Extreme events, organizations and the politics of decision making

David C. Wilson, Layla Branicki, Bridgette Sullivan-Taylor, Alexander D. Wilson

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Purpose – Threats of extreme events, such as terrorist attacks or infrastructure breakdown, are potentially highly disruptive events for all types of organizations. This paper seeks to take a political perspective to power in strategic decision making and how this influences planning for extreme events.
Design/methodology/approach – A sample of 160 informants drawn from 135 organizations, which are part of the critical national infrastructure in the UK, forms the empirical basis of the paper. Most of these organizations had publicly placed business continuity and preparedness as a strategic priority. The paper adopts a qualitative approach, coding data from focus groups.
Findings – In nearly all cases there is a pre-existing dominant coalition which keeps business continuity decisions off the strategic agenda. The only exceptions to this are a handful of organizations which provide continuous production, such as some utilities, where disruption to business as usual can be readily quantified. The data reveal structural and decisional elements of the exercise of power. Structurally, the dominant coalition centralizes control by ensuring that only a few functional interests participate in decision making.
Research limitations/implications – Decisional elements of power emphasize the dominance of calculative rationality where decisions are primarily made on information and arguments which can be quantified. Finally, the paper notes the recursive aspect of power relations whereby agency and structure are mutually constitutive over time. Organizational structures of control are maintained, despite the involvement of managers charged with organizational preparedness and resilience, who remain outside the dominant coalition.
Originality/value – The paper constitutes a first attempt to show how planning for emergencies fits within the strategy-making process and how politically controlled this process is.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)699-721
Number of pages23
JournalAccounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal
Volume23
Issue number5
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2010

Fingerprint

Decision making
Extreme events
Business continuity
Planning
Preparedness
Power relations
Agenda
Emergency
Qualitative approaches
Disruption
Focus groups
Agency and structure
Breakdown
Organizational structure
Terrorist attack
Design methodology
Threat
Strategy-making
Exercise
Strategic decision making

Keywords

  • coalitions
  • decision making
  • management power
  • structures

Cite this

Wilson, David C. ; Branicki, Layla ; Sullivan-Taylor, Bridgette ; Wilson, Alexander D. / Extreme events, organizations and the politics of decision making. In: Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal. 2010 ; Vol. 23, No. 5. pp. 699-721.
@article{97fe9942aa114c6bafa8be3c58a6c1f7,
title = "Extreme events, organizations and the politics of decision making",
abstract = "Purpose – Threats of extreme events, such as terrorist attacks or infrastructure breakdown, are potentially highly disruptive events for all types of organizations. This paper seeks to take a political perspective to power in strategic decision making and how this influences planning for extreme events.Design/methodology/approach – A sample of 160 informants drawn from 135 organizations, which are part of the critical national infrastructure in the UK, forms the empirical basis of the paper. Most of these organizations had publicly placed business continuity and preparedness as a strategic priority. The paper adopts a qualitative approach, coding data from focus groups.Findings – In nearly all cases there is a pre-existing dominant coalition which keeps business continuity decisions off the strategic agenda. The only exceptions to this are a handful of organizations which provide continuous production, such as some utilities, where disruption to business as usual can be readily quantified. The data reveal structural and decisional elements of the exercise of power. Structurally, the dominant coalition centralizes control by ensuring that only a few functional interests participate in decision making.Research limitations/implications – Decisional elements of power emphasize the dominance of calculative rationality where decisions are primarily made on information and arguments which can be quantified. Finally, the paper notes the recursive aspect of power relations whereby agency and structure are mutually constitutive over time. Organizational structures of control are maintained, despite the involvement of managers charged with organizational preparedness and resilience, who remain outside the dominant coalition.Originality/value – The paper constitutes a first attempt to show how planning for emergencies fits within the strategy-making process and how politically controlled this process is.",
keywords = "coalitions, decision making, management power, structures",
author = "Wilson, {David C.} and Layla Branicki and Bridgette Sullivan-Taylor and Wilson, {Alexander D.}",
year = "2010",
doi = "10.1108/09513571011054945",
language = "English",
volume = "23",
pages = "699--721",
journal = "Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal",
issn = "1368-0668",
publisher = "Emerald Group Publishing Ltd.",
number = "5",

}

Extreme events, organizations and the politics of decision making. / Wilson, David C.; Branicki, Layla; Sullivan-Taylor, Bridgette; Wilson, Alexander D.

