UNIT – 4 : LESSON ONE

RESPONSES, HUMAN BEHAVIOR AND ROLE OF LEADERSHIP IN

DISASTERS

'Leadership in managing disasters and emergencies can minimize the damage inflicted by an
event whilst lack of successful leadership exacerbates the impact. Leaders should have certain
skills and abilities in order to manage catastrophes based on the environmental conditions,
organizations they lead, scope of the disaster'

5.41 Objective

A leader must provide direction and respond to the situation in a timely fashion. The objective
of this unit is to make the student familiar with the psychology of human response in times of
crisis—as a leader and as the affected party. Leaders, and their teams, are unable to effectively
apply their knowledge and skills to a situation that is either so novel, or of a scale that is beyond
their experience and conception.

5.42 Introduction

One of the most difficult aspects of developing effective security, emergency, risk and crisis
management policies, plans, procedures and exercises, is accurately anticipating human behavior
under extreme or threatening circumstances. Planning and exercising around flawed behavioral
assumptions can seriously compromise real-time crisis response and recovery efforts, and lead to
actions that are ineffective, inappropriate and in some instances, dangerous. The threat could be
natural (flood, tsunami, earthquake) or man made (industrial accident, sabotage, terrorist action).

When trouble strikes, people want it to be over right now — but seldom is this kind of quick
resolution possible. It falls to the leader in charge to address the size and scope of the crisis. You
don’t want to alarm people, yet do not be afraid to speak to the magnitude of the situation.
Winston Churchill was a master at summing up challenges but offering a response at the same
time. As he famously said when taking office in 1940, “You ask, what is our aim? I can answer
in one word. It is victory; victory at all costs; victory in spite of all terror; victory, however long
and hard the road may be, for without victory there is no survival.”

Several authors identified criteria for distinguishing disasters, crises and catastrophes : according
to the scale or magnitude of the event (the magnitude should be measured in lives or property
lost, or by the extent of the failure of the normative or cultural system, according to the actions or
inactions of an organization, according to the assistance from regional and national governments
or from international or nongovernmental relief organizations, according to the damages, an
event can be classified in terms of crises, disasters or catastrophes. But these authors do not
specify which threshold or which combinations of variables are used to qualify the event as a
crisis, disaster or catastrophe. Quarantelli (2005) identifies six elements to capture the major
differences between catastrophes and disasters. In a catastrophe :

 There is massive physical impact (in contrast to the localized impact in disasters).
 Local officials are unable to undertake their usual work roles. - Help will come mostly
from more distant areas (such as international help).
 Most everyday community functions are sharply and simultaneously interrupted. -
International media focus their attention on the event.
 Very high-level officals and governmental agencies from the national level become
directly involved in the management of the event.

As for the crisis, it is often defined as an event that exerts heavy and destabilizing pressure on
organizations. The crisis stakes the adaptive capacity of organizations. Although these authors
have distinguished the catastrophe from the disaster and crisis, we use them interchangeably,
because they ”connote both the idea of a disastrous or catastrophic event, of a disruption, which
may involve an infinite variety of situations ” (Lepointe, 1991).

There is thus a requirement of awareness and knowledge of human behavior for anyone involved
in the various phases of emergency management, security or business continuity planning in case
of disasters, crisis and catastrophes. This knowledge will help addresses both the emotional and
behavioral responses to disasters, violent incidents and public health emergencies, and introduces
strategies and techniques for managing the individual and organizational impact of crisis.

2
With the continual improvement of technology, modern governments and corprates are much
better equipped to handle crisis more effectively than empires or kingdoms in the past. Today, in
order to govern through times of crisis, it is imperative that leaders rely on legitimacy and the
trust of the people. Failure to do so will cause the system to breakdown. This inevitably will lead
to chaos with far-reaching consequences and uncontrollable outcomes. In managing during times
of disasters, along with legitimacy and trust, it is important that leaders employ a sense of
urgency in their decision-making strategies.

5.43 Human Behavior And Responses

Comparatively few people experience a disaster directly, yet it is a highly emotional situation
which occupies a place in the thoughts and daydreams of everyone. Both children and adults tend
to ask themselves "how would I cope"? This is a way of finding out about oneself, of confronting
fears and preparing for any eventuality.

The strong need to know how people react leads the media to present many accounts of people
coping with disaster. The various character types and their responses can readily be predicted.
These accounts of people coping with disaster. The various character types and their responses
can readily be predicted. These accounts rely on emotion for their popularity, but lead to grossly
inaccurate descriptions of human behaviour.

