Employee Reactions to Leader-Initiated Crisis Preparation: Core Dimensions

Abstract

Crisis prevention plans are usually evaluated based on their effects in terms of preventing or limiting organizational crisis. In this survey-based study, the focus was instead on how such plans influence employees' reactions in terms of risk perception and well-being. Five different organizations were addressed in the study. Hypothesis 1 tested the assumption that leadership crisis preparation would lead to lower perceived risk among the employees. Hypothesis 2 tested the conjecture that it would also lead to a higher degree of well-being. Both hypotheses were supported. The results and their implications are discussed.

Risk Framing and Business Model Adaptation: A Conceptualization Based on Threat-Rigidity Theory

“…As these and the examples in Section 1 indicate, research shows equivocal results when attempting to predict firm risk behaviour. Our study provides additional proof of threat-rigidity theory, suggesting that managers are more concerned with the possibility of downside outcomes than upside outcomes as risk (see also Selart, Johansen & Nesse, 2013). According to threat-rigidity theory, one important reason for this perception is that external threats induce adversity, which in turn sets organizational change in motion.…”

Extending Discourse of Renewal to Preparedness: Construct and Scale Development of Readiness for Renewal

“…Organizational change, such as crises, can influence job satisfaction and turnover intentions (DuFrene & Lehman, 2014; Markovits, Boer, & van Dick, 2014; Zhu, May, & Rosenfeld, 2004). Moreover, employees’ perceptions of organizational preparedness were related to self-reported positive experiences at work (Selart, Johansen, & Nesse, 2013). Ulmer et al (2019) argued that the conditions for renewal were more likely if the triggering event that led to the crisis was unintentional compared to intentional.…”

The Emergence of Collective Leadership During a Terrorist Attack: Dynamic Role Boundary Transgressions as Central in Aligning Efforts

“…Further, as organizations are likely to experience extreme situations for which resilience needs to be developed in advance (Hällgren et al, 2018; Williams et al, 2017), they need to prepare to combine planned and impromptu efforts. In high reliability organizations (HROs) such as the one studied, there is a tendency to rely on formality and preparedness plans (Selart et al, 2013). Yet, as this study shows, during extreme events, this appears not to be enough.…”

“…In this study, we narrow our scope to study crisis leadership on the more extreme end of the continuum of being disruptive. While there may be plans and structures in place for different risk and crisis potentials (Selart et al, 2013), effective response is likely to require the mobilization of ad hoc structures, demanding structural flexibility and improvization. This diverges substantially from the static bureaucratic structures often found in existing plans and structures in risky and emergency contexts, such as in emergency wards (Klein et al, 2006) or firefighting units (Bigley & Roberts, 2001).…”