Purpose Organizations of all types desire to be imbued with resilience, or the ability to withstand and bounce back from difficult events (Richardson, 2002; Walsh 2003). But resilience does not play the same role in every organization. Previous research (Weick and Sutcliffe, 2011) has argued that organizations can be more or less resilient. For high reliability organizations (HROs) such as fire crews and emergency medical units, resilience is a defining feature. Due to the life-or-death nature of their work, the ability to be successful in the face of difficult events is imperative to the process of HROs. The paper aims to discuss these issues. Design/methodology/approach This is a theory piece. Findings The authors put forth a dual-spectrum model that introduces adaptive and anchored approaches to organizational resilience. Research limitations/implications There are organizations for which resilience is only enacted when the organization must overcome difficult events. And at the other end are organizations that may not enact resilience in difficult times, and therefore fail or deteriorate. But while it has been shown that organizations can be more or less resilient, there has been little attention paid to how organizations may have differing types of resilience. Originality/value In this piece, the authors theorize that resilience may differ in type between organizations. Drawing on theoretical approaches to resilience from communication (Buzzanell, 2010), organizational behavior (Weick and Sutcliffe, 2011), and motivational psychology (Dweck, 2016), the authors introduce a model that views resilience as a dynamic construct in organizations. The authors argue that an organization’s resilience-centered actions affect – and are determined by – its approach to Buzzanell’s (2010) five communicative processes of resilience. The authors offer testable propositions, as well as theoretical and practical implications from this model, not only for HROs, but for all organizations.
Action teams are unique among group types in that their work is focused on time-constrained performance events that cannot be redone later. This aspect of their team temporality gives rise to an emphasis on simulationa technique used by teams to replicate the taskwork, coordination, and communication of real-life events-and adaptation-in which teams use "time-outs" to give members a chance to regroup and communicate. In the present article, we attempt to offer more precision in research and theorizing across diverse team types through first offering a typology of action teams that considers the work of critical, contending, and performing teams. This typology informs the nested phase model introduced next, which accounts for the unique temporality of teams that place a heavy emphasis on performance and the related issues of cyclicity, finality, and epochality that characterize their work. Testable propositions intended to guide future research are offered.
Experiential learning is essential for many high-performing teams, yet there are also challenges to its incorporation into team training. Using an interpretivist lens, this study explores how members of wildfire crews are encouraged to appropriate the experiences of their teammates to improve team process. First, we offer a tripartite argument for how experiential learning is inhibited. Then, based on our findings, we argue that a key practice of critical teamwork is the ability of team members to “borrow” experiences or learn from the experiences of others. We examine how firefighters interpret the concept of experience; the delineation between experiences and personal experiences was often blurred, as some firefighters spoke about experience as something that could be gained through activities that are not specifically firefighting. We delineate five training interactions through which firefighters are encouraged to appropriate the experiences of their colleagues. We then discuss how this extends the principles of the Nested Phase Model for critical teams and suggest areas for future research. These findings have implications for all types of critical teams—including military units and medical teams—as well as high-reliability organizations.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.