Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-gb8f7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-25T08:59:15.713Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The 2010 and 2011 Canterbury earthquakes and organisational learning at the University of Canterbury: Does practice make perfect?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 February 2015

Nigel Healey
Nigel Healey*
Affiliation:
College of Business and Economics, University of Canterbury, Christchurch, New Zealand
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In September 2010 and again in February 2011, the city of Christchurch was rocked by earthquakes of magnitude 7.1 and 6.3 respectively. The second earthquake was shallow and caused extensive damage and loss of life, destroying most of the Central Business District. This paper focuses on recovery management at the University of Canterbury, exploring the extent to which the senior management team learned lessons from the September event which informed the way that the recovery was managed after the February earthquake. It examines the counter-intuitive possibility that successfully dealing with a prior, lesser event, may not necessarily better equip managers to deal with a subsequent, more extreme event.

Keywords

organisational learningadaptiveearthquake recovery managementdisaster managementuniversity
Type
Managing for the Human Spirit – ANZAM Members Reflect on the Christchurch earthquake and Queensland floods
Information
Journal of Management & Organization , Volume 17 , Issue 6: 25th ANZAM Anniversary Edition Remembering 2011: Managing for the Human Spirit , November 2011 , pp. 850 - 856
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press and Australian and New Zealand Academy of Management 2011

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Fine, G. A. (1993). Ten lies of ethnography. Journal of Contemporary Ethnography, 22(3), 267–294.Google Scholar
Flood, R. L. (1999). Rethinking the fifth discipline: Learning within the unknowable. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Kim, D. H. (1993). The link between individual and organizational learning. Sloan Management Review, 35(1), 37–50.Google Scholar
New Zealand Society for Earthquake Engineering (NZSEE). (2011). Christchurch earthquake – An overview. Wellington, New Zealand: Institution of Professional Engineers of New Zealand. Retrieved May 27, 2011, from http://www.ipenz.org.nz/ipenz/forms/pdfs/ChChFactSheets-Overview.pdfGoogle Scholar
Nonaka, I., & Takeuchi, H. (1995). The knowledge creating company. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Reed-Danahay, D. (2002). Turning points and textual strategies in ethnographic writing. Qualitative Studies in Education, 15(4), 421–425.Google Scholar
Seville, E., Hawker, C., & Lyttle, J. (2011). Shaken but not stirred: A university's resilience in the face of adversity – The 4th September 2010 earthquake. Christchurch, New Zealand: University of Canterbury. Retrieved May 27, 2011, from http://www.resorgs.org.nz/pubs/Shaken%20but%20not%20Stirred%20-%20A%20University's%20resilience%20in%20the%20face%20of%20adversity.pdfGoogle Scholar