This study aims to advance crisis communication by incorporating morality in understanding crisis communication and explicating effective strategies for using artificial intelligence (AI) technology (e.g., ChatGPT) in the context of the ‘preventable’ cluster of crisis types. To this end, we conducted an online experiment, adopting a 3 (crisis type) × 2 (crisis response source label) between-subjects design. The results indicate that scansis elicited greater moral outrage than other crisis types and that a crisis response from ChatGPT led to lower authenticity than a crisis response from a PR representative. Indirect effects analyses demonstrated that moral outrage, authenticity and forgiveness mediated the effects of crisis type and message source label on behavioural outcomes. Theoretical and practical implications are discussed.
{"title":"Unpacking Generative Artificial Intelligence-Powered Crisis Communication From a Moral Angle: The Role of Moral Outrage, Authenticity, and Forgiveness","authors":"Sungsu Kim, Myoung-Gi Chon","doi":"10.1111/1468-5973.70066","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-5973.70066","url":null,"abstract":"<p>This study aims to advance crisis communication by incorporating morality in understanding crisis communication and explicating effective strategies for using artificial intelligence (AI) technology (e.g., ChatGPT) in the context of the ‘preventable’ cluster of crisis types. To this end, we conducted an online experiment, adopting a 3 (crisis type) × 2 (crisis response source label) between-subjects design. The results indicate that scansis elicited greater moral outrage than other crisis types and that a crisis response from ChatGPT led to lower authenticity than a crisis response from a PR representative. Indirect effects analyses demonstrated that moral outrage, authenticity and forgiveness mediated the effects of crisis type and message source label on behavioural outcomes. Theoretical and practical implications are discussed.</p>","PeriodicalId":47674,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management","volume":"33 3","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.2,"publicationDate":"2025-07-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/1468-5973.70066","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144751564","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abolfazl Khanbeiki, Beatriz Sora, Mehran Mohebi, Joan Boada-Grau
There are many inconsistencies in the conceptualisation and measurement of organisational resilience. Existing measures often focus on either the ability or process perspective, limiting their comprehensiveness, and failing to capture the multifaceted nature of resilience. Furthermore, many of these measures and their psychometric properties have not been appropriately validated and they focused on specific organisations and countries, which limits its usability to other work contexts. This study aims to provide a measure that uses the main approaches in the literature and to validate this in a cross-cultural sample of 1435 employees from 138 organisations in two European countries (Spain and Austria). The data were randomly split in two independent subsamples (Sample 1: Explorative; Sample 2: Confirmative). The exploratory factor analysis had a bi-dimensional factorial structure consisting of the dimensions of ability and process. Confirmatory factor analysis replicated this bi-dimensional structure by presenting better goodness of fit indices than the alternative one-factor model. Reliabilities were acceptable for ability and process dimensions in both countries. Convergent validity was also adequate for the two dimensions in both countries with satisfactory AVE and CR. In addition, significant correlations were found in both countries between organisational resilience and organisational commitment and job satisfaction. Finally, discriminant validity was also appropriate. This study is relevant for researchers and practitioners because it provides a useful tool for advancing understanding of organisational resilience and for assessing how resilient organisations are.
{"title":"Brief Organisational Resilience Scale (BORS): Development and Validity in Spain and Austria","authors":"Abolfazl Khanbeiki, Beatriz Sora, Mehran Mohebi, Joan Boada-Grau","doi":"10.1111/1468-5973.70063","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-5973.70063","url":null,"abstract":"<p>There are many inconsistencies in the conceptualisation and measurement of organisational resilience. Existing measures often focus on either the ability or process perspective, limiting their comprehensiveness, and failing to capture the multifaceted nature of resilience. Furthermore, many of these measures and their psychometric properties have not been appropriately validated and they focused on specific organisations and countries, which limits its usability to other work contexts. This study aims to provide a measure that uses the main approaches in the literature and to validate this in a cross-cultural sample of 1435 employees from 138 organisations in two European countries (Spain and Austria). The data were randomly split in two independent subsamples (Sample 1: Explorative; Sample 2: Confirmative). The exploratory factor analysis had a bi-dimensional factorial structure consisting of the dimensions of ability and process. Confirmatory factor analysis replicated this bi-dimensional structure by presenting better goodness of fit indices than the alternative one-factor model. Reliabilities were acceptable for ability and process dimensions in both countries. Convergent validity was also adequate for the two dimensions in both countries with satisfactory AVE and CR. In addition, significant correlations were found in both countries between organisational resilience and organisational commitment and job satisfaction. Finally, discriminant validity was also appropriate. This study is relevant for researchers and practitioners because it provides a useful tool for advancing understanding of organisational resilience and for assessing how resilient organisations are.</p>","PeriodicalId":47674,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management","volume":"33 3","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.2,"publicationDate":"2025-07-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/1468-5973.70063","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144740494","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This paper examines learning processes in crisis management organizations, focusing on Incident management and command in the military, police, and county administrative board in Sweden. Using a participation lens, we explore human interactions during high-pressure crises. Our research question is formulated as follows: How does the practice of training for crisis shape practitioners' habits regarding crisis management in organizations? To examine this, we conducted 19 days of fieldwork, including observations and 18 semi-structured interviews, enabled a comparative analysis of organising in incident management situations. We found that training groups influence organizational routines, suggesting that learning routines involve habit formation through repeated actions. This challenges traditional incident command training assumptions and highlights the need for training programs that prioritize relevance over realism.
{"title":"Forming Habits in Emergency Organisations—Training for Extreme Situations","authors":"Ola Lindberg, Oscar Rantatalo, Markus Hällgren","doi":"10.1111/1468-5973.70067","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-5973.70067","url":null,"abstract":"<p>This paper examines learning processes in crisis management organizations, focusing on Incident management and command in the military, police, and county administrative board in Sweden. Using a participation lens, we explore human interactions during high-pressure crises. Our research question is formulated as follows: How does the practice of training for crisis shape practitioners' habits regarding crisis management in organizations? To examine this, we conducted 19 days of fieldwork, including observations and 18 semi-structured interviews, enabled a comparative analysis of organising in incident management situations. We found that training groups influence organizational routines, suggesting that learning routines involve habit formation through repeated actions. This challenges traditional incident command training assumptions and highlights the need for training programs that prioritize relevance over realism.</p>","PeriodicalId":47674,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management","volume":"33 3","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.6,"publicationDate":"2025-07-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/1468-5973.70067","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144687892","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}