Content area
Full Text
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Even highly competitive, successful organizations face crisis, defined as "a low-probability, high-impact event that threatens the viability of the organization and is characterized by ambiguity of cause, effect, and means of resolution, as well as by a belief that decisions must be made swiftly" (Pearson & Clair, 1998; p. 60.). This paper describes the challenges facing leaders and managers attempting to prepare their organizations to engage in effective crisis management. The paper contends that when behavioral readiness is absent, crisis management effectiveness is a matter of chance. The behavioral model draws salient contributions from role theory, learning theory, and multilevel theory and applies them to the body of crisis management theory developed over the past two decades by Mitroff and his associates as well as the recent work of Pearson and Carr (1998). Five propositions are developed and implications for research and practice are presented.
INTRODUCTION
To compete in today's volatile global markets is to face risks. Organizations that have honed their competitive strategies and skills take calculated risks gladly in the spirit of free enterprise. Their visionary leaders (Bennis & Nanus, 1985; Rowe, 2001) think long-term about positive future states and develop courses of action designed to make visions into realities. Followers buy into the visions of their leaders and commit themselves to their achievement. The huge expenditures of creativity, resources, and energy needed for success make if difficult for leaders to "think the unthinkable," that is to prepare themselves and their organizations for the unknown risks that could undermine their competitiveness and jeopardize their existence. This paper explores the challenges leaders face as they attempt to prepare their organizations to manage crises effectively.
Organizations, comprised of people, goals, systems, competitive strategies, and operating plans, vary substantially in size, technology, and complexity to the point that it is difficult to develop models common to the challenges they face. One of the unfortunate commonalities among organizations is that each faces known and unknown threats to its existence (Mitroff & Kilmann, 1984; Perrow, 1984; Shrivastava, Mitroff, Miller, & Miiglani, 1984). The more obvious and predictable the threat, the more likely its people and systems are aligned to deal with it. But as Pearson and Clair (1998) pointed out in their definition of organizational...