While reactive, crisis management would respond to a crisis that was (typically) prepared for in advance, to the extent possible. It's highly scenario-based. Not all situations can be foreseen or planned for ahead of time. However, certain situations can be responded to via a documented playbook as a guide (i.e., what happens in the event of a natural disaster?). Management by crisis is a highly reactive management style where events are prioritized based on their occurrence and not based on strategy. Think of 'putting out fires' in an organization instead of working through an established plan. If you are familiar with the whack-a-mole game, managing by crisis is very similar.
I addressed both components in my response. Look for where I began speaking about “Management by crisis….”
Perhaps this will help -
While reactive, crisis management would respond to a crisis that was (typically) prepared for in advance, to the extent possible. It's highly scenario-based. Not all situations can be foreseen or planned for ahead of time. However, certain situations can be responded to via a documented playbook as a guide (i.e., what happens in the event of a natural disaster?).
Conversely, management by crisis is a highly reactive management style where events are prioritized based on their occurrence and not based on strategy. Think of 'putting out fires' in an organization instead of working through an established plan. If you are familiar with the whack-a-mole game, managing by crisis is very similar.
OK professor, you answer was good, would you explain the content and porpose of the whack-a-mole game plz?
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Methodology
- Research Methodology
- Research Papers