Innovative behaviour of employees refers to a key aspect of organizational effectiveness: the creation, intro-duction and application of new ideas within a group or organization in order to benefit performance. Using data from a Dutch and German survey in four technical organizations (n=272) we developed and tested two models to explain the relationships between Leader-Member-Exchange (LMX), satisfaction with HR prac-tices (employee influence, flow, rewards and work content) and innovative behaviour. As expected both LMX and satisfaction with HR practices were positively related to innovative behaviour. Furthermore, we found evidence that satisfaction with HR practices mediates the relationship between LMX and innovative behaviour. No significant interaction effects between LMX and satisfaction with HR practices on innovative behaviour were found

This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non-commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made. Boin (2019) argues that in transboundary crisis management it is almost impossible to achieve centralization and coordination. This article identifies three principles through which actors in a transboundary crisis can balance centralization with autonomy while shaping coordination along the way. We reanalysed three transboundary cases: the Dutch military mission in Afghanistan, the downing of MH17 and hurricane Irma striking Sint-Maarten. The principles we found are as follows: (a) reformulating key strategic priorities, (b) flexible adaptation of crisis management protocols and (c) the emergence of multifunctional units. With these three principles, we reflect on challenges in the Dutch crisis response to the corona outbreak and propose improvements for progressing current crisis management efforts. Abstract K E Y W O R D Scorona virus, organizational synthesis, transboundary crisis

Management of safety within organizations has become a key topic within safety science.Theorizing on this subject covers a diverse pallet of concepts such as "resilience" and "safety management systems". Recent studies indicate that safety management theory has deficiencies. Our interpretation of these deficiencies is that much confusion originates from the issue that crucial meta-theoretical assumptions are mostly implicit or applied inconsistently. In particular, we argue that these meta-theoretical assumptions are of a systems theoretical nature. Therefore, we provide a framework that will be able to explicate and reflect on systems theoretical assumptions. With this framework, we analyze the ability of two frequently used safety management theories to tackle the problem of managing safety of Dutch military expeditionary organizations. This paper will show that inconsistent and implicit application of systems theoretical assumptions in these safety management theories results in problems to tackle such a practical problem adequately. We conclude with a reflection on the pros and cons of our framework. Also, we suggest particular metatheoretical aspects that seem to be essential for applying safety management theory to In our interpretation, a contributing factor to these difficulties in safety management theory is that crucial meta-theoretical assumptions are mostly implicit or not explicated consistently. More in particular, we assert that these meta-theoretical assumptions are of a systems theoretical nature.We argue so because within systems theory, dealing with, or reducing, uncertainty is the central topic of concern (e.g., Von Bertalannfy, 1972). Dealing with uncertainty also seems to be of central concern to safety management. Grote (2007, p. 638) points out that: "Safety is frequently defined as the smallest possible and/or acceptable risk, while risk is the product of possible damages and the probability of their occurrence. Inherent in these definitions is the concept of uncertainty.".Managing safety within organizations consequently centres on the problem of how organizations can reduce uncertainty in the best possible way (Grote, 2012(Grote, , p. 1985. Debate between different schools of thought within systems theory, however, has resulted in the development of fundamentally different perspectives on how a system can deal with (environmental) uncertainty in the best possible way (e.g., Blom, 1997;Kramer, 2007;Stacey, 1993). As safety management theory frequently employs systems theoretical concepts such as "control" and "emergence", it may therefore benefit from a reflection on systems theoretical assumptions. Also, such a reflection possibly resolves some of the difficulties that were described above.The goal of this paper is therefore to show that explicating and reflecting on systems theoretical assumptions is crucial for understanding ways safety management problems are perceived, defined and the way they are tackled. We argue that this becomes particularly relevant when safety mana...

No abstract