Injunction use contributed to data collect organization as the National level
trusted Local Management Team ability to gather adequate means because of
geographic position and responsibility repartition. But injunction use also contributed to recruit individual contribution to solution design such as sending a robot
to a damaged building to prevent criticity peak consequences on intervention
forces.
As a consequence, injunction reduced uncertainty and contributed to an effective
internal force deployment through order. So this second management device could
help, for its part, to solve the crisis in a clean-cut way.
Second, Headquarter injunction use in its relationship with local management
allowed priority fixing, innovative choices but also, to a certain extent, contributed
to limit errors due to omission or deny, as even the terrorism hypothesis has been
considered. To put it in a nutshell, injunction contributed to an exhaustive situation
assessment by cross-checking practices without penalizing field action.
5 Discussion
Choosing wisely between order and injunction management devices during the
crisis participates in effective system recovery.
If resilience is a characteristic of a system with elastic behavior which can face
disturbances [17]; that is to say a system able to partly absorb human experience
through contextualization without rejecting all systemic aspects; knowing more
about safety injunction reception could be an important step in for organizations
dealing with high risks design.
But how could one understand that, in the one hand, injunction nature implies
some result uncertainty because of the addressee regarding reliability criterion and,
in the other hand that this device also effectively contributed to safety thanks to this
same addressee?
Regarding management, qualifying devices, understanding their logics such as
in order and injunction case might lead us beyond finding sole conditions of use.
Injunction use could be an empirical proof that systems are not only meant to be
designed according to models [18], and in our case quite causal and narrow ones if
we refer to Nancy Leveson and al. analysis: “this confusion of component reliability
with system safety leads to a focus on redundancy as a way to enhance reliability,
without considering other ways to enhance safety” [19].
But crossing an organizational approach with Professor Kyoko Sato’s present
book contribution regarding imaginaries referring to Castoriadis philosophy could
also be adapted to complete our complex system understanding, as imaginaries are
fundamentally out of modelling approaches but intertwined with their works:
“reality and rationality” [20].
248
S. Agulhon
trusted Local Management Team ability to gather adequate means because of
geographic position and responsibility repartition. But injunction use also contributed to recruit individual contribution to solution design such as sending a robot
to a damaged building to prevent criticity peak consequences on intervention
forces.
As a consequence, injunction reduced uncertainty and contributed to an effective
internal force deployment through order. So this second management device could
help, for its part, to solve the crisis in a clean-cut way.
Second, Headquarter injunction use in its relationship with local management
allowed priority fixing, innovative choices but also, to a certain extent, contributed
to limit errors due to omission or deny, as even the terrorism hypothesis has been
considered. To put it in a nutshell, injunction contributed to an exhaustive situation
assessment by cross-checking practices without penalizing field action.
5 Discussion
Choosing wisely between order and injunction management devices during the
crisis participates in effective system recovery.
If resilience is a characteristic of a system with elastic behavior which can face
disturbances [17]; that is to say a system able to partly absorb human experience
through contextualization without rejecting all systemic aspects; knowing more
about safety injunction reception could be an important step in for organizations
dealing with high risks design.
But how could one understand that, in the one hand, injunction nature implies
some result uncertainty because of the addressee regarding reliability criterion and,
in the other hand that this device also effectively contributed to safety thanks to this
same addressee?
Regarding management, qualifying devices, understanding their logics such as
in order and injunction case might lead us beyond finding sole conditions of use.
Injunction use could be an empirical proof that systems are not only meant to be
designed according to models [18], and in our case quite causal and narrow ones if
we refer to Nancy Leveson and al. analysis: “this confusion of component reliability
with system safety leads to a focus on redundancy as a way to enhance reliability,
without considering other ways to enhance safety” [19].
But crossing an organizational approach with Professor Kyoko Sato’s present
book contribution regarding imaginaries referring to Castoriadis philosophy could
also be adapted to complete our complex system understanding, as imaginaries are
fundamentally out of modelling approaches but intertwined with their works:
“reality and rationality” [20].
248
S. Agulhon