Organizational Resilience and the Relationship With Six Major Crisis Types for Dutch Safety Regions

IF 1.9 Q3 PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION Risk, Hazards & Crisis in Public Policy Pub Date : 2019-09-01 DOI:10.1002/RHC3.12167
J. V. Trijp, K. Boersma, S. V. Trijp, P. Groenewegen
{"title":"Organizational Resilience and the Relationship With Six Major Crisis Types for Dutch Safety Regions","authors":"J. V. Trijp, K. Boersma, S. V. Trijp, P. Groenewegen","doi":"10.1002/RHC3.12167","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"An emergency response organization is resilient when it learns from and is well equipped to handle (potential) risks and hazards. In this paper, we will address the organizational resilience fit for Dutch emergency response organizations (safety regions) in relation to various types of crisis. The approach presented in this paper is based on a quantitative organizational resilience model. We validated the model by means of a survey conducted among the employees of Dutch safety regions. In this survey, we queried how the employees perceive the different attributes related to a set of crisis types. We used the results to calculate the quantitative representation of organizational resilience. We found that the presence of a Quality Management system or a Safety Management system does not significantly influence the organizational resilience of the organization. However, a statistically significant difference for organizational resilience was found in the type of staff assignment: volunteer, professional, or volunteer and professional. The volunteers rated the organizational resilience lower. We recommend to increase a safety region’s organizational resilience by enhancing communication and organizational engagement of volunteers, stop pursuing a Quality/Safety Management program and perform further research on (international) emergency response organizations.","PeriodicalId":21362,"journal":{"name":"Risk, Hazards & Crisis in Public Policy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2019-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1002/RHC3.12167","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Risk, Hazards & Crisis in Public Policy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/RHC3.12167","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

An emergency response organization is resilient when it learns from and is well equipped to handle (potential) risks and hazards. In this paper, we will address the organizational resilience fit for Dutch emergency response organizations (safety regions) in relation to various types of crisis. The approach presented in this paper is based on a quantitative organizational resilience model. We validated the model by means of a survey conducted among the employees of Dutch safety regions. In this survey, we queried how the employees perceive the different attributes related to a set of crisis types. We used the results to calculate the quantitative representation of organizational resilience. We found that the presence of a Quality Management system or a Safety Management system does not significantly influence the organizational resilience of the organization. However, a statistically significant difference for organizational resilience was found in the type of staff assignment: volunteer, professional, or volunteer and professional. The volunteers rated the organizational resilience lower. We recommend to increase a safety region’s organizational resilience by enhancing communication and organizational engagement of volunteers, stop pursuing a Quality/Safety Management program and perform further research on (international) emergency response organizations.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
荷兰安全区域组织弹性及其与六种主要危机类型的关系
当应急组织从(潜在的)风险和危害中吸取教训并有充分的准备时,它就具有弹性。在本文中,我们将讨论适合荷兰应急组织(安全区域)应对各类危机的组织弹性。本文提出的方法是基于一个定量的组织弹性模型。我们通过在荷兰安全区域的员工中进行的调查来验证该模型。在这项调查中,我们询问了员工如何看待与一系列危机类型相关的不同属性。我们使用这些结果来计算组织弹性的定量表示。我们发现质量管理体系或安全管理体系的存在对组织的弹性没有显著影响。然而,组织弹性在员工分配类型上有统计学显著差异:志愿者,专业,或志愿者和专业。志愿者对组织弹性的评价较低。我们建议通过加强志愿者的沟通和组织参与来提高安全区域的组织弹性,停止追求质量/安全管理计划,并对(国际)应急响应组织进行进一步研究。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
7.50
自引率
8.60%
发文量
20
期刊介绍: Scholarship on risk, hazards, and crises (emergencies, disasters, or public policy/organizational crises) has developed into mature and distinct fields of inquiry. Risk, Hazards & Crisis in Public Policy (RHCPP) addresses the governance implications of the important questions raised for the respective fields. The relationships between risk, hazards, and crisis raise fundamental questions with broad social science and policy implications. During unstable situations of acute or chronic danger and substantial uncertainty (i.e. a crisis), important and deeply rooted societal institutions, norms, and values come into play. The purpose of RHCPP is to provide a forum for research and commentary that examines societies’ understanding of and measures to address risk,hazards, and crises, how public policies do and should address these concerns, and to what effect. The journal is explicitly designed to encourage a broad range of perspectives by integrating work from a variety of disciplines. The journal will look at social science theory and policy design across the spectrum of risks and crises — including natural and technological hazards, public health crises, terrorism, and societal and environmental disasters. Papers will analyze the ways societies deal with both unpredictable and predictable events as public policy questions, which include topics such as crisis governance, loss and liability, emergency response, agenda setting, and the social and cultural contexts in which hazards, risks and crises are perceived and defined. Risk, Hazards & Crisis in Public Policy invites dialogue and is open to new approaches. We seek scholarly work that combines academic quality with practical relevance. We especially welcome authors writing on the governance of risk and crises to submit their manuscripts.
期刊最新文献
“Fight or flight”—A study of frontline emergency response workforce's perceived knowledge, and motivation to work during hazards Unequal burials: Medicolegal death investigation system variation as a determinant of FEMA's disaster funeral assistance allocation Translating global norms into national action. Insights from the implementation of societal security norms in Sweden Innovation and adaption in local governments in the face of COVID‐19: Determinants of effective crisis management Explaining regulatory change in the European Union: The role of the financial crisis in ratcheting up of risk regulation
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1