Chapter 15: Exercises — Reframing

About These Exercises

These exercises build the skills of reframing — the deliberate act of changing the conceptual lens through which you see a conflict situation. Some exercises are internal and reflective; some require a partner; some involve written analysis. They are organized from foundational to applied to synthesis.

Difficulty guide: - ★ Accessible — most learners can complete independently - ★★ Intermediate — requires sustained effort or partner engagement - ★★★ Advanced — requires significant reflection, skill integration, or real-world application

Part A: Understanding the Concept

Exercise 1 [Conceptual] ★

In your own words, define reframing. Then write one sentence explaining why reframing is not the same as each of the following: - Spin - Minimizing - Gaslighting - Pretending the problem isn't real

What is the key feature that distinguishes a genuine reframe from these alternatives?

Exercise 2 [Conceptual] ★

The chapter introduces three types of reframes: cognitive, emotional, and narrative.

For each type, write one example from your own life — past or present — where that kind of reframe would be (or would have been) useful. You do not need to have successfully applied the reframe; you only need to identify a situation where it would apply.

Be specific: name the original frame and the reframe.

Exercise 3 [Conceptual] ★

The chapter says a frame is a lens, not a window. Unpack this metaphor. What does it mean to say that a frame determines what we can see rather than just affecting the angle from which we see it?

Give two examples — one from everyday life and one from a conflict situation — where changing the lens revealed information that was invisible from the previous frame.

Exercise 4 [Conceptual] ★★

The chapter distinguishes between changing perspective and changing frame. Using the camera metaphor from the chapter, explain: - What does "changing perspective" mean in terms of the camera? - What does "changing frame" mean in terms of the camera? - Why does changing the frame typically produce a more significant shift than changing perspective?

Part B: Position vs. Interest

Exercise 5 [Scenario] ★

The orange conflict is the classic illustration of position vs. interest. Read each of the following scenarios and identify: a) The stated position of each party b) At least two possible interests that might lie beneath each position

Scenario A: Two roommates argue about the temperature of the apartment. One wants it at 68°F; the other wants it at 74°F.

Scenario B: Two colleagues disagree about the format of a team meeting. One wants a written agenda distributed in advance; the other prefers the meetings to be spontaneous and flexible.

Scenario C: A parent and a teenager argue about curfew. The parent wants 10 PM; the teenager wants midnight.

Scenario D: Two neighbors argue about a fence. One wants it six feet tall; the other wants it no higher than four feet.

Exercise 6 [Applied] ★★

Choose a real conflict you are currently experiencing or recently experienced. Complete the Position/Interest Analysis Worksheet from Chapter 15:

My position (what I'm saying I want):
My interests (why I want it — at least three):
Their apparent position:
Their possible interests (at least three — include sympathetic ones):
Where might our interests overlap or be compatible?
What positions could satisfy my interests other than the one I'm currently advocating?
What positions could satisfy their interests other than the one they're currently advocating?
What question could I ask in the conversation that would help me understand their interest better?

After completing the worksheet: What changed about how you see the conflict?

Exercise 7 [Scenario] ★★

Marcus Chen's conflict with Diane in the billing office is traced through the chapter. But the chapter focuses on Marcus's side.

Write Diane's Position/Interest Analysis from Diane's perspective — as she might see it. What is Diane's position in the conflict? What are her possible interests? What are her possible interests regarding Marcus specifically as a person she interacts with?

Then: What question could Marcus have asked earlier in the conflict that would have surfaced Diane's interests sooner?

Exercise 8 [Applied] ★★★

The chapter notes that "the same interest can be satisfied by multiple positions." Choose one of the interests listed below and generate at least five different positions that could satisfy it. The positions should be meaningfully different from each other — not variations on the same solution.

Interest options: a) "I need to feel like my contributions are recognized." b) "I need to have some control over how my time is spent." c) "I need to feel safe in this relationship." d) "I need to feel like my professional judgment is respected."

After generating your five positions: What does the variety of options tell you about how conflict conversations typically get stuck?

Exercise 9 [Synthesis] ★★★

Return to Exercise 5 and select one of the four scenarios. Now that you have identified the positions and possible interests:

Design a "win-win" solution that satisfies the core interests of both parties without either party having to fully concede their position.
What question would you ask in the conversation to surface the interests you identified?
How might the conversation unfold differently if it began with interest exploration rather than positional argument?

Write the conversation as a brief scene (10–15 exchanges) — first as a positional argument, then as an interest-focused conversation.

Part C: Applying the Reframe Catalog

Exercise 10 [Scenario] ★

Using the Reframe Catalog from Section 15.3, identify which reframe(s) would be most useful for each of the following statements. Write the original frame, the reframe, and one sentence explaining why the reframe would be more useful.

a) "She always does this. I can't trust her with anything." b) "He's trying to make me look bad in front of the whole team." c) "If I don't win this argument, I'll look weak." d) "This whole project is a disaster." e) "They should have known not to say that in front of everyone."

