Reactive vs. Proactive Crisis Management

Reactive vs. Proactive Crisis Management

A crisis is viewed as a significant incident that poses substantial damage to an institute or the community at large. Emergency services vary in different countries and they encompass the management roles to the public aimed at overcoming the problems infused by such emergencies as fire, earthquakes, sudden illnesses, just to mention a few. However, there are major emergency services transversing across all nations with the first being the emergency health services. Ambulances and air rescue operatives are the main programs used in medical management crisis in cases where accidents or unexpected ailments occur (Moore and Lakha, 2006). The second emergency service is offered by the police in security enhancement by reducing the number of felonies conducted to harm the public and possessions. The fire and rescue department is the third emergency unit that governs firefighting equipment that is used in fire outbreaks and any other forms of emergency services. Moore and Lakha (2006) note that, crisis management may be “proactive (preventing the incident or reducing frequency) and reactive (after the event),” (p. 265).

In pro-active crisis management, an organization conducts a susceptibility analysis that aims at identifying the possible emergencies that a given organization or public may face at any given period. This analysis is conducted before a crisis manifests itself. For instance, the fire department may analyze all the possible causes that may lead to fire ignition like gas leaks and electrical malfunctions/surges. A simple analysis rubric may categorize all the possible crises and their impacts to the public. The analysis phase is referred to as the pre-crisis as it precedes an actual emergency (Hough & Spillan, 2005). The subsequent stage upon the completion of the pre-crisis phase is the forecasting and organization stage where various stratagems are laid down as a way to overcome the posited emergency. Reverting to our earlier example, the fire department will ensure that it has transport services to ferry the fire equipment to the affected area. Additionally, it will ensure that the fire engines are well maintained, an emergency team is present in the department for twenty-four hours and a monitoring system is present to notify the fire fighting crew when a fire outbreak occurs.

Contrastingly, reactive management does not anticipate crises and it therefore lacks the two initial stages namely pre-crisis and forecasting/organization. This is because no form of anticipation is conducted on the possible crises that may occur in a given situation thereby rendering the planning requirement as an obsolete function (Moore & Lakha, 2006). It is only upon the occurrence of a crisis, that reactive management switches to the planning phase to determine the requirements needed to curtail the problem. The planning in this case is very hasty since the longer the time spent in the management of the crisis, the worse the situation becomes. With proactive management, a crisis may be averted or its destructive ability minimized considerably (Hough & Spillan, 2005). For instance, with the knowledge that one of the fire causes is electrical malfunctions, the fire department my have a program that assesses the condition of electrical wires in houses where worn out wire cables are replaced. This will prevent the occurrence of possible fires. Alternatively, when the fire occurs, the tem will reduce the time spent in controlling the fire since all measures are usually pre-planned awaiting execution.

The last phase in both types of management is marked by the post-crisis stage where management evaluation occurs. Having undergone through an unplanned crisis, most reactive managers would attempt to transform the process into a proactive one to avert the strength of future crises. With the proactive managers, the given phase would be used for the appraisal of the crises strategies used. If the effectiveness is considered low, then relevant changes are instituted to overcome the problem. The susceptibility of the plans may also be reviewed and dealt with to prevent future problems. In conclusion, emergency services apply the proactive type of crisis management as evidenced by fire fighters, ambulances, flying doctors and other anticipative measures. This form of management works best to prevent or reduce the damage caused by emergencies.

References:

Hough, M. G., & Spillan, J. E. (2005). Crisis Planning: Increasing Effectiveness, Decreasing Discomfort. Journal of Business & Economics Research, 3(4), 19-24.

Moore, T., & Lakha, R. (2006). Tolley’s Handbook of Disaster and Emergency Management: Principles and Practice.Oxford, UK: Butterworth-Heinemann.