Another source of distortion is the difficulty people have in maintaining an accurate view of
strongly emotionally charged situations. There is on one hand, a tendency to minimise events and
deny their effects, with the aim of showing they are not as threatening as they seem. The result is
a failure to recognise real problems and needs. On the other hand, there is also a tendency to
over-dramatise important events and show that no one can do anything about them, and things
will never be the same again. This approach is one which takes satisfaction in the disaster, and
leads to failure to recognise the endurance and resilience of people and communities in the face
of extreme situations.

It is understandable then, that myths should develop about disasters, but proper understanding
and planning requires them to be identified and corrected. Certain important factors which affect
human psychology and govern the responses are as follows-

3
 5.43.1 Danger And Panic. The idea of panic involves two things. First, loss of control
leading to unthinking, impulsive behaviours; second, selfish concern to save oneself even at the
expense of others if necessary. Experience and research show that panic is very rare in disasters.
Normal people react to danger by doing the best they can for themselves and those with them.
They may even make mistakes from lack of knowledge of confusion, which may even cost them
of others their lives. But that is not panic. The circumstances under which panic is most likely to
occur are when:

 people do not have adequate information about what is happening.

 there is an immediate perceived threat of death of serious injury.
 the people feel themselves to be trapped or a means of escape is blocked.
 there is lack of leadership and direction.

Even in these circumstances only a small number are likely to panic; the majority will take
whatever steps are available to protect and comfort themselves.

It is also important not to confuse the need for direction and information with panic. People who
are uncertain, may behave inappropriately, but they make rational decisions based on the
available information.

5.43.2 Individual Reaction In The Face Of Personal Danger. The majority of people in
disasters, behave with responsibility and concern for their neighbours. Many stories have
emerged from the recent earthquakes, terror bombings and floods of people endangering
their own lives to ensure others were safe, of men helping save a neighbour`s house while their
own burned. There are always stories of self interest in all disasters, but although they tend to get
the most publicity, they are far from representative. Disaster planning should take account of the
fact that most people will think of others in an emergency.

5.43.3 Requirement of Credible Information. It is sometimes thought that people are

unable to handle information about a threat to themselves of their property, that it will cause
panic of they will over-react. It is true that if information is incomplete, vague, or ambiguous, its
effect on a group or community will be unpredictable and often unhelpful. However, on the other
hand it has been found that people are reluctant to believe in the reality of a threat which is

4
unexpected and outside their ordinary experience. Some people refuse to be evacuated even
when urged to do so by Police.

The evidence is that the majority of people react responsibly to the information they are given.
They usually check it and look to familiar people for guidance and leadership, such as friends
and relatives, even if they are outside the threatened area. Sometimes, however the information is
misleading of inaccurate. Information about an impending disaster should be provided by
somebody known and trusted, or in an appropriate official position. It should be clear and
concise about the nature of the threat, the likelihood of it occurring and the possible conditions
which may affect it. It should also include suggested courses of action. Categorical statements
such as "there is no threat",should be avoided unless it is quite certain. It is better to be specific
about the situation at ta given time and provide later information on the altered situation, than to
be vague or try to cover too many possibilities.

5.43.4 Emotional and Psychological Disturbance. The idea is based on the assumption that
crisis situations cause people to break down and when they do so, they produce symptoms of
mental illness. Where this does not happen, the expectation is that the person has "coped" and
will not be affected by it, other than perhaps temporary reactions. Serious mental disturbance
occurs in only a very small number of cases. The majority of people employ the strengths and
skills they have and meet the demands of the situation. At the same time, the stress of the disaster
experience and the lengthy recovery process can be expected to have its effects on all of those
involved. These problems are in the nature of normal reactions to an abnormal situation.
However these reactions need to be understood. Most people will need extra help during the
recovery period, even if only from family and friends. If these response-appropriate reactions are
understood and recognised, they can be anticipated and dealt with before they develop into more
serious problems.
5.43.5 Effect Of Conflict Followed By Disaster. In addition to the disruption of the
workforce and damage/destruction of offices, industries, factories and services, the effects of
disaster combined with a conflict situation is extremely critical. Although the situations vary, the
occurrence of a natural disaster in an area affected by on-going conflict can lead to:

