Upper echelons research has emphasized decision making either by individual CEOs or by teams of top managers. The authors introduce the CEO-Adviser model as an intermediate model of strategic decision making. The CEO-Adviser model leads to new propositions that have not been explored through the individual CEO or top management team models concerning how context affects the use of formal versus informal advisory systems and how advisers are selected.

In recent years, the concept of resilience has been introduced to the engineering field in particular related to disaster mitigation and management. However, the built environment is only part of the elements that support community functions. Maintaining community functionality during and after a disaster, defined as resilience, is influenced by multiple components. The paper is proposing a framework for measuring community resilience at different spatial and temporal scales. Seven dimensions are identified for measuring the community resilience: Population and Demographics, Environmental/Ecosystem, Organized Governmental Services, Physical Infrastructures, Lifestyle and Community Competence, Economic Development, and Social-Cultural Capital. They are summarized with the acronym PEOPLES. Each dimension is characterized by a corresponding performance metric that is combined with the other dimensions using a multi-layered approach. Therefore, once a hybrid model of the community is defined, the proposed framework can be applied to measure its performance against any type of extreme event during emergency and in long term post-disaster phases. A resilience index can be determined to reflect all, or part, of the dimensions influencing the events. Several applications of part of such framework can already be found in literature for different types of infrastructures, physical and organizational (e.g. gas network, water distribution networks, health care facilities etc.). The proposed framework can be used as decision support by stakeholders and managers and it can help planners in selecting the optimal restoration strategies that enhance the community resilience index.

The relationship between individual humor styles and several organizational variables was investigated: stress, satisfaction with coworkers, team cooperation, and organizational commitment. Four humor styles from the Humor Styles Questionnaire were measured. Survey results of 349 participants indicated different humor styles (affiliative, self-enhancing, aggressive, and self-defeating) can have either a positive or negative effect on organizational outcomes. Results suggested that both researchers and practitioners can benefit from having a better understanding of how different humor styles affect people and outcomes in organizations.

No abstract