University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Leadership in times of crisis management: an analyzation for success

(USC Thesis Other)

Leadership in times of crisis management: an analyzation for success

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content

Leadership in Times of Crisis Management:
An Analyzation for Success

by

David J. Needham

Rossier School of Education

University of Southern California

A dissertation submitted to the faculty

in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of

Doctor of Education

December 2021

© Copyright by David J. Needham 2021
All Rights Reserved

The Committee for David J. Needham certifies the approval of this Dissertation

Eric Canny
Adrian Donato
Jennifer Philips, Committee Chair

Rossier School of Education
University of Southern California
December, 2021

iv

Abstract
The purpose of this study was to explore and understand the capacity of aviation industry senior
leaders to successfully manage in a crisis to support organizational performance. Qualitative
interviews and an artifact and document analysis were utilized to understand the competencies
needed for leaders to lead through crisis. Interviews were conducted with 13 senior leaders in the
aviation industry. A review of literature and past researched was conducted to connect past
research with the study. The research aimed to gain a deeper understanding of leadership during
crisis and what influences impact that leadership. The findings revealed a gap in procedural
knowledge with a majority of participants unable to demonstrate an understanding of what
procedures to take when realizing they are in crisis. The findings also revealed a gap in
organizational resources provided to leaders to prevent crisis. The organization provides
resources to lead through crisis, but a majority of participants were unable to identify resources
the organization provides to prepare them and their teams prior to crisis. The study supports
three recommendations to close these gaps including providing scenario based training with role
play, developing toolkits as job aids to support leaders, and implement a senior leader talking
series to share experiences across leaders. These recommendations focus on the identified
competencies to support organizations in developing leaders with the ability to lead through
times of crisis.

v

Dedication
To my mom, Linda, and my dad, Jim, I could not have achieved this without your love and
support always encouraging me to reach higher and farther. Thank you.

vi

Acknowledgements
Thank you to my family and friends who have always believed in me and encouraged me
to do things I never imagined possible. Your encouragement and support have allowed me to
push through difficult times, even when I wanted to give up, to achieve my ultimate goal. Thank
you to my grandmother, “Nani.” Although you left us many years ago your presence has always
been felt in everything I do. The lifetime of love and encouragement you provided continued to
push me through barriers in my way. Thank you Jeff for encouraging me and supporting me to
start this journey and helping me get started in that first semester. You were one of my biggest
supporters and I wish you were still with us to see me achieve what you had known was possible
even when I did not believe it. Thank you Sam for understanding the long nights at the computer
and the weekends of classes and writing needed to complete this. Your support meant more than
you will know. To my doctorate buddy Stephanie, what can I say? Our talks throughout the day
helped me understand I was not experiencing this alone. Your feedback and insights made my
journey richer and I thank you for it. Congratulations as you finish your journey and thank you
for your support.
Thank you to my Cohort, specifically the “Saturday Warriors.” You each made it a little
easier to wake up Saturday mornings and get to class. It is amazing the relationships you build
across a computer screen and it has truly been an honor to walk this path with you. I’m proud of
us all for pushing through and leaning on each other when needed. Just remember – the files are
in the files.
Thank you to my dissertation committee for your unwavering support, your knowledge,
your guidance, and your understanding. Dr. Canny and Dr. Donato, you were both truly amazing
at bringing out the best in me and forcing me to do my best. Finally, thank you to my

vii

unbelievable committee chair, Dr. Phillips. I would have never made it through this without you.
You made me laugh. You made me cry (especially every time I opened a new edited chapter). I
honestly believe I would have quit and walked away without your guidance over the last year
and a half. You are truly a special person to dedicate the amount of time you did to see me
succeed. Thank you USC and Fight On!

viii

Table of Contents
Abstract ..........................................................................................Error! Bookmark not defined.
Dedication ......................................................................................Error! Bookmark not defined.
Acknowledgements ........................................................................Error! Bookmark not defined.
List of Tables ................................................................................................................................. xi
List of Figures ............................................................................................................................. xiiii
Chapter One: Overview of the Study .............................................Error! Bookmark not defined.
Background of the Problem ...............................................Error! Bookmark not defined.
Importance of addressing of the Problem ........................................................................... 3
Organizational Context and Mission .................................................................................. 5
Organizational Goal ............................................................................................................ 6
Description of Stakeholder Goals ....................................................................................... 7
Stakeholder Group for the Study ........................................................................................ 7
Purpose of the Study and Questions ................................................................................... 9
Overview of the Conceptual and Methodical Framework .................................................. 9
Definitions......................................................................................................................... 10
Organization of the Project ............................................................................................... 10
Chapter Two: Review of the Literature ........................................................................................ 12
Crisis and Crisis Management .......................................................................................... 12
Crisis in the Aviation Industry .......................................................................................... 18
Summary of Needs for Leaders in Crisis Management .................................................... 26
Clark and Estes’s (2008) Knowledge, Motivation and Organizational Influences'
Framework .................................................................................................................. 30
Stakeholder Knowledge, Motivation and Organizational Influences ............................... 31
Conceptual Framework ..................................................................................................... 45

ix

Summary ........................................................................................................................... 47
Chapter Three: Methodology ........................................................................................................ 49
Study Questions ................................................................................................................ 49
Overview of Methodology ................................................................................................ 49
Data Collection, Instrumentation and Analysis Plan ........................................................ 51
Ethics and Role of Researcher .......................................................................................... 56
Chapter Four: Results or Findings ................................................................................................ 58
Participanting Stakeholders .............................................................................................. 58
Documents and Artifacts................................................................................................... 60
Findings for Research Question 1 ..................................................................................... 60
Findings for Research Question 2 ..................................................................................... 75
Findings for Research Question 3 ..................................................................................... 81
Summary of Knowledge, Motivation and Organizational Influences' Data ..................... 92
Chapter Five: Discussion .............................................................................................................. 95
Discussion of Findings ...................................................................................................... 95
Recommendations for Practice ......................................................................................... 99
Limitations and Delimitations ......................................................................................... 113
Recommendations for Future Research .......................................................................... 115
Conclusions ..................................................................................................................... 115
References ................................................................................................................................... 118
Appendix A: Interview Protocol ................................................................................................. 138
Appendix B: Document Analysis Protocol ................................................................................. 147
Appendix C: Informed Consent Form ........................................................................................ 148
Appendix D: Sample Dashboard Tracking Implementation ....................................................... 150
Appendix E: Immediate Evalutation Form ................................................................................. 151

x

Appendix F: Delayed Evaluation Form ...................................................................................... 152

xi

List of Tables
Table 1: Organizational Mission, Organizational Goal and
Stakeholder Group’s Performance Goal 8

Table 2: Summary of Competencies to be Assessed 29

Table 3: Assumed Knowledge Influences and Knowledge Type 36

Table 4: Assumed Motivational Influences 39

Table 5: Assumed Organizational Influences 44

Table 6: Data Sources 50

Table 7: Participant Reflection on Past Experiences and Applied
Learning from Those Experiences 68

Table 8: Leadership Styles 77

Table 9: Senior Leader Resources and Document Analysis Resources 85

Table 10: Knowledge Motivation and Organizational Assets or Needs
Determined by the Data 93

Table 11: Outcomes, Metrics and Methods 105

Table 12: Critical Behaviors, Metrics, Methods and Timing 107

Table 13: Required Drivers to Support Critical Behaviors 108

Table 14: Evaluation of the Learning Components 111

Table 15: Components to Measure Reactions 112

Table 16: Projected Implementation Timeline for Gaps 113

Table A1: Interview Protocol 139

xii

List of Figures
Figure 1: The Five Dimensions of Meta-Leadership 17

Figure 2: Conceptual Framework: Inter-relationship
of Stakeholder Knowledge, Motivation, and
Organizational Influences 46

Figure 3: Gender of Interview Participants 59

Figure 4: Skills Identified as Important for Crisis Leadership 63

Figure 5: Organizational Resources Identified as Important
for Crisis Leadership 83

Figure 6: The New World Kirkpatrick Model 104

Figure D1: Sample of Level 3 Tracking 150

Figure E1: Immediate Evaluation Form Example 151

Figure F1: Delayed Evaluation Form Example 152

1
Chapter One: Introduction

Leadership impacts an organization during times of crisis. Crisis events were considered
low probability but high consequence events in the past that could threaten an organization’s
profitability, legitimacy, and viability (Bundy et al., 2017; Shirvastava, 1987. Crisis events have
become more frequent underlining the importance of how an organization and its leaders react
which impacts organizational performance (Brandebo, 2017; Mitut, 2011). Leaders need to
possess the ability to manage a crisis and must embody and portray the characteristics allowing
the ability to transcend difficulty (Powley & Taylor, 2014). Crisis events can have positive or
negative consequences for an organization based on how leaders respond. Leaders who are able
to manage a crisis responsibly and successfully realize the benefits reflected in maintaining or
even improving an organization’s share price and corporate reputation (Varma, 2020).
Organizational leaders need to be prepared to manage a crisis. Crisis management and crisis
leadership have not been focal points of education through studies of organizational behavior,
strategic management or leadership development (Powley & Taylor, 2014). Organizations that
do not prepare leaders to successfully manage a crisis risk negative consequences of soiled
reputation, lower stock price, and damage to the corporate brand (Mishra, 2017). The aviation
industry has experienced crises that have impacted organizational performance, brand, stock
price and financial viability. This study analyzed knowledge, motivational, and organizational
influences to explore the capacity of aviation industry senior leaders to successfully manage in a
crisis to support organizational performance.
Background of the Problem
The aviation industry has experienced numerous crises over time. Organizations able to
manage the crisis successfully have continued to operate while others have failed and are no

2
longer in existence. Airline leadership during times of crisis impacts the success or failure of
organizations as they navigate the complexity of each crisis. An airline’s ability to recognize
leader competencies and to educate, train, and prepare leaders to lead during a crisis is necessary
to the organization’s survival.
Studies regarding crisis management have focused mainly on planning and analysis of
organizational contingencies (Cook & Anderson, 2019; Lalonde, 2007). Leadership has not been
the focus of studies for crisis management; research shows business schools do not generally
highlight crisis management education and leadership during crisis in their programs (Powley &
Taylor, 2014). Leadership has come to the forefront more recently as crisis has become more
present and ongoing due to events such as the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks (Bhaduri,
2019; Brandebo, 2020; Brown, 2018; Dalcher, 2020; Varma, 2020). Researchers have sought to
identify competencies needed to respond to crisis (Van Wart & Kapucu, 2011). Van Wart and
Kapucu (2011) identified crisis into two categories of having a natural cause, such as events with
unusual magnitude or extreme rarity, and human causes, such as human error or terrorism.
Leaders are challenged during crisis management to respond in support of their people and in
support of the organization, and it is necessary for leaders to be prepared to navigate the support
of each and align them. Leaders should act to address the tactical aspects of the organization,
such as financial considerations and customer needs, but also the responsibilities of leading the
organization by not reacting emotionally and remaining open-minded and flexible (Bundy et al.,
2017). Existing literature also researches gender and leadership decisions exploring different
competencies (Alonso-Almeida & Bremser, 2015; Alvinius, 2019; Mano-Negrin & Sheaffer,
2004).

3
A major question of review is what competencies are most important in the midst of a
crisis (Van Wart & Kapucu, 2011). The stress and pressure caused by crisis makes it even more
important that leaders are prepared to respond appropriately. Leaders who see crisis as a threat
act more emotionally and are more limited in their efforts (Bundy et al., 2017). Organizations
must identify, recognize, and provide support in training leaders for the competencies identified
for successful leadership during crisis management.
In the education community, schools originally adopted a linear model to prevent,
respond, and recover from a crisis (Smith & Riley, 2012). Crisis management has shifted from a
linear model approach as crisis has become more commonplace requiring different competencies
from leaders who manage the crisis events (Van Wart & Kapucu, 2011). Crisis can be
anticipated in cases like financial crisis where a model was developed to help predict impending
crisis through review of economic waves (Rybnikov et al., 2017). In other cases, crisis can be
unpredictable as in the case with the 2020 COVID-19 pandemic. COVID-19 is an infectious
disease spread through direct contact with an infected person which was discovered in December
2019 (Kabadayi et al., 2020). This makes it necessary to implement alternate ways of thinking
and leading to accommodate high levels of uncertainty and ambiguity (Smith & Riley, 2012).
Importance of Addressing the Problem

Airlines have experienced financial crises, mergers and acquisitions, terrorist attacks,
aircraft crashes and global pandemics in just the past 15 years. The number of airlines over the
same time frame has been reduced as these crises have impacted the ability to continue
operations. Crisis challenges leaders and organizations must prepare leaders to perform during
those times.

4
Understanding aviation industry leadership during crisis management is important for
numerous reasons. Crisis is unexpected by an organization, presents a restricted amount of time
to respond, and threatens the values of an organization (Bechler, 1995; Garcia, 2017). However,
a crisis that is managed well can also benefit the organization (Bechler, 1995; Garcia, 2017).
Leadership becomes the major driver of organizational profitability during a crisis (Mitut,
2011), the main factor in raising employee morale and productivity, and a key element to
maintaining a functional work environment (Mitut, 2011; Radic et al., 2020). Poor crisis
management leadership can have a negative impact. For example, the lack of leadership and the
leader’s inability to adopt new strategies in the cruise industry during the COVID-19 pandemic
has put some cruise lines on the verge of bankruptcy leaving the leaders unprepared to manage a
major health related crisis (Radic et al., 2020).
It is leadership competencies that determine the success or failure of an organization in
crisis (Bhaduri, 2019). Leaders are the face and voice of the organization during these troubled
times. Their decisions and reactions have a significant impact on the employees they lead and the
success of the organization coming out of a crisis. Successful leaders through crises make smart
choices in a timely manner (Garcia, 2017). Crisis creates the environment of many urgent,
interrelated, and competing problems causing leaders to become overwhelmed with many
struggling to handle their essential functions (Kaiser, 2020). Chaos Theory indicates the totality
of the behaviors of an individual in all situations will reveal the way the individual understands
the circumstances which connects with the way the individual reflects and influences the
circumstances in a way that advances their goals (Erez et al., 2021). Leaders need to have the
competencies in crisis to avoid chaos and further creating instability.

5
Fortunately, successful crisis management can be learned (Garcia, 2017), and training all
employees is one of the most profitable investments reducing stress and increasing performance
(Mitut, 2011). Crisis management training aims to prepare professionals on how to perform in
the event of crisis providing benefits of enabling learning by doing, opportunities to fail and try
again in a safe setting, and providing an environment that is the closest professionals can get to a
real crisis without being in crisis (van Laere & Lindbloom, 2019). There are various training
formats and techniques that when utilized can develop crisis management capabilities which can
impact the individual, group, and organizational levels better preparing all for successful crisis
management leadership and organizational performance (van Laere & Lindbloom, 2019). Crisis
management training will strengthen the leader and the organization.
Organizational Context and Mission
Global Carrier Airline (GCA) is a global airline located in the United States serving
passengers domestically and globally. GCA is managed by a Board of Directors who selects a
Chief Executive Officer (CEO) to manage the daily operations. The CEO selects their
management team consisting of numerous senior executives to oversee each of the departments
necessary to function. GCA conducts operations in cities across the United States and around the
world operating in most major cities. The major city locations, such as New York and Los
Angeles, require a local leadership structure to manage the operations in these cities. This
leadership structure consists of senior leaders including General Manager, Director and Vice
President levels.
The organization’s purpose is to transport customers for business and leisure purposes.
The main organizational focus is safety, on-time operations, and profitability. To meet these
goals, the local leadership team must implement policy and procedure, motivate and manage

6
employees toward higher productivity, and maintain the local budget in an effort to contribute to
the overall organizational success. GCA has realized such success as they have served their
customers for well over 50 years becoming one of a few major carriers in the United States. The
carrier continues to be a major contributor to the job market employing tens of thousands of
employees across the world.
Organizational Goal
The organizational goal is to recover from a crisis and to ensure a crisis does not
negatively impact GCA’s business operations by developing leaders with 100% of competency
in crisis response. This goal has been developed for the purpose of this study and is not an
explicit goal of GCA. GCA has implemented a number of assessments intended to support career
growth of current employees by identifying candidates with competencies determined by GCA to
predict successful leadership. Assessments are utilized for candidates interested in employment
with the carrier as well as current employees searching for promotion to leadership levels.
The assessment process is not solely utilized by GCA as other carriers within the aviation
industry have also adopted similar assessment mechanisms to support selection of employees for
leadership positions. However, assessments focus on questions regarding day-to-day operational
needs without taking into consideration variations such as a crisis and the leader’s ability to
manage during the crisis. Crisis has been an ongoing problem for the aviation industry with
aircraft crashes, the 9/11 terrorist attacks, and the COVID-19 pandemic. GCA continues working
to identify areas of opportunity to strengthen leadership, survive, and quickly recover from a
crisis without a negative impact to business operations.

7
Description of Stakeholder Groups
The organizational goal will be achieved through the cooperation of the stakeholder
groups impacted by the organizational goal. There are several stakeholder groups with the ability
to influence the success of the organizational goal. Frontline employees who work day-in and
day-out toward operational reliability can impact performance and productivity through working
to maintain aircraft on-time departures and arrivals. These employees are crucial to keeping
GCA’s operation running successfully and efficiently during a crisis. Decisions at the macro
level could increase or decrease the risk experienced by the frontline worker (Yarrow & Pagan,
2020). Another stakeholder group is the frontline leader. These are the individuals that are the
leaders of frontline employees at the simplest level of the leadership structure. The frontline
leader impacts the daily work completed by the frontline employee but the frontline leader also
must take direction from the leaders above. This is a position key to communication up the chain
and down to the frontline employee. Frontline leaders are at the street level accountability
structure where professional judgement is necessary as shapers of policy (Murphy & Skillen,
2015). A third stakeholder group is senior leaders in the General Manager title and above. These
are the leaders who will make the decisions and provide direction during a crisis. Implications
are that leaders are followed partly so that a result can be achieved but also due to the sense of
purpose offered (Dalcher, 2020). Alignment of all three groups is essential to successfully
managing a crisis.
Stakeholder Group for the Study
Leaders of all levels are stakeholders and contribute to the achievement of successfully
managing a crisis. However, it is important to focus on the organization’s senior leaders. Senior
leaders have the greatest potential for business success or failure throughout a crisis event as the

8
decision-making authority (Garcia, 2017). Therefore, the stakeholder group for this study will be
1,100 leaders in the General Manager title and above within GCA. The stakeholder goal of
senior leaders is to implement 100% competencies to lead through crisis as seen in Table 1. GCA
hires or develops leaders with day-to-day work experience and success. Competencies required
to lead through crisis, which may not be utilized in the day-to-day work, need to be considered
when developing senior leaders. Failure to accomplish this goal will lead to the organization
being unable to manage a crisis, which leads to negative consequences to the employees and the
organization’s success. These consequences can include brand damage, negative stock price, and
decreased morale among employees (Mitut, 2011). All of these consequences will drastically
hinder GCA’s ability to obtain the capital needed to maintain or grow operations leading to a
decline in profitability.

Table 1
Organizational Mission, Organizational Goal and Stakeholder Group’s Performance Goal
Organizational mission
The mission of Global Carrier Airline (GCA) is to safely and efficiently transport individuals
in aircraft from one destination in the country or world to another.
Organizational performance goal
The organizational performance goal is to recover from a crisis and to ensure a crisis does not
negatively impact GCA’s business operations by developing leaders with 100% of
competencies in crisis response.
GCA senior leader goal
The GCA senior leader goal is to implement 100% of competencies to lead through crisis

9
Purpose of the Study and Questions
The purpose of this study is to explore and understand the capacity of GCA senior leaders
to successfully manage in a crisis to support organizational performance. GCA senior leaders
need to lead their departments and teams to ensure a crisis does not negatively impact or cripple
GCA’s business operation. There are a number of stakeholders that influence this goal. This
study focuses on those holding the General Manager title and above as those senior leaders have
the greatest impact on GCA’s operations. The analysis focuses on this group’s knowledge,
motivational, and organizational influences regarding successful leadership during times of
crisis.
The questions that guide this study are as follows:
1. What knowledge and motivation influences enable GCA senior leaders to lead in a crisis?
2. How does GCA senior leader experience with past crises influence their perception of
their ability to lead in crisis?
3. In what ways does the organization influence the ability of GCA senior leaders to lead in
a crisis?
Overview of the Conceptual and Methodological Framework
A modified Clark and Estes’s (2008) gap analysis is utilized as the conceptual framework
in this research. Clark and Estes’s (2008) gap analysis is a method to identify key business goals
and individual performance goals in an effort to determine performance gaps. The research will
help identify knowledge, motivational, and organizational influences to further analyze senior
leadership during crisis management. Knowledge, motivational, and organizational influences
impacting GCA’s senior leadership team will be examined to determine the capacity of senior

10
leadership to successfully manage a crisis. The methodological framework is a qualitative study
utilizing interviews with GCA senior leaders coupled with document analysis.
Definition of Terms
This study utilizes terms within the study that will be important to understand the
meaning of and are as follows :
• Competencies refers to the skills and abilities of a crisis manager (Mikusova & Copikova,
2016).
• Crisis refers to an event or problem that threatens the values of the organization, presents
a restricted amount of time in which to respond, and is unexpected by the organization
(Van Wart & Kapucu, 2011).
• Crisis Management is the organizing, directing, and implementing actions to minimize
the impact of threats (Dalcher, 2020).
• Frontline Employee is an hourly employee in Global Carrier Airline (GCA).
• Frontline Leader is a salaried leader in Global Carrier Airline (GCA) that holds a
manager title below General Manager.
• GCA refers to the organization known as Global Carrier Airline.
• Senior Leader is a leader in Global Carrier Airline (GCA) that holds the title of General
Manager or above.
Organization of the Project
This study is organized in five chapters. This chapter provides the reader with key
concepts and terminology commonly utilized in the aviation industry. The organization, goals,
stakeholders, and the framework utilized in the study were also introduced. Chapter Two
provides a literature review surrounding the topics of leadership and crisis management. The

11
focus is on leadership competencies, crisis management frameworks, and organizational impact.
Chapter Two presents the knowledge, motivational, and organizational influences for GCA that
is the focus of the study. Chapter Three provides information on the methodology regarding data
collection and analysis which includes participant choice and criteria. Chapter Four assesses and
analyzes that data collected while Chapter Five provides recommendations for implementation
and future research.

12
Chapter Two: Review of the Literature
This study examines GCA senior leadership during times of crisis management in the
aviation industry. Airline leaders impact the failure or success of the organization’s ability to
navigate a crisis. Senior leaders in GCA are the focus of the study to determine how motivational
factors, GCA senior leaders past experiences with crises, and organizational influences
contribute to the success or failure of leadership during times of crisis.
To examine leadership during times of crisis management, it is essential to review
literature on crisis and crisis management in three areas. These areas are understanding crisis,
emerging practices of crisis management, and a summary of needs for leaders in crisis
management. Furthermore, to understand crisis in the aviation industry, it is important to also
examine specific crises in the aviation industry such as the 9/11 terrorist attacks, aircraft crashes,
and the COVID-19 pandemic. Additionally, crisis response internal to the organization, external
to the organization, and in recovery mode will be examined. The chapter concludes with the
Clarke and Estes (2008) gap analysis conceptual framework with the knowledge, motivational,
and organizational influences related to leadership during times of crisis management.
Crisis and Crisis Management
Crisis can threaten organizational goals, harm financial performance, and impact an
organization’s reputation redefining the relationship with customers, employees, and local
communities (Bundy et al., 2017). Past research has shown organizations which have mishandled
a crisis saw a 10% decrease in stock price in the first week of the crisis and a 15% decrease after
the first year post-crisis (Wooten & James, 2008). Crisis and crisis management have often
garnered sustained interest, but understanding of crisis and crisis management through research
has only just started to scratch the surface (Bundy et al., 2017). Yet crisis, crisis management,

13
and change management have all become increasingly important in a global context in the 21
st

century (Burckhardt et al., 2012). A major factor, regardless of whether an organization is public
or private sector, big or small, or multi-billion and multi-national, organizations that are not
prepared for business disruptions will fail (Cook & Anderson, 2019).
Emerging Research in the Field of Crisis Management
Past research generally described how to manage a crisis but did not explore leadership or
the competencies needed for successful leadership (Saltz, 2017). However, more recently,
leadership and competencies for crisis management has come to the forefront (Bartsch et al.,
2020). Many issues remain unanswered in crisis research and are worth exploring to minimize
negative impacts of crisis and leveraging stakeholder involvement in each stage of crisis
(Bhaduri, 2018). Crisis management realizes unavoidable questions due to critical stakes,
cascading effects, an incomplete vision, and is not a mastered recurrent process for leaders
(Benaben et al., 2016). Crisis management as a discipline can be broken down into three phases
of pre-crisis with procedures to prevent crisis, crisis, which includes dealing with it, and post-
crisis in order to readapt to the outcome of the crisis and adjust behavior (Al Eid & Arnout,
2020). Another element of crisis management is the increasing volume of available data that
forces crisis managers to determine how to extract valuable information from uncontrollable data
sources and how to evaluate the credibility and trust of those sources (Benaben et al., 2016).
Crisis Management and crisis literature have been filled with speculation and have not
been rigorously tested empirically (Bundy et al., 2017). The relationship between normal
leadership practices versus crisis management leadership practices, as well as crisis management
leadership at different leadership levels needs further study (Oscarsson & Danielsson, 2017).