5
  Increased misery for people whose lives have already been disrupted by conflict.
For example, in the Philippines camps for people displaced by conflict in
Mindanao were flooded in 2008, reportedly undermining their coping skills.
 Further displacement as when people displaced by conflict are forced to move yet
again because of the disaster. In the case of the Mindanao floods, some of the
conflict IDPs were forced to move again as a result of the flooding. Or following
the tsunami in Sri Lanka, some of those displaced by the conflict were displaced
again by the storm surge.
 Increased hardship on communities hosting the displaced. Thus in Somalia, rural
areas hard-hit by flooding in 2009 were already having difficulties growing
sufficient food for their communities. The arrival of Somalis displaced by the
fighting in Mogadishu increased the strain on these communities. The majority of
recent IDPs from Mogadishu went to the nearby Afgooye corridor – making it the
“highest density of internally displaced persons in the world – over half a million
IDPs along a stretch of 15 kilometers of road.”
 More difficulties for relief agencies in accessing affected communities. This is
particularly the case for countries in governments that are unwilling to extend
access to humanitarian actors. For example, after the 1990 earthquake in Gilan
province in Iran which measured 7.7 on the Richter scale, killed 50,000 people
and decimated entire villages, the government initially insisted that the country
would handle the crisis on its own and turned away international assistance. By
the time the government was willing to enlist assistance from abroad, a significant
proportion of the affected had reportedly died from otherwise preventable deaths.
A similar initial rejection of international aid by the government of
Burma/Myanmar following the May 2008 Cyclone Nargis complicated the relief
effort.

5.44 The Importance of Understanding Human Behavior Correctly

Does human behavior in disaster situations really matter? The answer –yes. One must base
the post-disaster decisions and policies on what people are most likely to do. One does not want

6
to implement choices on incorrect or incomplete beliefs. Doing so would unintentionally add to
the problems associated with disasters. For example:

 The media’s reporting of a “panicked evacuation” may make the emergency manager
and government look incompetent. It could also postpone necessary evacuations.
 Inaccurate beliefs about human behavior may have led to the inability of authority to
create an effective homeland security advisory system for terrorist attacks and corporate
crisis.
 The belief that there will be massive amounts of looting and price gauging may take
law-enforcement officials away from more important work after a disaster (e.g., traffic
control). Reports of criminal activity and the law-enforcement responses may also
prevent victims from returning to their homes to salvage their personal belongings.
 The assumption that responders will be unreliable may result in unnecessary
communications to make sure emergency workers are doing their jobs. This ties up
communication channels and interrupts vital activities.
 The assertion that victims cannot help themselves in disasters may also slow down the
recovery of the community and the corporate organisation. This is because it is believed
that the government and official disaster agencies must perform all disaster-related tasks.
 An overstatement of the disaster’s impacts may result in the delivery of unnecessary
donations. Volunteers may also show up at the scene when they are not needed.
 The perception that martial law will be imposed could cause some potential volunteers to
refrain from participating in the response and recovery.

5.45 Need For Effective Leadership In The Corporate Sector

Companies lose momentum when they fail to see the opportunities that their competitors are
consistently seizing and when they have not plans in place to deal with disasters and crisis. This
happens when a company’s senior leadership refuses to understand that they are responsible to
have all sorts of contingency plans prepared and ready. Companies fail to grow and compete
when their senior leadership gets lazy and they lack the required skills and competencies to stay
in lock step with their employees, their competition and their market. At the very least, they must
start paying more attention to their employees and the consumers who are telling them it’s time

7
to do things differently. This is where good leadership matters , specially when faced with a
disasters, terror strikes, lockouts, corporate espionage or worker un-rest.

Leadership in managing disasters and emergencies can minimize the damage inflicted by an
event whilst lack of successful leadership exacerbates the impact. Leaders should have certain
skills and abilities in order to manage catastrophes based on the environmental conditions,
organizations they lead, scope of the disaster. There are five key tasks in order to be successful in
crisis leadership :

 Sense Making – Leaders have the responsibility to look out for the possibility of crises
and handle the preparation process to eliminate any factors that could have been avoided.
 Decision Making and Coordinating Implementation – Leaders have the responsibility
to make final decisions and in doing so make sure that they reach out to the community
and gather as many interested crisis responders as possible.
 Meaning Making – Leaders are in the limelight to direct the public in the right
direction. It is their ultimate responsibility to motivate the community to believe that they
will get through this situation.
 Accounting and Ending – The leader must keep the effected parties on track to
eventually achieve closure and an opportunity to move on past the crisis.
 Learning – It is imperative that the leader evaluates the situation and comes up with
lessons that can be learned from either the shortfalls or the successes of the entire
response efforts. The most important aspect of leading in crisis situation is through
communication.

