IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ers/journl/vxxivy2021ispecial5p122-139.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

OrgRes Diagnostic Tool for Organizational Resilience: The Case of a Polish Aviation Company during the Pandemic

Author

Listed:
  • Tomasz Ewertowski
  • Patryk Kuzminski

Abstract

Purpose: The purpose of the research paper was to redevelop the OrgRes Diagnostic tool in order to improve and make it more precise. It was originally developed in partnership with the Resilience Expert Advisory Group (REAG) in Australia and Resilient Organizations in New Zealand. The OrgRes Diagnostic tool allows to determine (measure) the only initial state of organizational resilience of individual organizations or particularly their departments. Design/Methodology/Approach: A Methodology of the survey is based on a questionnaire with twenty six questions used for more effective and precise assessing the potential of resilience measures such as: leadership & culture, change ready and networks & relationships. The results of the analyses were subject of two in-depth interviews for better explanation of the findings. Due to the specific situation during the shutdown of the Polish aviation industry, the survey was directed at the personnel of a selected Polish commercial air transport operator in order to obtain statements describing the potential of resilience to the crisis caused by the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic. Findings: Therefore, main finding of the survey proves that, the redevelopment of the OrgRes Diagnostic tool allows managers to assess the potential of resilience measures such as, leadership and culture, change ready and networks and relationships in more effective and precise way. Additionally, two sub-measures related to the key resilience capabilities of the organization were identified. Practical Implications: The paper also presents values and benefits that companies can obtain by adopting the improved tool to combat COVID-19, mainly boosting the organizational resilience and minimizing the pandemic risk. Originality/Value: The redeveloped tool is so versatile that it can also be used as measure of resilience potential in other organizations for comparison purposes. The key objective of the study was to identify particularly sensitive areas in the company that require immediate improvement. Their further neglect will result in the deterioration of the company's resilience potential.

