Data from the 2007 U.K. floods are examined using institutional theory and practice theory lenses. We note that learning from crisis ultimately results in “lessons learned” being institutionalized in new norms, tools, and infrastructure. As the basis of legitimate action for coping in the future, they may provide a measure of resilience, but crisis management and recovery is an active and emergent process. Learning must also identify the ability to create resilience by developing the capacity and ability to be creative when such “lessons learned” prove inappropriate in an emerging scenario. This has implications for policy learning processes that may be difficult to justify since public inquiries are also institutionalized events that require “legitimate” recommendations to codify learning.
Antonacopoulou, E. ( 2008). On the practise of practice: In Tensions and ex-tensions in the ongoing reconfiguration of practices. In D. Barry & H. Hansen (Eds.), Handbook of new and emerging approaches to management and organization. London: SAGE.
2.
Antonacopoulou, E., & Sheaffer, Z. (2010, August 6-7). Learning in crisis: Reconceptualising organizational learning and crisis management. Paper presented at the Academy of Management, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
3.
Bechky, B.A. ( 2003). Sharing meaning across occupational communities: Transformation of understanding on a production floor. Organization Science , 14, 312-330.
4.
Birkland, T. ( 1997). After disaster: Agenda setting, public policy, and focusing events. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.
5.
Birkland, T. ( 2006). Lessons of disaster. Washington, DC : Georgetown University Press.
6.
Boin, A., McConell, A., & t’Hart, P. (2008). Governing after crisis . In A. Boin, A. McConell, & P. t’Hart (Eds.), Governing after crisis (pp. 3-32). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
7.
Boin, A. ( 2008). Learning from crisis: NASA and the challenger disaster . In A. Boin, A. McConell, & P. t’Hart (Eds.), Governing after crisis (pp. 232-254). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
8.
Brändström, A., Bynander, F. & ‘t Hart, P. ( 2004). Governing by looking back: Historical analogies and crisis management, Public Administration, 82, 191-210.
9.
Brown, A., & Jones, M. ( 2000). Honourable members and dishonourable deeds: Sense making, impression management and legitimation min the arms to Iraq affair. Human Relations, 53, 655-689.
10.
Brown, J.S., & Duguid, P. ( 1991) Organizational learning and communities-of-practice: Toward a unified view of working, learning, and innovation. Organization Science, 2, 40-57.
11.
Callon, M. ( 1999). Actor-network theory-the market test. In J. Law & J. Hassard (Eds.), Actor network theory and after (pp. 181-195). Oxford, UK: Blackwell.
12.
Carroll, J.S., Rudolph, J.W., & Hatakeneka, S. (2002). Learning from experience in high-hazard organizations. Research In Organizational Behaviour , 24, 87-137.
13.
Charmaz, K. ( 2000). Grounded theory: objectivist and constructivist methods . In N. Denzin, & Y. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (pp. 509-535). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
14.
Chia, R., & MacKay, B. (2007). Post-processual challenges for the emerging strategy-as-practice perspective: Discovering strategy in the logic of practice. Human Relations, 60, 217-242.
15.
Clarke, L. ( 2006). Worst cases: Terror and catastrophe in the popular imagination . Chicago: Chicago University Press .
16.
Cox, S., Jones, B., & Rycraft, H. ( 2004). Behavioural approaches to safety management within UK reactor plants. Safety Science, 42, 825-839.
17.
Crossan, M.M., Lane, H.W., & White, R.E. ( 1999). An organizational learning framework: From intuition to institution. Academy of Management Review, 24, 522-537.
18.
Denzin, N., & Lincoln, Y. ( 2003). Strategies of qualitative inquiry. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
19.
Drori, G. S., Meyer, J. W., & Hwang, H. (Eds.). (2006). Introduction: Globalization and organization: World society and organizational change: Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
20.
Easterby-Smith, M., Thorpe, R., & Lowe, A. ( 2002). Management research: An introduction. London: SAGE.
