Organisation theory consistently invites a pressing yet too-often under-explored question: How do institutions and organisations handle uncertainty? My research explores this question by focusing on emergency management organisations in the Australian State of Victoria and does so in conversation with broader social theory (especially in sociology). The publications below are based on a multi-year ethnographic study of the 2009 Black Saturday bushfires, the public inquiry that followed, the implementation of its recommendations and an ongoing exploration of emergency management organisations in general.
The research shows that historical imprints within institutional and organisational practices often create inherent paradoxes (consistent with organisational paradox theory, especially on latent paradoxes). Organisations operate based on certain guiding principles, or what have been variously referred to as 'logics' (consistent with the institutional logics perspective). When these logics are in conflict, organisational paradoxes can be generated. The logical contradictions inherent, or latent paradoxes, become especially pronounced during unforeseeable events (consistent with research on organisational surprises). In these incidents, immediate decisions have the potential to lead to disastrous outcomes. These deep-seated contradictions, while latent, can therefore pose significant threats when they surface.
A case in point is the 'emergency management paradox' in which institutions pour extensive resources to prepare for future unexpected events by utilising knowledge that is essentially retrospective; we can only truly know such events after they have happened. Risk thinking is used by organisations to try to resolve or ignore this paradox, yet the underlying economic logic of the risk calculus and its effects on organisational decision-making are at odds with the sovereign responsibility these government agencies have, to protect a territorial population and their property (consistent with what social studies of disaster have shown). As a result, inequalities can be perpetuated and marginalised people ignored at moments when their lives are under greatest threat.
While the focus of this research is on Australia, its implications are global. Addressing grand challenges, such as climate change, requires a holistic comprehension of the paradoxes rooted in history. Simply put, to handle the uncertainties presented by risk, one must understand how the past configures both the present and the future in the here and now. Since these configurations can be as different as the future itself, the challenge is more to do with their emergence than it is to do with our predictions. One must therefore also be able to develop organisational technologies that are capable of registering the unexpected as it happens, so that decisions can be made based on reality rather than dogma.
The challenge for institutionalised organisations is that institutions do the thinking for us (consistent with what anthropologist Mary Douglas argues). Organisations therefore need to have instruments that are open to registering the unexpected and mechanisms for updating institutionalised practices that would otherwise be blind to this. A case in point is the fire index that was converted from a hand-held manual dial to an open-ended algorithm. The index escaped its own maximum value when the fires were so ferocious that the measurements produced calculations greater than the dial would have contained. The practical concern is about how to update practices but it is underpinned by philosophical concerns: what is uncertainty, what is risk and where do unexpected things come from?
All organisations encounter unexpected challenges. From market shifts to internal disruptions, navigating 'surprises', or events that are wholly unanticipated, is a widespread organisational challenge. To improve decision-making, organisations need a deeper understanding of these surprises. This involves preparing for external uncertainties while also addressing and reconciling internal discrepancies that might compound these challenges.
References