Crisis management: what a successful exercise does not prove
Crisis exercises often produce a finding of compliance: the planned steps were completed. The useful management question is different: how can we check whether the team can apply what it has learned when the next disruption does not resemble the rehearsed scenario?
What the literature establishes
Nina Keith and Michael Frese (2008, Journal of Applied Psychology) demonstrate, in a meta-analysis, the value of training that allows mistakes and encourages participants to learn from them. Their findings are particularly relevant to adaptive transfer, when the task to be performed differs from the one practised. They suggest that smooth execution during training should not be confused with the ability to succeed in a new situation.
Debriefing as a learning process
Scott I. Tannenbaum and Christopher P. Cerasoli (2013, Human Factors) establish, through a meta-analysis, that debriefs can improve individual and team performance. A structured review of action therefore involves more than gathering participants’ impressions. In a crisis exercise, this means examining differences between expected and observed effects, then identifying what should be tested differently.
The premature conclusion
It would be tempting to conclude that a good exercise must necessarily make the team fail. These studies justify neither difficulty for its own sake nor publicly exposing participants’ shortcomings. The aim is to make mistakes open to analysis in a safe setting, without turning the exercise into a trap or relaxing safety requirements. (our executive and employee training programmes)
What the evidence does not demonstrate
These meta-analyses cover varied training and performance settings, not industrial crises alone. They do not demonstrate that a debrief or a successful exercise guarantees continuity in precision manufacturing. This reveals a limitation of common assessment practice: repeating the same scenario may measure its memorisation rather than the transfer of learning.
A practical check in Neuchâtel
As part of SHR’s crisis management programme, a Neuchâtel company in microtechnology, watchmaking or precision microelectronics could simulate a loss of batch traceability without affecting actual production. Following the debrief, a second exercise would introduce an unrehearsed variation, such as the usual traceability register being unavailable. The measure would be the proportion of simulated batches whose status — blocked or eligible for release — is correctly justified by accessible evidence, using an assessment rubric established before the exercises. Comparing this result across the two scenarios, while retaining the supporting evidence, would provide a verifiable indication of transfer, not a guarantee of effective management of a real crisis. To go further: explore the Crisis Management training in Neuchâtel in the canton of Neuchâtel, or browse our executive and employee training programmes in Switzerland.
In pictures: Crisis Management in Neuchâtel
- crisis management
- Neuchâtel
- research
- training neuchâtel