Organizational Behavior during Emergencies - Literature review Example

Organisation Behaviour Introduction Organisations comprise a variety of various elements that must be managed in harmony to facilitate effective running of their activities. Many authors, such as Fox (2007) and Peyton (2003) reviewed organizations from a systems perspective. Key findings in their reviews include the point that organisations are complex systems with elements that must be well coordinated in order to produce the desired results. The complexity of an organisation arises from the fact that different people have to perform different roles, but these roles have to be well coordinated because the people work towards attaining the same objective. The study of organisational behaviour thus involves how the various people within an organisation behave and relate as individuals or as groups, and consequently how the organisations they work for perform (Armstrong 2006, p.237). It is therefore important to analyse organisation behaviour from different perspectives in order to understand their operational effectiveness. Based on what has been highlighted above, this paper discusses organisation behaviour by considering the fire and rescue service in the United Kingdom as a case study. The services offered by the fire service cannot be ignored. Without the service perhaps some emergencies that occurred in the past could have turned in massive calamities and disasters. For such an important organisation, organisational behaviour needs to be well coordinated in that during emergencies, the staff can rush against time to save casualties and help salvage property. The paper therefore gives a balanced theory on the topic. In this context, the Buncefield fire disaster will be considered. The paper also examines the organizational perspective by analyzing the connection between organisational structures and external environmental factors. The paper also looks at the role that individuals and teams play within organizations, with particular focus on communication, learning, motivation, perception, formation of groups as well as structure and teamwork. The paper also gives an explanation of how roles are defined within an organisation, particularly how roles are defined within the fire and rescue service. In addition, the paper highlights organisational development by focusing on organisation change, organisational culture and organisational conflict. The last issue addressed in this paper is organisational management, with a focus on decision making, politics, conflict and power. Issues in organisation behaviour: The Buncefield fire The fuel depot fire at Buncefield in Great Britain, which started on December 11 2005, was the largest fire ever witnessed in Europe in about 60 years (Tscheidel 2008, p. 91). The fire’s magnitude and damage was enormous (plate 1). Plate 1: A scene during the Buncefield fire Source: Tscheidel (2008), p. 91. The fire nature of service offered by the fire and rescue service at the scene can be praised in that only some 43 people sustained minor injuries, and no death occurred (Tscheidel 2008, p. 92) (which is good news going by the magnitude of the fire) but can also be criticised for delays or some sort or confusion in response. The sad note of the disaster is that the fire burned for several days, thus causing overwhelming damage to the fuel depot. This can largely be blamed on poor or ill prepared strategies to manage the fire. A significant number of issues to do with organisation behaviour arose from the Buncefield fire disaster: (1) that there was insufficient notification to mobilise for a national incident of a protracted nature such as the Buncefield disaster; (2) that there were issues in the range and quality of national “turnout” information including expected duration, RVPs, welfare arrangements, and so forth (3) there was prolonged and regular use or mobile phones that bypassed communications with hub and control (Hertford Fire and Rescue Service 2006). It was also noted that the role of the Hertford Fire and Rescue Service (HFRS) was at times blurred (HFRS 2006) perhaps due to poor organisation. In essence, the HFRS (2006) notes that “it was not clear whether the fire service was operating as a total resource centre, or undertaking the more limited role of a mobilization and communications hub” (p.56). This point raises some issues about organisations, a fundamental one being that organisations many a time neglect their roles by not spreading their functions across all areas. According to Dayal, Zachariah and Rajpal (1996), if clear objectives are the key to high performance, then some sort of organization that reflects that purpose is essential. Effective organization is the key to achieving an organisation’s and this seem to have been ignored by the HFRS in its attempt to deal with the Buncefield fire. The fact that the role of the HFRS was not clearly depicted during the Buncefield fire highlights some points as noted by Peyton (2003): (1) an organisation does not exist within a vacuum; it is a component of, and is related to the environment; (2) an organisation comprises a number of interrelated subsystems; and (3) in order for the organisation to flourish, it needs an internal congruency between the subsystems (p. 124). Failure to connect the points 1 to 3 could lead to an organisation playing a peripheral role at a time