Int. Journal of Business Science and Applied Management / Business-and-Management.org
22
Crisis management planning often mistakenly places humans at the bottom of the priority list, and
instead emphasizes the recovery of systems, operations, infrastructure, and public relations (Lockwood,
2005). In their post-crisis procedures, many organizations’ HR practices are terminated shortly after a
crisis, or whenever it is perceived that the danger is over. The HRD, as an original Rejuvenator, should
continue to offer counselling services and monitor the procedures being carried out by experts, in the
event an employee requires further post-trauma support. Without these supports, humans have a
tendency to withdraw, thereby minimizing workgroup communication (Barton, 1993). Productivity
may also deteriorate, and employees may soon become vulnerable to other crises.
In the role of the Renaissance Man, the HRD is obliged to do anything within its power to ensure
the full recovery of the employees. The HRD must also maintain a direct line of communication
between the department and the employees, with the aim of strengthening employees’ emotional and
mental states. Since crises are experienced as “major acts of betrayal” (Mitroff, 2005, p. 39), the
negative emotions, fears, uncertainties, and stresses that arise during the crisis stage continue long after
the crisis is over. One HRD solution is providing employee assistance programs (EAPs), which may
help employees overcome the negative emotions and sense of grief they might experience long after a
crisis (Premeaux and Breaux, 2007). Lockwood (2005) writes that organizations have to be aware of
the impacts that crises have on employees, their families, and the larger society, and notes that
“business recovery and operational sustainability cannot occur without employees” (p. 3).
Numerous practitioners and scholars argue that a crisis may promote organizational learning and
observe that organizational learning from the critical aftermath and previous crisis events is an
underdeveloped process (Pauchant, Mitroff, and Lagadec, 1991). According to Wang, Hutchins, and
Garavan (2009) “organizational learning focused SHRD strategies emphasize critical reflection,
organizational socialization, tacit learning, learning from mistakes, and action-centered learning” (p.
40). Contrary to many beliefs, a crisis can promote organizational as well as individual learning.
Numerous people, organizations, communities, and societies that have overcome crises have derived
valuable knowledge and experience in doing so. The lessons gained resulted in stronger and healthier
individuals relative to these individuals in the pre-crisis stage. Thus, crises may motivate organizations
to search for a wider portfolio of responses to future crisis (Seeger, Ulmer, Novak, and Sellnow, 2005).
Crises, and the events associated with them that have never been taken into consideration and have
been omitted from existing CMPs, can motivate CMTs—and especially the HRD’s managers—to
reassess their plans. One such example is the case of the University of Texas, which acquired and used
the lessons learned from the 2007 shootings that ended the lives of 32 people in the Virginia
Polytechnic Institute and State University (Virginia Tech) in Virginia (Wang and Hutchins, 2010). The
2-hour delay before notifying the campus community and the police occurred simply because a
scenario such as that was not included in the university’s Emergency Response Plan (ERP), and it
became an “example to be avoided”. According to Wang and Hutchins (2010) “prior to the 2007 mass
shootings, there had been no crisis events requiring the involvement of the Policy Group. Furthermore,
there was no training or testing of how the campus Policy Group would respond to a crisis situation”
(p. 560). This difficult lesson was subsequently used by the University of Texas to expand its portfolio
of responses to future crises. A similar incident occurred on 28 September 2010, in a library on the
University of Texas (Austin) campus, where a shooter opened fire. In a very short period of time the
campus was locked down, and approximately 43.000 students, faculty, and personnel had been warned
via mobile and text messages to stay away from the campus (Wang and Hutchins, 2010). Particularly
after the 9/11 attacks, HR managers have been reassessing and redesigning their CMPs, with the aim of
increasing their effectiveness.
The HR manager, as a Renaissance Man, is also obliged to promote and share values with the
employees. The culture of an organization, the philosophy and vision of its founders, and its
foundational values are essential for its survival and revival following a critical event. To recover from
a severe crisis, Mitroff (2005) highlights that “one has to ‘re-humanize’ the dehumanization that has
taken place with regard to one’s betrayer, whether individual, an organization, a society, or even a
whole civilization, as in the case of 9/11” (p. 47). Characteristics such as independence, self-
sufficiency, impartiality, the development of critical thinking, the acceptance of challenges, the
application of innovative practices, and the advisory review should be the HRD’s main attributes. The
HRD may then use these values to inspire its employees. Integrity, in combination with objectivity and
quality, are cornerstone values that contribute to the viability of every organization, as well as to its
competitiveness (Parrett, 2007). Common values develop a powerful interactive bond between the
HRD and its employees. This interface is of great importance, as it brings together employees with
different cultures, morals, customs, languages, religions, and cultural backgrounds. Only by reinforcing
the previously mentioned values is it possible to achieve the desired level of unity, which in turn will
lead to success, via the appropriate and wise management of every potential crisis.