Leadership has a prominent and powerful role in society and influences all aspects of life in
normal as well as crisis situations. Leaders can emerge from within a group and can also be
formally appointed or elected. There are many qualities that a leader should have such as
intelligence, quick comprehension, decisiveness, courage, strength, confidence, education,
knowledge, personality, charisma and above all integrity. There may be a long list of leadership
traits but the following five attributes have strong correlation with the leadership. There are:

 Dominance (Personality)

8
  Intelligence
 Self-confidence
 High energy level and
 Task related knowledge (political or organizational).

Leadership traits are applicable to crises situations in general but it is obvious that specific crisis
conditions will likely to require prioritization of different leadership skills. In order to guide the
understanding leadership in crisis situations leaders should be skillful in managing networks.
Emergency management systems involve substantial amount of interorganizational and
intergovernmental networks. Numerous stakeholders in the system have to collaborate with each
other for reaching organizational goals as well as network goals as a whole. To summarise, the
leadership traits which are esssential to deal with crisis are :

• Decisiveness

• Flexibility

• Informing

• Problem solving

• Managing innovation and creativity

• Planning and organizing personnel

• Motivating

• Managing teams and team building

• Scanning the environment

• Strategic planning

• Networking and partnering

• Decision making

Three levels can be used to reduce the vulnerability of corporates and industry : planning
policies, civil engineering and awareness raising, education and training for disasters situations.

9
If, this last level is applied in societies that regularly are facing to particular types of hazards
(earthquakes, hurricanes, floods), it remains marginally considered in societies where hazards
frequency is low. More generally, research related to disasters focus on hazard and its mode of
diffusion at detailed levels to improve planning policies and civil engineering. Recent
developments in computer science and the evolution of computing power permit to make
complex simulations. However, human behaviours modelling is less studied. Yet, this aspect also
influences damages and thus their costs all the more when human behaviours are unadapted.
Modelling human behaviours suppose beforehand to identify observed behaviours during
catastrophes, their frequency, conditions in which they appear and their effects. It is a necessary
precondition to produce simulations as close as possible to reality. That is why planning,
prepartion and preparedness are essential.

5.46 Every Disaster Is An Opportunity Which One Must Seize

Apple seized such an opportunity with its stores in Tokyo during the earthquake. Frightened
residents were invited into the stores to watch the news streaming on computers, e-mail their
families, recharge their mobile phones and so forth. Stranded employees and their families were
invited to sleep at the stores, or given paid hotel rooms and private transportation when possible.
In effect, management converted the stores into makeshift shelters. The effort may have had only
a minor impact, but it is unlikely to be forgotten. Natural disasters put companies on stage, and
how they behave leaves a lasting impression. It also provides an opportunity to do the right thing
and to get credit for it.

Businesses today are also reinventing how communities respond to disasters. Companies tell of
how in times of disaster they're developing temporary housing solutions for displaced people,
creating new information systems to help schools, courts, and hospitals maintain their records,
giving urgent supplies to those in need, and much more.

The frequency and severity of sudden-onset natural disasters is also increasing. Presently there
are about 400 natural disasters per year, affecting 200 million people. This is double the number
reported 20 years ago. In particular hydrometeorological events are increasing – most likely as
the result of climate change. Of the 200 million people whose lives are affected by natural
disasters, around 36 million were forced to leave their homes in 2008 and are considered to be

10
internally displaced persons. Unlike those displaced by conflict, this displacement is usually
temporary and almost always occurs within the borders of the country. However, as Hurricane
Katrina demonstrates, displacement can last a long time. It is estimated that about a quarter of
those displaced by Hurricane Katrina have not returned. Data pertaining to the damage by the
recent hurricanes Harvey and Irma which devasted Florida, Mexico and Texas is being collected

A textbook example of this is Wal-Mart Stores’ response to Hurricane Katrina in 2005. The
company outperformed federal and local relief efforts and was widely recognized for its efficient
provision of much-needed emergency supplies. Wal-Mart drivers were greeted as heroes when
their trucks reached the disaster areas days before government relief efforts.

Wal-Mart’s swift response was no accident; it was the result of meticulous preparation and
execution based on the company’s decades of experience with stores affected by hurricanes and
other natural disasters–not to mention its strength in logistics and supply chain management. The
program’s public face consisted mainly of local employees, store managers and truck drivers,
whom Wal-Mart made available to the media for interviews, an unusual but very effective move.
In times of crisis, local employees typically have more credibility than senior management, as
they are seen as less calculating. They told powerful stories about neighbors helping neighbors
that reflected well on Wal-Mart.

