At the bottom of this page, the results of the research are outlined in reverse chronological order. Some commercially sensitive aspects of the diagnostic instrument are not shown on this website.

A short introduction to the "Psychology in Crisis Management" is available here.

What does the diagnostic instrument measure?

The instrument measures three factors that represent distinct clusters of behaviours and attitudes that are important to be demonstrated by a crisis manager or crisis leader. In essense, these factors represent the organisational crisis management capability from a behavioural and attitudinal perspective.














Why do we need this diagnostic assessment?

What are the benefits?

• Quick identification of core psychological enablers of and barriers to effective crisis management.
• Confidential, non-threatening diagnostic for individuals as a precursor for personal development measures.
• Assessment of organisational crisis management capability by combining individual scores

And what are the practical applications?

• Assessment at times of relative stability to identify the organisation’s potential weaknesses in terms of crisis management and leadership capability.
• Development of management personnel into roles with significant ‘trouble-shooting’ responsibility.
• Precursor for executive education and coaching.
• Succession planning for senior management and board members

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Since 2013: In early 2013, the results were discussed with an expert panel. Subsequently, some additional confirmation factor analyses were provide greater assurance that the most stable structural model was in fact selected - and other, less stable rival models dismissed. The outcome was again subjected to external examination,and the Researcher was awarded a PhD for this work in 2014. The research, especically the efforts to conduct a large-scale G-Study, in different countries and organisational contexts, is ongoing.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Third and fourth Quarter 2012: The statistical results and the rigorous instrument development process as such provided strong support for the validity of the psychological construct "organisational trust behaviour in crisis management".

A series of analytical procedures and statistical tests on demographic variables (gender, education, and age) as well as organisational variables (hierarchical position, work experience, and management experience) supported seven out of eight research hypotheses. 

- Gender and education were found to have no significant association with the test item/factor scores. 

- In contrast, age, hierarchy, and work/management experience were significant predictors for the test items/factors (measuring managerial attitudes and behaviours) and the control scales (measuring managerial skills and competencies and existing organisational trust). 

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Second Quarter 2012: The statistical results and the emerging factor solution were interpreted substantively, in order to ensure that the results make sense in the "real world". The items with salient loadings on the factors represented each a common theme and could explain coherently the psychological meaning/substance of the respective factor. 

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

First Quarter 2012: The analytical procedures comprised descriptive and inferential statistics. Statistical significance was determined at the 95% level. Whilst most research hypotheses were supported, some require further research into the underlying construct.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

The empirical data for a selection of 80 items with a development sample of 377 US managers in the fourth quarter of 2011 were subjected to exploratory factor analysis, with various rotational methods and factor extraction techniques. Parallel analysis with real-data perputations supported the decision as to how many factors to retain. Ultimately, a four-factor solution emerged that was successfully tested against the classical Thurstonian criteria of "Simple Structure".

The demographic characteristics of the development sample were as follows:

Gender mix: 55% male, 44% female, 1% no data
Age profile: average age 40.2 years (SD 11.0)
Education: 79% at least four-year college education, with 23% Masters or higher degrees
Hierarchy: 20% top management, 69% middle management, 11% no management responsibility
Work experience: average 17.1 years (SD 10.9)
Management experience: average 9.0 years (SD 6.9)

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

As of September 2011, a large set of discrete items was been developed, all which are linked to one or more specific responses from the focus group/survey results. A rigourous quality assurance is an integral part of this process. A further round of IRA studies confirmed the match of individual items with the respective behavioural category, again, with all results being statistically highly significant (p<.0001).

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Update August 2011:

The Inter-Rater Agreement (IRA) study showed satisfactory results. The two groups of independent judges confirmed the high-level behavioural categories, at a statistically highly significant level (average Kappa of 0.4, p<.0001) with upper bounds of the 95% confidence interval of up to 0.7. The results provided a robust foundation for the further development and validation of discrete items for the future psychometric instrument.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Update June 2011:

In the third, fourth and fifth iteration, the following seven high level behavioural categories were established. These categories are currently being validated by a group of independent, experienced managers and leaders.

** TRRM and DMPC were subsequently merged into DMRC (Decision-Making under Resource Constraints)

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Update May 2011:
Important Management and Leadership Behaviour in Crisis

In the first and second iteration of the content analysis, the following 14 preliminary categories were established: