The Prescriptical Model Of Leadership During A Crisis

984 Words4 Pages
My research focuses on the complexity of mental models associated with leaders in a crisis situation. In order to grasp the thought process during a catastrophic event, it is essential to analyze a conceptual model as it applies to a leader’s cognitive abilities, which is composed of two facets noted as the descriptive and prescriptive mental models, (Combe & Carrington, 2015). The descriptive metal model focuses on the interpretation of external changes that occur in a crisis, (Combe & Carrington, 2015). The prescriptive model concentrates on cause and effect and future actions that provide clarity in the midst of ongoing changes, (Combe & Carrington, 2015). According to the authors, Combe & Carrington, (2015) longitudinal research perspective…show more content…
In order to understand the thought process of leadership during a crisis, the authors state that we must first understand a conceptual model that is theoretically grounded, (Combe & Carrington, 2015). The conceptual model is divided into two elements, the descriptive and prescriptive mental models, (Combe & Carrington, 2015). The descriptive mental model focuses the external changes that occur during a crisis. The prescriptive mental model concentrates on future actions that need to be implemented to derail the cognitive overload due to continuous external changes as the situation unfolds. The prescriptive model aligns objectives, providing clarity to future implications related to the crisis, (Combe & Carrington, 2015). The authors, Combe & Carrington, (2015) have noted the importance of longitudal research perspective to capture the thought processes of interaction, communication and problem solving in a crisis. This type of research method is instrumental in depicting the challenges to incorporate better solutions to evolving situations. Sense making in a crisis defines these issues to ascertain the complexity and provide meaning to the event, (Combe & Carrington, 2015). Sense making entails the filtering of excessive data to identify the areas of importance. This perspective provides a means of taking a negative, that being disruptive and changing it to a positive or opportunity for…show more content…
Ambiguity can create an abundance of interpretations, therefore creating a situation of being overwhelmed do to degraded focus, (Combe & Carrington, 2015). Uncertainty is the direct opposite, by providing minimal to no interpretation, thus leading to misdirection and disorientation, (Combe & Carrington, 2015). It is at these times that it is imperative for a leader to seek assistance and work with a team, which will provide different perspectives in formulating a solution. Working as a team can influence changes in mental models, thus creating cross understanding by sharing the same perceptions in reaching a consensus, (Combe & Carrington, 2015). According to the authors, Combe & Carrington, (2015) cross understanding can be very beneficial to accurate interpretations of a crisis, but at the same time can also lead to errors in judgement. Based on prior research, there is a concern regarding leaders utilizing case based knowledge and prior experience in addressing a crisis, (Combe & Carrington, 2015). I feel that this is partially true due in part to crisis situations being unpredictable events that cannot be modeled from previous case study’s, therefore establishing a set method of addressing the problem might not be the best approach. I would

More about The Prescriptical Model Of Leadership During A Crisis

Open Document