What Factors Drive Organizational Learning From Crisis? Insights From the Dutch Food Safety Services’ Response to Four Veterinary Crises

Abstract

Although organizational learning has been studied extensively, empirical studies in relation to crises and theory building have remained scarce. This study explored what factors affect the learning process from crises of a public sector organization. We studied the responses of the Dutch food safety services (NVWA) to the veterinary crises classical swine fever (1997–1998), foot‐and‐mouth disease (2001), avian influenza (2003) and Q fever (2007–2010). Data from in‐depth interviews with key experts in the organization and from crisis management documents pointed to political–economic context, social–emotional understanding, organizational structure, organizational culture, crisis management stage and organizational forgetting as key factors. Remarkably, postcrisis evaluation reports, leadership and a shared sense‐making of what lessons to learn were not found to play a central role.

Leading frontline enforcers: how supervisors’ leadership style impacts inspectors’ enforcement style

“…Another explanation may be that the work of inspectors as street-level bureaucrats is a unique setting, and its characteristics (such as the type of task, the characteristics of the encounter with the inspectee) may be more important than the leadership style of the supervisor in shaping enforcement style (see also Broekema, Van Kleef, and Steen 2017). For instance, the inspectors in our study specifically are often 'out' in the field and spend the majority of their time alone (or with a colleague) on the road or visiting inspectees for inspections.…”

Collective Learning in Organizations—Opportunities and Constraints: Case Study of an Avalanche Blocking a Railway Line

“…Trusting environment is highlighted as a major positive aspect for learning and sharing of knowledge (Ask et al, ; Broekema et al, ; Ford et al, ). Collective leaning in an organizational setting is said to require a close‐knit inter‐organizational system, where trust among actors are fulfilled and where boundaries are flexible.…”

“…Learning and knowledge is regarded as a critical resource for organizations to sustain (Broekema, Kleef, & Steen, ; Lam, ). Learning is seen as acquisition of (new) information that is interpreted and translated into contextual fitted knowledge, which leads to (sometimes new) effective actions in the organization.…”

“…Learning is seen as acquisition of (new) information that is interpreted and translated into contextual fitted knowledge, which leads to (sometimes new) effective actions in the organization. Learning could mean knowledge acquisition by individuals; distribution of new knowledge in the organization's teams, interpretation by the team‐members where new information may become shared understanding, and lastly the new knowledge may become part of the organization's memory (Broekema et al, ; Ohlsson, ; Ohlsson & Granberg, ). Learning involves both cognitive processes as sense‐making by the individual, and processes of action as new policies or procedures on the organizational level or by new behavior at team and individual level.…”

Designing a Quantum Management Model for Organizational Learning Through a Systematic Approach to Grounded Theory: A Case Study of the Zahedan University of Medical Sciences

“…Organizational learning can be defined as the "process of improving actions through better knowledge and understanding", which is a changing process occurring over time. Organizational knowledge is achieved by experience (14), which means acquiring new knowledge and using it for the effectiveness and efficiency of the activities of the organization (15). According to Karpin (cited in Jegarvande and Daryakesh), a learning organization is one that "creates the opportunity for learning for all of its members and is constantly changing.…”