Advertisement

Leading After-Action Reviews among Emergency Responder Teams: how Perceptions of Leader Behaviors Relate to Proximal and Distal Outcomes

  • Joseph A. AllenEmail author
  • Roni Reiter-Palmon
  • Kelly A. Prange
  • Marissa L. Shuffler
  • Elliott Barber
Original Research Article

Abstract

Safety concerns are a critical issue for individuals and teams in high reliability organizations (HROs). As HROs with positive safety climates often have fewer accidents and injuries, understanding which approaches can improve safety climate is paramount. The purpose of the current study was to investigate how leaders’ behavior in after-action reviews (AARs) relates to AAR quality, perceptions of team safety climate, and perceptions of organizational safety climate. We used a sample (N = 89) of firefighters to test the mediation model. Results indicated that AAR leader behaviors focusing on consideration and learning promote positive perceptions of team and organizational safety climate through AAR meeting quality.

Keywords

After-action reviews Leader behavior Firefighting Emergency responders Safety norms 

Notes

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of Interest Statement

On behalf of all authors, the corresponding author states that there is no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Allen, J. A., Baran, B. E., & Scott, C. W. (2010). After-action reviews: A venue for the promotion of safety climate. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 42, 750–757.Google Scholar
  2. Allen, J. A., & Rogelberg, S. G. (2013). Manager-led group meetings: A context for promoting employee engagement. Group & Organization Management, 38, 543–569.Google Scholar
  3. Allen, J. A., Lehmann-Willenbrock, N., & Rogelberg, S. G. (2015). The Cambridge handbook of meeting science. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  4. Allen, J. A., Reiter-Palmon, R., Crowe, J., & Scott, C. (2018). Debriefs: Teams learning from doing in context. American Psychologist, 73, 504–516.  https://doi.org/10.1037/amp0000246.Google Scholar
  5. Alvesson, M. (2011). Leadership and Organizational Culture. In A. Bryman, D. Collinson, K. Grint, B. Jackson, and M. Uhl-Bien (Eds.), The SAGE Handbook of Leadership, 151–164.Google Scholar
  6. Barton, M. A., & Sutcliffe, K. M. (2009). Overcoming dysfunctional momentum: Organizational safety as a social achievement. Human Relations, 62, 1327–1356.Google Scholar
  7. Bass, B. M., & Bass, R. (2009). The Bass handbook of leadership: Theory, research, and managerial applications. New York: Simon & Schuster.Google Scholar
  8. Bennett, R. J. (1998). Perceived powerlessness as a cause of employee deviance. Dysfunctional Behavior in Organizations: Violent and Deviant Behavior, 23, 221–239.Google Scholar
  9. Briggs, R. O., Reinig, B. A., & de Vreede, G.-J. (2006). Meeting satisfaction for technology-supported groups: An empirical validation of a goal-attainment model. Small Group Research, 37, 585–611.Google Scholar
  10. Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2017). National census of fatal occupational injuries in 2016. News Release BLS USDOL. Retrieved from https://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/cfoi.pdf. Accessed 20 Aug 2018.
  11. Burke, C. S., Stagl, K. C., Klein, C., Goodwin, G. F., Salas, E., & Halpin, S. M. (2006). What type of leadership behaviors are functional in teams? A meta-analysis. The Leadership Quarterly, 17, 288–307.Google Scholar
  12. Busby, J. S. (1999). The effective of collective retrospection as a mechanism of organizational learning. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 35, 109–129.Google Scholar
  13. Christian, M. S., Bradley, J. C., Wallace, J. C., & Burke, M. J. (2009). Workplace safety: A meta-analysis of the roles of person and situation factors. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94, 1103–1127.Google Scholar
  14. Clarke, S. (2006). The relationship between safety climate and safety performance: A meta-analytic review. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 11(4), 315–327.Google Scholar
  15. Clarke, S. (2010). An integrative model of safety climate: Linking psychological climate and work attitudes to individual safety outcomes using meta-analysis. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 83(3), 553–578.Google Scholar
  16. Cohen, M. A., Rogelberg, S. G., Allen, J. A., & Luong, A. (2011). Meeting design characteristics and attendee perceptions of staff/team meeting quality. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice, 15, 90–119.Google Scholar
  17. Crowe, J., Allen, J. A., Scott, C., & Harms, M. (2016). After-action reviews: Influencing safety through practice. Research presented at the eleventh annual INGroup conference, July 14–16, 2016, Helsinki.Google Scholar
  18. Crowe, J., Allen, J. A., Scott, C., & Harms, M. (2017). After-action reviews: The good behavior, the bad behavior, and why we should care. Safety Science, 96, 84–92.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2017.03.006.Google Scholar
