Crisis during recovery: lessons from 1904 Baltimore fire

Abstract

Purpose -A recovery crisis is an occasion when there is a subsequent calamity after a major crisis such as the recovery crisis following the 9/11 World Trade Center tragedy or the recovery crisis following the devastation in New Orleans caused by Hurricane Katrina. Consequently, this paper seeks to focus on what can be done to prevent or limit the ill effects of a crisis during recovery. Design /methodology/approach -An examination of the details of the great Baltimore fire of 1904 reveals why there was a crisis during their recovery; and by studying the lessons they learned, it will be evident that some of these lessons should be considered for dealing with present day recovery crises. Findings -While many people worked together to bring the fire under control during the great Baltimore fire many of the same people fought each other in a crisis that followed the fire during the recovery of Baltimore's 70 block business district. That is, initial passions changed abruptly from working unselfishly together for the greater good during the 30-hour fire to self-serving actions during the rebuilding of the city. In fact, the political conflict was so stressful after the fire that Baltimore's mayor committed suicide. Practical implications -The findings of this article focus on sound measures that should be considered today. Originality/value -The paper is an application of historical lessons learned. The experiences described in this paper can be helpful in discussions today about crisis management.

What management history can tell us about the postpandemic workplace, and other useful things?

“…Such changes can, of course, lead to unexpected positive outcomes for some people, along with poor, even tragic, results for many others. Often in the aftermath of a crises, political infighting and other conflict ensues as a recovery crisis, defined as a period of calamity after a major crisis (Petersen, 2010). Petersen used the Baltimore fire of 1904 to illustrate ways to address recovery crises and better understand them.…”

Leadership lessons from the Titanic and Concordia disasters

“…This theme has adopted and investigated several areas of leadership, including the (Humphreys et al, 2013) study of the Battle of Blair Mountain to better understand defiance of leaders, as did (Coye et al, 2010) cases of mutinies. Other important studies on leaders and crisis included (Hollow, 2014) examination of bank failures, (Petersen, 2010) study of the Baltimore fire of 1904, (Lopes, 2014) study of the Lisbon earthquake of 1755 focusing on leadership in organizational transformation and (Brady, 2011) study of the battle of Stalingrad and the contrast of rigid vs improvisational approaches to organization. The present study builds on this work and considers leadership in crisis situations, particularly where leadership decisions came up short and resulted in preventable disasters.…”

The history of the modernisation construct

“…For example, in Management & Organisational History , Barratt (2014) discussed modernisation as rhetoric within the British Civil Service and presented it as highly associated with cooperative bureaucracy, which generated distinct perspectives from the New Labour and Conservatives. In the Journal of Management History , Petersen (2010) utilised modernisation to frame the development of the equipment and building standards after the 1904 Baltimore fire in an effort to demonstrate how locals sought to reduce the likelihood of a similar disaster and expedite recovery. Peterson specifically found that modernisation involved examining, establishing and enforcing stricter building codes, eliminating, when possible, above-ground electricity units and wires and redeveloping community space, all of which are considered important to modern day fire prevention.…”