14
Education on crisis management and crisis leadership are lacking in terms of leadership
development requiring additional research (Powley & Taylor, 2014).
Understanding Crisis
The term crisis is not easy to grasp. Crisis exists when there is uncertainty, urgency, and
an existential threat to highly valued societal assets (Brinks & Ibert, 2020). The world is full of
uncertainty, risk, and tough times stemming from events known as crises (Wang et al., 2016).
Society lives in times of crisis making it more important to develop an understanding of crisis
(Brinks & Ibert, 2020). Crisis has a low probability of occurrence but a high impact (Wang et al.,
2016). It can range from small personal situations, such as a serious illness, to large scale events
like earthquakes or terrorist attacks (Wang et al., 2016). In fact, twenty percent of small to
medium sized businesses suffer some major disaster every five years (Cook & Anderson, 2019).
The term crisis has been utilized for numerous events, which makes the term more
commonplace and mitigates the severity of an impending crisis (Freeden, 2017). It has gained
some critical attention with a focus on unstable situations leading to undesirable outcomes if they
are not contained or fought off by the concerned parties (Al Eid & Arnout, 2020). An increase in
crisis events, and the acceptance of their impact on various levels of stakeholders, creates an
environment necessary to gain a solid understanding of crisis so strategies can be developed to
successfully address crisis events (Wang et al., 2016). Crisis is seen as an emergency that
damages society and may lead to its collapse either economically or socially (Al Eid & Arnout,
2020). Leaders need to be prepared to identify the difference between an emergency, such as a
supply chain interruption, and a crisis, such as a cyber-attack (Cook & Anderson, 2019).
Understanding crisis is important but it is necessary to understand emerging practices as well.

15
Crisis Management: Emerging Practices
Organizations need to always be ready for crises in order to get through them without any
damage (Ciftci et al., 2017). Traditional views of crisis management have been criticized for
relying on old beliefs such as building separate professional crisis management teams (Oscarsson
& Danielsson, 2018). Instead, emerging research identifies the need for all leaders to have broad
crisis management abilities rather than only a select team experienced in crisis (Oscarsson &
Danielsson, 2018). Training is an area that has gained acceptance with a focus on identifying
basic processes for crisis response, especially in the education community (Holzweiss & Walker,
2018). Crisis situations, such as active shooters and natural disasters, have increased on college
campuses and administrative leaders have lacked the proper preparation, training and resources
to successfully address these situations (Holzweiss & Walker, 2018).
Holzweiss and Walker (2018) identified task management, resource management, and
self-care as categories of crisis training mentioned by the participants in research. In addition to
training, the structure of the organization impacts crisis management with research showing
teams were one of the most successful tools used in building strategies in the pre-planning phase
as well as successfully managing during a crisis (Castle, 2019). Castle (2019) suggested
choosing individuals from different departments with different abilities when building a team to
provide immediate response on a tactical level and to make the appropriate decisions to
overcome extraordinary situations.
Another focus for emerging practice is centered around three practices of improvisation,
prioritization, and creating alternatives, for organizational success (Oscarsson & Danielsson,
2018). Improvisation allows leaders to be flexible to the changing environment while
prioritization allows leaders to understand the need to focus on the most important item at that

16
time (Oscarsson & Danielsson, 2018). Creating alternatives is necessary to navigate the crisis as
new practices are created when necessarily deviating from normal routines and rules (Oscarsson
& Danielsson, 2018).
The Meta-leadership Model indicates a leader must first precisely determine what is
occurring in order to find the most appropriate solution (Marcus et al., 2007). The crisis event is
volatile and quickly changing making it difficult to determine what is occurring as it takes time
for information to emerge and a leader’s assessments to evolve (Marcus et al., 2007). This model
introduces five dimensions including the person of the leader and their awareness or problem
assessment, the problem, change or crisis which requires response, leading one’s entity or
operating in one’s designated authority, leading up to bosses or those who are accountable, and
leading cross system (Marcus et al., 2007). These meta-leaders show that organizations can
accomplish more when leaders interact above, beyond and across the confines of their own
entities (Marcus et al., 2007). Figure 1 displays the dimensions of meta-leadership framework
derived through observation and analysis of leaders in crisis circumstances (Marcus et al., 2007).
This framework is one emerging practice to support leaders in understanding their leadership and
how to lead in various situations, including crisis. The first dimension is the person where
leaders are encouraged to hold a mirror to you as a leader understanding your awareness and
leadership abilities (Marcus et al., 2007). The second dimension is the situation. This is how you
view the event and that must constantly be adjusted as you lead (Marcus et al., 2007). The next
dimensions focus on leading. The three areas are leading the silo, leading up, and leading across.
Leading the silo is supporting your staff so they support you while leading up is knowing your
boss’s priorities and being able to deliver on those (Marcus et al., 2007). Finally, leading across

17
allows the leader to create leverage by building links with others (Marcus et al., 2007). Many of
these emerging practices focus on the role of leaders in crisis management.

Figure 1
The Five Dimensions of Meta-Leadership

Note. From “The Five Dimensions of Meta-Leadership,” by L. J. Marcus, I. Ashkenazi, B. Dorn,
and J. Henderson, 2007, Pre-publication paper, Harvard School of Public Health.

18
Crisis in the Aviation Industry
The aviation industry has realized many different types of crises including terrorist
attacks, aircraft crashes, and most recently a health pandemic. Airlines cannot avoid crisis, but
they are unprepared for dealing with psychological problems and extreme emotions, such as
anger and grief, resulting from crisis, specifically an aircraft crash (Butcher & Hatcher, 1988;
Gerken et al., 2016). On March 25, 2015, a copilot, who had previously been on medical leave
and admitted to the hospital with depression and suicidal tendencies, crashed the plane he was
flying, killing 144 passengers and five crew members (Soubrier, 2016). Fourteen years earlier,
the September 11, 2001 attacks had a major impact on the United States and the world that led to
action on the federal level with the creation of the Transportation Security Administration (TSA)
(Hunter & Lambert, 2016). Currently, the airline industry is in financial difficulty and in a
survival mode due to the COVID-19 pandemic (Vlnod, 2020). Countries introduced travel bans
and quarantine requirements that resulted in flight cancellations starting in early 2020 and an
expected loss of $113 billion in sales to global airlines if the pandemic continues into 2021
(Kabadayi, O’Connor, & Tuzovic, 2020). Crisis is not new to the aviation industry. The industry
has seen several crisis events that have impacted the industry which also stresses the importance
of senior leadership during times of crisis.
Types of Crisis
The aviation industry has seen a number of crises in its history. Financial crisis, terrorist
attacks, airline crashes, and transmittable diseases are all examples of crises the aviation industry
has had to navigate. Leaders must be prepared to act for organizational success. Crisis creates
risk and uncertainty to which responding with ignorance is not a choice (Pietreanu et al., 2020).
It is necessary for leaders to successfully navigate crisis management in the aviation industry due

19
to the nature of crisis they may face. Recent crises include terrorist attacks, aircraft crashes and a
global pandemic.
9/11 Terrorist Attacks
On September 11, 2001, extremist Islamic terrorists hijacked aircraft from major United
States airlines and used them as deadly weapons to crash into high profile locations killing
thousands of people. The 9/11 attacks in 2001, as this event has become known, are known to be
the biggest safety breaches to ever occur in the history of airlines (Hunter & Lambert, 2016). Out
of this security breach government and the aviation industry worked together to support
legislation with the purpose of calming Americans and strengthening confidence in the safety of
air travel (Fraher, 2004).
Security measures were put in place including enhanced screening equipment and
procedures, expanding the list of prohibited items, reinforced cockpit doors, law enforcement,
such as air marshals, on planes, and stronger security measures in the airport (Jashari, 2018). The
9/11 attacks decreased customer confidence in safety and security of air travel as many
Americans were afraid to fly for fear of being victim to another terrorist attack (Deepa &
Jayaraman, 2017).
Airlines and airports have had to evolve since the 9/11 attacks to regain confidence as
security measures have strengthened aircraft safety but terrorists have changed tack trying to
detonate bombs at airports ticket counters, departure and arrival gates, or lobbies (Woods, 2017).
However, the 9/11 terrorist attacks had a financial impact on the industry as well. An average
loss of an airline bombing is estimated to be around $25 billion while the direct and indirect
losses from the 9/11 terrorist attacks ranged around $50 billion (Stewart & Mueller, 2018). Since

20
September 11, 2001, there have been 124 cases of planned Islamist terrorism in the United
States, but none of those targeted documented events have targeted airliners (Muller, 2018).
Aircraft Crashes
In 1958, the rate of fatal crashes within the airline industry was one in 100,000 hours of
flying; in 2016 the rate was approaching two million hours per fatal accident (Hunter & Lambert,
2016). While most crashes are not intentional a recent one was. On March 25, 2017 the copilot
of Germanwings Flight 9525 locked the chief pilot out of the cockpit while he utilized the
bathroom and crashed the plane into the southern French Alps killing 144 passengers and five
crew members (Soubrier, 2016). An investigation revealed the copilot was treated for mental
health issues. Investigations into aircraft crashes commonly conclude with recommendations to
avoid future similar occurrences. This crash was no different concluding with six
recommendations following the investigation including authorizing doctors to inform companies
of patients with suicidal tendencies that present a risk to the public without the doctor fearing
being sentenced for violation of medical confidentiality (Soubrier, 2016).
Airline crashes are normally not intentional like Germanwings Flight 9525. The Lion Air
and Ethiopian Airlines crashes in 2018 and 2019 respectively, were both caused by mechanical
failures of Boeing’s 737 Max aircraft, which forced the planes’ noses down, a feature designed
to assist pilots when a plane is stalling, when neither plane was stalling, killing 346 people in
total (Johnston & Harris, 2019). The Boeing 737 MAX aircraft was grounded after these crashes
as a thorough investigation and safety checks were performed.
Mechanical failures, similar to those in the Lion Air and Ethiopian Airlines crashes, are
not the only factors that can cause airliners to crash. Human error is another reason for an
aircraft accident. Colgan Air flight 3407 crashed on February 12, 2009 during a scheduled

21
passenger flight from Newark, New Jersey to Buffalo, New York. The cause of the crash was
determined to be the captain’s inappropriate response to a stall warning during landing in icing
conditions caused by poor training practices and a tired crew who did not receive enough rest
(Starr, 2017). Research indicates that causal factors such as high fuel costs and bankruptcies
forced main line carriers to use regional carriers, like Colgan Air, as cost savings (Broderick et
al., 2017). Broderick et al. (2017) also focuses on the regional carriers cost cutting measures such
as reduced training and low pay for the pilots, which caused the crew to pick up the extra flight
to make money sacrificing sleep. The crash of Colgan Air flight 3407 spurred legislation on the
federal level called Part 117 that implemented timing on rest rules, duty days, and fit for duty
assessments for aircraft crews (Starr, 2017).
COVID-19
COVID-19, discovered in December 2019, forced most countries in the world to
discourage unnecessary travel and to implement some measure of restrictions or lockdown on
movement by the end of 2020 for their citizens as well as those traveling into their country (“Air
Travel”, 2020; Kabadayi et al., 2020). Airlines realized reduction in flights due to travel
restrictions in an attempt to slow the spread of the virus (Shi et al., 2020). The reduction led to
airlines grounding entire fleets and parking airplanes on tarmacs while requirements for
reparation flights continued to put airline crews in danger of being exposed to the virus
(Kabadayi et al., 2020).
In order to safely operate, airlines adjusted to the threat of COVID-19 with a focus on
boarding passengers with seats in the rear of the airplane in order to minimize the number of
passengers passing each other (Cotfas et al., 2020). Airlines continue to seek ways to mitigate the
risk of COVID-19 spread. Research has contemplated the airlines’ ability to require customers to

22
be vaccinated in order to reduce the risk of contagion even prior to COVID-19 (Robertson,
2016). Americans take 2.1 airline trips per year with airlines moving approximately two million
people every day (Robertson, 2016). If unvaccinated, travelers are more likely to carry infectious
diseases with them crossing different state and country jurisdictional borders (Robertson, 2016).
Service providers continue to work to provide timely and transparent practices such as
proactively contacting customers and providing detailed information about procedures and
efforts implemented to deal with the pandemic (Kabadayi et al, 2020). Having been recently
discovered COVID-19 research is an emerging area at this time and growing at a rapid pace.
The COVID-19 pandemic continues at the time of this study, so the full effect on the aviation
industry is yet to be determined. Further research will be necessary in the future.
Aviation Response to Crisis
No organization is immune from crisis and different crises will create different
perceptions and responses from customers and from the organization (Lee et al., 2019). Leaders
are confronted during crisis with the need to balance their ethical responsibility to respond to
those impacted by crisis, such as families of crash victims, with the fiduciary responsibility to
protect shareholder value (Racine et al., 2020). This balance requires the proper response
internally in the organization, externally to the public, and during recovery.
Internal Response
A positive relationship with employees is critical in reducing the risk of crisis making
knowledge on how to strategically communicate with employees increasingly crucial (Lee et al.,
2018). Employees serve as internal communicators and external corporate ambassadors in crisis,
which makes internal response critical (Ravazzani, 2015). The organization must ensure there is
not a misalignment between organizational communication, employee communication, and

23
activities during a crisis or employees will misinterpret, resist, or reject the organization's
response (Kim, 2018). Research shows providing employees with important and updated
information will allow them to act creatively and serve as ambassadors of the organization or
help to solve novel problems (Adamu & Mohamad, 2019).
While communication is one focus, mental health is another critical internal
consideration. Crisis management is an all-consuming responsibility for all employees, and
employees will experience personal influences on their physical and emotional health,
professional identity, faith and relationships (Treadwell, 2017). Emergency plans should include
emotional support for all employees as research demonstrates there is an undeniable long-term
impact from crisis and tragedy (Treadwell, 2017).
Airport service providers in Australia airports faced difficulty with their internal response
in regards to the COVID-19 pandemic. Incomplete and misleading communication weakened
leadership’s credibility causing employees to have a lack of trust, justice, and fairness
(Buhusayen et al., 2020). Research showed participants believed leaders had a lack of resources
and experience dealing with crisis and the fluid changes as they came from various aviation
backgrounds (Buhusayen et al., 2020). Over 50% of respondents felt there was a gap in
communication from senior leaders to frontline leaders causing a failure to provide clear
direction on how to achieve goals (Buhusayen et al., 2020). A failure in the internal response led
to problems caused by layoffs and negative psychological reactions among employees leading to
decreased organizational performance and employee morale during the COVID-19 crisis
(Buhusayen et al., 2020).

24
External Response
An organization’s failure to respond quickly to a crisis can bring on adverse effects on
brand perception, consumers’ willingness to pay a premium price for the product, and future
purchase intentions (Mishra, 2017). Every crisis is a business problem before it is a
communication problem, and the organization’s response can leave a battered stock price, shaken
shareholder confidence and low employee morale and productivity (Garcia, 2017). This was the
case with Korean Air flight 86 on December 5, 2014. Flight 86 returned to the gate as it was
taxiing for takeoff when a Korean Air Vice President demanded a flight attendant be expelled
from the flight for improperly serving nuts aboard the plane (Yim & Park, 2019). While not a life
threatening crisis Korean Air initially tried to reason the incident away by blaming the cabin
crew’s low quality of service which caused public anger (Yim & Park, 2019). The anger
escalated causing economic harm to Korean Air and forcing the organization to change external
communication strategies (Yim & Park, 2019). The Vice President was forced to resign and in
2015 she was sentenced to 12 months in prison on four charges of violating aviation security
laws, assaulting plane staff and interfering with the aircrew’s duty (Yim & Park, 2019).
Senior leaders will be pressured to make decisions to try and meet expectations of public
opinion in order to minimize negative impact on corporate reputation (Fragouli, 2020). Research
has shown the need for crisis and strategic communicators to adjust external communication
strategies based on consumer beliefs and the national and cultural environments as people create
their own reality based on what they perceive (Mishra, 2017). Organizations that frame decisions
in light of stakeholder expectations lead to smarter and faster choices that increase stakeholder
trust (Garcia, 2017).

25
In addition to communication, organizations can increase their corporate social
responsibility efforts within the community to strengthen the perception of their response and
brand. These actions can include impromptu and formal memorial ceremonies when needed,
collection of artifacts and construction of permanent physical memorials to honor victims,
community response, and affirmation of the values of the organization (Treadwell et al., 2020).
American Airlines created a permanent exhibition in their CR Smith Museum remembering the
lives lost in the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks where the community can visit.
Organizations can work to rebuild trust with the community by being part of the community.
Recovery Response
The restoration of an organization’s reputation is one of the most significant issues that
must be prioritized by leaders in a post-crisis recovery (Fragouli, 2020). The crisis response of a
company during a crisis is a major factor in determining the success of leadership during the
crisis (Mansor & KaderAli, 2017). Over 90% of all online adults in the U.S. have some form of
social media that can impact an organization and its reputation quickly spurring a new industry
of social media crisis management firms (Abney et al., 2016). A slow response to crisis makes it
difficult for organizations to bounce back with most unable to recover (Pangarkar, 2016).
Coming out of crisis requires organizations to prepare and respond to future challenges and the
new risks associated with the transformation forced upon it (Sousa & Alberio, 2020). Customer
perception is difficult to change when an organization is found to be responsible for the crisis
and the organization needs to communicate credibly, accurately, unbiased, trustworthy, and
convincing (Mansor & KaderAli, 2017).
Korean Air’s recovery response to the 2014 incident from the vice president failed to
quickly support the recovery of the brand as Korean Air had incorrectly identified the true cause

26
of public outrage (Yim and Park, 2019). Korean Air attempted to provide customers onboard
with monetary compensation, bargain tickets, frequent flyer programs, discounts and other items
in order for the customers to publicly support Korean Air’s response to them which portrayed
insincerity (Yim and Park, 2019). Instead, the public was calling for a sincere apology, more
humane leadership and more socially responsible contributions to the world which if Korean Air
could have met public expectations, would have strengthened the response recovery (Yim and
Park, 2019). The recovery phase requires organizations to obtain the trust of stakeholders again
acting with integrity, which may present an opportunity for change and improvements turning
the crisis into an opportunity (Fragouli, 2020).
Summary of Needs for Leaders in Crisis Management
Leadership and management are different and require different skills based on the facts of
each crisis (Bundy et al., 2019; Powley & Taylor, 2014; Van Wart & Kapucu, 2011). The role of
leadership during a crisis is to provide stability, empower others, impart encouragement and
optimism to strengthen hope, and maintain resources to recover from the crisis while ensuring
economic survival (Kaiser, 2020). Leaders need to be flexible during a crisis where
improvisation, prioritization and creating alternatives come to the forefront (Oscarsson &
Danielsson, 2018). Flexibility allows leaders to successfully define and frame the initiative from
the start to facilitate the appropriate response in terms of focus and resources needed (Fusch et
al., 2018).
During times of crisis, it is critical for leaders to remain composed and operate
successfully under pressure (Fragouli, 2020). Successful leaders demonstrate calmness and
boldness early and often as they view crisis as a test (Garcia, 2006). Stability during a crisis will

27
positively impact corporate reputation and support leaders in gradually recovering reputation as
well as trust of stakeholders (Fragouli, 2020).
Empowering others is another trait essential to crisis management leadership (Dirani et
al., 2020). Empowerment refers to employees’ ability to be proactive and self-sufficient in
supporting achievement of organizational goals (Fischer & Schultz, 2017). It allows those facing
the crisis to obtain the desired results and resolve the crisis quickly and successfully (Fusch et al.,
2018). Empowerment connects to an employee’s sense of autonomy, self-efficacy, and job
satisfaction which leads to organizational success (Fischer & Schultz, 2017). Providing
empowerment increases speed in decision making and reduces unnecessary bureaucracy to end
the crisis successfully (Dirani et al., 2020).
Encouragement and optimism are additional traits for successful crisis management
leadership. Leaders need to put people first during a crisis and provide positive accountability
and recognition for an employee’s ability to deal with their stress, job, and personal situations
during times of crisis (Dirani et al., 2020). Recent research shows employees identified
encouragement from coworkers and supervisors as a reason for reduced stress (Bellamy et al.,
2019). Leaders can see increased tension needing to balance providing encouragement and
optimism while also using facts to provide a realistic view to the crisis and threat (Kaiser, 2020).
Goleman (2001) highlighted emotional intelligence as a key trait a leader needs to have in
order to handle crisis management successfully. Emotional intelligence became prominent in
1981 and indicates emotions are contagious and that a single person can influence the emotional
tone of groups by modeling those emotions (Goleman, 2001). It comprises four abilities allowing
individuals to perceive, use, understand, and manage emotions (Hajncl & Vucenovic, 2020).
Research shows self-respect and leading by example allows leaders to connect with employees

28
for maximum success (Hall et al., 2019). Leaders who understand the emotions are more likely
to have strong personality traits such as conscientiousness and openness to experiences allowing
them to be a more successful leader (Hajncl & Vucenovic, 2020).
Expectations are high for leaders during crisis; unprepared leaders can be destructive to
themselves, the organization, and their employees by being over-controlling, avoiding
responsibility, and becoming stressed and losing control (Brandebo, 2020). It is necessary for
leaders to prepare by formulating a crisis plan, providing support for the planning process pre-
crisis, evaluate resources and responsibilities, and plan financial funding for a crisis and crisis
recovery (Brown, 2018). During the pre-crisis planning phase the focus should be on all
preventive procedures to avoid crisis (Eid & Arnout, 2020). Leaders must be aware of potential
warning signs while attempting to avoid crisis (Fragouli, 2020). Organizations should also
prepare leaders by conducting scenario planning to engage critical thinking and familiarization
with crisis (Smith & Riley, 2012). To successfully implement their preparation, leaders need to
have a clear vision and values, strong decision making and problem-solving abilities, be
adaptable, develop their teams and communicate clearly while constantly assessing the situation
(Caulfield, 2018; Demiroz & Kapucu, 2012; Kapucu & Van Wart, 2008, Klann, 2003).
Additional research shows the personality of a leader, with traits such as conscientiousness and
high emotional intelligence, coupled with their behavior are more important than a leader’s
ability to assess information and make decisions in times of stress and crisis (Hajncl &
Vucenovic, 2020; Tokakis et al., 2018). While research may be conflicting on competencies
needed to successfully manage a crisis, a common factor is crisis situations need great leaders to
be solved (Korosenyi et al., 2016). Table 2 highlights the competencies that were assessed
through this study.

29
Table 2
Summary of Competencies To Be Assessed
Competency Knowledge type Literature
Calmness/Stability Conceptual Fragouli, 2020;
Garcia, 2006
Empowering/Autonomy Conceptual Dirani et al., 2020;
Fischer & Schultz, 2017
Remain optimistic Metacognition Dirani et al., 2020;
Bellamy et al., 2019
Flexibility Conceptual Oscarsson & Danielsson, 2018;
Fusch et al., 2018
Emotional Intelligence Metacognitive Goleman, 2001;
Hajncl & Vucenovic, 2020
Communication Conceptual Caulfield, 2018;
Demiroz & Kapucu, 2012;
Kapucu & Van Wart, 2008;
Klann, 2003

Note. The assumed knowledge types are identified in the conceptual framework section below
and in Table 3.

30
Clark and Estes’s (2008) Knowledge, Motivation and Organizational Influences
Framework
The study utilized a gap analysis model as the conceptual framework. Gap analysis
(Clark & Estes, 2008) clearly defines organizational goals and then identifies the cause of gaps
between actual performance and desired performance within the organization. This is done in a
systematic fashion by defining measurable goals, identifying current performance and the gaps
as it relates to the desired performance, determining the possible causes for the gaps and
confirming them, creating solutions and implementing them, and finally evaluating the outcome.
This process is a continuous cyclical process with a goal of constant closing of performance
gaps. Gap analysis focuses on three influence areas which are the potential causes for
performance gaps. Knowledge, motivation and organizational influences are all studied and
identified.
The gap analysis model is utilized to identify gaps with data and research. This is
necessary to avoid developing solutions that will not solve the true symptom of the gap.
Additionally, the information gathered allows for a realistic view of the gap avoiding inaction
due to the possible complexity of solving it. The gap analysis systematic approach helps avoid
these inappropriate solutions which could create additional gaps or performance problems. The
gap analysis process ends with an evaluation of the implemented solutions. The gap analysis
process begins again to determine if additional gaps exist.
This study is designed as a qualitative study following the gap analysis model. The
study’s goal is to identify both assets and gaps that impact successful senior leadership during
times of crisis management in the aviation industry. Once the stakeholder goal and competency
were determined, knowledge, motivation and organizational influences that impact stakeholder

31
capacity was generated based on context-specific as well as general learning and motivation
literature. These influences will be presented next.
Stakeholder Knowledge, Motivation and Organizational Influences
This study focused on the stakeholder knowledge, motivation, and organizational
influence which impact successful crisis leadership. The concepts are reviewed to understand the
needs of leaders and the organization to lead during crisis. The knowledge, motivation, and
organizational influences are utilized to strengthen leadership in times of crisis to reduce the
negative impact of crisis on the organization and its employees.
Knowledge Influences
Knowledge and skill enhancement are required for job performance when employees do
not know how to successfully complete performance goals or when future challenges will require
innovative problem solving (Clark & Estes, 2008). Literature focused on knowledge-related
influences is reviewed to understand what knowledge and skills leaders need to successfully
manage a crisis in the aviation industry. Clark and Estes (2008) stress the importance for people
to know the how, when, what, why, where, and who in order to achieve performance goals.
Individuals are often not aware of the lack of their own knowledge or are afraid to acknowledge
their opportunities (Clark & Estes, 2008).
Anderson et al. (2001) identified four types of knowledge to better understand problems
in performance. Those four, factual, conceptual, procedural, and metacognitive, hold subtypes of
knowledge that focus on concrete knowledge and abstract knowledge. Factual knowledge refers
to knowledge of terminology and specific details and elements (Anderson et al., 2001).
Conceptual knowledge covers knowledge of classifications, categories, principles, theories,
models and structures (Anderson et al., 2001). Procedural knowledge refers to knowledge of

32
subject specific skills, techniques, methods, and criteria for utilizing appropriate procedures
(Anderson et al., 2001). Metacognitive knowledge is strategic knowledge, self-knowledge, and
knowledge about cognitive tasks (Anderson et al., 2001). Categorizing knowledge into these four
types is important in order to support learning, teaching and assessing the necessary knowledge
by utilizing techniques geared toward those types of knowledge (Anderson et al., 2001). A
review of current scholarly literature in this study highlights two knowledge influences,
conceptual and metacognitive, which leaders must understand to successfully lead during times
of crises.
Conceptual Understanding: Leadership and Crisis Management
Successful leadership during a crisis will depend on the ability to understand the
principles and relationships occurring within the crisis. GCA senior leaders will need to
understand what is occurring and how to react to it as a crisis will present a different
environment and different circumstances than day-to-day operations. GCA senior leaders must
know how to successfully communicate throughout the organization to navigate the crisis event.
GCA senior leaders achieve conceptual understanding when they can transfer their knowledge
into new situations and apply it to new contexts.
When managing crisis, leaders need to understand the problem, frame it correctly and
consider behavior outside of standard operating procedures (Fusch et al., 2018). Additionally,
leaders also must quickly identify primary and secondary stakeholders to limit potential
roadblocks, build relationships and develop good will to obtain the desired outcome (Fusch et al.,
2018). Experience is a factor that supports understanding concepts of crisis management
leadership as experience has a positive impact on future response to crisis situations, encourages
crisis thinking, and allows a leader to tap into learning from past crisis management events

33
(Labas, 2017). Crisis experience is an important factor in organizational success (Parnell et al.,
2010) as it allows leaders to learn principles, structure and theory of crisis management.
Communication and understanding how to communicate is critical in crisis management
by clearly, constantly, and specifically communicating what is being demanded (Johnston,
2016). A research survey showed 94.7% of respondents identified creation of efficient
information flow as a successful crisis management concept (Labas, 2017). Information should
be communicated quickly, accurately, directly, and candidly as leaders are responsible for the
interactions among managers and their team members (Fusch et al., 2018). Communication can
have a positive influence on morale and motivation and send a positive, reinforcing message to
employees that crises can be controlled by the organization which reduces anxiety and
uncertainty (Labas, 2017). Leaders are tasked with bringing order out of chaos and successfully
communicating will support that goal (Fusch et al., 2018).
Learning and training is a third concept that occurs when individuals can exchange
knowledge through interaction with one another allowing employees to learn from the
organization and each other (Labas, 2017). With training, leaders can learn to notice the
temporariness of their thoughts allowing them to see what is actually happening as opposed to
their story about the crisis (Kantor et al., 2020). Learning from previous crises is useful to
prevent similar crises and to help conduct organizational learning to ensure preparedness for
future crises (Fowler et al., 2007; James et al., 2011). Past crisis events provide opportunities for
learning and the development of new leadership skills to better prepare for the future (Fusch et
al., 2018).

34
Procedural Actions: Leadership and Crisis Management
Procedural knowledge refers to the capacity to follow steps in a particular order to solve a
goal (Hurrell, 2021). Organizations with established crisis management procedures have leaders
with a high level of crisis preparedness and crisis prevention (Nizamidou & Vouzas, 2020). This
allows the leaders and organization to assist employees to cope with crisis, minimize its impacts
to overcome it and return back to normalcy quickly (Nizamidou & Vouzas, 2020). However,
skilled crisis leaders recognize the importance of following procedures but also knowing when to
deviate from it when the crisis requires (Caulfield, 2018). Organizations should have a fully
trained emergency operations or crisis team to create and provide leaders specific procedures for
triage of a crisis (Woitaszewski et al., 2020). Procedural knowledge can support leadership
during a crisis but it also can be utilized as a preventive measure to avoid crisis (Walecka, 2021).
Denmark, which in a recent study in the banking industry regarding the 2008 financial collapse,
saw less negative impact than other countries like Iceland, due to Denmark’s leaders having
crisis procedure knowledge which Iceland’s leaders did not have (Rikhardsson et al., 2021).
Airlines were challenged in 2020 and continue to be challenged with creating procedures in
response to COVID-19 (Bielecki et al., 2020). New procedures needed to be formulated in order
to accommodate the ongoing crisis which required airline leaders to quickly gain new procedural
knowledge to effectively manage the COVID-19 crisis (Bielecki et al., 2020).
Procedures for crisis manage vary with some organizations providing specific checklist
instructions and other organizations with loose frameworks (Harwood, 2017). Crisis
management emphasizes the need for continuous monitoring of the external and internal
environment of the organization (Harwood, 2017; Kovaltchuk et al., 2016). Checklists, flow

35
charts, playbooks, and standard operating procedures (SOP) plans can be utilized to aid leaders
before, during and after crisis (Harwood, 2017).
Metacognitive Strategy: Leadership and Crisis Management
Metacognition is defined as deliberate, planned, goal-directed, and future-oriented mental
processing that can be utilized to accomplish cognitive tasks (Flavell, 1979). When leaders are
able to assess their processing, they can better predict the events and conditions allowing for
more strategic decision making (Gottfredson & Reina, 2020). A research survey showed 94.8%
of respondents felt detection of early warning signal changes allowed for better organizational
crisis preparedness (Labas, 2017). In a training regarding mindfulness at the workplace,
participants noticed their mind wandering which allowed them to refocus and offer new ways of
doing while creating space for self-reflection (Kantor et al., 2020). Leaders need self-awareness
and flexibility to respond with new strategies as their options and conditions change (Johnston,
2016).
Metacognition is a key aspect of understanding job requirements (Dreibelbis et al., 2018).
A leader’s self-awareness allows them to be more conscious of their situations allowing them to
alter their behavior and decisions to avoid negative processing (Gottfredson & Reina, 2020). A
leader must assess their ability to adopt successful mechanisms and respond to changes during
crisis (Labas, 2017). Finally, metacognition allows leaders to see after cues they generally would
not pay attention to which expands their processing and options for behavior and decision
making allowing them to successfully and most successfully meet the organizational goal
(Gottfredson & Reina, 2020).
Table 3 presents the assumed knowledge influences and knowledge type for successful
leadership during times of crisis management.

36
Table 3
Assumed Knowledge Influences and Knowledge Type
Assumed knowledge influence Knowledge type
Leaders need to have knowledge of concepts
necessary to lead through crisis.
Conceptual

Leaders need to know what actions to take
upon recognizing they are in a crisis.
Procedural
Leaders need to assess their own strengths
and weaknesses in adopting new strategies
in crisis as conditions change.
Metacognitive

Motivational Influences
Motivation is a second key influence in the Clark and Estes (2008) gap analysis.
Literature focused on motivation-related influences impacting leadership competencies during
crisis management will be reviewed. According to Pintrich and Schunk (1996) (as cited in Clark
and Estes, 2008, p. 44) motivation is an “internal psychological process that gets us going, keeps
us moving, and helps us get the jobs done.” Motivation influences lead employees to choose to
work towards a goal, persist until it is completed and focus on how much mental effort is
invested to get the job done (Clark and Estes, 2008). Leaders who face crises will encounter
motivational influences for themselves and for their employees. Motivation at work results from
our experiences and beliefs regarding ourselves, peers and past experiences which are not always
accurate (Clarke and Estes, 2008). Motivation is important as beliefs and experiences will impact
leadership success in times of crisis. Self-efficacy and expectancy outcome are two motivational
theories to be explored.
Self-efficacy is one motivational influence that impacts a leader's ability as perceived
efficacy can affect behavior (Bandura, 1978). A leader’s belief in their ability to manage a crisis

37
will impact success or failure. Clark and Estes (2008) reference “motivational homicide,” a term
indicating leaders who believe motivation cannot be influenced by an outside person or
environment. Leaders unable or unwilling to believe the ability exists to motivate others create a
barrier to maximizing motivation in the workplace (Clark and Estes (2008).
Expectancy outcome is another motivational influence impacting leadership in times of
crisis management. A belief exists that monetary rewards or threats of punishment will force
employees to do what the organization wishes (Clark and Estes, 2008). Furthermore, a person is
unmotivated when the effort to perform well is extreme, the performance needed to obtain the
goal is unrealistic, or the outcome is not valued (Riihimaki & Viskupic, 2020). Leaders may have
confidence in themselves and the employees but if they believe they will be prevented from
achieving goals by organizational barriers they will not be successful (Clark and Estes, 2008).
Self-Efficacy: Confident Leadership and Successful Decisions
Self-efficacy refers to an individual’s self-belief in successfully completing a narrowly
defined task (Elliot et al., 2017). Bandura (1977) found that self-efficacy was a stronger predictor
of behavior with threats as compared to past performance. Additionally, self-efficacy gained
from performance accomplishments predicted performance on stressful tasks that individuals had
never done before (Bandura, 1977). Bandura (1977) also asserted efficacy expectations influence
the level of performance by enhancing intensity of persistence of one’s efforts.
GCA senior leaders need to make quick decisions under enormous time pressure during
times of crisis (Bienkowska et al., 2020). Strong leadership capable of making proper and quick
decision with limited information is critical to successful crisis management leadership
(Goniewicz et al., 2020). Brown (2018) identified a principal who managed a school shooting
and admitted mistakes were made, which she learned a lot about crisis management from, due to

38
difficulties in making quick decisions in the moment. The principal identified her trouble was
due to the crisis being fresh, new and unexpected (Brown, 2018). Brandebo (2020) highlighted
the ability for a leader to make quick decisions as a valuable talent in crisis management but may
also be perceived as insensitive. Leaders are under extreme pressure to make decisions quickly
that have immediate and long-term consequences, and they must be confident in their abilities to
do so (Hirudayaraj & Sparkman, 2019). The ability to be decisive and make quick decisions with
incomplete information is seen as a highly valuable asset in crisis management leadership
(DuBrin, 2013; Howitt & Leonard, 2009; Kaiser, 2020).
Goal Orientation (Mastery): Achievement of Individual Development Goals
Goal orientation relates to goals individuals set for themselves and the affect the actions
they take in relation to the goals (Yildizli, 2021). Goal orientation also has a dimension that
relates to an individual’s attitude towards tasks, completing tasks, and evaluating the
performance on a given task (Yildizli, 2021). Goal orientation focuses on acquiring relevant
skills, knowledge, and attitude to become competent (Singh & Rangnekar, 2020). Crisis can
cause individuals to reach a point where they question their commitment to personal goals
experiencing doubts and impulses to quit (Ghassemi et al., 2021).
Research suggests leaders who are actively engaged in goal orientation will have a higher
positive outcome from crisis events; additionally, leaders who experience higher number of crisis
events will have a more positive outcome in maintaining goal orientation (Ghassemi et al.,
2021). Crisis will create the perception of easy tasks becoming hard to complete, not so much in
physical difficulty but in level of cognitive difficulty (Iso-Ahola, 2021). Behavior initiated and
modeled in a stable environment reinforces and creates a stronger link in goal orientation making
it easier to repeat which is where crisis can interfere with goal orientation (Iso-Ahalo, 2021).

39
Table 4 presents the assumed motivational influences by motivation construct for successful
leadership during times of crisis management.

Table 4
Assumed Motivational Influences
Assumed motivation influence Motivation construct
Leaders need to be confident in their ability to
make decisions as a leader in crisis
Self-Efficacy

Leaders need to believe they will achieve
individual development goals from leading
through crisis
Goal Orientation (Mastery)

40
Organizational Influences
Organizational influences join knowledge and motivational influences as the key areas
for performance improvement and goal achievement in the Clark and Estes (2008) gap analysis
framework. Literature focused on organizational-related influences impacting leadership
competencies during crisis management will be reviewed. Organizational barriers, such as
missing tools, inadequate facilities, or poor process and procedures can result in poor
organizational performance (Clark and Estes, 2008). The organizational setting is important
where leaders should be provided with a clear vision, goals, performance measurements,
knowledge, skills, motivational support, and structure and processes in order to be successful in
times of crisis (Clark and Estes, 2008). Additionally, the organizational culture is important to
organizational success as it can change organizational innovation and performance (Alshammari,
2020). Organizational culture can take years to build but it boosts morale of employees to get
maximum output and leads to improving organizational performance (Alshammari, 2020; Joyner
et al., 2013; Lavigna & Hays, 2004; Lawrence & Lorsch, 2019).
Organizational Settings: Providing Resources to Manage During a Crisis
Organizations must allocate resources consistent with the concerns being addressed
(Zhao et al., 2018). Organizational resources are sponsored sources of supply and support
provided to individuals or groups to help achieve an organizational outcome (Albrecht et al.,
2018). Fusch et al. (2018) identified stress as the relationship between demand and resources
where stress increases when the demand on leaders is high but they do not have the resources to
meet it. Communicating who to approach for support and where to receive the resources needed
by leaders is an important step in business continuity during a crisis (Kuntz et al., 2017).

41
Organizations that fail to devote the resources risk losing a competitive advantage and cannot
respond flexibly to change (Zeneli et al., 2018).
Successful leadership in crisis management is dependent on leaders receiving resources
from the organization as the flow of organizational resources impact the thinking, feeling and
ways a leader reacts to important events (Albrecht et al., 2018). Leaders can be overwhelmed
with the different critical needs, competing priorities and uncertainty which create stress when
unable to obtain the necessary resources (Kaiser, 2020). Yerkes and Dodson (1908) established a
psychological theory that some level of pressure is needed for optimal performance but as
pressure increases beyond a threshold, performance begins to decrease. Poor crisis leadership
occurs for a number of reasons including a lack of resources, which limits the leader’s ability to
apply their leadership style successfully (Fragouli, 2020). Organizations will realize success
under a leader who is able to share leadership, has resources and can provide them to employees,
and promotes organizational resilience (Dirani et al., 2020).
Organizational Settings: Providing Resources to Prepare for Crisis
Frameworks designed to prepare leaders for crisis are rare (Hirudayaraj & Sparkman,
2019). While crisis leadership studies have appeared in literature over the past 5 years, crisis
leadership preparedness is often left out of the curricula (Caulfield, 2018). Leaders are able to
manage emotions and prepare for crisis if trained properly by their organization (Moran, 2010).
Training programs encourage leaders to see crisis events as opportunities rather than threats and
prepare them for the disruption (Wicker, 2021). Leader deficiencies are revealed during crisis
indicating organizations need to invest in developing leaders for many different types of crises
(Wicker, 2021). The recent COVID-19 pandemic has allowed organizations to understand gaps

42
and the implications they caused in order to react to the present and prepare leaders for future
crises (Ulrich, 2020).
Organizations need to advance organizational learning by sharing lessons learned from
past mistakes and crisis (Nizamidou & Vouzas, 2020). The business world has seen numerous
crises in the past five years turning crisis management into a major research topic (Smeureanu &
Diab, 2020). Organizations have to provide leaders the resources to set and test emergency plans
which may cause uncertain losses to their businesses (Smeureanu & Diab, 2020). The training
and development should also include an operational focus, such as employee productivity, as
well as an employee support focus, such as training to recognize mental issues such as anxiety
and depression among their staff (Bano et al., 2021).
Organizational Models: Providing Leaders Autonomy During a Crisis Without Fear
The accepted definition of organizational culture is based on the Schein findings (1985)
referring to organizational culture as a basic assumption a group has invented, discovered, or
developed in learning to navigate problems (Krupskyi & Kuzmytska, 2020). Culture helps to
establish a system that allows employees to know which activities are acceptable and which
behaviors are rewarded or disciplined (Sherman & Roberto, 2020). A famous quote attributed to
Peter Drucker, yet there is no source referencing him having said it, is “culture eats strategy for
breakfast” (Kaul, 2019). Research shows each organization has its own culture which can
influence ways organizations react in crisis (Adamu et al., 2016). Significant changes in the
environment, such as crisis, force an organization to adjust its culture to fit the new environment
(Bhaduri, 2019). Organizations should constantly audit the organizational culture to promote
successful crisis management to manage different types of crises (Nizamidou & Vouzas, 2020).

43
Autonomy is defined as the capacity to manage one’s own affairs (Olsson & Verbeek,
2018). A lack of autonomy for a leader not only impacts successful leadership but will also
impact motivational aspects of the leader and the employees they lead and the organizational
culture (Bernardo et al., 2017). Organizational culture plays a role in directing how an
organization responds to crisis and how successful leadership can avert or control crisis
(Bhaduri, 2019). Organizations that build a culture understanding errors are part of normal work
and foster acknowledgement and learning from those errors help to build successful leadership
and decision making (Van Rooij & Fine, 2018). Leaders will fail and be unwilling to comply
with organizational rules if organizations foster an unethical culture and behavior including
issuing blame and punishing employees which will increase anxiety and stress (Van Rooij &
Fine, 2018). Research shows an error management culture helps to create leaders who are not
afraid to make decisions quickly understanding errors will create learning opportunities and not
discipline (van Steenbergen et al., 2020). An error management is the way errors are dealt with
in an organization, part of the corporate culture, and exists when employees can detect their
errors, admit, communicate, analyze and correct them quickly (van Steenbergen et al. 2020).
Organizational Model: Organizational Culture of Trust
Trust in an organization, and the organization’s trust in their leaders, are important during
times of disruption given the rate at which organizations have been facing disruptions in the last
five years (Gustafsson et al,, 2021). Employees trust an organization when they have faith or
confidence in the organization’s capabilities and belief that the organization will not damage
their interests (He et al., 2020). When employees sense they are trusted from the organization,
they take greater pride and concern for the work they are completing and contribute toward the
success of organizational goals which is beneficial during crisis (Chen & Sriphon, 2021).

44
Leader decisions will determine the future of the organization, for better or worse, during
times of crisis (Silveira dos Santos et al., 2016). Leaders need to believe their organizations will
trust them and support them. Distrust causes anxiety and insecurity which undermines
cooperation and efficiency (Sutherland, 2017). It is essential for leaders to be trusted to make
decisions independently as there is often insufficient time to communicate or build consensus
during times of crisis (Marko et al., 2020). A key component to successful leadership through a
crisis is a decentralized decision making that allows authority to individuals rather than upper
management leadership (Sutherland, 2017). Leaders need autonomy to make decisions and make
them quickly with the support of the organization. Decisions made and implemented quickly will
help mitigate the crisis (Marko et al., 2020). Table 5 shows the assumed organizational
influences by category for successful leadership during times of crisis management.

Table 5
Assumed Organizational Influences
Organizational influence category Organizational influences
Organizational settings The organization needs to provide leaders
with resources to manage during a crisis.
Organizational settings The organization needs to provide leaders
with resources to prepare for crisis
Organizational models The organization needs to provide autonomy
to leaders during crisis without the fear of
retribution or discipline.

Organizational models The organization needs to foster a culture of
trust.

45
Conceptual Framework
Clark and Estes (2008) stated that to close business gaps and achieve goals organizations
must first determine the cause of the gap and the type of performance improvement program
required. A conceptual framework is the justification for why a study should be conducted
describing the current known knowledge through a literature review, gaps in understanding of
the problem, and an outline of methodology all in an effort to understand why the research is
important and what contributions might the findings make to what is already known (Varpio et
al., 2020). A conceptual framework is a result of a thorough literature review and should be a
mental map connecting various dimensions of the research process including concepts,
assumptions, expectations, beliefs and theories that support the research (van der Waldt, 2020).
This study previously presented the assumed knowledge, motivation, and organizational
(KMO) influences affecting the goal of GCA senior leader success in times of crisis
management. Knowledge, motivation and organizational influences do not exist in a silo and
must be analyzed collectively to develop holistic solutions to achieve the goal (Clark and Estes,
2008). Understanding Clark and Estes (2008) interaction between knowledge, motivation, and
organizational influences, the conceptual framework was influenced by the assumed KMOs
previously presented, along with previous research, theory, and newly generated data. The KMO
influences and concepts discussed in this chapter are illustrated in Figure 2 to depict the inter-
relationships.

46
Figure 2
Conceptual Framework: Inter-relationship of Stakeholder Knowledge, Motivation, and
Organizational Influences

Figure 2 introduces the conceptual framework and highlights the interaction between the
knowledge, motivational and organizational influences. Understanding successful leadership
during crisis management, the gaps in performance and the interdependency on the influences
leads to analysis and assessment in order to create the correct solutions. Gap analysis helps
determine whether leaders have the adequate knowledge, motivation and organizational support
to achieve the organizational goals (Clark & Estes, 2008). The conceptual framework is a

47
continuous circle as the gap analysis process will be cyclical. Once evaluation is complete the
process can begin again to review any gaps for further performance development. Knowledge,
motivation and organizational influences are in the center of the circle as the entire process will
revolve around identifying, analyzing and assessing those influences. The knowledge influences
consist of conceptual and metacognitive while the motivational influences consist of self-
efficacy and expectancy. The organizational influences include the organizational setting and
the organizational culture. Each is defined by separate bubbles depicting the distinct influence
each have, and they are connected and interconnected to one another indicating all must align for
the correct solution to be created leading to improvement of organizational goals.
Summary
The aviation industry has experienced crisis on many levels from aircraft crashes to
world health pandemics. Research shows the role of leaders in successfully navigating crisis
management is important to the organization’s brand and financial stability post-crisis. Crisis
creates ambiguity and uncertainty leading to the incorrect internal, external, and recovery
responses. Leaders who react inappropriately can negatively impact shareholder value and
organizational viability. Finally, the review of literature further examined the assumed
knowledge, motivational, and organizational influences related to successful leadership in times
of crisis management.
The knowledge influences focused on conceptual knowledge and metacognitive
knowledge of a leader’s ability to understand the concepts necessary to lead through a crisis and
their ability to assess their own ability to adapt new strategies as crisis conditions change. The
motivational influences centered on self-efficacy and expectancy related to a leader’s confidence
to make quick, successful decisions in a crisis and the leader’s belief that the organization will

48
support their decisions. The organizational influences included organizational settings and
organizational culture focused on a leader being provided the resources to successfully manage a
crisis while having the ability to act autonomously without fear of retribution or discipline.
Finally, a conceptual framework was provided utilizing the Clark and Estes (2008) gap analysis
to examine the assumed knowledge, motivational, and organizational influences impacting the
goal of successful leadership during crisis management.

49
Chapter Three: Methodology
This qualitative study analyzes GCA senior leadership to better explore and understand
the capacity of GCA senior leaders to successfully manage in a crisis to support organizational
performance. GCA senior leaders need to be prepared to successfully lead during times of crisis
to ensure a crisis does not negatively impact or cripple business operations. The analysis focuses
on the stakeholder’s knowledge, motivational, and organizational influences impacting
successful senior leadership during times of crisis. This chapter details the methodology, the
research questions, overview of the methodology, data collection, instrumentation, and analysis
plan, ethics and the role of the researcher, and finally, limitations and delimitations.
Study Questions
The questions that guide this study are as follows:
1. What knowledge and motivation influences enable GCA senior leaders to lead in a crisis?
2. How does GCA senior leader experience with past crises influence their perception of
their ability to lead in crisis?
3. In what ways does the organization influence the ability of GCA senior leaders to lead in
a crisis?
Overview of Methodology
This study utilizes qualitative research to study GCA senior leadership during times of
crisis management. The methodology includes interviews and document analysis to collect data.
Interviews were identified as a data collection method in order to support a deep analysis of the
topic of study from the stakeholders within the title of General Manager and above. Merriam and
Tisdell (2016) identified interviewing as necessary when researchers cannot observe behavior,
feelings or how people interpret the world. Qualitative interviews involve open-ended questions

50
to elicit views and opinions from the participants (Creswell & Creswell, 2018). Document
analysis was selected as documents exist prior to commencing the research study and are a
ready-made source of data that are a natural part of research (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). A
review of documents can uncover useful data once authenticity and accuracy is determined
(Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).

Table 6
Data Sources
Study questions Interviews Document analysis
What knowledge and motivation influences
enable GCA senior leaders to lead in a crisis?
X X
How does GCA senior leader experience with
past crises influence their perception of their
ability to lead in crisis?
X X
In what ways does the organization influence the
ability of GCA senior leaders to lead in a
crisis?
X X

51
Data Collection, Instrumentation and Analysis Plan
The data collection consisted of multiple methods. First, interviews were conducted
followed by a document analysis to gather data in analyzing GCA senior leadership during times
of crisis management. The data was analyzed to answer the study’s research questions.
Method: Interviews
Interviewing is necessary when behavior, feelings, or understanding how others interpret
the world cannot be observed (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Interviewing is also necessary when
researchers are interested in past events where it is impossible to replicate identical conditions of
the past event (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Interviews are an important aspect of this research as it
is impossible to replicate past crisis experiences of participants. The primary purpose of the
interviews is to gather data on a deeper level to understand the conceptual and metacognitive
knowledge, self-efficacy and expectancy outcome, and organizational settings and organizational
models that influence leadership during times of crisis management. Gaining an understanding of
these influences and the participants’ feelings, beliefs, and understanding of leadership during
crisis management will support the ability to identify performance gaps and create solutions for
implementation.
Participating Stakeholders
A non-probability purposeful sampling approach was utilized to select GCA senior
leaders to be interviewed. The participating stakeholders for the interviews consisted of GCA
senior leaders who hold the title of General Manager or above. The individuals must have been
in their leadership position for more than two years, a leader in the aviation industry for more
than five years, had a minimum of twenty-five employees report to them directly or indirectly,

52
and were in a leadership position at the time of the interviews due to the interest in COVID-19 as
a crisis.
A non-probability sampling method was most beneficial for interviews in this study as
the participants were in a decision-making leadership capacity in times of crisis impacting
organizational performance. While this sample is not necessarily representative of all senior
leaders in the aviation industry it allowed for valuable data to be collected from individuals who
have a history of leading people and who have experienced crises.
Instrumentation
The interviews were semi-structured to allow for open-ended questions to be asked in no
predetermined order, with flexibility, and utilizing a guided list of questions and issues to be
explored (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). The interview protocol, listed as Appendix A, provides the
open-ended questions to better understand the gaps in the knowledge, motivational, and
organizational influences of GCA senior leaders during crisis management. Participant responses
allowed for data to be gathered on demographics, past experiences with crisis, and the
participants’ beliefs and lenses on successful leadership during crisis management.
Questions focused on understanding the participants’ knowledge and skills regarding
leadership during crisis management. Additionally, questions gathered data on the participant’s
self-efficacy as a leader in their ability to lead through crisis. The questions also worked to
identify how each participant believed their past strategies aided or impeded their ability to
successfully lead through crisis. Finally, the participants provided insight into their view of the
organization’s role and how the organization can influence successful leadership.
The conceptual framework in this research highlighted the need for identifying
performance gaps in achieving the stakeholder goal to lead in crisis by understanding the

53
knowledge, motivational, and organizational influences. Interviews allowed for in-depth
discussion with the participants to better understand, analyze, and assess the data in order to lead
to the creation of solutions. The interview protocol in Appendix A references the protocol
questions, the research questions the data support, and key concepts addressed by the questions.
Data Collection Procedures
I contacted individual GCA senior leaders who meet the sample criteria by email inviting
them to participate in the interview process. I gained approval from a GCA General Manager of
Human Resources to support identifying eligible GCA senior leaders through company profiles.
Once the invitation was accepted the researcher scheduled a mutually agreed upon date and time
to conduct the interview. The researcher provided information on the study as well as the details
from the Information Sheet for Exempt Studies, as shown in Appendix C, to provide the
participant with a full understanding of their rights in regards to participating in the study.
Individual interviews were completed face-to-face virtually through a visual web-based meeting
platform called Zoom. At the time of the interviews, due to the COVID-19 pandemic, the
University of Southern California Independent Review Board (IRB) restricted the ability to
conduct in-person interviews. This restriction was for the health and safety of all participants and
to reduce the possible transmission of the COVID-19 virus. Interviews lasted 60 minutes in
length where I took field notes and recorded the interview in order to transcribe at the completion
of the interview. The interviews of the 13 identified participants were completed over an eight-
week period.

54
Data Analysis
Data analysis for qualitative research like interviews has a preferred method of analyzing
data simultaneously with data collection (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). This allowed me to gather
focused data that is not repetitious or of an overwhelming volume to be processed (Merriam &
Tisdell, 2016). Upon completion of the interviews, I first read through the interview transcripts
to ensure confidentiality and accuracy. The second phase of analysis was to utilize a priori
coding and then review in vivo to identify additional themes that emerged outside of the
identified knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences. The in vivo and a priori open
codes were useful in determining themes between the data from all participants in the interviews.
Finally, the themes emerging from the interviews were analyzed and linked to knowledge,
motivational, and organizational influences associated with leadership during times of crisis
management. The connections to those influences were utilized to answer the listed research
questions of the study.
Credibility and Trustworthiness
Merriam and Tisdell (2016) defined trustworthiness as a study being valid and reliable
where there has been some rigor in carrying out the study. Credibility is defined as a study that
has been conducted ethically with the study being explicit about the researcher’s role, their
relationship to those studied, detailing why the topic of study is important, being clear about how
the study was conducted, and providing a convincing presentation of the findings (Merriam &
Tisdell, 2016). I utilized multiple sources of gathering data, to promote trustworthiness and
credibility. Additionally, after the interviews were completed, I had the interviews transcribed
and provided the transcription back to the participants to ensure the correct intention was
collected through interviewee transcript review (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).

55
Method: Document Analysis
Analysis of documents refers to a wide range of items including written, visual, digital,
and physical materials (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Documents are similar to observations
allowing for a snapshot into what the creator deemed important at the time (Merriam & Tisdell,
2016). They can be accessed at any time, with permission if not public, utilizes the language and
words of the creator of the document, and is written evidence (Creswell & Creswell, 2018).
Data Collection Procedures
I requested access to documents from GCA to include memos, emails, internal web
access and any other documents that may have been pertinent to the study questions. Two
approaches to document collection were used. First, a request was made to the Managing
Director of Human Resources. These documents were those created by specific senior leaders of
GCA or documents created on an enterprise level from GCA and filtered down to all employees.
Additionally, during the interview process, participants were asked if they can produce any
documents useful to the study and if they can share them with the researcher.
Data Analysis
Copies of the documents were utilized to code and categorize the data using the same a
priori codes based upon the knowledge, motivational and organizational influences used in the
analysis of the interview data. Themes were compared to the data analyzed from the interviews
to triangulate the data. Triangulation occurs when multiple data sources are utilized in order to
confirm the findings (Creswell & Creswell, 2018). In the case of this study, the two sources of
data were analyzed independently and in relation to one another to capture different perspectives
of leaders with respect to managing in crisis. Together, the data was utilized to answer the
study’s research questions in accordance with the study’s conceptual framework.

56
Ethics and Role of Researcher
Merriam and Tisdell (2016) indicate ethical practice ultimately connects to the individual
researcher’s own values and ethics. The researcher has a role to protect the participants and
understand their own role and impact on the relationship and treatment of the participants
(Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). This responsibility includes do no harm, the right to privacy, the
notion of informed consent, voluntary participation, and building trust with the participants
(Creswell & Creswell, 2018; Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).
I took several steps in this study to account for my role and the ethical standards
determined. First, I was aware of, accounted for, and questioned my biases and assumptions in
the study in regards to my role with the organization. The methods utilized were disclosing the
purpose of the study, not pressuring participants to provide answers to specific protocol
questions, avoiding siding with participants or leading them to conclusions, and respecting the
privacy and confidentiality of participants (Creswell & Creswell, 2018). Additionally, I utilized
triangulation through multiple sources of data, reflexivity to reflect upon the processes of the
study, and provided interview transcripts to the participants for review (Merriam & Tisdell,
2016).
Voluntary participation is important to the ethical validity of the study; I provided an
Information Sheet for Exempt Research to participants that detailed the purpose of the study and
outlined participation guidelines including confidentiality. The study also received approval from
the University’s Independent Review Board (IRB) to provide protection to the participants of the
study (Creswell & Creswell, 2018). Finally, I took the necessary steps to receive approval to
record the interviews conducted and secured and stored the data in a locked location not

57
accessible to the public. This ensured confidentiality and protection of the data collected
throughout the study.
I remained aware of my biases and assumptions throughout the research. I am
experienced in leadership development and coaching leaders, which could have impacted the
research. Additionally, I work for the organization and with the participants, but none of the
potential participants are supervised by me. This affiliation required the need to reduce the
impact on the relationship to both. I mitigated the potential assumptions and biases by utilizing
reflexivity and a review of the interview protocol and document analysis protocol by the
dissertation committee. Merriam and Tisdell (2016) indicated the best a researcher can do is to
be conscious of the ethical issues that can impact the research and examine their own
philosophical beliefs with the issues.

58
Chapter Four: Findings
A qualitative study was conducted collecting data from interviews and a document and
artifact review. The purpose of the interviews was to gather data from individuals identified as
stakeholders for this study. A finding was determined to be an asset if interview data from eight
or more participants, 61.5% of the participants, demonstrated that particular knowledge or
motivational influence. A finding was determined to be a gap if interview data from less than
eight participants, fewer than 61.5% of the participants, demonstrated that particular knowledge
or motivational influence. Eight participants were chosen as the level due to the small sample
size in the research. Less than eight participants would be too close to 50% which would not
have been a strong finding with a small sample size. The data was collected to better understand
the knowledge, motivation, and organizational assets and gaps to support Global Carrier Airline
(GCA) senior leaders in implementing 100% of competencies to lead through crisis. Interviews
were conducted first followed by a review of documents and artifacts.
The Clark and Estes (2008) gap analysis framework was utilized to explore assumed
influences as outlined in Chapter 2 to understand in what ways the knowledge, motivational, and
organizational influences were present. The findings were gathered through multiple sources of
qualitative data to validate the assumed causes. All interviews were conducted virtually through
the Zoom platform over an eight week time frame with each interview completed in 45 minutes
to one hour.
Participating Stakeholders
Participating stakeholders for this study were GCA senior leaders. GCA senior leaders
were defined as leaders with the title of General Manager or above. The total participant pool
consisted of 1,100 individuals who met the study criteria. A non-probability purposeful sampling

59
approach was utilized based on criteria identified in Chapter 3. Seventeen senior leaders were
invited to participate in accordance with the recruitment approach outlined in Chapter 3. Thirteen
senior leaders completed the interviews. Figure 3 provides a gender breakdown of the interview
participants in this study. GCA senior leaders who participated in the interview ranged from the
title of General Manager to Senior Vice President. Interview participants were from operational
areas within the business as well as supporting departments. GCA senior leaders in corporate
departments and divisions were not included in this study. Participating senior leaders had a
combined over 225 years of employment experience with GCA. Demographic data is not
disaggregated by participant to protect the identity of the participants.

Figure 3
Gender of Interview Participants

Participant Gender
Male (7)
Female (6)

60
Documents and Artifacts
Documents and artifacts were reviewed as the secondary data collection method. GCA’s
leadership toolkit, which was created during the COVID-19 crisis, was identified as a document
relevant to this study. Additionally, 47 public statements and press releases were reviewed
covering March 1, 2020 through August 15, 2021. During the interview process, participants
were asked if they had any documents, such as memos, they would be able to provide for review.
No participants provided documents. The researcher focused on reviewing documents that could
be found. These documents were not created by the participants of the study or the participant
stakeholder group. The document and artifact review only contributed to the organizational
influence findings and will be discussed in that section below. The document and artifact review
was weighted equally with the interviews from an instrumentation perspective. The study
findings are presented by research question.
Research Question 1: What Knowledge and Motivation Influences Enable GCA Senior
Leaders to Lead in a Crisis?
The knowledge and motivational influences were identified as either an asset or gap
based on the findings from the participant interviews. As discussed above, the threshold for
determining a gap or asset was set at eight participants, or 61.5%. The findings for the assumed
knowledge influences will be presented first followed by the findings for the assumed motivation
influences.
Knowledge Influences’ Findings
Assumed knowledge influences were evaluated to determine assets and gaps for GCA
senior leaders leading during times of crisis management. The assumed competencies were
probed through the study and utilizing Clark and Estes (2008) as the conceptual framework.

61
Analysis of data was able to substantiate conceptual knowledge and metacognition as assets with
procedural knowledge as a need.
GCA Senior Leaders Understand the Concepts Required to Lead Through Crisis
In evaluating this assumed conceptual knowledge influence, the findings determined this
influence to be an asset. Participants were first asked to share the types of education classes or
training they had taken in regards to crisis management. Only two participants acknowledge
having taken formal educational courses in a school setting, but nine participants acknowledge
receiving formal training within the industry. Participant 10 stated “They set me up there for a
two week course, and I really think that has helped me through my career, really stopping and
thinking through it.” Participant 13 identified training taken in the course of employment. “It’s
pretty intense…it’s very in-depth, it’s very tense.” Other leaders were not as confident in the
trainings provided. According to Participant 2, “we do have some annual training that to me is
very basic, that it doesn’t really scratch the surface.” Participant 1 was straight forward
indicating, “I struggle to think of many trainings very specific to crisis management.”
Participants were next asked to share what they believed were the most important skills
that have led to their success in leading during a crisis. Eight participants identified three
particular skills as an asset: remaining calm, being flexible, and communicating with employees.
Participant 3 and Participant 8 both agreed remaining calm was the most important skill for them
during crisis. Participant 3 indicated “Staying calm, just breathing. That’s the first, most
important part,” and Participant 8 stated “Keeping the calm is number one.” Flexibility and being
able to be nimble were identified as an important skill where Participant 11 felt “you can have
the books and all the preparations…but when something happens, that kind of stuff gets thrown
out the window.” Participant 2 thought more strategically about flexibility by saying “see the

62
forest through the trees and say, Okay, we can do this, and here’s how we are going to do it, and
be able to direct traffic from there.” Finally, communication was the third skill identified. Being
able to communicate clearly, transparently, and with correct information was seen as important.
Participant 12 took a realistic perspective by saying “I operate under the assumption that all of
the information that I’m receiving initially is wrong – it’s not intentionally wrong, it’s just the
dynamic of crisis.” Speaking about a past crisis experienced Participant 5 stated “we had a matter
of minutes to make a decision about what to communicate to employees because word was going
to travel like wildfire…the first 30 minutes was going to dictate everything that happened from
there forward.” Figure 4 presents the skills identified by participants as important for crisis
leadership.

63

Figure 4
Skills Identified As Important for Crisis Leadership

Data obtained from the participants affirms the research in Chapter 2. Table 2 in Chapter
2 outlined the competencies literature highlighted as needed for leaders to lead through crisis.
Calmness, flexibility, and communication were all identified as desired competencies through
the literature review. Table 2 also presented empowering, autonomy, and remaining optimistic.
The literature identifies communication as being needed to empower employees and portray
optimism (Dirani et al., 2010). Emotional intelligence was identified in Table 2 but was not
measured in participants for this study. Emotional intelligence will be discussed in the
motivation section below.

64
Interview participants were questioned on areas of conceptual knowledge where training
and the skills needed to navigate leadership during times of crisis were queried. Calmness,
flexibility, and communicating with employees were identified by participants as conceptual
knowledge to have in order to lead through times of crisis. The competencies most identified by
participants, above the 61.5% threshold, align with the research in Chapter 2 making this
influence is an asset.
GCA Senior Leaders Lack Procedural Knowledge of What to Do When in Crisis
Participants were asked to share their knowledge of crisis management procedures. Only
one participant, or approximately 8%, was able to identify crisis management procedures making
this influence a need. Participant 13 walked through procedural steps they took in several crises.
We created some little cards…and put [emergency] information on there. All the
information that they would need, we had it on that little card so that the only
thing they would have to do is just flip and look at it…so very convenient
Participant 13 continued, “we [got] leaders…on a conference call, understanding what we were
going to do, how we were going to close up the airport operation, make sure all of our equipment
is safe and secure.” While there was no job aids or checklists available, Participant 13 utilized
procedural knowledge to prepare and manage the crisis employing the competencies referred to
in Table 2. Participant 13 prepared job aids to support success and communicated the necessary
information to reinforce the behaviors needed to lead through the crisis.
Two participants acknowledged procedures in a specific discipline, such as safety, but
other participants did not identify any procedural knowledge of crisis response. Participant 2 was
very direct in saying “I would say, being vulnerable for a second, I think I have limited
knowledge of that.” Participant 2 acknowledged they did not have a strong understanding of

65
procedural knowledge in crisis management. Interview data showed GCA senior leaders
struggled to identify procedures in place to scan the organization’s internal and external
environment to asses for crisis threats. Specific to their departments, GCA senior leaders did not
identify job aids, checklists, toolkits, playbooks, or standard operating procedures that they
followed before, during, or after crisis.
Participants were also asked what actions they take to prepare themselves and their
subordinate leaders to manage crisis prior to crisis occurring. Five participants had formal
activities they conducted to prepare themselves or their leaders for crisis before it occurred,
which failed to meet the threshold for this influence to be considered an asset. In most cases, this
was being done not as a formal program and was not being shared with other leaders or the
organization. These activities were based on senior leader experience and were not based in
formal training. For Participant 9 it was more imbedded in everyday work than formal crisis
preparation, “I don’t know that I’ve done this deliberately but...asking the questions, helping my
team find answers within as opposed to me providing the answers.” Participant 9 finished with
“Know thyself…when we know ourselves, we know we have the ability to come to terms with
our gifts and our challenges.” Participant 5 identified different trainings they provide their
leaders, “it’s helping them wrap their heads around the fact that a crisis is going to happen…the
reality says it’s going to happen so to me, it’s more training and it’s more getting it in their
mind.”
Interview participants were questioned on areas of procedural knowledge of how to
respond to a crisis. Crisis management procedures and knowing what actions to take upon
recognizing they are in crisis was seen as a need falling well below the 61.5% threshold. Only
one participant, Participant 13, self-identified the ability and provided examples that

66
demonstrated their procedural knowledge in previous situations. Two participants were able to
demonstrate having used procedural knowledge in a specific crisis but did not demonstrate
applying procedural knowledge in all crisis situations faced. For these two participants, it was the
type of crisis they faced, a safety issued, where they demonstrated procedural knowledge. Five of
participants prepared themselves or their leaders through formal processes using procedural
knowledge to do so. However, those senior leaders were utilizing their experience to prepare
their leaders and not procedural knowledge. Document analysis confirmed the organization has
procedures in place, both internally and externally, to support senior leaders and customers
throughout the most recent crisis, the COVID-19 pandemic, which will be discussed in the
organizational influences section below. It is unknown what methods are in place to ensure these
procedures are known to senior leaders, and the participants did not discuss this themselves.
Only 8% of participants identified procedural knowledge which is well below the 61.5%
threshold. Based on the findings, this influence is a need.
GCA Senior Leaders Are Able to Assess Their Own Strengths and Weaknesses to Adopt New
Strategies in Crisis As Conditions Change
Participants were asked to share their first, or one of the first, crises they had managed as
a leader, to identify what went well and what went poorly and what they had learned from it
about themselves as a leader to strengthen leadership in future crises. All 13 participants, or
100%, displayed metacognition in understanding what their strengths are as well as their
opportunities for development.
Participants indicated that, through experience with crisis, they learn what their strengths
are and how to leverage them. They also shared how they learn what their challenges are and to
surround themselves with other leaders who have those strengths and can support them. For

67
example, Participant 1 said, “sometimes as a leader myself, I know there are things that I am not
as good at and so it’s important for me to understand the strengths of my team and who I can
leverage to do those things.” All 13 participants also indicated they self-reflect and seek
feedback on their performance post crisis. This allows them to understand themselves, their
leadership style, and their reactions to the crisis. For example, Participant 4 shared “we’re human
and there’s no perfection.” Participant 4 went on to share an experience with crisis “I realized I
don’t think I’m equipped to make these types of decisions…that was a humbling experience…in
that moment that I realized I was in over my head and needed to ask for help and that’s what I
did.”
Senior leaders were also asked to share how they believe past experiences with crisis
impact the decisions they make now when leading during a crisis. All 13 participants believed
experience with crisis has evolved them as a leader to better prepare them for crisis. Participant
11 expressed how the experience has helped to calm them, “I used to go zero to 60, get
completely engrossed in something and for me personally, and everyone’s different, it was not
healthy.” Participant 9 indicated that experience has “definitely confirmed I’m much stronger
than I think that I am.” Participant 9, when asked about crisis conditions changing went on to say
“I can pivot quickly and I’ve had to do that before. I draw on what I’m sensing in the
organization.” When specifically discussing COVID-19 and how past experiences with crisis
helped as a leader, Participant 2 shared “none of us faced a COVID-19 pandemic before, but in
my career, I did have some experiences that I could draw on to help me lead the team through
that.”

68
Table 7

Participant Reflection on Past Experiences and Applied Learning from Those Experiences
Reflection on past experience Applied learning in future crises
Reach out on an individual basis to
employees
Communicate and impart optimism

You must trust your team as you cannot be
in control of everything
Empower others

Communicate but understand the internal
and external environment and what and
when to communicate
Understand the situation and environment
and communicate the appropriate
information at the right time
Be mindful of what others are experiencing
as they go through the crisis and lead by
example and with empathy
Empower others and lead with empathy and
transparency. Allowed staff to eat first
before leaders and check in on employees
Do not get tunnel vision and know your
surroundings (those who are watching)
Increased communication – even when it
needed to be high level
We did not have best practices or lessons
learned anywhere
Created a response book with lessons learned
and best practices to be utilized
The need to stay calm and ask the right
questions. The need to make quick
decisions
Focused on what could be controlled and
identifying next steps. Set tone as a leader
and working a plan step by step. Remain
calm and confident
Own it and do not make excuses. Identify
when you need help/support
Provide accurate honest information and
when wrong, admit it and fix it. Utilize
resources and experts

69
Interview participants were questioned to see if they were self-aware of their strengths
and weaknesses to support adopting new strategies as crisis conditions change. GCA senior
leaders have to adjust their leadership style to fit the crisis happening. Four senior leaders
acknowledged their need to be in control and be the decision maker yet they had to adjust to
allow for support and take guidance. Five senior leaders acknowledged the need to be transparent
and communicate as much detail as possible yet in crisis when legal action may be imminent,
they must hold back some of the details and not communicate often. Finally, adopting new
strategies by understanding when to be decisive, when to build consensus, and when to be more
direct versus when to be more empathetic was acknowledged by participants as important to
control crisis as the conditions change. Of those interviewed, 100% were self-aware and shared
experiences when they needed to ask for support which is above the 61.5% threshold. Based on
the findings, this influence is an asset.
Motivation Influences’ Findings
Assumed motivational influences were evaluated to determine assets and gaps for GCA
senior leaders leading during times of crisis management. The assumed influences were probed
through the study. Utilizing Clark and Estes (2008) as the conceptual framework, the research
was able to substantiate both the assumed self-efficacy and mastery goal orientation influences
as assets. An additional influence was identified through data collection connecting the
motivational theory of emotions with family support.
GCA Senior Leaders are Confident in Their Ability to Make Decisions in Crisis
Participants were asked questions to assess their self-efficacy in their decision-making
during crisis. All 13 participants, or 100%, indicated confidence in their ability to make decisions
in crisis. All 13 participants also indicated confidence in their ability to lead through crisis, but

70
the answers ranged from strong confidence to passive confidence. Those displaying strong
confidence provided positive, strong answers in their abilities portraying the ability to lead
through anything. Those displaying passive confidence were a bit softer in their confidence
admitting a leader cannot be confident leading through something they do not know but feeling
confident in their ability to navigate it when the time comes. These participants had more in-
depth discussion on their abilities.
Decision making confidence also ranged from strong to passive among the participants.
Participant 12 providing a realistic perspective on their self-efficacy, “I’m totally confident then
I’m crazy and clueless because I always feel like when it comes to crisis, you don’t know what
you don’t know and you don’t know what you haven’t experienced yet.” Participant 12 went on
to say “I would say I’m confident but my confidence is not in my ability to execute, it’s in my
ability to know when I need help.” Participants 3, 5, 6, 13 indicated strong confidence with all
answering simply – “100%.” Others, like Participant 9, stated “I’m confident. I don’t know that
it’s always right, but I’m confident in making the decision,” and Participant 8, “I love making
decisions and I feel really confident in that.” Participant 8 continued “But if my decision has to
go to somebody else for approval, I tend to be a little bit more hesitant and thoughtful in that
decision making.”
Interview participants were questioned on areas of self-efficacy to assess senior leaders’
confidence in their decision-making during crisis. One hundred percent of participants possessed
some level of confidence from strongly confident to passively confident which is above the
61.5% threshold. Based on the findings, this influence is an asset.

71
GCA Senior Leaders Believe Leading Through Crisis Will Achieve Individual Development
Goals
Participants were asked how they self-evaluate, how they determine whether they have
done well during crisis, and in what ways has leading through crisis helped their self-
improvement. All 13 participants, or 100%, indicated they utilize reflection after the crisis to
self-evaluate which allows them to strengthen their response to crisis in order to achieve their
personal goals. All participants also acknowledged seeking feedback from others who they
interacted with as part of the crisis in an effort to gather as much feedback to support that
reflection process.
Eight GCA senior leaders who participated in the study acknowledged they thrive on the
chance to prove themselves in difficult times, such as crisis, which supports their developmental
goals for career growth. Leading through crisis allows them to focus on mastering new skills,
gaining stronger understanding, and improving their competence. Participant 10 acknowledged
leading through crisis taught them to “be the calm in the storm.” They have gained an
understanding through crisis leadership of the need to ask the right questions.
What are we trying to solve for?...Do you have the right team members? Do you
have the right plan? What are your milestones? What is the minimal viable
product? And just being the calm?
Participant 12 agreed leading through crisis supports developmental goals; “the majority of
people are thinking about if they’re career making or career limiting at the moment [during crisis
management].” Participant 12 acknowledged while leading through crisis and making decisions,
there is an aspect of understanding how this leadership will impact your career growth and
ability. Participant 6 believes this experience equates to making them a more desired leader for

72
promotional opportunities and leading through crisis makes them more marketable as a leader
due to mastering these new skills during crisis; “I think that person becomes more marketable
because you never know when another crisis is going to take place.” They finished by saying,
“So I would assume it would make me or make anyone more marketable.” Experiencing crisis
provides GCA senior leaders with the ability to master skills, understanding and competence that
will lead to achieving individual development goals.
All participants acknowledged that this self-reflection and self-evaluation with the
feedback of others has helped them grow as a leader by understanding lessons learned. For
example, Participant 12 indicated this when saying “in terms of my reflection on that event,
that’s where I’m drawn to is where could I have gotten information faster, better, to come to that
situational assessment conclusion.” They continued “are there better ways that I could have
supported people, both locally on the ground and remotely to respond?” Participant 1
acknowledged self-evaluation is needed to understand lessons learned. “You’ve got to do that
self-evaluation…because there are usually areas where you recognize, ‘I could do better here.’”
Participant 8 indicated they do not self-evaluate during the crisis as time does not allow it but
they do self-evaluate after. “I’ve learned that if you’re going to really improve you can’t keep
thinking about the mistake. You have to focus on what are we going to do differently in the
future.” The questions leaders ask during self-evaluation support those leaders in leading through
the next crisis by understanding their reaction and improving their leadership to be seen as a high
potential leader of the organization.
Leading through crisis provided clarity of future situations for Participant 9 who stated “I
look out at the environment and draw conclusions based on what I see…I read my environment
when I’ve made difficult decisions.” Participant 8 spoke to their growth by saying “It has

73
humbled me…I have learned to give myself a bit more grace in how I lead…don’t expect
perfection.” Participant 10 referenced the ability to watch how others react in crisis and replicate
the skills they portrayed that were seen as positive. “It has made me a better business
person…just being able to watch everybody else also, and taking learning opportunities from
people.” These senior leaders have set individual goals for themselves to reach influential levels
within the organization and leading through crisis has strengthened their resolve toward those
goals as opposed to questioning their commitment to personal goals.
Interview participants were questioned on areas of goal orientation to assess whether they
possess a mastery orientation towards leading through crisis as a means to achieve individual
development goals. One hundred percent of participants believed leading through crisis does
improve them as a leader as well as better prepare them for future crises helping to achieve
individual development goals. All participants self-evaluated to determine if they have done well
and what they could have done better through reflection and seeking feedback to improve their
performance to meet or exceed expectations. All participants also saw some level of self-
improvement from leading through crisis. Based on the findings, this influence is an asset.
GCA Senior Leaders Rely on Family Support to Lead Through Crisis
Interviews with the participants revealed data on how senior leaders rely on family
support to lead through crisis. This influence was not an assumed influence at the start of the
research. The motivational theory of emotions links emotions and behavior as having an emotion
involves creating a stimulus in a particular way, feeling a particular way, and being motivated to
act a particular way (D’Arms & Jacobson, 2014).

74
Ten participants, or just about 77%, indicated family support is important to GCA senior
leader ability to lead through crisis. When asked how they manage stress during a crisis,
Participant 11 responded:
I have a picture of my family in my wallet and on my phone to think about and
even if it’s for 30 seconds, ‘this is what’s important to me. This is what matters.
This is what I’m going home to.’
Participant 11 recalled a crisis they led through and receiving the call outside of work
hours while spending time with family and a new born child. At the time, Participant 11 did not
know what to do in terms of leaving their family to the crisis but their family said “You have to
go. [They] will be okay. You have to go.” Participant 11 went thinking “And going through all
that, I had that to come back to.” Participant 7 echoed a similar sentiment stating, “I think you
really got to have a very strong family support system…typically we all take work home…you
need someone to really help you get through it so I think family’s very important.” Participant 8
identified family specifically regarding the COVID-19 crisis. According to Participant 8, “As a
leader you can’t separate necessarily what’s on your mind and happening in your real life with
how you’re leading your team at work.” They continued “I think we experienced that probably
more during COVID than most crisis because the crisis not only impacted my work life but it
also impacted my personal life.” Interview data indicate how a GCA senior leader leads through
crisis is connected with the family support they rely on from home.
During questioning interview participants offered family support as a motivational
influence that was not originally considered. This was presented by 77% of participants either
during the interview or when asked if there was anything not covered in the interview they would
like to offer. The data supports that GCA senior leaders rely on family support to lead through

75
crisis. The motivational theory of emotion supports the idea that GCA senior leaders family
support create emotions or a feeling that leads the senior leader to be motivated to act in a
particular way when leading through crisis (D’Arms & Jacobson, 2014). The lack of family
support could lead to negative emotions with a negative impact on motivation and behavior.
With 77% of participants identifying family support, above the 61.5% threshold, this influence is
an asset. The next section will turn to research question 2.
Research Question 2: How Does GCA Senior Leader Experience With Past Crisis
Influence Their Perception of Their Ability to Lead in Crisis?
Experience was another focus when researching GCA senior leaders’ capacity to lead
through crisis. How does their experience with past crisis influence their perception of their
ability to lead through crisis? Do they develop the necessary competencies through experience?
There were no assumed influences for this research question. Instead, open-coding was
conducted to identify themes. A theme was created when eight or more participants shared the
same data. The data identified three themes, changing leadership styles, making quick decisions,
and becoming more comfortable with crisis, which will be discussed below.
GCA Senior Leaders More Willing to Change Leadership Styles As They Experience More
Crisis
Interview participants shared they have the ability to and will change leadership styles in
order to manage the crisis at hand. This was seen through the interviews with 11 participants, or
84.5%, acknowledging the need to do so as they have gained experience with crisis. Bhaduri
(2019) identified several different leadership styles. The 11 participants who acknowledged
changing leadership styles provided examples of times in crisis where they had to utilize
different leadership styles. All leadership styles identified by Bhaduri (2019) were described by

76
participants through their description of their leadership styles utilized. Several leadership styles
were described by multiple participants with Directive Leader and Servant Leader being the two
most described. Table 8 below depicts the leadership styles, a description, and the key quotes
that indicate where participants identified their application of these styles that can be adopted.
These examples are quotes where each leadership style was identified but throughout the
interviews participants identified more than one leadership style they have utilized based on the
crisis they faced at the time.

77
Table 8
Leadership Styles
Leadership style Description Key quotes
Cognitive Leader Perceptive, thinks strategically uses
knowledge and expertise to solve
the problem
“[I had] to provide a more
strategic approach”
(Participant 2)
Laissez-Faire Leader Hands-off leader providing full
freedom to subordinates and
does not interfere with daily
actions
“The best thing you can do is
to let folks do their jobs”
(Participant 11)
Transformational Leader Detail-oriented, seeks out
consensus and able to provide
the big picture
“There’s not one leader
that’s going to execute a
crisis by him or herself”
(Participant 7)
Directive Leader In charge, makes decisions and
communicates clearly
“You have to make some
decisions and execute on
those decisions”
(Participant 3)
Democratic Leader Allows participation in the
decision-making process and
shares responsibility with
everyone
“My general leadership
style…help my team find
answers…[give] a sense
of empowerment
(Participant 9)
Transactional Leader Takes all details into account,
makes sure the job gets done per
a set of rules and regulations
“[In crisis] Making sure we
have employee rosters,
able to contact employees
and [follow procedures]”
(Participant 13)
Servant Leader Has the desire to serve and help
others, focuses on developing
people
“Self-awareness and self-
care are equally important
for me to focus on”
(Participant 12)

Note. Leadership styles are from “Leveraging culture and leadership in crisis management,” by
R. Bhaduri, 2019, European Journal of Training and Development, 43(5/6), 534-549.

78
Each crisis may require a particular leadership style. Senior leaders utilize their experience with
crisis to understand the environment, what resources they need to lead through the crisis, and
what leadership style is most effective in that particular situation. This experience allows them to
know that leading through a crisis, such as COVID-19, is much different than leading through a
crisis like a terrorist attack. Every crisis is different and requires different actions and responses.
Participant 2 acknowledged the need to remain calm and lead but to also leverage support
around them by saying “I knew [John Doe] went through something like this one time, I’m going
to give him a call.” Senior leaders also understand the influence they have and needing to flex
their leadership styles in order to support different employee needs. Participant 11 stated “The
thing that I take away from that is me, one, I don’t have the power to change anything. I only
have the power to keep the atmosphere of my folks informed.” Finally, Participant 5 summed it
up by saying, “I think every crisis is different. And I think every reaction is different because I
think you have to deal with the crisis based on what it puts in front of you.” The ability to change
leadership styles comes from experiencing crisis and understanding how to react based on the
crisis one faces.
Participants all indicated they believe they are able to change leadership styles in order to
lead through crisis based on their past experiences and understanding what is needed at that time.
Senior leaders felt one could not lead through every crisis the same way as the reactions needed
to be different in order to get through the particular crisis—an aircraft accident does not require
the same leadership style what is required in response to the COVID-19 pandemic does.

79
GCA Senior Leaders Able to Make Quicker Decisions As They Gain More Experience with
Crisis
Participants were asked to share their first experience, or one of their first experiences,
with crisis as a leader as well as experiences after. The experiences they shared provided an
understanding of the ability of participants to make quick decisions where all participants, or
100%, were more comfortable making quick decisions now than in the past due to having led
through crisis and gained experience. As participants recounted the situation, they shared a level
of uncertainty. Participant 9 shared their first experience where they were required to close a
business location laying-off the staff there:
I was brand new and never led a store fully on my own and I was about to have to
tell 10 people that they no longer had a job. And I was about to shut down the
store and divest all of the inventory to other stores.
There was a level of uncertainty and fear of the unknown. Participant 9 was asked to relate that
to current crisis leadership for them:
I had to make a decision really quick and I learned through that experience that I
can make a decision really quickly. That I’m wired in such a way…to cut through
the noise and say…I can see this, and this step. This is where I’m going. All right,
what’s next?
Participants expressed their perception of how precious time is during a crisis. Participant
12 stated “I just think in general, the role that time plays and the different facets of time are a key
piece of crisis leadership as well.” Participant 1 focused on quick decisions by saying “I think in
a crisis you have to be able to make decisions with partial information…We’ve got to make the
most perfect decision we can at the time with the information that we have.” Participant 9

80
acknowledged having to make decisions in a timely manner saying a leader must have “the
ability to read the environment” in order to utilize time in crisis. Finally, Participant 8 equated
the COVID-19 pandemic as an unusual crisis related to time, “I’m going to have long hours [this
week], and that one week has turned into 14 months.”
Participants acknowledged being more comfortable making quick decisions, at times
without all of the necessary information, during crisis now then they have been in the past due to
experience with crisis leadership. They attributed this perception to having experienced crisis
leadership in the past, which allowed them to gain confidence and comfort.
GCA Senior Leaders Become More Comfortable With Leading in Crisis With Experience
All GCA senior leaders who participated in the interviews stated that they are better
prepared to lead through crisis currently in their careers then they were in the past. They also
attributed this to the experience they have gained and becoming more comfortable navigating
crisis. All 13 participants, or 100%, indicated their experiences with crisis in the past have
allowed them to lead through crisis currently. Participant 11 acknowledged “Yeah…I mean,
every single one of those situations that have come up [in the past] helped me deal with what
we’ve had to deal with in the last 16 months.” Participant 12 agreed “In my time working at
[GCA], I have been involved in multiple aircraft accident responses in leadership positions…I’m
pretty sure there’s a crisis about every eight minutes so it has well prepared me to deal with all
the random chaos.” Participants shared that they have learned from past crises which allow them
to lead differently, in their eyes more successfully, now. Participant 2 shared “Over time you
learn what those guardrails are and how they get expanded a little bit in the time of crisis in order
to give…more leeway.” They continued:

81
I think that is how I’ve evolved is it’s not about what the policy is or what the rule
books say, right. It’s more about, okay, what do we have to do that’s right at this
moment in time to really help guide the organization through that particular
crisis?
Throughout the interviews, participants were probed on past experiences with crisis to
understand how it has influenced their current leadership during crisis. All participants indicated
past experiences support them in feeling more prepared and comfortable to lead through crisis
now. Based on the findings, this theme emerged.
Research Question 3: In What Ways Does the Organization Influence the Ability of GCA
Senior Leaders to Lead in a Crisis?
Four assumed organizational influences were assessed in alignment with this research
question. The finding for determining an organizational influence as either an asset or gap was
through the participant interviews and an analysis of documents. A finding was determined to be
an asset if data from eight or more participants, 61.5% of the participants, indicated a positive
view of that particular organizational influence and the document analysis triangulated the
finding. A finding was determined to be a gap if data from less than eight participants, under
61.5% of the participants, had a positive view of that particular organizational influence or the
document analysis did not triangulate the finding. The findings from interviews will be discussed
first for each influence followed by the findings from the document and artifact analysis.
The Organization Provides GCA Senior Leaders With Resources to Manage Crisis
Interview Findings. Participants were asked to identify the most important resources
they need during a crisis to successfully lead through it and whether the organization provides
those resources. All 13 participants, or 100%, identified that they believe the organization

82
provides them the resources they need to lead through crisis. Participants differed on what they
identified as the most important resource, but they all felt the organization provided them what
they felt they needed. Six participants identified mental health resources as a resource provided
by the organization, four participants identified people, and five identified trust.
Mental health was the top identified resource among the participants. Participant 2
acknowledged the corporate employee assistance program for on-site counseling made possible
by adequate funding, “We are fortunate that we have the dollars necessary to support the
individual or organization through it.” Participant 7 also identified the employee assistance
program, “You definitely need the employee assistance program. I think that’s number one,
because you got to make sure people are taken care of.” Participant 5 identified self-mental
health, “You’ve got to take care of yourself and you’ve got to have a system that allows you to
take care of yourself through the crisis.”
Six participants identified people as a much-needed resource in crisis. Participant 13
identified resources, such as people and corporate communication experts. Participant 13 said,
“If you’re the person that is on the other side of four of five microphones and you’re the
spokesperson for your airport location, having those media statements is really really important.
That’s a huge resource.” Participant 4 also said people, “I would say people, trained people…for
me training and people, those are the resources.”
Finally, five participants remarked on trust as a resource they needed to lead through
crisis. Participant 9 felt they just needed trust, “let me do what I need to do…give me the
autonomy and let me do what I need to do.” Participant 3 agreed, “Trust, communication, and the
freedom to execute.” Participant 8 tied trust to culture, “Be true to the values and what’s

83
important to us…consistency in values, expectation, what the priorities are.” Figure 5 presents
the resources identified by the participants.

Figure 5
Organizational Resources Identified As Important for Crisis Leadership

84
Leader responses related to the resources they need to lead through crisis aligned with previous
research. Kaiser (2020) identified mental health resources important for the organization to
provide for leaders. Stress and pressure impact a leader’s ability to remain mentally focused.
Additionally, Kuntz et al. (2017) identified communication as a key resource to remain aligned
as an organization. Finally, training was identified in research in order to strengthen the
competencies and knowledge of leaders (Nizamidou & Vouzas, 2020; Bano et al., 2021).
Document Analysis. The leadership toolkit was analyzed and found to provide a vision
for senior leaders. This vision directs the mission to be completed and how to take care of
employees during the COVID-19 pandemic. It also provides a number of resources identified by
interview participants, including keeping leaders informed through communication allowing
them to make decisions aligned with the organization, finances, and mental health support. In
analyzing the press releases and public statements, these items showed some of the resources the
organization provides to its senior leaders being utilized toward its customers. Communication,
trust, and vision are the main resources identified in the press releases and public statements. The
data indicates the organization is communicating to employees and customers the vision for the
organization during the pandemic and building trust by being transparent and honest. Table 9
shows resources identified by senior leaders as being needed and provided and triangulates
whether those resources were also discovered through the document analysis available for the
purpose of this study.

85
Table 9
Senior Leader Resources and Document Analysis Resources
Senior leader resources Document analysis resources
Autonomy Not Confirmed
Updated Communication I personally want to ensure that every
member of our Delta family is informed on
an ongoing basis (Document 28 Press
Release March 15, 2020; Document 30,
March 9, 2020)
Finances Upgrading filters on airplanes, spending on
cleaning resources, spending the capital to
do what is needed (Document 13 Press
Release September 25, 2020)
Mental Health Not Confirmed
Organizational Structure Not Confirmed
People Taking care of our people so they can take
care of our customers. Staffing to meet
needs (Document 8 Press Release July 27,
2021; Document 2 Press Release February
4, 2021)
Project Management Not Confirmed
Training Training to clean differently, focus on safety
and health, give employees tools for all of
this (Document 19 Press Release July 23,
2020)
Trust Any leader’s most powerful tools are his or
her words. We are committed to listening
to you and having you guide our decision
making. (Document 2 Press Release
February 4, 2021)

86
Senior leader resources Document analysis resources
Vision We have ambitious goals for the next 12
months centered around our core values.
(Document 1 Press Release January 1,
2021)

Summary. All 13 participants identified the organization as having provided the
resources they identified as most important. While senior leaders identified different resources
they found important, the key finding is that all senior leaders felt the organization provides
those resources that they desired in times of crisis. A document analysis of the Leader Toolkit
identifies some of the same resources the organization is providing to senior leaders, confirming
the participants’ statements. Press releases and public statements also provide similar resources
to the employees writ-large within the organization and customers. One hundred percent of
participants identified the organization providing the most important resources to allow them to
lead through crisis, above the 61.5% threshold. Based on the findings, this influence is an asset.
GCA Senior Leaders Are Not Provided Resources From the Organization to Prepare for Crisis
Interview Findings. Participants were questioned on what resources the organization
provides for them to prepare for crisis. Two participants, or just over 15%, acknowledge some
types of trainings. However, even these participants indicated the trainings do not necessarily
focus on crisis but are emergency management training, which includes media training. This
training can support senior leaders in dealing with acute emergencies, which can turn into crises,
but these types of events are not necessarily crises. Additionally, according to participants, these
trainings are focused on a select population of senior leaders but do not filter to all. Participants
also noted finances are not a barrier as the organization does not restrict leaders on funding.

87
In the absence of organizational support, three participants noted actions they take on
individually that do support preparation for crisis. For example, Participant 9 stated “when I
think about growth for my team is it comes with this sense of empowerment, knowing myself,
and being able to build that confidence and that experience, finding those answers within.”
Likewise, Participant 7 indicated “I don’t think you ever practice for crisis but I do think you
learned a skill daily.” They continued “and if a crisis does happen, how do you put all those
together?”
Participants did not indicate a lack of financial support from the organization. Participant
3 stated, “There has never been a restriction, so to speak to say ‘You can only spend this amount
or you can only do this’” but they also indicated there were no formal training or resources
participants could point to that prepares senior leaders or their teams for crisis. Participant 2
agreed, “I think we’re super fortunate…that there is adequate funding.” Finally, Participant 3
indicated the same, “There has never been a restriction [on funding].”
There was one senior leader who discussed a specific training they had organized for
their team, which was being supported financially through the organization. Participant 5 focused
on their own team saying:
Hot and heavy on my mind right now is active shooter, because I think it’s so real.
So I’m really pushing my team to do active shooter training and help our
employees think through what are you doing to do if somebody comes in and
opens fire?
Document Analysis. The Leader Toolkit previously introduced provides a resource
during crisis, but the toolkit did not exist as a preparedness resource for GCA senior leaders prior
to the COVID-19 pandemic. Public statements and press releases were analyzed for a timeframe

88
that included the COVID-19 pandemic. These statements do not give insight into planning or
training provided to senior leaders prior to the pandemic, so these documents and artifacts did
not support assessment of this influence.
Summary. Participants were asked interview questions to determine resources provided
by the organization for senior leaders to prepare themselves and their teams for crisis. Three
participants noted emergency management training and media training. However, other
participants discussed ways they attempt to prepare themselves and their teams for crisis. The
data revealed no formal training or resources provided to senior leaders specifically with the
focus of preparing themselves or their teams for crisis. A document analysis of the Leader
Toolkit shows the toolkit was implemented as a response to the COVID-19 pandemic and did not
exist prior to the crisis. Press releases and public statements were reviewed from a timeframe
where the COVID-19 pandemic was in process and do not give insight into any resources the
organization provided prior to the pandemic for senior leaders to prepare for crisis. Based on the
findings, this influence is a need.
The Organization Provides Autonomy to GCA Senior Leaders During Crisis Without Fear of
Retribution or Discipline
Interview Findings. Participants were asked to share whether they remember a time
they felt the organization would discipline them for actions they took while leading in a crisis.
They were also asked to share how that experience influenced the way they currently lead.
Twelve participants, or 92%, did not have a time when they felt they would be disciplined for
actions they took while leading in a crisis. One participant did think retribution was possible but
continued leading without being deterred.

89
The majority of the participants were clear they did not fear discipline. Participant 7
stated when asked if they felt they would ever be disciplined “No. If I think I’m going to get
disciplined for trying to do the right thing, I think I’m at the wrong organization.” Participant 12
did not recall a time they personally felt that way but also acknowledged, “there’s always the
potential that leaders in the organization can be disappointed in how the response was led.”
Participant 1 agreed, “I feel like they would say ‘you know what, I support you and learn this
from it.’” Participant 1 finished, “But I wouldn’t be concerned about discipline for that.” Eight
senior leaders were pretty definitive with their no response quickly and confidently with
responses such as Participants 3,4, 6, and 13, “No” and Participant 2, “I’ve never had that
feeling, No.”
One participant shared the thought that retribution was possible had been in their mind at
one point. According to Participant 9, “I think I’ve thought about it, but it hasn’t slowed me
down.” They finished with thinking of a particular crisis they led through and said “Yeah, no
fear.”
Document Analysis. Document analysis did not meaningfully contribute to the analysis
of this influence. The Leader Toolkit does not provide any indication of retribution or discipline
if the steps in the toolkit are not followed. Additionally, none of the public statements and press
releases analyzed provided any indication of disciplinary action against senior leaders in the
organization due to their actions during crisis.
Summary. Questions focused on the organization culture asked participants if they ever
had a fear that their organization would discipline them for actions they took while leading in a
crisis and if so, how it influenced the way they led. Ninety-two percent of the participants felt
they were provided autonomy and have not felt fear of retribution or discipline. One participant

90
indicated thoughts of not feeling like they could act with autonomy but did not necessarily feel
fear. The one participant who did not feel they were provided autonomy also noted that it did not
slow them down in the way they led or made decisions. Document analysis did not contribute to
the findings. With 92% of participants believing they were provided autonomy, above the 61.5%
threshold, this influence is an asset.
The Organization Fosters a Culture of Trust
Participants were questioned regarding their trust in the organization to determine if the
organization fosters a culture of trust. Additionally, participants were asked to share a time they
anticipated the organization would not support their decisions during a crisis. Interviews were the
only method utilized to gather data for this influence as the document analysis was not used. All
but one participant indicated in the interviews that they felt the organization fosters a culture of
trust that supports them in crisis.
Twelve participants, or 92%, indicated they trusted the organization would always
support their decisions during crisis. One of the 12 participants who trusted the organization
believed that there were times when they were not supported by leaders in their support groups,
which impacted their trust in that leader and group but did not have an impact on their perception
of a culture of trust within the organization. When discussing if they felt the organization would
not support their decisions Participant 5 stated:
No. I’m not going to do something that’s illegal. I’m not going to do something
that’s unethical, and I’m definitely not going to do something that
immoral…make the decision and we can come back and chat about it later and
say “Well maybe this is what I would do differently.”

91
Participant 6 shared a time they did not align with their direct leader, “[we] had a lot of
heart-to-heart discussions…and we didn‘t see eye-to-eye on it initially, but once I gave
the facts…then [I] was supported.” Five participants stated an emphatic outright “No”
when asked if they every anticipated the organization would not support their decision
during crisis.
One participant felt that there were times they lost trust in the organization. Participant 8,
who felt there were times they were not empowered with autonomy, which caused a lack of trust
in the organization, described why they felt that way, “In my experience the further the person is
away from the crisis, I feel like the less accurate potentially their decision is going to be.”
Participant 8 continued “It happens to me less frequently today than it did maybe 10 years ago,
but it’s certainly a concern that I have during crisis when you’re making a decision in the
moment.” Participant 8 was asked if that impacts the way they lead during crisis and the
decisions they make. They indicated they do not change based on that as they “feel like I have an
obligation to my team to make the right decision.” Participant 11 has always felt empowered to
act with autonomy by the organization but had lost trust in support groups, “it impacted my trust
with that group and it took probably three months after for that…tension to be relieved.” They
finished with, “I didn‘t forgive as quick as I should have.”
Participants were probed on the culture of trust of the organization. Ninety two percent of
those questioned never anticipated the organization would not support their decisions during
crisis. In cases where the senior leader felt the organization would not support their decision, it
did not impact the way the senior leader made decisions but did impact trust with the senior
leader’s immediate leader and the organization. With 92% participants being above the 61.5%
threshold, this influence is an asset.

92
Summary of Knowledge, Motivation and Organizational Influences’ Data
The collection of data supported the review of assumed knowledge, motivational, and
organizational influences. The reviewed determined if the influence was an asset or a need based
on the findings. Table 10 presents the knowledge, motivation and organization influences
explored in this study and their determination as an asset or a need.

93
Table 10
Knowledge, Motivation and Organizational Assets or Needs as Determined by the Data
Assumed influence Asset or need
Leaders need to have knowledge of concepts
necessary to lead through crisis.
(Conceptual Knowledge)
Asset
Leaders need to know what actions to take
upon recognizing they are in a crisis.
(Procedural Knowledge)
Need
Leaders need to assess their own strengths
and weaknesses in adopting new strategies
in crisis as conditions change.
(Metacognition)
Asset
Leaders need to be confident in their ability to
make decisions as a leader in crisis
(Self-Efficacy)
Asset
Leaders need to believe they will achieve
individual development goals from leading
through crisis
(Goal Orientation Mastery)
Asset
The organization needs to provide leaders
with resources to manage during crisis
(Organizational Settings)
Asset
The organization needs to provide leaders
with resources to prepare for crisis
(Organizational Settings)
Need
The organization needs to provide leaders
with autonomy during crisis without the
fear of retribution or discipline
(Organizational Models)
Asset
The organization needs to foster a culture of
trust
(Organizational Models)
Asset

94
In addition to the assumed influences, themes emerged from open-coding of interview
data regarding research question 2. Those themes, as discussed above, contributed to
understanding what impacts a leader’s ability to lead during times of crisis. While those themes
were not assessed as an asset or a need, they contributed to supporting recommendations
discussed in Chapter 5.
This chapter presented the findings of the qualitative data from interviews and document
analysis regarding the knowledge, motivational and organizational influences and the research
questions. Chapter 5 presents recommendations for solutions based on these influences and the
evidence obtained through the data.

95
Chapter Five: Discussion and Recommendations
The purpose of this study was to utilize the Clark and Estes (2008) gap analysis
framework to assess the knowledge, motivational, and organizational influences on Global Air
Carrier (GCA) senior leadership’s ability to lead during times of crisis management. In this
effort, the questions guiding the study were as follows:
1. What knowledge and motivation influences enable GCA senior leaders to lead in a crisis?
2. How does GCA senior leader experience with past crises influence their perception of
their ability to lead in crisis?
3. In what ways does the organization influence the ability of GCA senior leaders to lead in
a crisis?
This chapter presents a discussion of findings from the study and recommendations to meet the
needs identified from the findings.
Discussion of Findings
This qualitative study utilized interviews and document analysis to gather data on the
research questions. Interviews of 13 GCA senior leaders were conducted first followed by a
document analysis of GCA’s Leader Toolkit, which was created for the COVID-19 pandemic.
Additionally, 47 public statements and press releases covering March 1, 2020 through April 15,
2021 were analyzed. Clarke and Estes (2008) gap analysis was the framework applied to this
study. Assumed knowledge, motivational, and organizational influences were studied in an
attempt to determine the competencies needed for leaders to lead through crisis. This section will
discuss the findings for assumed knowledge and organizational influences identified as needs.
There were no assumed motivational influences that were determined to be needs. These needs
will be utilized to provide recommendations for practice in the next section.

96
Discussion of Findings for Research Question 1: Knowledge and Motivation Influences
Research Question 1 focused on the knowledge and motivational assumed influences that
enable GCA senior leaders to lead in crisis. This was to understand the competencies needed to
lead through crisis identified in Table 2 (Chapter 2) and whether GCA senior leaders possessed
those competencies. The assumed influences were probed during interviews. One additional
motivational influence was identified through the research although it was not an assumed
influence at the start of the research. All motivational influences, including the newly identified
one, were determined to be assets. As such, there is no discussion of motivational needs. Only
the knowledge influences identified as needs are discussed below.
GCA senior leaders have the required conceptual understanding of crisis management
leadership to lead through crisis, but they lack procedural knowledge of what to do when in
crisis. GCA senior leaders also possess the metacognition to assess their own strengths and
weaknesses to adopt new strategies in crisis as conditions change. Procedural knowledge was
identified as the need with 12 of 13 leaders lacking the procedural knowledge of what to do
when in crisis.
Procedural knowledge is not only important for what to do in crisis but preparing
procedures for dealing with crisis situations can help senior leaders prevent crisis (Walecka,
2021). Additionally, senior leaders should agree upon specific procedures and process to triage
crisis and to organize by identifying places to store documents and materials (Woitaszewski et
al., 2020). Research shows organizations with a significant understanding of crisis management
procedures have a higher level of crisis preparedness and crisis prevention (Nizamidou &
Vouzas, 2020). It is necessary for GCA senior leaders to have procedural knowledge in order to
prevent, prepare for, and lead through crisis to protect the organization. Past research concluded

97
that leaders with procedural knowledge were more successful in minimizing the impact of crisis
and returning to normalcy quickly (Nizamidou & Vouzas, 2020; Rikhardsson et al., 2021). GCA
senior leaders with the needed procedural knowledge will have a higher success rate of
preventing crisis by understanding the signs of potential crisis and how to resolve it quickly.
Discussion of Findings for Research Question 2: Key Themes
Research Question 2 focused on GCA senior leaders experience with past crisis and how
it influenced their perception of their ability to lead in crisis. There were no assumed influences,
instead allowing open-coding to develop themes that emerged from the data. The themes
identified that GCA senior leaders are more comfortable leading in crisis, willing to change
leadership styles due to experience with crisis, and are more comfortable making quick decisions
as they become more experienced leading through crisis. The themes provided an understanding
of the perceived positive impact experience has on senior leaders’ ability to lead through crisis.
Experience is shown to be an indicator of successful crisis leadership and can lead to
strategic learning. However, experience can have a positive impact or negative impact depending
on how the leader utilizes that experience. Experienced leaders who are overconfident through
experience can portray narcissistic traits by having an overly positive self-view and perceptions
of superiority (Nevicka et al., 2018). The findings indicated several leaders were possibly
overconfident in their abilities based on previous experience through their belief in their ability
to lead through any crisis.
Experience should allow leaders to learn and teach in an effort to strengthen experience.
This will lead to strategic learning. Strategic learning from crisis is gained through experience
with crisis as a leader and from other leaders (Lee et al., 2020). Research has shown that
information gained through personal experience with crisis has a greater effect on behavior

98
relative to other sources of information (Afandi & Habibov, 2017). The findings indicate the
participants all obtained strategic learning and support passing that on to their teams through
their experiences. However, no formal method exists to ensure it happens.
Research shows leadership is the major driver of organizational profitability during a
crisis and the main factor in increasing employee morale and productivity while maintain a
functional work environment (Mutut, 2011; Radic et al., 2020). Organizations with leaders
experienced leading through crisis are more successful as leader make smart choices in a timely
manner (Garcia, 2017). Research indicates shared experiences from seasoned crisis leaders
would be beneficial in preparing leaders with limited exposure to crisis in an attempt to
strengthen the identified competencies to lead through crisis.
Discussion of Findings for Research Question 3: Organizational Influences
Research Question 3 focused on the assumed organizational influences that provide GCA
senior leaders the ability to lead in crisis, which were probed during interviews and through
document analysis. The findings determined the organization provides GCA senior leaders with
resources to manage through crisis, empowers GCA senior leaders to act with autonomy and lead
during crisis without fear of discipline or retribution, and fosters a culture of trust, all assets.
However, this study found the organization does not provide GCA senior leaders with the
resources to prepare for crisis.
Interviews determined the organization does not provide GCA senior leaders with the
resources to prepare for crisis, which creates a need. Preparedness is critical for successful
leadership of crisis events (Hede, 2016). Organizations must prepare their leaders with necessary
tools to make good decisions during crisis by creating what-if plans (Thurmer et al., 2020).
Planning activities, including checklists, are seen as a key to crisis management preparedness

99
(Hede, 2016). Organizations that do not provide the resources for leaders to prepare for crisis
make it difficult to avoid crisis putting the organization at risk (Bundy et al., 2017). Previous
research identified that organizations need to properly train their leaders, which can support them
in managing emotions, support employees by recognizing mental health issues, and increase
employee productivity (Bano et al., 2021; Moran, 2010). By providing resources to leaders to
prepare for crisis, the organization would be working toward reducing the number of crises it
faces.
Recommendations for Practice
The knowledge and organizational influence needs and themes identified in this study
inform the recommendations for practice. There are three recommendations identified below to
address the key findings from the interviews and document analysis. These three
recommendations will be integrated together to fill the gaps in GCA senior leader competencies
in order to lead through times of crisis.
Recommendation 1: Provide GCA Senior Leaders Crisis Management Leadership
Training That Incorporates Role Play and Simulations
One hundred percent of senior leaders identified becoming more comfortable leading
through crisis as they gained more experience leading through it, but 12 of 13 senior leaders
lacked the specific procedural knowledge to lead through crisis. According to Clark and Estes
(2008), training should be utilized when there is no experience or related expertise. Additionally,
role play allows for simulation that facilitates system thinking, decision-based decision making,
and collaboration in a safe environment (Young, 2018). Therefore, the first recommendation,
which would address the need in preparing for crisis and the gap in procedural knowledge, is to

100
provide GCA senior leaders with training that incorporates role play and simulations with crisis
situations.
Providing role play and simulations will support providing leaders with a comfort level
when they need to lead through crisis. Research shows using role playing enhances learning and
performance compared to using traditional learning and training programs (Servotte et al., 2019).
Leaders would participate in simulation crisis events. These events would be taken from real life
past scenarios. Leaders would be assigned a role to play and must work through the crisis by
identifying the problem, initiating a response, utilizing available resources, and mitigating the
impact of the crisis. This simulation based scenario training would allow leaders to identify the
necessary procedures to take once recognizing the crisis. Additionally, these scenarios would
allow the organization to develop toolkits from these training, test them, and continue to update
and refine them based on new learnings from the training.
Recommendation 2: GCA to Develop Toolkits to Support Leaders During Crisis
Only one participant identified having procedural knowledge in crisis management to
help understand when crisis is occurring and what to do. Leaders without procedural knowledge
are less likely prevent crisis as opposed to responding to it. Clark and Estes (2008) indicate job
aids can be provided to employees who complete training as reminders on how to implement
what they have learned. Developing toolkits, which are a type of job aid, would provide senior
leaders with specific procedures to follow in crisis. These toolkits can be developed from past
experiences with crises and refined based on learnings gathered through the training proposed in
Recommendation 1. Developing toolkits would address the need for procedural knowledge.
While participants acknowledged that each crisis may be different there are a number of
factors that do not change regardless of the crisis; understanding when crisis is occurring, roles

101
of leaders, procedures to undertake, and resources within the organization are examples.
Therefore, multiple toolkits should be developed to address the most common crises the aviation
industry faces as identified in Chapter 2; aircraft crashes, terrorist threats, and health and safety
incidents. As the environment changes over time, the toolkits can continue to be refined and
updated from additional learning gained when new methods emerge. Integration of job aids in
training is critical to building skillsets and competencies (Kavle et al., 2019) as research has
shown that job aids allow for immediate performance support and are a simple cost-effective
method for increasing performance (Clark & Estes, 2008; Parnell et al., 2017). Well-designed
job aids serve to provide key information about roles, procedures and resources supporting
leaders through crisis (Militello et al., 2007).
Recommendation 3: Implement a Senior Leader Talking Series to Share Crisis Experiences
Among Leaders on an Ongoing Basis
An easy resource for the organization to provide to senior leaders in order to prepare for
crisis is to utilize their current senior leaders who have led through crisis to share their
experiences to help other leaders better prepare for crisis. This recommendation would address
the need of preparing for crisis. One hundred percent of senior leaders interviewed agreed that as
they gain more experience, they are better prepared to lead through crisis. Research suggests
inexperienced leaders often fail to make well-informed decisions, but experienced crisis leaders
are more used to making quick decisions under pressure (Brandebo, 2020). Shared experience,
utilized as a tool, allows for exploring leadership, learning from experiences, and understanding
how leaders can develop going forward in a safe environment (Shelton et al., 2020). Information,
which is useful for employees who do not need help practicing in applying information, helps to
reduce uncertainty about how to achieve a performance goal (Clark & Estes, 2008). Therefore,

102
the third recommendation is for GCA to implement a senior leader talking series where crisis
experienced senior leaders can share their experience and learnings with other leaders on an
ongoing basis.
Knowledge sharing, sharing experiences, and sharing insights help to improve the
decision-making process and allows leaders and organizations to develop strategies that are
efficient (DeSisto et al., 2020). For example, a senior leader who has been through an aircraft
crash is able to share their experience of leading through that crisis. This recommendation allows
that senior leader to share lessons learned, areas of opportunity to improve on how they led, and
what they had done right in order to protect the organizations brand, reputation, finances, and
people. Inexperienced leaders will be able to accept this shared learning and feel more
comfortable understanding past success and failures and how they would need to lead in a
similar situation.
Integrated Recommendations
The review of literature identified several competencies GCA senior leaders need in order
to lead through crisis. Those competencies, listed below, are vital for leaders to be successful:
1. Leading with calmness and stability
2. Empowering others to act with autonomy
3. Remaining optimistic
4. Being flexible to adjust when crisis conditions change
5. Having emotional intelligence
6. Providing relevant and constant communication
Recommending a training program to solve identified gaps, and develop these competencies,
must come with an evaluation plan in order to measure the success. Training programs are not

103
effective unless the training is relevant and is implemented on the job (Kirkpatrick &
Kirkpatrick, 2016). Effective training will provide GCA senior leaders with the knowledge, skills
and confidence to utilize them in times of crisis. The integrated recommendation plan proposes
the New World Kirkpatrick Model (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016) as the training framework
for implementation and evaluation.
The New World Kirkpatrick Model utilizes four levels of training in reverse order to
evaluate the effectiveness (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). Level four identifies the results to
determine what the goal of the training is in relation to the organizational purpose. Level three
focuses on the critical behaviors needed to gain and reinforce the performance the organization
wants the participants to apply from what they learned in training. Level two focuses on the
learning that participants gained from the training while Level one focuses on the reactions from
the participants to identify to what degree did they find the training relevant and engaging
(Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). Figure 6 shows the levels of the New World Kirkpatrick
Model.

104
Figure 6
The New World Kirkpatrick Model

Note. The four levels of the New World Kirkpatrick Model by Kirkpatrick, J. D. and Kirkpatrick,
W. K. (2016), Kirkpatrick’s Four Levels of Training Evaluation, ATD Press, p. 11.

The three recommendations can be integrated into one implementation plan. All three
recommendations are connected and can be developed in a way that allows senior leaders to
work through simulation and role play training first as a way for the organization to provide the
resources to prepare leaders for crisis. This would allow for the development and utilization of
toolkits (job aids). The toolkits presented in the training will help to develop procedural
knowledge for the leaders. Finally, the implementation can be completed with the senior leader
talking series hosted on an ongoing basis to share crisis experiences with other leaders. This
comprehensive approach strengthens the resources provided to senior leaders to prepare for crisis
gaining an understanding of other leaders’ past experiences with crisis providing a level of
comfort for the next crisis leadership moment.

105
Level 4: Results
Level 4 of The New World Kirkpatrick Model is the reason why training is performed
(Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). Leading indicators, which are short-term observations and
measurements, are utilized to suggest critical behaviors are on track to positively impact the
desired results of the training. Table 11 provides the outcomes, metrics, and methods to measure
the results of the integrated training. This will help identify if the competencies listed above are
being implemented to support leadership during times of crisis.

Table 11
Outcomes, Metrics and Methods
Outcomes Metric(s) Method(s)
GCA maintains a
competitive advantage
(internal outcome)
Profitability compared to
competitor benchmarks
Quarterly financial results
GCA maintains positive
brand recognition
(external outcome)
Customer satisfaction scores Customer surveys
GCA maintains an
engaged workforce
(internal outcome)
Employee engagement scores Employee surveys
Win the J.D. Power
Award
(external outcome)
Customer satisfaction scores Customer surveys

106
Level 3: Behavior
Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick (2016) identified Level 3: Behavior as the most important
level and the most disruptive to traditional training evaluation practices. Behavior is the degree
that training participants apply what they learned during training back in the operation while on
the job. GCA senior leaders need to learn the competencies needed to lead through crisis and
apply what they learn on the job each day. These critical behaviors, which are limited to number
of behaviors that are specific, observable, and measurable, must be demonstrated consistently in
order to have the biggest impact on the desired results (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). Table
12 identifies three critical behaviors GCA senior leaders must be able to demonstrate in order to
achieve the goal of implementing 100% of competencies to lead through crisis. First, senior
leaders must be able to provide scenario based training to their direct reports in order to prepare
them for crisis. Second, senior leaders need to educate their direct reports on available job aids
and maintain them in an area accessible to themselves and their staff. Finally, senior leaders must
maintain calmness and stability during irregular operations demonstrating the ability to make
decisions quickly and confidently.

107
Table 12
Critical Behaviors, Metrics, Methods, and Timing for GCA Senior Leaders
Critical behavior Metric(s) Method(s) Timing
Senior leaders train
their department
leaders with
scenario based
training allowing
flexibility in
leadership styles
during crisis
Number of trainings
offered

Senior leaders
participate in the
training and then
provide it to their
direct reports
Quarterly
Senior leaders
educate
department
leaders on the job
aids to empower
them and
maintain them in
an accessible
location
Number of job aid
informational
meetings held

Recurrent training
with a quiz to
identify gaps in
procedural
knowledge
Every 90 days
Senior leaders will
update their staff
of important
activities to be
aware of through
a newsletter
communication
Number of updates
provided

Pulse check
surveys from a
population of the
employees
Monthly

After identifying critical behaviors, required drivers are utilized. Required drivers are processes
and systems that reinforce, monitor, encourage, and reward performance of the critical behaviors
on the job (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). Job aids, identified as an earlier recommendation,
is a reinforcing driver that is intended to reinforce what was learned in training while on the job.
Coaching is an encouragement driver that aligns with recommendation three above. Table 13
shows the required drivers needed to support GCA senior leaders in achieving their goal.

108
Table 13
Required Drivers to Support Critical Behaviors of GCA Senior Leaders
Method(s) Timing Critical behaviors
supported
Emergency Management Team
to provide a reminder at the
beginning of each quarter to
complete training of
employees (Monitor)
Ongoing 1
Emergency Management Team
to provide a reminder at the
beginning of each year to
educate on job aids and
complete recurrent training
(Reinforce)
Ongoing 2
Executive leaders provide public
recognition for senior leaders
who achieve goals of
training, educating, and
meeting monthly engagement
scores (Reward)
Ongoing 1, 2, 3
Emergency Management Team
to monitor data to track
progress on training
(Monitor)
Ongoing 1, 2
Facilitators of scenario based
training to observe senior
leaders conducting training
and during audits (Monitor)
Ongoing 1, 3
Facilitators to offer timely
feedback to senior leaders on
areas to improve in audits
and training (Encourage)
Ongoing 1, 3

It will be important for other stakeholders, such as the Board of Directors, the Executive
Leadership Team, all facilitators, and the Emergency Management team to support GCA senior
leaders in being successful at driving behavior changes. These additional stakeholders are critical

109
to providing the support, knowledge, and finances in allowing the recommendations to be
implemented. These stakeholders will also be critical in providing the motivation to implement
these changes as well as an understanding of the positive impact of implementing the changes.
Level 2: Learning
In Level 2: Learning, Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick (2016) provide formative methods for
evaluating learning through role play, simulation, knowledge test, and group activities.
Identifying the learning goals is the first step to building learning. The learning objectives below
are the recommended based on the knowledge, motivational, and organizational needs identified
in Chapter Four. These three learning objectives incorporate the six competencies GCA senior
leaders need to lead through crisis:
1. Demonstrate how to identify crisis and begin to lead through it with job aids allowing for
flexibility as crisis conditions change (Procedural)
2. Become more comfortable with crisis situations and believe in ability to lead through
them doing so calmly, remaining optimistic and communicating with employees (Self-
Efficacy)
3. Participate in shared experiences to help identify strengths and opportunities in ability to
lead through crisis by empowering others and utilizing emotional intelligence
(Metacognition)
Program
Role play and simulations will be utilized in the learning program. This will allow participants to
practice in a safe environment. The role play and simulation training will be required for all
senior leaders in the title of General Manager and above. This will account for 1,100 GCA senior
leaders. The sessions should last approximately three hours with a break midway to avoid

110
cognitive overload. Three sessions, for a total of nine hours, should be conducted for each
leader. Additionally, job aids, in the form of toolkits, will be introduced to GCA senior leaders
throughout the training to support procedural knowledge. Finally, GCA senior leaders
experienced in leading through crisis will participate in a speaker series. This will support shared
experiences allowing others to model behavior. The training will need to be conducted on an
ongoing basis to allow current GCA senior leaders to participate. Additionally, any new GCA
senior leader hired into the organization will be required to participate in the training. This is
necessary to meet the stakeholder goal of implementing 100% of competencies identified above.
Table 14 outlines the methods and activities the organization will use to evaluate the learning
goals.

111
Table 14
Evaluation of the Learning Components
Method(s) Timing
Knowledge tests/checks
(Declarative Knowledge “I know it”)
Ongoing during training
Survey questions on understanding
(Declarative Knowledge “I know it”)
After training is complete
Role Play and simulations with peers (Procedural Skills “I
can do it right now”)
During training
Demonstrate use of job aids
(Procedural Skills “I can do it now”)
After training is complete
while on the job
Survey questions on skills
(Procedural Skills “I can do it now”)
After training is complete
Discussion about value of investing time
(Attitude “I believe this is worthwhile”)
Before the training and during
the training
Survey questions on attitude and value
(Attitude “I believe this is worthwhile”)
After training is complete
Mentorship and shared experience
(Confidence “I think I can do it on the job”)
During the training and after
training is complete
Survey questions on confidence
(Confidence “I think I can do it on the job”)
After training is complete
Small focus groups to monitor commitment
(Commitment “I will do it on the job”)
Ongoing throughout the
program
Survey questions on commitment
(Commitment “I will do it on the job”)
After the program is complete

Level 1: Reaction
Kirkpatrick and Kirkpatrick (2016) identified reaction as “the degree to which
participants find the training favorable, engaging, and relevant to their jobs” (p. 39). Formative
methods, those used to evaluate during the program, will be utilized through instructor
observation and pulse checks (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). Additionally, a course
evaluation will be utilized as a summative evaluation method to support Level 1 as well. This
course-evaluation will be used to measure immediately after training and again after four months

112
to obtain feedback on the quality of the program after participants attempted to apply the
concepts on the job (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). Table 15 identifies the methods to be
utilized in measuring reactions to the training program while Table 16 identifies the projected
implementation timeline to close the gaps and achieve the goal of implementing 100%
competencies in senior leaders.

Table 15
Components to Measure Reactions
Method(s) Timing
Attendance
(Engagement)
Each session
Instructor observation
(Engagement)
Each session
Course Evaluation
(Engagement, Relevance, Customer
Satisfaction)
After program
Pulse-check surveys
(Relevance, Customer Satisfaction)
Each session

113
Table 16
Projected Implementation Timeline for Gaps
Action Current
performance
Target
performance
Timing to
achieve target
Development and
implementation of toolkits
(Procedural knowledge need)
7.7% 100% 12 months
Role Play and Simulation
Training and Senior Leading
Talking Series
(Organizational settings
need)
15.4% 100% 12 months

Summary
The integrated recommendations in this study were designed utilizing the New World
Kirkpatrick Model. The model is structured to identify the desired result and work backward
through critical behaviors, learning, and reactions respectively, to achieve the desired result of
the training. The New World Kirkpatrick Model is also designed to have evaluation points at
each level to identify the outcome of the training and the progression of the participants. The
New World Kirkpatrick Model will support GCA senior leaders in implementing 100% of
competencies identified above needed to lead through crisis.
Limitations and Delimitations
This study has a number of limitations and delimitations. Limitations are areas that are
beyond the researcher’s control and therefore cannot be controlled within the study (Nenty,
2009). Delimitations are areas that are in the researcher’s control like choices the researcher
makes that impact the data collected (Nenty, 2009).
A delimitation of this study is my decision to conduct this study on my own organization.
Collecting data from one’s own workplace can make it easier to collect data, but it also mean that

114
information may not be accurate and jeopardize the role of the researcher and the participants
(Creswell & Creswell, 2018). Another delimitation is my decision to pursue a qualitative study
rather than a mixed-method or quantitative study with the data collection through interviews.
While interviews have advantages, there are also disadvantages. The interviews provide
information in a designated place rather than the field. As a result, the researcher’s presence may
bias responses resulting in concerns of truthfulness. (Creswell & Creswell, 2018). I attempted to
mitigate this by presenting participants with a document outlining the study and the
confidentiality measures put in place.
A limitation of this study was the possibility of social desirability bias in the interview
process. Social desirability bias refers to a participant’s tendency to present answers that are
perceived as socially acceptable as opposed to reflecting their true belief or reality (Bergen &
Labonte, 2020). I attempted to mitigate this by asking probing questions in an attempt to
ascertain the true beliefs of the participants. Another limitation is my experiences in the research
topic, which could impact my positionality. Mitigation was attempted by allowing the
Dissertation Committee to review protocols to counter any bias. Finally, the artifact and
document analysis was conducted on documents strictly during the time frame of the COVID-19
pandemic and focused only on the organizational influences. This limited data available to me
could provide insight into one crisis and not necessarily crisis in general.
This study utilized multiple sources of credible data to account for the limitations
(Creswell & Creswell, 2018). Interviewees were offered the opportunity to review the transcripts
of the interviews to verify accuracy and intent, as suggested by Creswell and Creswell (2018).
Finally, the researcher utilized reflexivity to reflect upon the data collection and data analysis
processes and allowed the Dissertation Committee to review to counter any bias.

115
Recommendations for Future Research
This study was limited in some areas, which creates opportunities for future research.
One recommendation for future research is to examine the impact of competencies for leadership
during times of crisis more broadly. The literature review focused on competencies to lead
through crisis, but this study examined 13 senior leaders in one organization within one industry.
Moreover, this study focused on senior leaders as the sole stakeholder group; future research
could include other stakeholders, such as middle management.
Additionally, this study utilized Clark and Estes (2008) Gap Analysis as its framework.
Future research could study the same problem through a different lens allowing for additional
recommendations using another framework. Finally, future research could build on the findings
in this study as well by understanding if there is a difference between necessary competencies of
senior leaders and frontline leaders. Additionally research could also be conducted to understand
if there is a difference between male and female leaders in crisis leadership.
Conclusion
Effective leadership during crisis is a competitive advantage (Garcia 2006). Crisis
situations put organizations at a high risk of threat to their reputation, stability, and survival
(Fragouli, 2020). Senior leaders need the competencies to lead through crisis, especially at GCA,
as the tourism industry has a high probability for potential crisis (Hirudayaraj & Sparkman,
2019). GCA needs to have prepared leaders with the right competencies in order to avoid brand
damage, decreased profits, lack of investor trust, low employee engagement and morale, and
even the threat of going out of business due to poor crisis leadership.
The purpose of this study was to analyze and understand the competencies GCA senior
leaders need in order to lead through crisis. Using the Clark and Estes (2008) gap analysis

116
framework, assumed knowledge, motivational, and organizational influences were studied and
evaluated through a literature review, participant interviews, and a document analysis.
Additionally, open-coding was utilized to gain an understanding of the impact senior leaders’
experience had on their ability to lead through crisis. Based on the findings and themes that
emerged, recommendations were proposed to close the knowledge gap of leaders lacking
procedural knowledge of crisis, and the organizational gap of GCA not providing resources to
leaders to prepare for crisis. These gaps impact GCA senior leaders’ ability to lead through
crisis.
Family support was not considered at the beginning of the study yet it was offered as a
motivational factor by the participants. Organizations must remember that leaders are human and
are impacted by the crisis they are leading through. Mental health support was another area that
was highlighted by the research. Crisis can have a devastating impact on the mental health of
employees and leaders. Organizations must support all employees, frontline and senior leaders
alike, with mental health support. These resources are necessary for senior leaders to lead
through crisis and maintain their emotional stability.
The New World Kirkpatrick Model (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016) was used as a
framework to develop an integrated training plan in order to implement three identified
recommendations. The New World Kirkpatrick Model approach also facilitates the evaluation of
outcomes from the training in order to close the knowledge, motivational, and organizational
gaps to meet the GCA senior leader goal of implementing 100% of the competencies identified
in Table 2. In the end, the aim of this improvement study was to identify the competencies
needed for GCA senior leaders to lead through crisis and implement those competencies across
the organization for the organization to successfully navigate crisis in the future. This study was

117
able to identify those competencies needed and recommend a road map for successful
implementation across the organization’s senior leaders. Leading through crisis should have a
focus on organizational success but also must maintain a focus on a culture of caring.
Organizations that develop leaders with 100% of the identified competencies will not only get
the best out of its leaders for performance during a crisis, they will also maintain a culture of
caring while coming out of the crisis stronger and better.

118
References

Abney, A., Pelletier, M., Ford, T., & Horky, A. (2016). #IHateYourBrand: adaptive service
recovery strategies on Twitter. Journal of Services Marketing, 31(3), 281-294.
Adamu, A. A., & Mohamad, B. (2019). A reliable and valid measurement scale for assessing
internal crisis communication. Journal of Communication Management, 23(2), 90-106.
Adamu, A. A., Mohamad, B., & Rahman, N. (2016). Antecedents of internal crisis
communication and its consequences on employee performance. International Review of
Management and Marketing, 6(S7), 33-41.
Afandi, E. & Habibov, N. (2017). Pre- and Post-Crisis Trust in Banks: Lessons From
Transitional Countries. Journal of Economic Development, 42(1), 73-94.
Air travel in the time of COVID-19. (2020). The Lancet Infectious Diseases, 20(9), 993.
Al Eid, N. A. & Arnout, B. (2020). Crisis and disaster management in the light of the Islamic
approach: COVID-19 pandemic crisis as a model (a qualitative study using the grounded
theory). Journal of Public Affairs, 20(4), 1-14
Albrecht, S., Breidahl, E., & Marty, A. (2018). Organizational resources, organizational
engagement climate, and employee engagement. Career Development International,
23(1), 67-85.
Alonso-Almeida, M., & Bremser, K. (2015). Does gender specific decision making exist?
EuroMed Journal of Business, 10(1), 47-65.
Alshammari, A. (2020). The impact of human resource management practices, organizational
learning, organizational culture and knowledge management capabilities on
organizational performance in Saudi organizations: A Conceptual Framework. Revista
Argentina de Clinica Psicologica, 29(4), 714-721.

119
Alvinius, A. (2019). A gender perspective on teachers as crisis manager. Nordic Journal of
Feminist and Gender Research, 27(2), 125-138.
Anderson, L.W., Krathwohl, D.R., Airasian, P.W., Cruikshank, K.a., Mayer, R.E., Pintrich, P.R.,
Raths, J., & Wittrock, M.C. (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching and assessing: A
revision of Bloom’s Taxonomy of Education Objections. Longman
Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change.
Psychological Review, 84(2), 191-215.
Bandura, A. (1978). Reflections on Self-Efficacy. Advances in Behaviour Research and Therapy,
1(4), 237-269.
Bano, Y., Omar, S. S., & Ismail, F. (2021). Revitalising Organisations’ Emergency Succession
Planning in the Face of the Covid-19 Outbreak. The European Journal of Social and
Behavioural Sciences, 30(1), 3253-3268.
Bartsch, S., Buttgen, M, Weber, E., & Huber, A. (2020). Leadership matters in crisis-induced
digital transformation: how to lead service employees effectively during the COVID-19
pandemic. Journal of Service Management, Vol. ahead-of-print No. ahead-of-print.
Bechler, C. (1995). Looking beyond the immediate crisis response: analyzing the organizational
culture to understand the crisis. Journal of the Association for Communication
Administration, 1, 1-17.
Bellamy, N. D., McGee, L. A., Wang, M. Q., Liu, J. S., & Robinson, M. E. (2019). Crisis-
Counselor perceptions of job training, stress, and satisfaction during disaster recovery.
Psychological Trauma Theory, Research, Practice, and Policy, 11(1), 19-27.

120
Benaben, F., Lauras, M., Truptil, S., & Salatge, N. (2016). A Metamodel for Knowledge
Management in Crisis Management. IEEE International Conference on System Sciences,
Proceedings, 126-135.
Bergen, N. & Labonte R. (2020). “Everything is perfect, and we have no problems”: Detecting
and limiting social desirability bias in qualitative research. Qualitative Health Research,
30(5), 783-792.
Bernardo, S. M., Anholon, R., & Novaski, O. (2017). Main causes that lead strategies to decline
at execution phase: an analysis of Brazilian companies. International Journal of
Productivity and Performance Management, 66(3), 424-440.
Bhaduri, R. (2019). Leveraging culture and leadership in crisis management. European Journal
of Training and Development, 43(5/6), 534-549.
Bielecki, M., Patel, D., Hinkelbein, J., Komorowski, M., Kester, J., Ebrahim, S., Rodriguez-
Morales, A. J., Memish, Z. A., & Schlagenhauf, P. (2020). Air travel and COVID-19
prevention in the pandemic and peri-pandemic period: A narrative review. Travel
Medicine and Infectious Disease, 39, 1-11.
Bienkowska, A., Tworek, K., & Zablocka-Kluczka, A. (2020). Organizational Reliability Model
Verification in the Crisis Escalation Phase Caused by the COVID-19 Pandemic.
Sustainability, 12(10), 4318.
Brandebo, M. F. (2020). Destructive leadership in crisis management. Leadership &
Organization Development Journal, 41(4), 567-580.
Brinks, V. & Ibert, O. (2020). From Corona Virus to Corona Crisis: The value of an analytical
and geographical understanding of crisis. Tijdschrift voor Economische en Sociale
Geografie, 111(3), 275-287.

121
Broderick, R., Emmel, L., Gierczak, K., & Gonzalez, R. (2017). Safety and profits in the airline
industry. International Journal of Arts & Sciences, 10(2), 327-338.
Brown, C. H. (2018). The role of leadership in surviving a school shooting. Journal of Cases in
Educational Leadership, 21(2), 3-14.
Buhusayen, B., Seet, P., & Coetzer, A. (2020). Turnaround management of airport service
providers operating during COVID-19 restrictions. Sustainability, 12(23), 1-24.
Bundy, J., Pfarrer, M., Short, C., & Coombs, W. T. (2017). Crises and crisis management:
Integration, interpretation, and research development. Journal of Management, 43(6),
1661-1692.
Burckhardt, O., Hargiss, K., & Howard, C. (2012). The role of leadership and technology in
successful and sustainable airline management: A case of two carriers. International
Journal of Strategic Information Technology and Applications, 3(4), 16-30.
Butcher, J. & Hatcher, C. (1988). The neglected entity in air disaster planning. American
Psychologist, 43(9), 724-729.
Castle, A. (2019). Crisis management in 21st century. Turan: Stratejik Arastirmalar Merkezi;
Kars, 11(42), 318-322.
Caulfield, J. L. (2018). Using case work as a pretest to measure crisis leadership preparedness.
Journal of Management Education, 42(6), 704-730.
Chen, J. K. C. & Sriphon, T. (2021). Perspective on COVID-19 Pandemic Factors Impacting
Organizational Leadership. Sustainability, 13(6), 1-21.
Ciftci, G., Kucukaltan, D. & Mentes, S. A. (2017). Empirical analysis of crisis management
practices in tourism enterprises in terms of organizational learning. Business &
Management Studies: An International Journal, 5(1), 42-57.

122
Clark, R. E. & Estes, F. (2008). Turning Research Into Results. Information Age Publishing, Inc.
Cotfas, L., Delcea, C., Milne, R. J., & Salari, M. (2018). Evaluating classical airplane boarding
methods considering COVID-19 flying restrictions. Symmetry, 12, 1087.
Cook, R., & Anderson, R. (2019). Transitioning from incident to crisis management to continuity
of operations. Journal of Business Continuity & Emergency Planning, 14(1), 46-54.
Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2018). Research Design. Qualitative, Quantitative, and
Mixed Methods Approaches. Sage Publications, Inc.
Dalcher, D. (2020). Leadership in times of crisis: What’s different now? PM World Journal,
9(5), 1-17.
D’Arms, J. & Jacobson, D. (2014). Moral Psychology and Human Agency: Philosophical Essays
on the Science of Ethics. Oxford Scholarship.
Deepa, M. V. & Jayaraman, K. (2017). Scale measurements for airline service quality to secure
passenger confidence in air travel. The Quality Management Journal, 24(3), 31-53.
Demiroz, F., & Kapucu, N. (2012). The role of leadership in managing emergencies and
disasters. European Journal of Economic & Political Studies, 5, 91-101.
DeSisto, M., Cavanagh, J., & Bartram, T. (2020). Bushfire investigations in Australia: A case for
building collective leadership practices for crisis events. Leadership & Organization
Development Journal, 41(2), 177-192.
Dirani, K. M., Abadi, M., Alizadeh, A., Barhate, B., Garza, R. C., Gunasekara, N., Ibrahim, G.,
& Majzun, Z. (2020). Leadership competencies and the essential role of human resource
development in times of crisis: a response to COVID-19 pandemic. Human Resource
Development International, 23(4), 380-394.

123
Dreibelbis, R. C., Martin, J., Coovert, M. D., & Dorsey, D. W. (2016). The looming
cybersecurity crisis and what it means for the practice of industrial and organizational
psychology. Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 11(2), 346-365.
DuBrin, A. J. (2013). Handbook of research on crisis leadership in organizations. Edward Elgar.
Elliot, A., Dweck, C., & Yeager, D. (2017). Handbook of Competence and Motivation. Theory
and Application. The Guilford Press.
Erez, O., Cristal-Lilov, A., & Salmon, A. B. (2021). Structures and Mechanisms, The Chaos
Theory and Organizational Change. American Journal of Management, 21(1), 98-105.
Fischer, K., & Schultz, J. (2017). Covenant and empowerment: integrative themes for
organizational leadership and behavior. Organization Development Journal, 35(3), 43-67.
Flavell, J. H. (1979). Metacognition and metacognitive monitoring: A new area of cognitive-
developmental inquiry. American Psychologist, 51, 906-911.
Fowler, K. L., Kling, N. D., & Larson, M. D. (2007). Organizational preparedness for coping
with a major crisis or disaster. Business & Society, 46(1), 88-103.
Fragouli, E. (2020). Interaction of crisis leadership and corporate reputation. Journal of Business
and Retail Management Research, 15(1), 44-58.
Fraher, A. L. (2004). ‘Flying the friendly skies:’ Why US commercial airline pilots want to carry
guns. Human Relations, 57(5), 573-595.
Freeden, M. (2017). Crisis? How is that a crisis?! Reflections on an overburdened word.
Contributions to the History of Concepts, 12(2), 12-28.
Fusch, P., Hall, J., & Fusch, G. (2018). Empowering internal stakeholders through the
dissemination of useful information: A review of crisis management concepts. Journal of
Social Change, 10(1), 145-158.

124
Garcia, H. F. (2017). Strategic choices for managing potential crises. Strategy & Leadership,
45(6), 34-40.
Garcia, H. F. (2006). Effective leadership response to crisis. Strategy & Leadership, 34(1), 4-10.
Gerken, F., Van der Land, S. F., & van der Meer, T. G.L.A. (2016). Crisis in the air: an
investigation of AirAsia’s crisis-response effectiveness based on frame alignment. Public
Relations Review, 42(5), 879-892.
Ghassemi, M., Wolf, B., Bettschart, M., Kreibich, A., Herrmann, M., & Brandstatter, V., (2021).
The Dynamics of Doubt: Short-Term Flucuations and Predictors of Doubts in Personal
Goal Pursuit. Motivation Science, 7(2), 153-164.
Goleman, D. (2001). The Emotionally Intelligent Workplace: How to Select For, Measure, and
Improve Emotional Intelligence in Individuals, Groups, and Organizations. Jossey-Bass.
Goniewicz, K., Khorram-Manesh, A., Hertelendy, A., Goniewicz, M., Naylor, K., & Burkle, F.
(2020). Current response and management decisions of the European Union to the
COVID-19 outbreak: A review. Sustainability, 12(9), 3838.
Gottfredson, R. K., & Reina, C. S. (2020). Exploring why leaders do what they do: An
integrative review of the situation-trait approach and situation-encoding schemas.
Leadership Quarterly, 31(1).
Gustafsson, S., Gillespie, N., Searle, R., Hailey, V. H., & Dietz, G. (2021). Preserving
Organizational Trust During Disruption. Organizational Studies, 42(9), 1409-1433.
Hajncl, L., & Vucenovic, D. (2020). Effects of measures of emotional intelligence on the
relationship between emotional intelligence and transformational leadership.
Psychological Topics, 29(1), 119-134

125
Hall, J. A., Fusch, P. I., & Booker, J. M. (2019). Tribal gaming leader strategies toward a
sustainable future. The Qualitative Report, 24(4), 887-905.
Harwood, S. M. (2017). Adaptive Standard Operating Procedures for Complex Disasters
[Master’s thesis, Naval Postgraduate School] ProQuest Dissertations Publishing.
He, J., Mao, Y., Morrison, A. M., & Coca-Stefaniak, J. A. (2020). On being warm and friendly:
the effect of socially responsible human resources management on employee fears of the
threats of COVID-19. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management,
33(1), 346-366.
Hede, S. (2016). Perceptions of crisis preparedness and motivation: A study among municipal
leaders. Safety Science, 95, 83-91.
Hirudayaraj, M. & Sparkman, T. (2019). Building leadership capacity: a framework for
disruptive events in tourism. Industrial and Commercial Training, 51(2), 114-124.
Holzweiss, P. & Walker, D. (2018). Higher education crises: Training new professionals for
crisis management. College of Student Affairs Journal, 36(1), 124-135.
Howitt, A. M. & Leonard, H. B. (2009). Managing crises: Responses to large-scale
emergencies. CQ Press.
Hunter, J. A., & Lambert, J. R. (2016). Do we feel safer today? The impact of smiling customer
service on airline safety perception post 9-11. Journal of Transportation Security, 9(1-2),
35-56.
Hurrell, D. P. (2021). Conceptual knowledge OR Procedural knowledge OR Conceptual
knowledge AND Procedural knowledge: Why the conjunction is important for teachers.
Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 46(2), 57-71.

126
Iso-Ahola, S. E. (2021). Toward a Theory of Conscious-Nonconscious Processing and Getting
Hard (and Easy) Things Done in Everyday Life. Psychology of Consciousness: Theory,
Research, and Practice Advance online publication.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/cns0000291
James, E. H., Wooten, L. P., & Dushek, K. (2011). Crisis Management: Informing a new
leadership research agenda. The Academy of Management Annals, 5(1), 455-493.
Jashari, L. (2018). Soft Target Security: Environmental Design and the Deterrence of Terrorist
Attacks on Soft Targets in Aviation Transportation [Master’s thesis, Naval Postgraduate
School] ProQuest Dissertations Publishing.
Johnston, A. (2016). The evolution of interstate security crisis-management theory and practice
in China. Naval War College Review, 69(1), 28-71.
Johnston, P. & Harris, R. (2019). The Boeing 737 MAX Saga: Lessons for software
organizations. Software Quality Professional, 21(3), 4-12.
Joyner, F., Frantz, D., & Maguire, L. (2013). When culture saved the day: Organization culture
and crisis management. Journal of Business Case Studies, 9(2), 165-174.
Kabadayi, S., O’Connor, G., & Tuzovic, S. (2020). The impact of Coronavirus on service
ecosystems as service mega-disruptions. Journal of Services Marketing, 34(6), 809-817.
Kaiser, R. (2020). Leading in an unprecedented global crisis: The heightened importance of
versatility. Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research, 72(3), 135-154.
Kantor, L., April, K., & Nilsson, W. (2020). The transformative leadership capacities of
mindfulness. Effective Executive, 13(3), 27-64.
Kapucu, N., & Van Wart, M. (2008). Making matters worse: An anatomy of leadership failures
in managing catastrophic events. Administration & Society, 40, 711-740.

127
Kaul, A. (2019). Culture vs strategy: which to precede, which to align? Journal of Strategy and
Management, 12(1), 116-136.
Kavle, J. A., Picolo, M., Buccini, G., Barros, I., Dillaway, C. H., Perez-Escamilla, R. (2019).
Strengthening counseling on barriers to exclusive breastfeeding through use of job aids in
Nampula, Mozambique. PLoS One, 14(12), 1-32.
Kim, Y. (2018). Enhancing employee communication behaviors for sensemaking and
sensegiving in crisis situations. Journal of Communication Management, 22(4), 451-475.
Kirkpatrick, J. D. & Kirkpatrick, W. K. (2016). Kirkpatrick’s Four Levels of Training
Evaluation. ATD Press.
Klann, G. (2003). Crisis leadership. Center for Creative Leadership.
Kohli, A., Blitzer, D., Lefco, R., Barter, J., Haynes, M. R., Colalillo, S., Ly, M. & Zink, C.
(2018). Using Expectancy Theory to quantitatively dissociate the neural representation of
motivation from its influential factors in the human brain: An fMRI study. Neurolmage,
178, 552-561.
Korosenyi, A., Illes, G., & Metz, R. (2016). Contingency and political action: The role of
leadership in endogenously created crises. Politics and Governance, 4(2), 91-103.
Kovaltchuk, A. P., Dedusenko, E. A., Blinova, E. A., & Miloradov, K. A. (2016). Concept and
Procedures of Crisis Management in Russian Hotel Enterprises. Journal of
Environmental Management and Tourism, 8(3), 473-480.
Krupskyi, O., & Kuzmytska, Y. (2020). Organizational culture and business strategy: connection
and role for a company survival. Central European Business Review, 9(4),1-25.
Kuntz, J., Malinen, S. & Naswall, K. (2017). Employee resilience: Directions for resilience
development. Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research, 69(3), 223-242.

128
Labas, D., (2017). The impact of organizational crisis preparedness on firm business
performance. Market-Trziste, 29(1), 75-92.
Lalonde, C. (2007). Crisis management and organizational development: Towards the
conception of a learning model in crisis management. Organizational Development
Journal, 25(1), 17-26.
Lavigna, R., & Hays, S. (2004). Recruitment and selection of public workers: An international
compendium of modern trends and practices. Public Personnel Management, 33(3), 237-
253.
Lawrence, P., & Lorsch, J. (2019). Differentiation and integration in complex organizations.
Administrative Science Quarterly, 12(1), 1.
Lee, G. K., Lampel, J., & Shapira, Z. (2020). After the Storm Has Passed: Traslating Crisis
Experience into Useful Knowledge. Organizaitonal Science, 31(4), 1037-1051.
Lee, S., Sung, Y., Choi, D., & Kim, D. (2019). Surviving a crisis: How crisis type and
psychological distance can inform corporate crisis response. Journal of Business Ethics,
163(3), 485-505.
Lee, Y., Kim, K. H., & Kim, J. N. (2018). Understanding the impacts of issue types and
employee-organization relationships on employees’ problem perceptions and
communicative behaviors. Corporate Communications: An International Journal, 24(3),
553-568.
Lloyd, R., & Mertens, D. (2018). Expecting more out of Expectancy Theory: History urges
inclusion of the social context. International Management Review, 14(1), 24-66.

129
Mano-Negrin, R., & Sheaffer, Z. (2004). Are women “cooler” than men during crisis? Exploring
gender differences in perceiving organisational crisis preparedness proneness. Women in
Management Review, 19, 109-122.
Mansor, F., & Kaderali, N. N. (2017). Crisis management, crisis communication, and consumer
purchase intention post-crisis. Global Business and Management Research: An
International Journal, 9(4s), 60-79.
Marcus, L. J., Ashkenazi, I., Dorn, B., & Henderson, J. (2007). The Five Dimensions of Meta-
Leadership. Pre-publication paper, Harvard School of Public Health.
Marko, M. D., Gilman, L. G., Vasulingam, S., Miliskievic, M., & Spell, C. S. (2020). Leadership
lessons from the Titanic and Concordia disasters. Journal of Management History, 26(2),
216-230.
Merriam, S. B., & Tisdell, E. J. (2016). Qualitative Research. A Guide to Design and
Implementation. Jossey-Bass.
Mikusova, M., & Copikova, A. (2016). What business owners expect from a crisis manager? A
competency model: Survey results from Czech businesses. Journal of Contingencies and
Crisis Management, (24)3, 162-180.
Militello, L., Patterson, E., Bowman, L., & Wears, R. (2007). Information flow during crisis
management: challenges to coordination in the emergency operations center. Cognition,
Technology & Work, 9(1), 25-31.
Miner, J. B. (2005). Organizational Behavior 1. Essential Theories of Motivation and
Leadership. M.E. Sharpe

130
Mishra, S. (2017). The importance of “consumer type” in the attribution of crisis responsibility:
The case of the Maggi Noodles crisis in India. International Journal of Strategic
Communication, 11(3), 224-243.
Mitut, I. (2011). The role of leadership in the management of crisis situations. Romanian
Economic and Business Review, 6(3), 20-33.
Moran, D. J. (2010). ACT for leadership: Using acceptance and commitment training to develop
crisis-resilient change managers. International Journal of Behavioral Consultation and
Therapy, 6(4), 341-355.
Muller, J. (2018). Terrorism since 9/11: the American cases. Mershon Center, Ohio State
University, Columbus, OH.
Murphy, M., & Skillen, P. (2015). The politics of time on the frontline: Street level bureaucracy,
professional judgment, and public accountability. International Journal of Public
Administration, 38(9), 632-641.
Nenty, H. J. (2009). Writing a Quantitative Research Thesis. International Journal of
Educational Sciences. 1(1), 19-32.
Nevicka, B., Van Vianen, A. E. M., De Hoogh, A. H. B., & Voorn B. C. M. (2018). Narcissistic
Leaders: An Asset or a Liability? Leader Visibility, Follower Responses, and Group-
Level Absenteeism. Journal of Applied Psychology, 103(7), 703-723.
Nizamidou, C., & Vouzas, F. (2020). The contribution of preoccupation with failure to TQM,
crisis management and HR aiming to overcome crises. The TQM Journal, 32(6), 1077-
1098.

131
Olsson, E. A., & Verbeek, B. (2016). International organisations and crisis management: Do
crises enable or constrain IO autonomy? Journal of International Relations and
Development, 21, 275-299.
Oscarsson, O., & Danielsson, E. (2018). Unrecognized crisis management - Normalizing
everyday work. J Contingencies and Crisis Management. 26, 225-236.
Pangarkar, N. (2016). A framework for effective crisis response. Journal of Organizational
Change Management, 29(4), 464-483.
Parnell, A. M., Lorah, E. R., Karnes, A., & Schaefer-Whitby, P. (2017). Effectiveness of Job
Aids and Post Performance Review on Staff Implementation of Discrete Trial Instruction.
Journal of Organizational Behavior Management, 37(2), 207-220.
Parnell, J. A., Koseoglu, M. A., & Spillan, J. E. (2010). Crisis readiness in Turkey and the
United States. Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management, 18(2), 108-116.
Pietreanu, C., Zaharia, S., & Iordache, V. (2020). Aviation risk assessment in the context of
uncertainty. Incas Bulletin, 12(3), 237-242.
Pintrich, P. & Schunk, D. (1996). Motivation in education: Theory, research and applications.
Merrill
Powley, E., & Taylor, S. (2014). Pedagogical approaches to develop critical thinking and crisis
leadership. Journal of Management Education, 38(4), 560-585.
Racine, M., Wilson, C., & Wynes, M. (2020). The value of apology: How do corporate apologies
moderate the stock market reaction to non-financial corporate crises? Journal of Business
Ethics, 163, 485-505.