Exercise 11 [Conceptual] ★

The chapter includes the reframe: "They should know better" → "They don't know what I need." Explain why this is a significant shift, not just a minor rephrasing. What does each frame imply about: - The cause of the problem? - Who is responsible for solving it? - What the appropriate next step is? - The likely outcome of the conversation?

Exercise 12 [Applied] ★★

Dr. Priya Okafor shifted from "performance problem" to "system problem" as her primary frame for errors in her department. This chapter focuses on one case. Now apply the reframe more broadly:

Think of an organization, team, or group you belong to (school, workplace, family, club). Identify a repeated "performance problem" — something that keeps happening that is attributed to individual failure. Now reframe it as a "system problem." What does the system make difficult? What conditions make the failure probable? What would need to change about the system to make the failure less likely?

Write 300–500 words on what the system reframe reveals that the performance reframe conceals.

Exercise 13 [Scenario] ★★

The following internal monologue represents someone locked in a limiting frame. Read it, identify the specific limiting frames being used (refer to the catalog), and then rewrite the internal monologue using the corresponding reframes.

Original internal monologue: "I can't believe she said that in the meeting. She's always trying to undermine me — she's been doing it for months and everyone can see it. I need to call her out publicly or she'll think she can keep getting away with it. If I let this go, I'll look like a pushover. This is war and I didn't start it, but I'm going to finish it. I'm so angry I can't even think straight."

Identify at least four limiting frames in the monologue and write the reframed version of each. Then rewrite the full internal monologue with the reframes integrated. How does the reframed monologue change what seems like the appropriate next step?

Exercise 14 [Applied] ★★★

Build your own reframe catalog. Think of the five conflict situations that come up most frequently in your life — at work, in school, in your family, in your friendships. For each:

Name the typical limiting frame you (or others) fall into.
Write the expanding reframe.
Write one question you could ask yourself to activate the reframe in the moment.
Write one sentence that describes what becomes possible inside the expanding frame that was not possible inside the limiting frame.

Part D: Helping Others Reframe

Exercise 15 [Scenario] ★

Rewrite each of the following "reframe attempts" using softening frame language so that they land as an offered possibility rather than a correction:

a) "You're not being disrespected — you're just being too sensitive." b) "He's not attacking you. He's just bad at communicating." c) "Think of it as an opportunity instead of a failure." d) "You need to stop taking this personally. It's not about you." e) "Have you considered that maybe you're wrong about her intentions?"

Exercise 16 [Conceptual] ★★

The chapter says: "You can offer a reframe. You cannot impose one."

Write a 200-word reflection on what this distinction means in practice. What is the difference — in terms of language, timing, and relationship impact — between offering and imposing? What signals tell you that a reframe has been received vs. rejected? What do you do if your offered reframe is not received?

Exercise 17 [Applied] ★★

Partner exercise (or solo with imagination): Think of someone you know who is currently stuck in a limiting frame about a conflict in their life. Write out:

The limiting frame they appear to be operating from (as you understand it)
The reframe you would want to offer them
The exact language you would use to offer it — using softening frame technique
The timing: when in the conversation would this be the right moment to offer the reframe?
The question you might ask instead of offering the reframe directly

If working with a partner: role-play the conversation. Practice offering the reframe and observe what response you get. Debrief: What worked? What felt like an imposition?

Exercise 18 [Scenario] ★★

Sam Nguyen shifted from "discipline conversation" to "support conversation" with Tyler. The chapter notes: "same content, completely different trajectory."

Think of a difficult conversation you are planning or have recently had. Write the opening two minutes of the conversation inside your current frame — the way you would naturally begin it.

Now write the opening two minutes of the same conversation from inside a different frame. You choose the reframe. What changes? What becomes possible in the second version that is not possible in the first?

Exercise 19 [Applied] ★★★

The charitable interpretation technique asks you to generate the most generous reading of someone's behavior that is consistent with the facts.

Choose a behavior by someone in your life that you have found difficult to understand or that has hurt you. Write three interpretations of that behavior:

The most negative interpretation you currently hold
A neutral interpretation — one that neither blames nor excuses
The most charitable interpretation — the most generous reading still consistent with the facts

Then: you do not need to commit to the charitable interpretation. But hold all three simultaneously for one week. At the end of the week, reflect: Has holding the charitable interpretation changed how you feel about the situation? Has it changed how you want to respond?

Part E: When Reframing Fails

Exercise 20 [Conceptual] ★

The chapter identifies five failure modes of reframing. In your own words, describe each one and give an original example (not from the chapter) of each:

The dishonest reframe
The premature reframe
The imposed reframe
The structural problem
The reframe that skips the conversation

Exercise 21 [Scenario] ★★

Read the following scenario and evaluate the reframe attempt. Is this a genuine reframe or a failure mode? Which failure mode applies (if any)? What would a more appropriate response have been?

Scenario: Keiko works in an office where her manager consistently takes credit for her work in front of senior leadership. When she raises this with an HR colleague, the colleague says: "I think you might be seeing it too negatively. Try thinking of it as a collaboration — when he presents your work, it still gets seen. And being associated with his track record could actually benefit you long-term."