In: Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal, Vol. 23, No. 5, 2010, p. 699-721.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Extreme events, organizations and the politics of decision making

AU - Wilson, David C.

AU - Branicki, Layla

AU - Sullivan-Taylor, Bridgette

AU - Wilson, Alexander D.

PY - 2010

Y1 - 2010

N2 - Purpose – Threats of extreme events, such as terrorist attacks or infrastructure breakdown, are potentially highly disruptive events for all types of organizations. This paper seeks to take a political perspective to power in strategic decision making and how this influences planning for extreme events.Design/methodology/approach – A sample of 160 informants drawn from 135 organizations, which are part of the critical national infrastructure in the UK, forms the empirical basis of the paper. Most of these organizations had publicly placed business continuity and preparedness as a strategic priority. The paper adopts a qualitative approach, coding data from focus groups.Findings – In nearly all cases there is a pre-existing dominant coalition which keeps business continuity decisions off the strategic agenda. The only exceptions to this are a handful of organizations which provide continuous production, such as some utilities, where disruption to business as usual can be readily quantified. The data reveal structural and decisional elements of the exercise of power. Structurally, the dominant coalition centralizes control by ensuring that only a few functional interests participate in decision making.Research limitations/implications – Decisional elements of power emphasize the dominance of calculative rationality where decisions are primarily made on information and arguments which can be quantified. Finally, the paper notes the recursive aspect of power relations whereby agency and structure are mutually constitutive over time. Organizational structures of control are maintained, despite the involvement of managers charged with organizational preparedness and resilience, who remain outside the dominant coalition.Originality/value – The paper constitutes a first attempt to show how planning for emergencies fits within the strategy-making process and how politically controlled this process is.

AB - Purpose – Threats of extreme events, such as terrorist attacks or infrastructure breakdown, are potentially highly disruptive events for all types of organizations. This paper seeks to take a political perspective to power in strategic decision making and how this influences planning for extreme events.Design/methodology/approach – A sample of 160 informants drawn from 135 organizations, which are part of the critical national infrastructure in the UK, forms the empirical basis of the paper. Most of these organizations had publicly placed business continuity and preparedness as a strategic priority. The paper adopts a qualitative approach, coding data from focus groups.Findings – In nearly all cases there is a pre-existing dominant coalition which keeps business continuity decisions off the strategic agenda. The only exceptions to this are a handful of organizations which provide continuous production, such as some utilities, where disruption to business as usual can be readily quantified. The data reveal structural and decisional elements of the exercise of power. Structurally, the dominant coalition centralizes control by ensuring that only a few functional interests participate in decision making.Research limitations/implications – Decisional elements of power emphasize the dominance of calculative rationality where decisions are primarily made on information and arguments which can be quantified. Finally, the paper notes the recursive aspect of power relations whereby agency and structure are mutually constitutive over time. Organizational structures of control are maintained, despite the involvement of managers charged with organizational preparedness and resilience, who remain outside the dominant coalition.Originality/value – The paper constitutes a first attempt to show how planning for emergencies fits within the strategy-making process and how politically controlled this process is.

KW - coalitions

KW - decision making

KW - management power

KW - structures

UR - http://www.emeraldinsight.com/journals.htm?articleid=1864540&show=abstract

U2 - 10.1108/09513571011054945

DO - 10.1108/09513571011054945

M3 - Article

VL - 23

SP - 699

EP - 721

JO - Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal

JF - Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal

SN - 1368-0668

IS - 5

ER -