Every crisis may require different styles of leadership. It is important for a successful leader to
understand the dimensions and requirements of the given task and adjust the leadership style to
achieve the desired results. A good and effective leader :

 Tells : The leader orders the team and waits for results and action while keeping an eye
on the progress. He does not expect his subordinates to ask questions or give suggestions.
This style is adopted when the matter is urgent and there is no time to lose.
 Sells : Convinces! the team about the decision taken by analyzing the positive and
negative points. It is like selling ideas to the team members. Obviously, this exercise
takes some time.
 Consults : Leader consults the team and allows them to participate in the decision
making with the view to making small adjustments but the main thrust of the decisions of

11
 the leader are more or less final. This style is somewhat less time consuming than the
“Sells” style.
 Joins : The leader discusses thoroughly the problem and the likely course of action.
Every member of the team is involved in the discussion and finally the consensus
decision prevails. This style consumes most time but later work is smooth.

Sometimes a multi-style or mixed-style approach is more useful in disaster situation. There are
various different tasks such as distribution of food, medicines, temporary shelter, and rescue
work. If each of such tasks is assigned to a different person instead of all tasks to one, there can
be better results. In other words, delegation of authority and work is also an important aspect of
leadership style. Of course, the leader has to continue to monitor and coordinate with his
colleagues.

Another useful factor in the development of disaster management is the strong and positive link
between leadership and training. A high standard of training can upgrade the professionalism in
the leadership. This is the reason that the Government of India (through its nodal ministries and
departments) and the various institutes of public administration (through their faculties of
disaster management are giving more emphasis on 'Human Resource Development' in the area of
disaster management. They want to provide training to various levels of government officers,
NGOs and to the community leaders so that they have more knowledge, skill and confidence to
tackle the likely disaster situations.

5.47 Coordination

Coordination can be defined as combined efforts of various related organizations and

agencies to achieve the goal/target of a task and is therefore very essential. In fact, there is
always scope for improvement in coordination between various agencies/organisations working
for relief and rehabilitation. There are three main bodies involved is disaster management.

5.48 Principles And Techniques of Coordination

In Disaster Management, all the concerned organizations, agencies, and the public have
common goals as discussed below. Pre-Disaster Situation- for disaster prevention, mitigation and
preparedness to minimize loss of life and property from natural disasters. Disaster Situation- to

12
provide effective relief, rehabilitation of affected people and recovery of the community. There
are no set principles or rigid techniques for coordination in disaster situation because each
disaster situation is unique in its own way. But, coordination is more effective if we follow the
basic principles of coordination given below:

 Clear Role Allocation. There should be clarity in roles of different participant

organizations. They should know their authority and limitations. There should not be
duplication of roles.

 Networking. All concerned organizations should have proper networking. This will
provide them better understanding of strengths and weaknesses of each other and will also
ensure proper coordination of efforts besides avoiding duplication. A proper networking of
NGOs will give them the idea about the capacity and capabilities of each other. This
knowledge is very essential for coordination among NGOs. It can be achieved by practicing
coordination during exercises, knowledge of professional competence of individual
organization and knowledge of available resources including financial resources.

5.49 Role Of Leader And Coordinator

A good leader or coordinator can make the task simple and more effective. He can serve the
affected people within limited resources and be cost-effective. Role of a leader starts from pre-
disaster situation. He has a very important role during and after the disaster. Roles of
leader/coordinator are almost same.

Leaders take decision concerning post-impact priorities for rescue, temporary evacuation,
shelter, immediate needs of the community crucial to the lines and livelihood of the affected
people. Leaders implement self-help measures and induce spirit of cooperation. They take
decisions to organize external assistance which can significantly defer or alleviate potential
hardship for those who have lost their home and means of livelihood. Involving people and
community in the decision making, implementation of plans and their participation at every step

13
of relief or rehabilitation process by keeping complete transparency. In pre-response to natural
hazards or likely accidents, a leader or coordinator should be able to convince the community
that they should reach these safer places at the time of pre-warning. Normally, people do not
want to leave their houses and belongings even after several warning and even police
intervention. But a good leader can persuade them to move to safe places. In cyclones and
floods, such evacuation of people can save a lots of human lives.

