CONCEPT
Framing Competence
The rhetorical skill of expressing genuine ethical conviction in terms the organizational culture can hear — neither manipulation nor capitulation but the recognition that communication is a two-party act.
Framing competence is the third of
Gentile's four core components of
voice-as-skill. It names the capacity to translate ethical conviction into the specific normative vocabulary the decision-makers in the room actually use. The concern framed as moral objection —
this is wrong — is typically less effective than the concern framed as risk
identification:
I want to flag a risk we haven't discussed. The concern framed as resistance —
we shouldn't do this — is typically less effective than the concern framed as strategic contribution:
I have an idea for how we can capture the benefits while managing the risks. The underlying conviction is identical. The probability of organizational impact is dramatically different. Gentile is emphatic that framing is not manipulation; it is recognition that communication fails when the speaker wins the argument in her own head and loses it in the room.
In The You On AI Field Guide
The framing choices available to the ethical advocate are not infinite.