The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Taming Deep Uncertainty: The Potential of Pragmatist Principles for Understanding and Improving Strategic Crisis Management
Open accessAbstract
Modern societies are increasingly faced with “unknown unknowns,” Black Swans, and mega-crises. Both public and corporate leaders find it deeply challenging to respond to these crisis events. Existing approaches and tools to cope with crisis-induced uncertainty are of little help in these dynamic environments. This article explores how the principles of Pragmatism may provide the building blocks for a theory of effective strategic crisis management. We argue that these principles, formulated by a group of American philosophers in a time of deep uncertainty, provide a way of thinking that will help practitioners prepare for, and deal with, emerging risks, crises, and disasters.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Organizing and the process of sensemaking
Weick, K. E., Sutcliffe, K. M., & Obstfeld, D. (2005) · Organization Science · doi:10.1287/orsc.1050.0133 · Cited by 6,943
Reason, J. (1990) · doi:10.1017/cbo9781139062367 · Cited by 5,108
Globally networked risks and how to respond
Helbing, D. (2013) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature12047 · Cited by 1,281
Cited by
Kuruvilla, S., Hinton, R., Boerma, T., Bunney, R., Casamitjana, N., Cortez, R., Fracassi, P., Franz-Vasdeki, J., Helldén, D., McManus, J., et al. (2018) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.k4771 · Cited by 153
Public governance, agility and pandemics: A case study of the UK response to COVID-19
Joyce, P. (2021) · International Review of Administrative Sciences · doi:10.1177/0020852320983406 · Cited by 37
Changing Perspectives: Managerial and Legal Considerations Regarding Crisis Communication
Claeys, A.-S., & Opgenhaffen, M. (2021) · Public Relations Review · doi:10.1016/j.pubrev.2021.102080 · Cited by 19
Metadata
- Authors
- Ansell, C., & Boin, A.
- Venue
- Administration & Society
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2017-12-18
- Volume
- 51
- Issue
- 7
- Pages
- 1079-1112
- ISSN
- 0095-3997 (ISSN-L)
- 1552-3039
- OpenAlex
- W2775995374
- Cited by
- 313
- References
- 3
- FWCI
- 20.97
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