  19. Dunn, A. M., Scott, C., Allen, J. A., & Bonilla, D. (2016). Quantity and quality: Increasing safety norms through after action reviews. Human Relations, 69, 1209–1232.Google Scholar
  20. Eddy, E. R., Tannenbaum, S. I., & Mathieu, J. E. (2013). Helping teams to help themselves: Comparing two team-led debriefing methods. Personnel Psychology, 66, 975–1008.  https://doi.org/10.1111/peps.12041.Google Scholar
  21. Eisenberger, R., Huntington, R., Hutchison, S., & Sowa, D. (1986). Perceived organizational support. Journal of Applied Psychology, 71(3), 500–507.Google Scholar
  22. Ellis, S., & Davidi, I. (2005). After-event reviews: Drawing lessons from successful and failed experience. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90, 857–864.Google Scholar
  23. Ellis, S., Mendel, R., & Nir, M. (2006). Learning from successful and failed experience: The moderating role of kind of after-event review. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91, 669–673.Google Scholar
  24. Fahy, R. F., LeBlanc, P. R., & Molis, J. L. (2018). Firefighter fatalities in the United States – 2017. National Fire Protection Association Report. Retrieved from https://www.nfpa.org/-/media/Files/News-and-Research/Fire-statistics/Fire-service/osFFF.pdf. Accessed 20 Aug 2018.
  25. Foti, R., Knee, R., & Backert, R. (2008). Multi-level implications of framing leadership perceptions as a dynamic process. The Leadership Quarterly, 19, 178–194.Google Scholar
  26. Hayes, A. F. (2017). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis second edition: A regression-based approach. Second Edition. New York: Guilford Publications.Google Scholar
  27. Haynes, H. J. G., & Molis, J. L. (2016). United States firefighter injuries – 2016. National Fire Protection Association Report. Retrieved from https://www.nfpa.org/-/media/Files/News-and-Research/Fire-statistics/Fire-service/osFFInjuries.pdf. Accessed 20 Aug 2018.
  28. Haynes, H. J. G., & Stein, G. P. (2017). U.S. Fire Department Profile - 2015. National Fire Protection Association Report. Retrieved from https://www.nfpa.org/-/media/Files/News-and-Research/Fire-statistics-and-reports/Emergency-responders/osfdprofile.pdf. Accessed 6 Dec 2018.
  29. Hofmann, D. A., & Stetzer, A. (1996). A cross-level investigation of factors influencing unsafe behaviors and accidents. Personnel Psychology, 49, 307–339.Google Scholar
  30. Hofmann, D. A., & Stetzer, A. (1998). The role of safety climate and communication in accident interpretation: Implications for learning from negative events. Academy of Management Journal, 41, 644–657.Google Scholar
  31. Lee, J., Huang, Y., Sinclair, R. R., & Cheung, J. H. (in press). Outcomes of safety climate in trucking: A longitudinal framework. Journal of Business and Psychology. Google Scholar
  32. Lehmann-Willenbrock, N., Lei, Z., & Kauffeld, S. (2012). Appreciating age diversity and German nurse well-being and commitment: Co-worker trust as the mediator. Nursing & Health Sciences, 14, 213–220.Google Scholar
  33. Lord, R. G., & Dinh, J. E. (2014). What have we learned that is critical in understanding leadership perceptions and leader-performance relations? Industrial and Organizational Psychology: Perspectives on Science and Practice, 7, 158–177.Google Scholar
  34. MacCallum, R. C., Widaman, K. F., Zhang, S., & Hong, S. (1999). Sample size in factor analysis. Psychological Methods, 4, 84–99.Google Scholar
  35. Maitlis, S., & Sonenshein, S. (1988). Sensemaking in crisis and change: Inspiration and insights from Weick. Journal of Management Studies, 47, 551–580.Google Scholar
  36. McGrath, J. E. (1962). The influence of positive interpersonal relations on adjustment and effectiveness in rifle teams. The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 65, 365–375.Google Scholar
  37. Morgeson, F. P., DeRue, S., & Karam, E. P. (2010). Leadership in teams: A functional approach to understanding leadership structures and processes. Journal of Management, 36, 5–39.  https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206309347376.Google Scholar
  38. Odermatt, I., König, C. J., Kleinmann, M., Nussbaumer, R., Rosenbaum, A., Olien, J. L., & Rogelberg, S. G. (2016). On leading meetings linking meeting outcomes to leadership styles. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 24, 189–200.  https://doi.org/10.1177/1548051816655992.
  39. Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J.-Y., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88, 879–903.Google Scholar
  40. Provost, S. M., Lanham, H. J., Leykum, L. K., McDaniel, R. R., Jr., & Pugh, J. (2015). Health care huddles: Managing complexity to achieve high reliability. Health Care Management Review, 40, 2–12.Google Scholar
  41. Probst, T. M., & Estrada, A. X. (2010). Accident under-reporting among employees: Testing the moderating influence of psychological safety climate and supervisor enforcement of safety practices. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 42, 1438–1444.Google Scholar
