might be required if this approach is taken:
- Parents juggling helping kids with homework and volunteering at night even if they’re worn out from working all day.
- The worry that we’re not taking aggressive enough action to keep kids from hurting others.
- Non-parent residents getting more involved in the community even if the kids aren’t theirs.
- A tax levy to fund youth activities even if the tax burden already feels high.
- Schools and faith communities incurring more overhead expense to provide after-school space.
Posted 15 Feb 2003