132
Radic, A., Law, R., Luck, M., Kang, H., Ariza-Montes, A., Arjona-Fuentes, J., & Han, H.
(2020). Apocalypse now or overreaction to Coronavirus: The global cruise tourism
industry crisis. Sustainability 2020, 12, 1-19.
Ravazzani, S. (2015). Exploring internal crisis communication in multicultural environments.
Corporate Communications: An International Journal, 21(1), 73-88.
Riihimaki, C., & Viskupic, K. (2020). Motivators and inhibitors to change: Why and how
geoscience faculty modify their course content and teaching methods. Journal of
Geoscience Education, 68(2), 115-132.
Rikhardsson, P., Rohde, C., Christensen, L., & Batt, C. E. (2021). Management controls and
crisis: evidence from the banking sector. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal,
34(4), 757-785.
Robertson, C. (2016). Vaccines and airline travel: A federal role to protect the public health.
American Journal of Law & Medicine, 42, 543-571.
Rybnikov, S., Rybnikova, N., & Portnov, B. (2017). Public fears in Ukrainian society: Are crises
predictable? Psychology and Developing Societies, 29(1), 98-123.
Saltz, M. (2017). Crisis Leadership and Complex Crises: A Search For Competencies [Master’s
thesis, Naval Postgraduate School] ProQuest Dissertations Publishing.
Schein, E. H. (1985). Organizational Culture and Leadership. San Francisco, CA: Jossey Bass
Servotte, J., Bragard, I., Szyld, D., Van Nogoc, P. & Scholtes, B. (2019). The Western Journal of
Emergency Medicane, 20(6), 893-902.
Shelton, F., Boylan, J., Jenkins, P., Conley, H., & Thurlow, J. (2020). 139 Using the ‘Leadership
Time Capsule’ to maximize learning in a crisis. BMJ Leader, 4(1), A52-A53.

133
Sherman, W. S., & Roberto, K. J. (2020). Are you talkin’ to me?: the role of culture in crisis
management sensemaking. Management Decision, 58(10), 2196-2211.
Shi, S., Tanaka, S., Ueno, R., Gilmour, S., Tanoue, Y., Kawashima, T., Nomura, S., Eguchi, A.,
Miyata, H., & Yoneoka, D. (2020). Travel restrictions and SARS-CoV-2 transmission: an
effective distance approach to estimate impact. Bull World Health Organ, 98, 518-529.
Shrivastava, P. (1987). Bhopal: Anatomy of a crisis. Ballinger.
Silveira dos Santos, R. A., Bandeira-de-Mello, R., & Castro de Almeida Cunha, C. J. (2016). The
leadership process during an organizational crisis. Journal of Operations and Supply
Chain Management, 9(1), 94-109.
Singh, A. & Rangnekar, S. (2020). Empowering leadership in hospital employees. Effects on
goal orientation, job conditions, and employee proactivity. International Journal of
Productivity and Performance Management, 69(7), 1497-1519.
Smeureanu, I,. & Diab, B. (2020). Investigating top management preparedness for leading IT
governance during the coronavirus crisis. Economics and Sociology, 13(4), 97-106.
Smith, L., & Riley, D. (2012). School leadership in times of crisis. School Leadership &
Management, 32(1), 57-71.
Soubrier, J. P. (2016). Self-Crash Murder-Suicide. Crisis: The Journal of Crisis Intervention and
Suicide Prevention, 37(6), 399-401.
Sousa, J., & Alberio, M. (2020). Coming out from a crisis: What Next? Canadian Journal of
Nonprofit and Social Economy Research, 11(1), 3-6.
Starr, A. W. (2017). Integrating fatigue management with safety management systems for
commercial flightcrew operations. International Journal of Aviation, Aeronautics, and
Aerospace, 4(1), 4.

134
Stewart, M. & Mueller, J. (2018). Risk and economic assessment of U.S. aviation security for
passenger-borne bomb attacks. Journal of Transportation Security, 11, 117-136.
Sutherland, I. E. (2017). Learning and growing: trust, leadership, and response to crisis. Journal
of Educational Administration, 55(1), 2-17.
Thurmer, J. L., Wieber, F., & Gollwitzer, P. M. (2020). Management in times of crisis: Can
collective plans prepare teams to make and implement good decisions? Management
Decision, 58(10), 2155-2176.
Tokakis, V., Polychroniou, P., & Boustras, G. (2018). Managing conflict in the public sector
during crises: the impact on crisis management team effectiveness. International Journal
of Emergency Management, 14(2), 152-166.
Treadwell, K. (2017). Learning from tragedy: Student affairs leadership following college
campus disasters. Journal of Student Affairs Research and Practice, 54(1), 42-54.
Treadwell, K., Lane, F., & Paterson, B. (2020). Reflections from crisis: A phenomenological
study of the Texas A&M bonfire collapse. Journal of Student Affairs Research and
Practice, 57(2), 119-131.
Ulrich, D. (2020). COVID-19: What’s next in the coronavirus crisis for HR? HR Connect.
https://www.hrdconnect.com/2020/05/04/covid-19-whats-next-in-the-coronavirus-crisis-
for-hr/
van der Waldt, G. (2020). Construction conceptual frameworks in social science research. The
Journal for Transdisciplinary Research in Southern Africa, 16(1), 758-767.
Van Eerde, W., & Thierry, H. (1996). Vroom’s Expectancy Models and work-related criteria: A
Meta-Analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 81(5), 575-586.

135
van Laere, J., & Lindblom, J. (2019). Cultivating a longitudinal learning process through
recurring crisis management training exercises in twelve Swedish municipalities. Journal
of Contingencies and Crisis Management, 27(1), 38-49.
Van Rooij, B., & Fine, A. (2018). Toxic corporate culture: Assessing organization processes of
deviancy. Administrative Sciences, 8(3), 1-38.
van Steenbergen, E., van Dijk, D., Cristensen, C., Coffeng, T. & Ellemers, N. (2020). Learn to
build an error management culture. Journal of Financial Regulation and Compliance,
28(1), 57-73.
Van Wart, M., & Kapucu, N. (2011). Crisis management competencies: The case of emergency
managers in the USA. Public Management Review, 13(4), 489-511.
Varma, T. (2020). Responsible leadership and reputation management during a crisis: The cases
of Delta and United Airlines. Journal of Business Ethics.
Varpio, L., Paradis, E., Uijtdehaage, S., & Young, M. (2020). The distinctions between theory,
theoretical framework, and conceptual framework. Academic Medice Journal of the
Association of American Medical Colleges, 95(7), 989-994.
Vlnod, B. (2020). The COVID-19 pandemic and airline cash flow. Journal of Revenue and
Pricing Management, 19, 228-229
Vroom, V. H. (1964). Work and motivation. Wiley.
Walecka, A. (2021). The Role of Relational Capital in Anti-Crisis Measures Undertaken by
Companies – Conclusions from a Case Study. Sustainability, 13(2), 780-796.
Wang, J., Anne,, M., & McLean, G. N. (2016). Understanding crisis and crisis management: an
Indian perspective. Human Resource Development International, 19(3), 192-208.

136
Wicker, C. (2021). Perspectives in HRD – Competency-based Approach to Developing Leaders
for Crises. New Horizons in Adult Education & Human Resource Development, 33(2),
52-59
Woitaszewski, S. A., Savage, T. A., & Zaslofsky, A. F. (2020). From Neutral to High Gear:
Critical Implementation Drivers for PREPaRE School Safety and Crisis Response in
Practice. Contemporary School Psychology, 24, 337-348.
Woods, S. (2017). Terrorism in aviation: Going on holiday? Young travellers take longer to pass
through security: Aviation, security, passenger experience, terrorism. International
Journal of Safety and Security in Tourism and Hospitality, 1(16), 1-22.
Wooten, L., & James, E. (2008). Linking crisis management and leadership competencies: The
role of human resource development. Advances in Developing Human Resources, 10(3),
352-379.
Yarrow, E., & Pagan, V. (2020). Reflections on front-line medical work during COVID-19 and
the embodiment of risk. Gender Work Organ, 1-12.
Yerkes, R. M., & Dodson, J. D. (1908). The relation of strength of stimulus to rapidity of habit-
formation. Journal of Comparative Neurology & Psychology, 18, 459-482.
Yildizli, H. (2021). A Case Study on Goal Orientations for Teaching. Journal on Efficiency and
Responsibility in Education and Science, 14(1), 9-27.
Young, J. (2018). Using a role-play simulation game to promote systems thinking. The Journal
of Continuing Education in Nursing, 49(1), 10-11.
Zeneli, V., Czinkota, M., & Knight, G. (2018). Terrorism, competitiveness, and international
marketing: an empirical investigation. International Journal of Emerging Markets, 13(2),
310-329.

137
Zhao, X., Zhan, M. & Wong, C. (2018). Segmenting and understanding publics in a social media
information sharing network: An interactional and dynamic approach. International
Journal of Strategic Communication, 12(1), 25-45.

138
Appendix A: Interview Protocol

Introduction to the Interview:

Thank you for agreeing to participate in this interview. I am David Needham and I am
conducting a study to analyze leadership during crisis management events. The purpose of the
study is to understand what factors make leaders successful during crisis management events.
Your responses will be kept confidential, and you will be identified in the study as a numbered
participant to further protect your identity. I will not be utilizing any identifying factors with the
exception of gender. Would you like to continue your participation in this study?

Please also understand that you may decline to answer any question you wish and you may stop
the interview and withdraw your participation at any time. I would also like to record the
interview to refer back to as I report out on my study. The recording will be kept confidential
and locked in a filing cabinet in a locked room. Nobody other than me will have access to the
recording and the recording will be destroyed once it is no longer needed. Do I have your
permission to record this interview?

Finally, before we begin the interview are there any questions you have for me that I can answer?

139
Table A1
Interview Protocol
Interview
questions
Potential
probes
RQ
addressed
Key concept
addressed
Q type (Patton)
First, please share
your experience
with crisis as a
leader. What
types of crisis
have you
experienced in
the past?
How do you
feel the
outcome of
past crises
have ended
for you as a
leader

The questions
will focus on
leadership and
crisis. For this
purpose, a
crisis is defined
as an event or
problem that
threatens the
values of the
organization,
presents a
restricted
amount of time
in which to
respond and is
unexpected by
the
organization.
N/A N/A N/A N/A
What type of
education,
classes, or
training, if any,
have you taken
in regards to
crisis
management?
What type of
education,
classes or
training has
your
organization
provided in
regards to
crisis
managemen
t?
How did what
you learned
1 Knowledge –
Declarative
Conceptual
Knowledge

140
Interview
questions
Potential
probes
RQ
addressed
Key concept
addressed
Q type (Patton)
in these
classes
impact your
leadership
during a
crisis, if at
all?
What do you feel
are the most
important skills
you have that
have led to
your success in
leading during
a crisis?
Why are
those skills
important?
What if a
leader does
not have
those skills?
1 Knowledge –
Declarative
Conceptual
Opinion
In what ways
have you
empowered
others, if at all,
during crisis?
How did that
impact the
empowered
employee?
How did
that
influence
the outcome
of the
crisis?
1 Knowledge –
Conceptual
Knowledge
Tell me about
your
knowledge of
crisis
management
procedures, if
any, to avoid
crisis before it
occurs?
What
evaluations
does your
organization
do, if any,
regarding
resources
and
responsibilit
ies prior to
crisis
occurring?
1 Knowledge –
Procedural
Opinion
What techniques
do you utilize,
if any, to
remain
composed
under pressure
during crisis?
How does
pressure
impact your
ability to
remain
optimistic,
if at all? In
1 Knowledge –
Declarative
Conceptual
Opinion

141
Interview
questions
Potential
probes
RQ
addressed
Key concept
addressed
Q type (Patton)
what ways
does
pressure
impact your
ability to
encourage
others?
Tell me a time
when you had
trouble
controlling
your emotions
during a crisis?
What were
those
emotions
you were
feeling?
Were you
able to
recognize
your
emotions as
you
experienced
them? How
did they
impact your
leadership
at the time?
1 Knowledge –
Declarative
Conceptual
Metacognitive
Opinion
Let’s talk about a
time where
communication
impacted crisis
negatively or
positively.
What
happened?
What should
have been
done
differently?
1 Knowledge –
Declarative
Conceptual
Metacognition
Opinion
Tell me about the
first crisis event
you managed as
a leader. What
went well, if
anything? What
went poorly?
What, if
anything did
you learn about
yourself as a
leader during
How did that
event
inform your
thinking, if
at all, in
other crises
you have
experienced
? How did
that event
influence
your
1 & 2 Knowledge –
Metacognitive
Feeling

142
Interview
questions
Potential
probes
RQ
addressed
Key concept
addressed
Q type (Patton)
that event. actions, if at
all, in future
crisis
events? Did
you alter
your
leadership
as you
gained
experience?
If so, how?
How would
you relate it
to the
current
COVID
crisis?
Tell me about
something you
would do
differently, if at
all, leading
through your
next crisis that
you did not do
during past
crisis events?
Why would
you do that
differently?
How do you
think it
would have
made the
crisis
different?
1 Knowledge –
Metacognition
Knowledge
What process
does your
organization
follow, to your
knowledge, to
identify
potential
warning signs
of crisis?
1 & 2 Knowledge –
Procedural
Knowledge
How have your
past
experiences
impacted, if at
all, the
decisions you
make while
leading during
1 Knowledge –
Metacognition
Knowledge

143
Interview
questions
Potential
probes
RQ
addressed
Key concept
addressed
Q type (Patton)
a crisis now?
What actions, if
any, do you
take to prepare
yourself and
your leaders to
manage crisis
prior to crisis
occurring?
1 & 2 Knowledge –
Procedural
Knowledge
What financial
planning, if
any, do you
take in
preparation for
crisis or crisis
recovery?
What plans
does your
organization
take to plan
financial
funding for
crisis or
crisis
recovery?
1 Knowledge -
Procedural
Knowledge
Tell me about
your
communication
style during a
crisis?
What is your
feeling
regarding
communicat
ion after
making a
quick
decision?
What is
your feeling
regarding
communicat
ion before
making
decisions?
1 Knowledge –
Declarative
Knowledge
Tell me about
how you view
your leadership
style during
crisis events.
Have you
ever had to
alter that
style? If so
how?
Why?
1 Knowledge -
Metacognition
Knowledge
How confident
are you, if at
all, in your
ability to
successfully
What feelings
do you
experience
when
making
1 Motivation –
Self-Efficacy
Opinion

144
Interview
questions
Potential
probes
RQ
addressed
Key concept
addressed
Q type (Patton)
lead during
crisis?
these
decisions?
How confident
are you, if at
all, in your
decision-
making if asked
to make a quick
decision during
crisis?
What do you
do if you
make the
wrong
decision?
1 Motivation –
Self-Efficacy
Feeling
Tell me how you
self-evaluate
your
performance
during crisis?
1 Motivation –
Goal Orientation
Opinion
How do you
determine
whether you
have done
well?
1 Motivation –
Goal Orientation
Opinion
In what ways has
leading through
crisis helped
your self-
improvement, if
at all?
Do you
believe
those
experiences
made you
more
marketable
as a leader?
How or why
not?
1 & 2 Motivation –
Goal Orientation
Opinion
Has there been a
time you felt
your
organization
would
discipline you
for actions you
took while
leading in a
crisis? If so,
what were the
circumstances?
How did that
influence
the way you
would lead
3 Organizational-
Organizational
Culture
Opinion
Tell me a time, if
ever, you
In what ways
did that
3

Opinion

145
Interview
questions
Potential
probes
RQ
addressed
Key concept
addressed
Q type (Patton)
anticipated the
organization
would not
support your
decisions
during a crisis.
impact your
leadership
during that
crisis? How
did it
impact your
leadership
in future
crisis
events?
How did it
impact the
trust you
have in your
organization
?
Organization –
Organizational
Models Trust
What resources,
if any, does
your
organization
provide you to
prepare for
crisis?
How does
funding
impact your
ability to
prepare for
a crisis? Do
you have
the financial
resources to
adequately
plan? Why
or why not?
3 Organization –
Organizational
Setting Prepare
Opinion
What are the
most important
resources you
need during a
crisis to
successfully
lead through it?

3 Organization –
Organizational
Setting Resources
During Crisis
Opinion
How does your
organization
provide you
those resources,
if at all?

3 Organization –
Organizational
Setting Resources
During Crisis
Opinion
Is there anything
I did not cover
that you feel is
important to
N/A N/A N/A N/A

146
Interview
questions
Potential
probes
RQ
addressed
Key concept
addressed
Q type (Patton)
know regarding
what impacts
your ability to
lead in times of
crisis?
Are there any
documents you
can provide and
share that
would be
helpful in
elaborating on
what we’ve
discussed
today?
N/A N/A N/A N/A

Conclusion to the Interview:

This is the conclusion of the interview. I want to thank you for your time in participating in this
study. The responses you provided will help analyze leadership during times of crisis
management to help leaders successfully manage crisis events in the future. As discussed prior
to the interview, your responses will remain confidential and you will only be identified in the
study as a numbered participant. Please feel free to contact me with any additional questions and
again, I appreciate your time. Thank you.

147
Appendix B: Document Analysis Protocol

The documents that will be analyzed for this study include the following:
1. Memos from GCA senior leaders
2. Emails from GCA senior leaders
3. Internal GCA web portal noted as “Leader Tool Kit”
Memos from GCA senior leaders
1. Do the memos refer to any past crisis and lessons learned? (RQ2; Metacognitive)
2. Do the memos outline organizational resources and influences regarding the crisis? (RQ3;
Organizational Models)
3. Do the memos clearly communicate the information intended? (RQ1; K-D)
Emails from GCA senior leaders
1. What resources were senior leaders requesting from the organization? (RQ3; Organizational
Settings)
2. Are the emails communicating the intended message clearly and concise? (RQ1; K-D)
3. Do the emails identify any knowledge of crisis principles or theories from leaders? (RQ1;
Knowledge Conceptual)
Leader Tool Kit
1. Does the tool kit provide the necessary resources for leaders to navigate the crisis? (RQ3;
Organizational Setting)
2. Is the tool kit easy to understand and navigate to get the correct answers? (RQ1; K-D)
3. Does the tool kit provide the ability to quickly find and resolve a concern quickly? (RQ3;
Organizational Setting)

148
Appendix C: Informed Consent Form
University of Southern California

INFORMATION SHEET FOR EXEMPT RESEARCH

STUDY TITLE: Leadership in Times of Crisis Management: An Analyzation for Success

PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR:
David J. Needham
djneedha@usc.edu
516-782-8592

Faculty Advisor
Jennifer L. Phillips, DLS
jlp62386@usc.edu
662-312-7367

You are invited to participate in a research study. Your participation is voluntary. This document
explains information about this study. You should ask questions about anything that is unclear to
you.

PURPOSE
The purpose of this study is to understand leadership during times of crisis management. I hope
to learn the competencies and organizational supports needed to successfully lead during times
of crisis. You are invited as a possible participant because you are a leader in the aviation
industry for more than five years, hold the General Manager title or above, been in your
leadership position for more than two years, have a minimum of 25 employees reporting to you
directly or indirectly, and have been in your leadership position during the COVID-19 pandemic.

PARTICIPANT INVOLVEMENT
As a participant, you will be asked to participate in an interview focusing on your experience,
thoughts, beliefs, views, and understanding of crisis and leadership in times of crisis. The
interview is expected to last approximately 60 minutes. The interview will be conducted virtually
and all responses will be kept confidential. The study is expected to be completed no later than
December 31, 2021, and your participation is expected to last approximately two to three
months. In addition to voluntary participation in the interview, you will be asked to review the
transcript of the interview for accuracy and intent if you choose to participate in the interview.
Interviews will be video recorded through the Zoom platform and will be kept secure.
Participants can also elect not to be recorded and continue with their participation. However,

149
there will be no transcript to review but the participant will be asked to review the field notes
from the interview.

PAYMENT/COMPENSATION FOR PARTICIPATION

You will not be compensated for your participation. There is no cost to you for your participation
other than the time it takes to participate in the requested interview.

CONFIDENTIALITY
The members of the research team and the University of Southern California Institutional
Review Board (IRB) may access the data. The IRB reviews and monitors research studies to
protect the rights and welfare of research subjects.

When the results of the research are published or discussed in conferences, no identifiable
information will be used.

The interview recording will be kept password protected on Zoom limited to being accessed by
the researcher. The field notes and transcripts will be kept in a filing cabinet in a locked room
limited to being accessed by the researcher. The transcripts will be referred to by a numbered
participant only. Once the research is completed and the data is no longer needed it will be
destroyed. The data will not be kept past December 31, 2022.

The Zoom interview recording will take place during the interview. The participant has the right
to review the recording and edit the recordings or transcripts. The researcher will have access to
the recording. Additionally, the researcher may have a transcriber complete the transcripts. The
transcriber, in this case, would have access to the recording as well. The video recording will be
erased once the transcript has been completed and reviewed and approved by the participant. In
the transcript and in the study, the participant will be referred to as a numbered participant only.

INVESTIGATOR CONTACT INFORMATION
If you have any questions about this study, please contact David J. Needham at
djneedha@usc.edu or 516-782-8592.

IRB CONTACT INFORMATION
If you have any questions about your rights as a research participant, please contact the
University of Southern California Institutional Review Board at (323) 442-0114 or email
irb@usc.edu.

150
Appendix D: Sample Dashboard Tracking Implementation

Figure D1
Sample of Level 3 Tracking
Action/Result Target Actual Previous Month Rating
Senior leaders
completed
trainings with
role play and
simulations
100% 20.0% 15.4%

Number of job
aid
informational
meetings held
100% 10.0% 7.7%

Number of
updates
provided
100% 40.0% 20.2%
☺

151

Appendix E: Immediate Evaluation Form
Figure E1
Immediate Evaluation Form Example

Note. From Kirkpatrick’s Four Levels of Training Evaluation, by J. D. Kirkpatrick and W. K.
Kirkpatrick, 2016, ATD Press.

152
Appendix F: Delayed Evaluation Form

Figure F1
Delayed Evaluation Form Example

Note. From Kirkpatrick’s Four Levels of Training Evaluation, by J. D. Kirkpatrick and W. K.
Kirkpatrick, 2016, ATD Press.

Abstract (if available)

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

Executive succession planning: a study of employee competency development

PDF

Exploring the experience of acquired employees within an organization following acquisition

PDF

Mentoring as a capability development tool to increase gender balance on leadership teams: an innovation study

PDF

Employee standardization for interchangeability across states: an improvement study

PDF

Optimizing leadership and strategy to develop an expenditure-reduction plan: an improvement study

PDF

The role of organizational leaders in creating sustainable diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives in the workplace

PDF

The development of change leadership skills in aspiring community college leaders

PDF

Where are they? The underrepresentation of African or Black American senior executives in the Department of Defense

PDF

Transformation of business models in terrestrial TV broadcasters in South Korea

PDF

Senior managers maintaining employee engagement during a crisis: analyzing success and opportunity

PDF

Women in executive leadership: a study of the gender diversity gap

PDF

The pursuit of anti-racism in university theater

PDF

Taking the pulse on accountability: an innovation study

PDF

Leadership in an age of technology disruption: an evaluation study

PDF

Lean construction through craftspeople engagement: an evaluation study

PDF

Emotional intelligence self-perceptions in non-clinical leaders: an examination into a healthcare organization

PDF

Factors influencing first-term naval aviator career continuation: a gap analysis

PDF

Cultivating culturally competent educators

PDF

Consultants leverage organizational change for successful adoption of agile methods in government organizations

PDF

Addressing physician burnout: is there a relationship with leadership behaviors?

Asset Metadata

Creator Needham, David J. (author)

Core Title Leadership in times of crisis management: an analyzation for success

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Organizational Change and Leadership (On Line)

Degree Conferral Date 2021-12

Publication Date 12/13/2021

Defense Date 11/16/2021

Publisher University of Southern California (original), University of Southern California. Libraries (digital)

Tag Aviation,competencies,Crisis,Knowledge,leadership,Motivation,OAI-PMH Harvest,organization,organizational performance

Format application/pdf (imt)

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor Phillips, Jennifer (committee chair), Canny, Eric (committee member), Donato, Adrian (committee member)

Creator Email david.john.needham@gmail.com,djneedha@usc.edu

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-oUC18367100

Unique identifier UC18367100

Legacy Identifier etd-NeedhamDav-10298

Document Type Dissertation

Format application/pdf (imt)

Rights Needham, David J.

Type texts

Source 20211216-wayne-usctheses-batch-904-nissen (batch), University of Southern California (contributing entity), University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses (collection)

Access Conditions The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the author, as the original true and official version of the work, but does not grant the reader permission to use the work if the desired use is covered by copyright. It is the author, as rights holder, who must provide use permission if such use is covered by copyright. The original signature page accompanying the original submission of the work to the USC Libraries is retained by the USC Libraries and a copy of it may be obtained by authorized requesters contacting the repository e-mail address given.

Repository Name University of Southern California Digital Library

Repository Location USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus MC 2810, 3434 South Grand Avenue, 2nd Floor, Los Angeles, California 90089-2810, USA

Repository Email cisadmin@lib.usc.edu