  42. Ravn, I. (2013). A folk theory of meetings-and beyond. European Business Review, 25, 163–173.Google Scholar
  43. Reichard, A. A., & Jackson, L. L. (2010). Occupational injuries among emergency responders. American Journal of Industrial Medicine, 53, 1–11.Google Scholar
  44. Reiter-Palmon, R., Kennel, V., Allen, J. A., Jones, K. J., & Skinner, A. M. (2015). Naturalistic decision making in after-action review meetings: The implementation of and learning from post-fall huddles. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 88, 322–340.Google Scholar
  45. Roberts, K. H. (1990). Managing high reliability organizations. California Management Review, 32, 101–113.Google Scholar
  46. Rogelberg, S. G., Allen, J. A., Shanock, L., Scott, C., & Shuffler, M. (2010). Employee satisfaction with meetings: A contemporary facet of job satisfaction. Human Resource Management, 49, 149–172.Google Scholar
  47. Rudolph, J. W., Simon, F. B., Raemer, D. B., & Eppich, W. J. (2008). Debriefing as formative assessment: Closing performance gaps in medical education. Academic Emergency Medicine, 15, 1010–1016.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1553-2712.2008.00248.x.Google Scholar
  48. Rudolph, J. W., Simon, R., Rivard, P., Dufresne, R. L., & Raemer, D. B. (2007). Debriefing with good judgment: Combining rigorous feedback with genuine inquiry. Anesthesiology Clinics, 25, 361–376.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anclin.2007.03.007.Google Scholar
  49. Schein, E. H. (2010). Organizational culture and leadership (Vol. 2). Hoboken: John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
  50. Schwartzman, H. B. (1989). The meeting. In The Meeting, 309–314. Springer: US.Google Scholar
  51. Scott, C., Allen, J. A., Bonilla, D. L., Baran, B. E., & Murphy, D. (2013). Ambiguity and freedom of dissent in post-incident discussion. Journal of Business Communication, 50, 383–402.Google Scholar
  52. Singer, S., Lin, S., Falwell, A., Gaba, D., & Baker, L. (2009). Relationship of safety climate and safety performance in hospitals. Health Research and Educational Trust, 44, 399–420.Google Scholar
  53. Spector, P. E., Van Katwyk, P. T., Brannick, M. T., & Chen, P. Y. (1997). When two factors don’t reflect two constructs: How item characteristics can produce artifactual factors. Journal of Management, 23(5), 659–677.Google Scholar
  54. Tannenbaum, S. I., & Cerasoli, C. P. (2013). Do team and individual debriefs enhance performance? A meta-analysis. The Journal of Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 55, 231–245.Google Scholar
  55. Weick, K. E., & Roberts, K. H. (1993). Collective mind in organizations: Heedful interrelating on flight decks. Administrative Science Quarterly, 38, 357–381.Google Scholar
  56. Weick, K. E., Sutcliffe, K. M., & Obstfeld, D. (2008). Organizing for high reliability: Processes of collective mindfulness. Crisis Management, 3, 81–123.Google Scholar
  57. Yoerger, M., Crowe, J., & Allen, J. A. (2015). Participate or else!: The effect of participation in decision-making in meetings on employee engagement. Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research, 67, 65–80.  https://doi.org/10.1037/cpb0000029.Google Scholar
  58. Yoerger, M., Jones, J., Allen, J. A., & Crowe, J. (2017). Meeting madness: Counterproductive meeting behaviors and personality traits. International Journal of Management Practice, 10(3), 203–223.  https://doi.org/10.1504/IJMP.2017.10003807.Google Scholar
  59. Yong, A. G., & Pearce, S. (2013). A beginner’s guide to factor analysis: Focusing on exploratory factor analysis. Tutorials in Quantitative Methods for Psychology, 9(2), 79–94.Google Scholar
  60. Zaccaro, S. J., Heinen, B., & Shuffler, M. (2009). Team leadership and team effectiveness. In E. Salas, G. F. Goodwin, & C. S. Burke (Eds.), Team effectiveness in complex organizations: Cross-disciplinary perspectives and approaches (pp. 83–111). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  61. Zaccaro, S. J., & DeChurch, L. A. (2012). Leadership forms and functions in multiteam systems. In S. J. Zaccaro, M. A. Marks, & L. A. DeChurch (Eds.), Multiteam systems: An organization form for dynamic and complex environments (pp. 253–288). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  62. Zohar, D. (2000). A group-level model of safety climate: Testing the effect of group climate on microaccidents in manufacturing jobs. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85, 587–596.Google Scholar
  63. Zohar, D., & Luria, G. (2005). A multilevel model of safety climate: Cross-level relationships between organization and group-level climates. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90, 616–628.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of PsychologyUniversity of Nebraska at OmahaOmahaUSA
  2. 2.Psychology DepartmentClemson UniversityClemsonUSA

Personalised recommendations