Th is essay addresses crisis communication by identifying and describing four conceptual lenses that are explicit in crises and in the scholarly literature and by applying them to the Katrina crisis. Th e four lenses are (1) crisis communication as interpersonal infl uence, (2) crisis communication as media relations, (3) crisis communication as technology showcase, and (4) crisis communication as interorganizational networking. We fi rst discuss the theoretical foundation for

Th e role of communication in public administration has been emphasized over time in public administration theory. Nonetheless, communication -with the exception of political communication -has been neglected in scholarship. Garnett's performance predicament posits the diffi culty of showing linkages between communication and performance. Th is paper explores the role that communication plays in achieving organizational performance through a review of research that bears on communication's direct and indirect infl uences on performance. Th e primary thrust is communication's indirect role in achieving performance by mediating or moderating the eff ects of organizational culture on performance, thereby adding another perspective on the cultureperformance relationship. Adapting the typology of Zammuto and Krakower, two types of organizational culture -rule-oriented culture and mission-oriented culture -are examined to explore how the relationship between organizational culture and organizational performance is infl uenced by communication. Th e analysis supports the claim that communication acts as a metamechanism for shaping and imparting culture in mission-oriented organizational cultures, thereby infl uencing performance. In particular, task orientation, feedback, and upward communication have positive eff ects on perceived organizational performance in mission-oriented organizations but potentially negative eff ects on performance in rule-oriented cultures. O ver the years, some public administration scholars and practitioners have paid attention to communication ( Downs Simon, Smithburg and Th ompson 1950 ). But for years, a mismatch has existed between the conventional wisdom that communication is the central management function most crucial to administrative success ( Barnard 1938 ; Garnett 2005 ; Lorch 1978 ) and the attention andrespect that communication has received within the public administration community in terms of scholarship and teaching. A major reason for this "respect gap" is inadequate research evidence linking communication with performance. Th is gap is partly attributable to what Garnett calls the performance predicament: "Th e costs of government communication are generally easier to measure than are its benefi ts, making it diffi cult to demonstrate a favorable performance ratio" ( 1997b , 10). Because of the diffi culty of measuring communication performance, researchers have been reluctant to tackle it head on, instead researching communication media, processes, and other aspects. At the heart of this predicament is the nature of the relationship between communication and performance. Communication's powerful, indirect infl uences on performance have remained, by and large, below the radar of public administration scholarship.Th is research more fully explores communication's indirect infl uence on performance through its eff ects on organizational culture -a variable that has been shown to infl uence performance and one that is profoundly shaped by communication. We explore whether com...

Despite its importance to agency eff ectiveness, communication performance is an understudied topic. Th is is partly attributable to the " performance predicament, " which arises because costs of communication are easier to measure than its benefi ts. In this study, we develop and test an exploratory model of public sector communication performance that is synthesized from the literature on public -private diff erences and organizational communication. Th is model is statistically signifi cant and explains the variation in interpersonal, external, and internal communication performance. Th is is perhaps the largest empirical study on public sector communication to date. Our fi ndings have two key implications for public managers. First, the constraints of red tape on communication performance can be overcome if key performance-enhancing conditions -goal clarity without rigidity and a culture that supports communication -are in place. Second, external communication poses more challenges and may require additional eff ort.A long-standing assumption within administrative and organization theory is that sound communication leads to sound performance. In his classic work Th e Functions of the Executive , Chester Barnard pronounced, " Th e fi rst executive function is to develop and maintain a system of communication " (1938, 226). For Barnard, communication is not just an executive function -it is the fi rst, primary function. In another classic, Simon, Smithburg, and Th ompson acknowledged the crucial nature of communication to government performance: " Blockages in the communication system constitute one of the most serious problems in public administration " (1950, 229). Indeed, similar assertions about the salience of communication have been made in diverse literatures, including policy analysis crisis management (Pijnenberg and van Duin 1991).Despite the focus on and attention paid to communication in a number of domains, few studies have directly examined communication performance. Th is is partly the result of what Garnett (1997) calls the " performance predicament, " which he defi nes thus: " Th e costs of government communication are generally easier to measure than are its benefi ts, making it diffi cult to demonstrate a favorable performance ratio " (10). Certainly, there are exceptions to the performance predicament -major disasters, for example-in which the benefi ts of averting a disaster are easily demonstrated in retrospect, powerfully bring home the importance of communication performance. It has been shown that unreceived (or unheeded) warnings blocked or fi ltered through upward channels were instrumental to the 1986 Chernobyl radiation release (Lowernhardt and van den , were exacerbated because of faulty interorganizational communication.Although crises forcefully demonstrate the benefi ts of eff ective communication performance, communication performance is just as important for day-to-day operations. Yet the extant literature on communication performance -specifi cally, communication performance...

Hurricane Katrina continues to capture attention and influence scholarship including official reports that focus more on event chronologies than on conceptual patterns. Our paper explores conceptual patterns crisis management behaviour, drawing upon Lalonde's (2004) archetypes of crisis managers as collectivists, integrators, and reactives. We add a paralytics archetype for our analysis. Key findings include an imbalance between counterproductive and constructive archetypes. Reactive and paralytic crisis manager behaviours were over-represented, significantly contributing to conflict, communication failures, and the systemic failure of governments. Collectivist and integrator archetypes were badly under-represented, limiting intergovernmental relations, cooperation, and communication embedded in these behaviour types. Crisis management performance with future crises would benefit from a systematic assessment of crisis management styles and behaviours.

Centralization, Crisis communication, Disaster capitalism, ICT, Media behaviour, Neo-liberalism, Policy invisibility, Public-private partnerships, Hurricane Katrina, Technology and crisis, Emergency management,