Instability in the global economy in the wake of COVID-19 has resulted in millions of people losing access to employment. As a result, these same individuals will be faced with the pain of job loss in the present and the stress of the job search process in the future. This commentary seeks to draw attention to the psychological trauma that can result from job loss and job search and motivate psychologists to consider issues of work–life spillover in the aftermath of the pandemic.
The incursion of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) reached global scale in 2020, requiring a response from leaders worldwide. Although the virus is a ubiquitous problem, world leaders have varied appreciably in their responses resulting in substantially different outcomes in terms of virus mitigation, population health, and economic stability. One explanation for this inconsistency is that leaders have taken differential approaches to making sense of the crisis that, in turn, have driven their approaches to decision making and communication. The present article elaborates on the role of leaders as sensemakers and explains how a leader’s sensemaking approach is a critical element in successful crisis management efforts. Through the charismatic, ideological, pragmatic (CIP) leadership model, a sensemaking-focused theory of leadership, it is explained how specific, relatively stable sensemaking approaches manifest and what actions leaders engaged in those styles are likely to take in times of crisis. These connections are then reinforced through case examples of 3 world leaders, framed through CIP, and demonstrate how their sensemaking approach has influenced their response to COVID-19. The article concludes with a discussion of the impacts that these differential approaches to COVID-19 may have on the global community, and recommendations for more explicit incorporation of sensemaking into our understanding of leadership.
For many terrorist organizations, also known as violent extremist organizations (VEOs), their ability to perpetuate violence is often contingent upon successful recruitment and selection of organizational members. Although academic work on terrorist recruitment and selection has improved in recent years, researchers have generally focused more heavily on aspects of radicalization rather than organization attraction and entry. Moreover, a number of terrorism scholars have lamented the lack of conceptual frameworks with which to interpret and extend findings linked to recruitment and selection, specifically. In light of these difficulties, we propose that considering literature bases outside of terrorism may be useful in extending lines of inquiry and offering alternative ways of thinking about how terrorist organizations operate. Specifically, we draw on Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Human Resource Management, and Organizational Behavior literature bases to offer alternative and extended modes of thought on terrorist recruitment and selection. In doing so, we believe both terrorism and more traditional organizational scholars can make substantive and novel contributions to future investigations of increasingly pressing issues surrounding violent extremism. (PsycINFO Database Record
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.