Corporate engagement in natural disaster response has grown significantly in both scale and
diversity during the last decade. Today, it is a central component of the international response
machinery. Since the 2004 Indian Ocean tsunami, large multinational corporations have become
increasingly involved in on-the-ground response efforts, forming partnerships with traditional
actors and with each other to enhance operating systems and to develop more rigorous strategic
thinking in preparation for disaster assistance. The reasons for the rise in corporate action are
multifold but generally stem from an expanded understanding of the roles and responsibilities of
business in a fully globalized society. Moving beyond customary standards of corporate social
responsibility, in the twenty-first century corporations have embraced an expanded agenda of
global citizenship, which is perceived to be at the heart of strong corporate culture, brand
reputation, and employee loyalty.

CEOs tackle tough issues every day, including cybersecurity, innovation, human capital,
operational excellence, customer retention, and corporate reputation, to name a few.

However, disaster planning typically only makes the top-five list after something has happened.
The reason: Many companies fail to advance plan for the impact of earthquakes, floods,
hurricanes and other potentially devastating human related events—even though they can
undermine every one of the priorities mentioned above. Here are 5 behaviors to watch out for
and eliminate. Doing so will help put our disaster risk management process back on track.

 Denial. We see it every year. In the weeks and months after a major natural disaster,
companies become keenly aware of the wisdom of hardening or relocating vulnerable
facilities. Yet, as catastrophes fade from memory, we shift our focus to more pressing
matters. We forget the long-term likelihood or potential severity of a recurrence. We need

14
 to overcome this behavior and look coolly at the true risk our facilities (and our suppliers’
facilities) may be exposed to.
 Selective attention. We like to feel smart, so we tend to discount data that makes us
uncomfortable and overvalue information that confirms our existing views. To counteract
this behavior, we need to create a comprehensive disaster response plan to deal with
contingencies we’d rather not think about, even if we’re convinced a disaster won’t
happen.
 Overreaction. While some people freeze in the face of a disaster, others overreact. This
can cause business leaders to make knee-jerk decisions, such as abandoning a facility
prematurely. The more we can stay calm and keep utilities and other services at our
facilities functioning during a severe weather event, the faster we will be able to bring our
operations back online after the immediate crisis has passed.
 Overestimation. Confident leaders sometimes place too much trust in the ability of their
teams to respond effectively to adverse events as they occur. It’s far wiser to design-in
physical protection from disruption (such as cybersecurity systems, lights that go on
when the electricity goes out, fireproof doors that close automatically, etc.) than to count
on employees to be heroes.

 Procrastination. It’s the mother of all ills. Being reactive rather than proactive in
assessing vulnerabilities can be disastrous when an event happens. The devil is in the
details. The time to prepare is well before a potential disaster rears its ugly head.

Paying attention to these five behaviors won’t prevent every business interruption. But as threats
of extreme weather events and other disruptions intensify, great leaders will take their natural
blinders off. They will more fully understand that insurance alone won’t bring back lost customers,
eroded market share, or a damaged corporate reputation for the company caught off guard. And
with blinders off and rational precautions taken, they can go right back to tackling their top-five
list.

5.47 Conclusion

A better understanding is needed of likely individual, group, and public responses to intentional
acts of terrorism, as well as disease outbreaks and epidemics, corporate emergencies and crisis.

15
As indicated in this capsule, there appears to be no strong a priori reason for assuming that
responses to natural, technological, or intentionally caused disasters and willful or naturally
occurring disease outbreaks will differ. However, research on hazards and disasters also calls
attention to factors that could well prove to be important predictors of responses to such
occurrences. Research on individual and group responses to different types of disasters and crisis
has highlighted the importance of such factors as familiarity, experience, and perceptual cues;
perceptions about the characteristics of hazards (e.g., their dread nature, lethality and other
harms); the content, clarity, and consistency of crisis communications; knowledge of appropriate
self-protective actions; and feelings of efficacy with respect to carrying out those measures.

Recent research has also highlighted the importance of emotions in shaping perceptions of risk.
Hazards that trigger vivid images of danger and strong emotions may be seen as more likely to
occur, and more likely to produce harm, even if their probability is low . If willful acts engender
powerful emotions, they could potentially also engender unusual responses among threatened
populations.

The leaders of companies need to realize that any major crisis will put them on stage, with the
public paying close attention. Anything they do–or don’t do–will likely be remembered for a
long time. Leaders with a keen sense of crisis management will recognize these opportunities
and seize the moment.

16