Exercise 22 [Applied] ★★

Think of a time when a reframe was offered to you that felt invalidating, dismissive, or like a minimization of your experience. Analyze it:

What was the reframe that was offered?
What made it feel invalidating rather than helpful?
Which failure mode does it best fit?
What would a genuine, honest reframe have looked like in that situation — if any reframe was appropriate at all?
What would you have actually needed from the other person before a reframe could have been received?

Exercise 23 [Synthesis] ★★★

The chapter ends by noting that some problems are structural, not perceptual — and that no reframe addresses a genuinely unjust situation. At the same time, reframing can open options even within unjust situations.

Write a 400-word reflection on this tension: How do you hold both truths at once? How do you use reframing to open options without using it to minimize or deny genuine injustice? Where is the line between "seeing the situation more completely" and "explaining away a real problem"?

Use a specific real-world situation — historical, contemporary, or personal — to ground your reflection.

Part F: Integration Exercises

Exercise 24 [Synthesis] ★★

This chapter is the final chapter of Part 3 (Communication Fundamentals). Write a 300-word integration paragraph connecting the skills of all five chapters in Part 3:

Chapter 11 (Language of Confrontation)
Chapter 12 (Active Listening)
Chapter 13 (Nonverbal Communication)
Chapter 14 (Asking Better Questions)
Chapter 15 (Reframing)

In your paragraph: How do these five skills build on each other? What does each one make possible that the others alone cannot? If you had to identify the central organizing idea that connects all five, what would it be?

Exercise 25 [Applied] ★★★

The Full Reframing Practice

Choose a real conflict situation in your life — something you are currently dealing with or that you dealt with recently. Work through the following sequence:

Step 1: Frame inventory. Write down every frame you currently hold about this conflict — your interpretation of what it is, what the other person is doing, what it means, what the right outcome is.

Step 2: Interest analysis. Identify your positions and interests. Identify the other person's likely positions and possible interests (generate at least three, including sympathetic ones).

Step 3: Reframe catalog. Review the catalog from Section 15.3. Identify which limiting frames from your inventory appear in the catalog. Write the reframe for each.

Step 4: Narrative reframe. Write the story of this conflict from the other person's point of view — as generously as you can while staying consistent with the facts.

Step 5: Offering a reframe. If you were going to offer a reframe to the other person in your next conversation, what would you say? Write the exact language, using softening frame technique.

Step 6: Reflection. What has changed about how you see this conflict after working through these steps? What remains unresolved? What will you do differently in the next conversation because of what you've discovered?

Exercise 26 [Synthesis] ★★★

Teaching Exercise

Teach the position/interest distinction to someone who has never heard of it. You might use the orange conflict as your illustration, or find a different example that fits your audience. After the teaching conversation:

What questions did they ask that you hadn't anticipated?
What was hardest to explain?
What example worked best and why?
What did the act of explaining it teach you about the concept that you didn't fully understand before?

Write 300 words reflecting on the experience of teaching the concept.

Exercise 27 [Applied] ★★★

Pre-conversation reframe worksheet

Identify a difficult conversation you need to have in the next two weeks. Use everything from this chapter to prepare for it:

Position/Interest Analysis (both sides)
Catalog check: what limiting frames am I carrying in? What is the reframe for each?
Narrative: what is the story I'm telling? What is another story consistent with the facts?
What reframe, if any, might I want to offer the other person? How will I offer it?
What are the failure modes I need to watch out for? What would tip me into the dishonest reframe? The premature reframe?
After the conversation, reflect: what reframes landed? What didn't? What did you learn about the other person's interests?

Exercise 28 [Conceptual] ★★

The chapter opens with the orange conflict and closes with the claim that "reframing is a habit of mind." What does it mean to say that reframing is a habit rather than a technique? What distinguishes a person for whom reframing is a habit from a person who uses it occasionally as a tactic? What would need to change — about how you typically think about conflict — for reframing to become a habit?

Exercise 29 [Synthesis] ★★★

Cross-chapter synthesis: The Five Layers and Chapter 15

In Chapter 2, the Five-Layer Model described five layers of conflict: positions, interests, needs, values, and identity. This chapter focuses primarily on the shift from positions (Layer 2) to interests (Layer 3).

Think of a conflict in your life where the real issue is at the level of values (Layer 4) or identity (Layer 5) — where the conflict is not really about what either person wants or why they want it, but about who each person is or what they fundamentally believe is right.

What would a position-to-interest reframe look like in this conflict?
Would that reframe be sufficient? What is it missing?
What would a deeper reframe look like — one that reaches Layer 4 or Layer 5?
What are the risks of a reframe that reaches the identity level?

Exercise 30 [Applied] ★★★

The week of reframing

For one week, keep a reframe journal. Each day, record:

One conflict or friction point you experienced or observed
The dominant frame you (or others) applied to it
An alternative frame you considered or tried
What changed when you held the alternative frame
Whether you offered a reframe to anyone else — and if so, how it was received

At the end of the week, review your journal. What patterns do you notice? Which limiting frames come up most often for you personally? Which reframes feel most natural? Which are hardest to hold?

Write a 400-word reflection on what the week taught you about your own relationship to framing.