STATES OF EMERGENCY - Patrick Lagadec

Organizations with their backs to the wall 29only leaves the crisis all the room it needs to flourish. Such a lack of directionserves to accentuate considerably two further weaknesses.A lack of initiativeThe event hits. The first reaction of the person at the helm is fear - fear ofchoosing the wrong decision and making the situation worse, fear of strayingfrom the framework of standard orders and norms. Beyond the agent incommand, other organizations, either directly implicated or only indirectlyconcerned, must be taken into account. It has often been noted that the furtheryou go from the problem's epicenter, the weaker people's capacity for takinginitiative becomes - yet those with some distance on the issue are precisely theones who have some latitude to act. Because organizations are cumbersome,with a low capacity for working in close, positive collaboration with otherorganizations (they are much better versed in defending their respectiveterritories), they are often ill-prepared to take initiatives in the face of events.Just when new types of behavior are necessary to come to grips with anexceptional event, everyone settles into a waiting posture, readily remarkingthat they are not specifically concerned by the problem - which is always avalid argument, since a crisis never singles out a particular target.This lack of initiative simply clears a path before the crisis. Yet only asystem that has been prepared, tested, and trained can summon the creativitynecessary for such an unusual challenge. A capacity for tactical riposte and anability to ask non-routine questions are vital to be able to adapt quickly andmeet the challenge. Without these elements, there are hundreds of goodreasons for doing nothing, and there are no laws specifying just whatconstitutes an abuse of power or, on the contrary, a failure to come to theassistance of persons or organizations at risk. So everyone waits - and thefield is left open to crisis, which quickly entrenches itself.A failure to anticipateWe cannot wrestle effectively with a crisis if we do not anticipate itstrajectory and how it may develop. Fighting against its present symptomsactually means simply running after the shadow it has left behind, whereas thekey is to stop its progression. But how can anyone anticipate, withoutknowing exactly what is happening? To anticipate, we need to understand,which would mean we were already in control.Nonetheless, the need for certain forms of anticipation is fairly clear.When an accident takes place near an international border, for instance, itdoesn't take a visionary to begin thinking immediately about informingneighboring countries. But here again, forces come into play that delay thetaking of appropriate measures, even when they are most evident. Here again,fear is lurking nearby, and its presence hampers our realization that we are ina crisis. The most basic questions - What if ? What next ? - go unasked.