Crisis Management: Leading vs. Managing

Unfolding Over Time: Each crisis has a beginning, middle, and end.
- Past: Relative stability and predictability.
- Present: Chaos and disruption.
- Future: Will vary by organization; may be resilient or catastrophic.

Management: Focus on immediate needs; allocate resources; make quick decisions.
Leadership: Guide organizations toward the best future outcomes; anticipate obstacles beyond the immediate situation.

Taking a Narrow View
- Human Instinct: Focus narrows when facing a threat, hindering broader analysis.
- Meta-Leadership: Cultivating a holistic view of challenges and opportunities; example from Admiral Peter Neffenger during the Deepwater Horizon spill.
Getting Seduced by Managing
- Thrill of Action: Crisis management can feel exciting, leading to over-involvement in operations instead of strategic foresight.
- Long View: Leaders must anticipate future changes rather than focus solely on current issues; trust subordinates to make decisions.
Over-centralizing the Response
- Control vs. Order: Attempts to oversee every detail can stifle responsiveness; leaders should delegate decision-making and focus on establishing guiding principles.
- Example: Deval Patrick's leadership during the Boston Marathon bombings involved facilitating, not controlling, operations.
Forgetting Human Factors
- People vs. Metrics: Crises influence people, and leaders should prioritize human elements over metrics like revenue.
- Common Mission: A clear mission fosters unity and purpose; example from James Dunne post-9/11 - balancing business goals with personal care for employees.

Overlapping Circles: At the crisis onset, leading and managing overlap; as time progresses, they diverge.
Interdependence: Present management must be balanced with future leadership focus; effective leaders ensure management functions adequately while focusing on leading into the future.