388
V. Meyer Jr. et al.
Sloppy management of various kinds can be tackled by establishing, strengthening
and asserting appropriate forms of management control. The system’s properties that
constitute disaster preconditions are not so immediately accessible by management
control. At both levels, managers in pursuit of high reliability should expect to have
to make a range of trade-offs (Turner 1994).
3 Complexity and High Reliability Organizations
A high reliability organization (HRO) is one that engages in hazardous operations
characterized by complexity and uncertainty, yet achieves relatively high levels of
safety (Sagan 1996). The original studies of HROs were based on three industries:
nuclear power generation stations, air traffic controls, and aircraft carriers (Sutcliffe
2011). According to LaPorte and Consolini (1991), the operating challenges of HROs
are twofold: (1) to manage complex, demanding technologies, making sure to avoid
major failures, and (2) to maintain the capacity for meeting periods of very high peak
demand, and production.
However, Weick proposed HRO principles as a conceptual framework for reliability seeking organizations and developed the concept of “collective mindfulness”
(Weick et al. 2008) that keeps them working well when facing unexpected situations. Mindfulness involves inquiry and interpretation grounded in capabilities for
action (Fraher et al. 2017). The processes of collective mindfulness are indicated
by a preoccupation with failure, reluctance to simplify interpretations, sensitivity
to operations, commitment to resilience, and deference to expertise (Weick and
Sutcliffe 2007; Weick et al. 2008; Hales and Satya 2016). In this context, HROs
are distinctive because of their efforts to organize in ways that increase the quality of
attention across the organization, thus increasing attention to detail to detect process
variation and require a contingent response.
Solutions proposed by Perrow (1999) include (1) abandoning those systems where
risks outweigh reasonable benefits, (2) making the system less risky despite considerable effort, and (3) enhancing those systems with the characteristics of self-correction
or self-organization. Therefore, HROs are able to attain high safety standards because
they apply the principles of collective mindfulness in their daily operations.
V. Meyer Jr. et al.
Sloppy management of various kinds can be tackled by establishing, strengthening
and asserting appropriate forms of management control. The system’s properties that
constitute disaster preconditions are not so immediately accessible by management
control. At both levels, managers in pursuit of high reliability should expect to have
to make a range of trade-offs (Turner 1994).
3 Complexity and High Reliability Organizations
A high reliability organization (HRO) is one that engages in hazardous operations
characterized by complexity and uncertainty, yet achieves relatively high levels of
safety (Sagan 1996). The original studies of HROs were based on three industries:
nuclear power generation stations, air traffic controls, and aircraft carriers (Sutcliffe
2011). According to LaPorte and Consolini (1991), the operating challenges of HROs
are twofold: (1) to manage complex, demanding technologies, making sure to avoid
major failures, and (2) to maintain the capacity for meeting periods of very high peak
demand, and production.
However, Weick proposed HRO principles as a conceptual framework for reliability seeking organizations and developed the concept of “collective mindfulness”
(Weick et al. 2008) that keeps them working well when facing unexpected situations. Mindfulness involves inquiry and interpretation grounded in capabilities for
action (Fraher et al. 2017). The processes of collective mindfulness are indicated
by a preoccupation with failure, reluctance to simplify interpretations, sensitivity
to operations, commitment to resilience, and deference to expertise (Weick and
Sutcliffe 2007; Weick et al. 2008; Hales and Satya 2016). In this context, HROs
are distinctive because of their efforts to organize in ways that increase the quality of
attention across the organization, thus increasing attention to detail to detect process
variation and require a contingent response.
Solutions proposed by Perrow (1999) include (1) abandoning those systems where
risks outweigh reasonable benefits, (2) making the system less risky despite considerable effort, and (3) enhancing those systems with the characteristics of self-correction
or self-organization. Therefore, HROs are able to attain high safety standards because
they apply the principles of collective mindfulness in their daily operations.