An examination of a paradox in crisis management: Can we prepare for the unpredictable

The purpose of this dissertation was to develop and test one theoretical explanation of why organizations that prepare plans and train for multiple types of crises are better able to recover from a crisis situation than organizations that focus on a single situation. Using cognitive psychology and decision theory, propositions were developed that a single crisis management plan provides a schematic, which guides the decision-maker's interpretation of a crisis situation and limits the decision-maker's ability to respond during a crisis. On the other hand, the preparation and training for multiple types of crises improves the decision-maker's ability to interpret a crisis situation. Thus, the decision-maker is better able to respond to a crisis. Organizations, however, do not always possess the necessary resources to develop multiple crisis plans. Another technique to improve decision-making during crisis is needed. Using the literature on creative decision-making, it was also proposed that the use of creative decision analysis would increase the ability of the decision-maker to make the correct decision during a crisis. A between-subject factorial design was used to test the hypotheses derived from the propositions. Individuals who received training in a crisis management plan for a specific crisis performed significantly better in a particular crisis situation rather than a deviate crisis situation and performed better than individual who received no training. Individuals who received training in creative decision analysis performed better in both crises situations than individuals who received no training. These results suggest that crisis management plans do create a rigid schema of a crisis situation that limits the decision-makers ability to respond to a crisis. Additionally, creative decision analysis may provide another avenue for training in crisis decision-making.