before you speak, set the frame. (musings from a tough conversation)

today, i had a tough conversation with someone in a community i’m involved with. out of respect for those involved, i won’t get into specifics, but it came down to confronting this person to address a problematic pattern of behavior that had been making others uncomfortable and lack a sense of psychological safety. i took up the role of delivering that feedback.

i went in optimistically hoping for an open dialogue – aiming for mutual understanding and discovery and learning – but from the very start, it genuinely felt as if we were approaching the conversation from two completely different worlds.

the recurring pattern in the convo: i’d bring up one concern, and their response would seem disconnected and defensive, as if they were engaging with an entirely different topic.

this got me thinking about the topic of establishing shared context, and how this is just as important as content. maybe even more. i'll try explain what i mean by this.

look at this image.

if i asked you right now, "what does this represent?" what would you say? a few answers might come to mind, but it quickly becomes clear that it is highly contextual. if the context is giving directions, it means "up." if it’s a teacher in a classroom, it might just mean "hold on." if this person is at a concert, they might be raising their hand in solidarity. in the context of number, it means "one". in the context of fingers, it is "pointer figure". same image, many different interpretations. what changes? the frame.

the frame is just as important as the picture that it holds. often, we focus on the image – the words spoken, the actions taken – without considering the invisible but crucial structure around it. yet, the frame determines what we see and how we interpret it. change the frame, and the meaning of the picture shifts completely. this is partly what media theorist Marshall McLuhan was getting at when he famously said "the medium is the message".

in conversations, the frame is the context: the shared assumptions, past experiences, and unspoken (or explicitly declared) agreements that for better or worse shape how we process another's words.

consider different contexts where framing is crucial. a work meeting has a different frame than a personal heart-to-heart. a one-on-one feedback session with your boss carries a different weight than casual advice between friends. conflict resolution in a community space requires a different frame than a brainstorming session with a creative team. even within the same relationship, the frame can shift – venting about frustrations has a different quality than seeking problem-solving help.

what i'm finding more and more is that recognizing and naming these contexts can prevent misalignment before it even happens.

one of my favourite frames to establish with people in my world, especially in my close relationships, is "assume best intentions." it’s a simple agreement, but it shifts the entire tone of interactions. if we both see this frame, then even if someone’s words come out clunky or a little harsh, we don’t immediately jump to defensiveness. we have a basic trust that they mean well, and we clarify rather than react.

another useful frame i've found is something like "curiosity over certainty." instead of assuming we already understand the other's perspective, we try approach the conversation with genuine curiosity.

without context setting like this, communication can sometimes feel like two radios playing on different frequencies. it’s easy to misinterpret, easy to assume the worst, easy to feel like someone just 'doesn’t get me.'

looking back on my conversation earlier, i think this is exactly what happened. i went in with a frame of wanting it to be a growth-oriented dialogue – a chance for learning and understanding – but they seemed to be operating from a frame of self-protection, perhaps feeling defensive rather than open. so while i was speaking from a place of 'how can we learn from this?', they were responding from a place of 'how do i justify myself?' the result: an unproductive conversation mostly talking past each other. frame-blindness on both sides.

perhaps all interpersonal conflicts boil down to something like this: a failure to establish common ground (dare i say!) on the frame of the conversation before diving into the content.

so how do we set context more intentionally?

here are a few practical ways i'm workshopping after today's experience:

• name the frame before diving in. "hey, i want to share some feedback, and i want you to know it’s coming from a place of care."
• check assumptions. "just to make sure we’re on the same page—how are you seeing this situation?"
• agree on guiding principles. in teams, friendships, and communities, shared agreements like "assume best intentions" or "seek to understand before reacting" can be game-changers.
• pause and recalibrate. if things feel off in a conversation, zoom out and ask: "are we even talking about this in the same frame?"

context shapes everything. the more we consciously set it, the less we fall into unnecessary conflict. and maybe, just maybe, we’ll find more common ground along the way in our communities, teams, families, and all other communal aspects of our lives.

what ways do you try set the frame in conversations? what frames have you found useful?