Suggested Citation

  • Tomasz Ewertowski & Patryk Kuzminski, 2021. "OrgRes Diagnostic Tool for Organizational Resilience: The Case of a Polish Aviation Company during the Pandemic," European Research Studies Journal, European Research Studies Journal, vol. 0(Special 5), pages 122-139.
    • Handle: RePEc:ers:journl:v:xxiv:y:2021:i:special5:p:122-139
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ersj.eu/journal/2707/download
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Richard T. Carson & W. Michael Hanemann & Raymond J. Kopp & Jon A. Krosnick & Robert Cameron Mitchell & Stanley Presser, 1998. "Referendum Design And Contingent Valuation: The Noaa Panel'S No-Vote Recommendation," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 80(3), pages 484-487, August.
    2. Shirali, Gh.A. & Mohammadfam, I. & Ebrahimipour, V., 2013. "A new method for quantitative assessment of resilience engineering by PCA and NT approach: A case study in a process industry," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 119(C), pages 88-94.
    3. Ana Paula Barroso & Virginia Helena Machado & Helena Carvalho & Virgilio Cruz Machado, 2015. "Quantifying the Supply Chain Resilience," Chapters, in: Hakan Tozan & Alper Erturk (ed.), Applications of Contemporary Management Approaches in Supply Chains, IntechOpen.
    4. Brown, Charlotte & Seville, Erica & Vargo, John, 2017. "Measuring the organizational resilience of critical infrastructure providers: A New Zealand case study," International Journal of Critical Infrastructure Protection, Elsevier, vol. 18(C), pages 37-49.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Patricia Champ & Richard Bishop, 2001. "Donation Payment Mechanisms and Contingent Valuation: An Empirical Study of Hypothetical Bias," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 19(4), pages 383-402, August.
    2. Sarah Maslen & Jan Hayes & Janice Wong & Christina Scott-Young, 2020. "Witch hunts and scapegoats: an investigation into the impact of personal liability concerns on engineers’ reporting of risks," Environment Systems and Decisions, Springer, vol. 40(3), pages 413-426, September.
    3. Mariana Conte Grand & Martina Chidiak, 2010. "Cambios potenciales en los usos recreativos de la costa del río Uruguay ante la instalación de la planta de celulosa Fray Bentos: un ejercicio de valoración contingente," CEMA Working Papers: Serie Documentos de Trabajo. 432, Universidad del CEMA.
    4. Francis, Royce & Bekera, Behailu, 2014. "A metric and frameworks for resilience analysis of engineered and infrastructure systems," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 121(C), pages 90-103.
    5. Catherine Chambers & John Whitehead, 2003. "A Contingent Valuation Estimate of the Benefits of Wolves in Minnesota," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 26(2), pages 249-267, October.
    6. Krupnick, Alan & Alberini, Anna & Cropper, Maureen & Simon, Nathalie & O'Brien, Bernie & Goeree, Ron & Heintzelman, Martin, 2002. "Age, Health and the Willingness to Pay for Mortality Risk Reductions: A Contingent Valuation Survey of Ontario Residents," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 24(2), pages 161-186, March.
    7. Champ, Patricia A. & Alberini, Anna & Correas, Ignacio, 2005. "Using contingent valuation to value a noxious weeds control program: the effects of including an unsure response category," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 55(1), pages 47-60, October.
    8. Carson, Richard T. & Hanemann, W. Michael & Kopp, Raymond J. & Krosnick, Jon A. & Mitchell, Robert C. & Presser, Stanley & Ruud, Paul A. & Smith, V. Kerry & Conaway, Michael & Martin, Kerry, 1996. "Was the NOAA Panel Correct about Contingent Valuation?," Discussion Papers 10503, Resources for the Future.
    9. Bert de Groot & Wim Leendertse & Jos Arts, 2020. "Building Adaptive Capacity through Learning in Project-Oriented Organisations in Infrastructure Planning," Urban Planning, Cogitatio Press, vol. 5(1), pages 33-45.
    10. Jung-Eun Kim & Jungsung Yeo, 2010. "Valuation of Consumers’ Personal Information: A South Korean Example," Journal of Family and Economic Issues, Springer, vol. 31(3), pages 297-306, September.
    11. Steven B. Caudill & Peter A. Groothuis, 2005. "Modeling Hidden Alternatives in Random Utility Models: An Application to "Don’t Know" Responses in Contingent Valuation," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 81(3).
    12. Richard T. Carson, 2011. "Contingent Valuation," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 2489.
    13. Giffoni, Eduarda & Jude, Simon & Smith, Heather M. & Pollard, Simon J.T., 2022. "Real-life resilience: Exploring the organisational environment of international water utilities," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 79(C).
    14. Grego, Marica & Magnani, Giovanna & Denicolai, Stefano, 2024. "Transform to adapt or resilient by design? How organizations can foster resilience through business model transformation," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 171(C).
    15. Gebreegziabher, Z. & Mekonnen, A. & Beyene, A.D. & Hagos, F., 2018. "Valuation of access to irrigation water in rural Ethiopia: application of choice experiment and contingent valuation methods," 2018 Conference, July 28-August 2, 2018, Vancouver, British Columbia 277168, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    16. V. Smith & Xiaolong Zhang & Raymond Palmquist, 1997. "Marine Debris, Beach Quality, and Non-Market Values," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 10(3), pages 223-247, October.
    17. Patriarca, Riccardo & Bergström, Johan & Di Gravio, Giulio, 2017. "Defining the functional resonance analysis space: Combining Abstraction Hierarchy and FRAM," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 165(C), pages 34-46.
    18. Labaka, Leire & Hernantes, Josune & Sarriegi, Jose M., 2015. "Resilience framework for critical infrastructures: An empirical study in a nuclear plant," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 141(C), pages 92-105.
    19. Samnaliev, Mihail & Stevens, Thomas H. & More, Thomas, 2004. "Attitudes Towards Alternative Management Policies For Public Recreation Lands," Working Paper Series 14530, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, Department of Resource Economics.
    20. Charles Sims, 2013. "Hypothetical Market Familiarity and the Disconnect Between Stated and Observed Values for Green Energy," International Journal of Energy Economics and Policy, Econjournals, vol. 3(1), pages 10-19.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Organizational resilience; commercial air transport; crisis management; safety management.;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • M2 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Business Economics
    • M29 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Business Economics - - - Other

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ers:journl:v:xxiv:y:2021:i:special5:p:122-139. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Marios Agiomavritis (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://ersj.eu/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.