21.
Eisenhardt, K.M., & Graebner, M.E. (2007). Theory building from cases: Opportunities and challenges. Academy of Management Journal , 50, 25-32.
22.
Elliott, D. ( 2009). The failure of organizational learning from crisis--A matter of life and death?Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management, 17, 157-168.
23.
Elliott, D., & McGuinness, M. (2002). Public inquiries, panacea or placebo. Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management , 10, 114-25.
24.
Elliott, D., & Smith, D. ( 2006). Patterns of regulatory behaviour in the UK Football Industry’Journal of Management Studies, 43, 291-319.
25.
Engeström, Y., & Blackler, F. ( 2005). On the life of the object. Organization , 12, 307-330.
26.
Garnham, R. ( 2007). Scrutiny inquiry into the summer emergency 2007. Gloucester, UK: Gloucestershire County Council.
27.
Geiger, D. ( 2009). Revisiting the concept of practice: Toward an argumentative understanding of practicing. Management Learning, 40, 129-144.
28.
Gherardi, S. ( 2001). From organizational learning to practice-based knowing . Human Relations, 54, 131-139.
29.
Gherardi, S. ( 2009). Introduction: The critical power of the practice lens . Management Learning, 40, 115-128.
30.
Gouldner, A. ( 1955). Patterns in industrial bureaucracy. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
31.
Green, S.E., Li, Y., & Nohria, N. ( 2009). Suspended in self-spun webs of significance: A rhetorical model of institutionalization embedded agency. Academy of Management Journal, 52, 11-36.
32.
Greenwood, R., Oliver, C., Sahlin, K., & Suddaby, R. ( 2008). Introduction The Sage handbook of organizational institutionalism . London: SAGE.
33.
Habermas, J. ( 1984). The theory of communicative action. Vol.1, Reason and the rationalization of society. Boston: Beacon Press.
34.
Improvement and Development Agency. (2009). The Beacon Scheme. Retrieved June 15, 2009, from http://www.beacons.idea.gov.uk/idk/core/page.do?pageId=5144771
35.
Kelle, U. ( 2004). Computer-assisted analysis of qualitative data. In F. Uwe, E. von Kardorff, & I. Steinke (Eds.), A companion to qualitative research (pp. 276-283). London: SAGE.
36.
Kellogg, K.C. ( 2006). Life in the trading zone: Structuring Co-ordination across boundaries in postbureaucratic organizations. Organization Science, 17, 22-44.
37.
King, N. ( 2004). Using templates in the thematic analysis of texts. In C. Cassell & G. Symon (Eds.), Essential guide to qualitative methods in organizational research (pp. 256-270). London: SAGE.
38.
Knorr Cetina, K. ( 1999). Epistemic cultures: How the sciences make knowledge. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
39.
Knorr Cetina, K. ( 2001) Objectual practice. In T. Schatzki, K. Knorr Cetina, & E. Von Savigny (Eds.), The practice turn in contemporary theory (pp. 175-188). London: Routledge.
40.
Lampel, J., & Meyer, A.D. ( 2008). Field-configuring events as structuring mechanisms: How conferences, ceremonies and trade shows constitute new technologies, industries and markets. Journal of Management Studies, 45, 1025-1035.
41.
Latour, B. ( 1999). Pandora’s hope: Essays on the reality of science . Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
42.
Law, J. ( 1999). After ANT: Complexity, naming and topology. In J. Law, & J. Hassard (Eds.), Actor network theory and after (pp. 1-14). Oxford , UK: Blackwell.
43.
Lawrence, T.B., Suddaby, R., & Leca, B. ( 2009). Institutional work: Actors and agency in institutional studies of organizations. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
44.
Lounsbury, M. ( 2007). A tale of two cities: Competing logics and practice variation in the professionalizing of mutual funds. Academy of Management Review, 50, 289-307.
45.