when its services are direly needed, as with the Buncefield fire. Effective running of organisations needs to consider various issues. First are the individual differences that occur between people: levels of intelligence, capabilities, race, gender, culture, personality and so forth. Secondly, people have different attitudes (Martinko, 1995) - this was apparent in the confusion within the HFRS. The third point is the various influences on people’s behaviour given that people have attitudes and personalities. Finally, it is important to consider the attribution theory, which states that people have a tendency to make different judgment about others and situations (Martinko, 1995). Situational attribution is when people put blame on people and their disposition; while situational attribution is when blame is put on a situation (McNiff & Whitehead 2000, p. 107). For instance, the HFRS could blame the destruction caused by the fire on the magnitude of the fire. Outline of the fire and rescue service: the HFRS The UK fire and rescue service is composed of three complex operational structures: the Gold command, the Silver command and the Bronze command. The Gold command is in charge of the strategic function of the service, the Silver command is in charge of the tactical operations, while the Bronze command is charged with the responsibility of delivering at the operational level. During emergency cases, the Bronze command has to be on the ground and has to coordinate effectively with both the Gold and Silver commands (Cabinet Office 2001, p.18). The success of the HFRS mitigating incidences of mass casualties can be attributed to the fact that all the three commands responded effectively to avoid many people being affected by the fire. For instance, at the incident, the HFRS set up a Control Unit some 950 metres from the main gate to the site. This facilitated space for marshalling and the safety of the position allowed medium term tactical planning to be effected from there. Further, in line with common practice, this was regarded as the Fire Silver command; with sector commanders operating in another capacity as the Bronze command (HFRS 2006, p. 56; Buncefield Major Incident Investigation Board 2007). The fact that all the three organs of the command structure need to be well coordinated in order to facilitate the efficiency of the fire and rescue service cannot be gainsaid. This calls for coordinated behaviour that is aimed at achieving the sensitive goal of providing rescue even in the most difficult of conditions as was experienced in the Buncefield fire. The National Policing Improvement Agency (NPIA) (2009) states that one of the most important factors that determine the success of emergency services provided by the fire and rescue service is for the personnel involved from each of the levels to understand the cultures, capabilities, and working practices of the related services. This needs to be emphasised through routine training and exercise practices (p.22). Thus, it is worth noting that the coordination of these services needs well coordinated organisational behaviour. Relationship between internal organisational structures and external environmental factors Internal organisational structures are the elements of the organization such as management orientation, the organisation size, and employee strength (Aswathappa 2005, p. 201). These are determined by the aspects of the organisation such as organisation behaviour and the organisation’s set objectives. The factors are interrelated with many others as shown inn figure 1. Figure 1: Factors influencing organisation structure Source: (Aswathappa 2005, p. 201) On the other hand, the external environment refers to the factors that exist outside the boundaries of the organisation, which have the potential to affect it. These include resources, technology, economic conditions and forth. However, this does not include events that are so far from the organisation that their impacts are not perceived (Daft 2007, p.72). The relationship between the two aspects of organisation is that the internal structure is composed of factors such as the current employees, management, and corporate culture; all of which define the behaviour of employees in the internal environment, hence organisation behaviour. This is in turn reflected a lot on how well the organisation adapts to the external environment; for instance how the HFRS can respond to emergencies of different magnitudes. Role of individuals and teams within organizations The organisational prescription of roles is also the means of subdividing the organisation’s total task and a means of reducing the variety of an individual’s behaviour (Eldridge & Crombie 1974, p.114). Organisational roles are featured by a much higher degree of specificity and this determines how they are distributed between individuals or teams. In organisations, individuals are usually surrounded by other people, whether superiors or subordinates, who act as role senders to them. Individuals determine the success of organisations, since their character is fundamental for the formation of teams. Thus, how well coordinated the individuals are determines the operational efficiency of teams. Organisations such as the HFRS need the services of teams, that is, the various commands, to facilitate emergency service delivery as was witnessed during the Buncefield fire. Without efficient collaboration, it is difficult for the fire service to deliver its services as expected. Defining roles in organisations and how they are affected by organisational design, structure, culture and strategy Defining roles within organisations ennobles managers to assess the impact of some decisions to the organisation. For best results, this should be an inclusive process that engages all the stakeholders in the organisation such that they are all allowed to contribute in a meaningful way (Rogers, Finley & Galloway 2001, p. 47). In the HFRS, the Gold, Silver and Bronze commands have well defined roles and this in turn augments the organization’s strategic, tactical and operational levels, which enhances service delivery. Additionally, this allows the development of a good culture since the roles of both individuals and teams are clearly defined. Evaluation of organisational development Assessment of organisational development is a critical issue. It can be argued that it increases the insight of the stakeholder in the organisation in terms of its performance, weaknesses, strengths, and motivation. Yet, again, it may be viewed as a source of retardation when the stakeholders start playing avoidance games. The assessment is significant for two reasons: (1) that it may be the best way of achieving targeted organisational development, and (2) that validity may be an issue of less concern in the organisation when its comes to accountability (Lusthaus 2002). Within the HFRS, there are many activities that need regular assessment in order to ensure preparedness during incidences such as the Buncefield fire. This is achieved through training and regular drills. But in order to be effective, these programmes also need to address other organisational issues such as organisational culture and conflict management to ensure harmony of the various fire service teams. Review of organisational management In order to be successful, fire rescue operations have to be supported by good management. This is achieved through daily learning that becomes a permanent change in organisation behaviour. Effective management means that members must be subjected to learning experiences that enable them to share tactics, skills and so forth. These experiences are then transferred into norms, customs, rules and regulations, which are the key elements of organisational management (Hagen 2008, p. 253). Learning helps employees to put aside their differences, such as political leanings, culture, race and gender, and focus on the main objectives of the organization. As such, organization management is pegged on cultivating a sense of ownership among the employees, which is nurtured through effective learning. Conclusion Organizations such as the HFRS are complex systems and must be managed with attention to a number of issues. The Buncefield fire is one of the disasters that exposed the strengths and weaknesses of the HFRS. Since such organisations require teamwork, it is important to ensure that individuals are integrated into teams that work towards attaining the set goals. The behaviour of individuals is critical since it determines the success of teamwork, and ultimately the overall performance of the organisation. References Armstrong, M 2006, A Handbook of Human Resource Management Practice (10th edition), Kogan Page Publishers, London. Aswathappa, A 2005, International Business (2nd edition), Tata McGraw-Hill, London. Buncefield Major Incident Investigation Board 2007, Recommendations on the design and operation of fuels storage sites, Available from www.buncefieldinvestigation.gov.uk/reports/recommendations.pdf (19th April 2010). Cabinet Office 2001, Dealing with Disaster (Revised Third Edition), Cabinet Office Civil Contingencies Secretariat. Daft, R L 2007, Management (8th edition), Cengage Learning, New York. Dayal, R, Zachariah, P & Rajpal, K 1996, Organisation Theory and Behaviour, Mittal Publications, London. Eldridge, J E T & Crombie, A D 1974, A Sociology of Organisations, Routledge, London Fox, W 2007, Managing Organisational Behaviour, Juta and Company Ltd, London. Hagen, C 2008, ‘Learning from disasters – information management in emergency planning’ in Apostol, I Risk Assessment as a Basis for the Forecast and Prevention of Catastrophes, IOS Press, London. Hertfordshire Fire and Rescue Service 2006, Buncefield: Hertfordshire Fire and Rescue Service's Review Of The Fire Response, The Stationery Office, London. Lusthaus, C (ed) 2002, Organizational Assessment: A Framework for Improving Performance IDRC, New York. Martinko, M J 1995, Attribution Theory: An Organizational Perspective, CRC Press, New York. McNiff, J & Whitehead, J 2000, Action Research in Organisations, Routledge, London. National Policing Improvement Agency (NPIA) 2009, Guidance on multi-agency interoperability, National Policing Improvement Agency and the Association of Chief Police Officers, Bedfordshire. Peyton P R 2003, Dignity at Work: Eliminate Bullying and Create a Positive Working Environment, Psychology Press, London. Rogers, G, Finley, D S & Galloway, J R 2001, Strategic Planning in Social Service Organizations: A Practical Guide, Canadian Scholars' Press, Toronto. Tscheidel, K 2008, ‘Conclusions after the fuel depot fire at Buncefield (GB), December 2005’ in Apostol, I Risk Assessment as a Basis for the Forecast and Prevention of Catastrophes, IOS Press, London. Read More