Ambiguity and Freedom of Dissent in Post-Incident Discussion

Clifton Scott; Joseph A. Allen; Daniel L. Bonilla; Benjamin E. Baran; Dave Murphy

doi:10.1177/0021943613497054

Ambiguity and Freedom of Dissent in Post-Incident Discussion

Clifton Scott, Joseph A. Allen, Daniel L. Bonilla, Benjamin E. Baran, Dave Murphy

Psychology

Research output: Contribution to journal › Review article › peer-review

28 Scopus citations

Abstract

The after-action review (AAR) is a discussion technique some high-reliability organizations employ to encourage learning via collective retrospection. AARs are an effective communication tool for promoting reliability if they are held regularly. One way to encourage frequent AARs is to increase participants' satisfaction with these meetings. This study examined the impact of post-incident, pre-discussion ambiguity and freedom of dissent on participant satisfaction with AARs. Firefighters (N = 119) completed a survey on their most recent AAR. As predicted, the level of post-incident, pre-discussion ambiguity was negatively related to AAR satisfaction. Freedom of dissent, however, attenuated the negative influence of ambiguity on AAR satisfaction.

Original language	English (US)
Pages (from-to)	383-402
Number of pages	20
Journal	Journal of Business Communication
Volume	50
Issue number	4
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1177/0021943613497054
State	Published - Oct 2013

Keywords

after-action reviews
ambiguity
meeting satisfaction
organizational dissent
sensemaking

ASJC Scopus subject areas

Business, Management and Accounting (miscellaneous)
Economics, Econometrics and Finance (miscellaneous)

Access to Document

10.1177/0021943613497054

Cite this

@article{6082f386dcc64d9ea4ea38c0ba89b1f4,

title = "Ambiguity and Freedom of Dissent in Post-Incident Discussion",

abstract = "The after-action review (AAR) is a discussion technique some high-reliability organizations employ to encourage learning via collective retrospection. AARs are an effective communication tool for promoting reliability if they are held regularly. One way to encourage frequent AARs is to increase participants' satisfaction with these meetings. This study examined the impact of post-incident, pre-discussion ambiguity and freedom of dissent on participant satisfaction with AARs. Firefighters (N = 119) completed a survey on their most recent AAR. As predicted, the level of post-incident, pre-discussion ambiguity was negatively related to AAR satisfaction. Freedom of dissent, however, attenuated the negative influence of ambiguity on AAR satisfaction.",

keywords = "after-action reviews, ambiguity, meeting satisfaction, organizational dissent, sensemaking",

author = "Clifton Scott and Allen, {Joseph A.} and Bonilla, {Daniel L.} and Baran, {Benjamin E.} and Dave Murphy",

year = "2013",

month = oct,

doi = "10.1177/0021943613497054",

language = "English (US)",

volume = "50",

pages = "383--402",

journal = "Journal of Business Communication",

issn = "0021-9436",

publisher = "SAGE Publications Inc.",

number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Ambiguity and Freedom of Dissent in Post-Incident Discussion

AU - Scott, Clifton

AU - Allen, Joseph A.

AU - Bonilla, Daniel L.

AU - Baran, Benjamin E.

AU - Murphy, Dave

PY - 2013/10

Y1 - 2013/10

N2 - The after-action review (AAR) is a discussion technique some high-reliability organizations employ to encourage learning via collective retrospection. AARs are an effective communication tool for promoting reliability if they are held regularly. One way to encourage frequent AARs is to increase participants' satisfaction with these meetings. This study examined the impact of post-incident, pre-discussion ambiguity and freedom of dissent on participant satisfaction with AARs. Firefighters (N = 119) completed a survey on their most recent AAR. As predicted, the level of post-incident, pre-discussion ambiguity was negatively related to AAR satisfaction. Freedom of dissent, however, attenuated the negative influence of ambiguity on AAR satisfaction.

AB - The after-action review (AAR) is a discussion technique some high-reliability organizations employ to encourage learning via collective retrospection. AARs are an effective communication tool for promoting reliability if they are held regularly. One way to encourage frequent AARs is to increase participants' satisfaction with these meetings. This study examined the impact of post-incident, pre-discussion ambiguity and freedom of dissent on participant satisfaction with AARs. Firefighters (N = 119) completed a survey on their most recent AAR. As predicted, the level of post-incident, pre-discussion ambiguity was negatively related to AAR satisfaction. Freedom of dissent, however, attenuated the negative influence of ambiguity on AAR satisfaction.

KW - after-action reviews

KW - ambiguity

KW - meeting satisfaction

KW - organizational dissent

KW - sensemaking

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84883547618&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84883547618&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1177/0021943613497054

DO - 10.1177/0021943613497054

M3 - Review article

AN - SCOPUS:84883547618

SN - 0021-9436

VL - 50

SP - 383

EP - 402

JO - Journal of Business Communication

JF - Journal of Business Communication

IS - 4

ER -

Ambiguity and Freedom of Dissent in Post-Incident Discussion

Abstract

Keywords

ASJC Scopus subject areas

Access to Document

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Cite this