Macpherson, A. ( 2007). Thematic analysis. In R. Thorpe, & R. Holt (Eds.), Sage dictionary of qualitative research in management (pp. 187-189). London: SAGE.
46.
Macpherson, A., & Jones, O. ( 2008). Object-mediated learning and strategic renewal in a mature organization. Management Learning, 39, 177-201.
47.
Macpherson, A., Kofinas, A., Jones, O., & Thorpe, R. ( 2010). Making sense of mediated learning: cases from small firms . Management Learning, 41, 303-324.
48.
March, J.G. ( 1991). Exploration and exploitation in organizational learning . Organization Science, 2, 71-87.
Miles, M.B., & Huberman, A.M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook. London: SAGE.
51.
Orlikowski, W. ( 2000). Using technology and constituting structures: A practice lens for studying technology in organizations. Organization Science, 11, 404-428.
52.
Orlikowski, W. ( 2002). Knowing in practice: Enacting a collective capability in distributed organizing. Organization Science, 13, 249-273.
53.
Paraskevas, A. ( 2006). Crisis management or crisis response system? A complexity science approach to organizational crises. Management Decision , 44, 892-907.
54.
Pauchant, T., & Mitroff, I. ( 1992). Transforming the crisis-prone organization. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
55.
Pitt, M. ( 2008). Learning the lessons from 2007 floods. London: HMSO.
56.
Power, M. ( 1997). The audit society: rituals of verification. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
57.
Schatzki, T. ( 2005). The sites of organizations. Organization Studies, 26, 465-484.
58.
Scrivens, S. ( 2007). Dedication, Initiative and Bloody-Mindedness Saw Off Floods Crisis. Retrieved October 5, 2009, from http://www.personneltoday.com/articles/2007/08/21/41945/dedication-initiative-and-bloody-mindedness-saw-off-floods.html
59.
Severn Trent Water. (2007). Final report: The impact of the july floods on the water infrastructure and customer service. Retrieved July 10, 2009, from http://www.stwater.co.uk/upload/pdf/The_Final_Gloucester_2007_Report.pdf
60.
Smith, D., & Elliott, D. ( 2007). Exploring the barriers to learning from crisis. Management Learning, 38, 519-538.
61.
Taylor, J.R., & Robichaud, D. ( 2004). Finding the organization in communication: Discourse as action and sensemaking. Organization, 11, 395-413.
62.
Toft, B., & Reynolds, S. ( 1997). Learning from disasters. Leicester , UK: Perpetuity Press.
63.
Tolbert, P.S., & Zucker, L.G. ( 1983). Institutional sources of change in the formal structure of organizations: The diffusion of civil service reform, 1880-1935. Administrative Science Quarterly, 28, 22-39.
64.
Turner, B.A. ( 1976). The organizational and interorganizational development of disasters. Administrative Science Quarterly, 21, 378-397.
65.
Weick, K. ( 1988). Enacted sensemaking in crisis situations. Journal of Management Studies, 25, 305-317.
66.
Weick, K.E. ( 1993). The collapse of sensemaking on organizations: The Mann Gulch disaster. Administrative Science Quarterly, 38, 628-652.
67.
Weick, K. ( 1995). Sensemaking in organizations. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
68.
Weitzman, E. ( 2000). Software and qualitative research. In N. Denzin & Y. Lincoln , (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (pp. 803-820). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
69.
Wooten, M., & Hoffman, A.J. ( 2008). Organizational fields: Past, present and Future. In R. Greenwood, C. Oliver, K. Sahlin, & R. Suddaby (Eds.), Sage handbook of organizational institutionalism (130-148). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
70.
Yeo, R., & Marquardt, M. ( 2010). Problems as building blocks for organizational learning: A roadmap for experiential inquiry. Group & Organizational Management, 35, 243-275.
71.
Zilber, T.B. ( 2002). Institutionalization as an interplay between actions, meanings, and actors, Academy of Management Journal, 45, 234-254.
