We have not lived long enough: Sensemaking and learning from bushfire in Australia Graham Dwyer Submitted in total fulfilment of the requirements of the degree of Doctor of Philosophy February 2017 Department of Management and Marketing The University of Melbourne Abstract Why did the bushfires of 7 February 2009 in Victoria take so many lives? Why were those bushfires so extreme, so feral, so catastrophic, so devastating? What can be done to ensure that so many lives are not lost, that so much devastation is not caused, in such bushfires in the future? (Parliament of Victoria, Opening Remarks, Chair of the Victorian Bushfires Royal Commission, 2009: 1) Victoria, Australia, is arguably the most fire-prone area in the world. Increasingly, with climate change, atmospheric scientists claim that we are experiencing longer drought periods, higher wind speeds and warmer temperatures which are giving rise to a greater bushfire threat in an already extremely bushfire-prone environment. Given such circumstances, it is likely that Victoria’s emergency management organisations will increasingly find themselves responding to bushfires characterised as complex, harmful and rare. Therefore, my study seeks to understand how emergency management organisations make sense of and learn from bushfires in Victoria so that they can be better prepared for bushfires in the future. To do so, I focus on the Royal Commission, which followed the “Black Saturday” bushfires, commonly referred to as Australia’s worst ever natural disaster. My study comprises a qualitative and interpretive methodology to explore how emergency management organisations implement recommendations emanating from public inquiries, and the role that sensemaking plays in this. In addition, given the devastating impact that disasters such as bushfires can have, I also explore how emotions influence the sensemaking process associated with implementing recommendations in such organisations. Through this dual-focused approach I build new theory in relation to the ways in which individuals in organisations make sense of and learn from public inquiry recommendations after disasters, while highlighting the role of both negative and positive emotions in this process. 2 Declaration of Originality This is to certify that: i. the thesis comprises only my original work ii. due acknowledgement has been made in the text to all other material used iii. the thesis is less than 100,000 words in length, exclusive of tables, maps, bibliographies and appendices. Signed: ____________________ Date: ______________________ 3 Acknowledgments I would like to take this opportunity to thank the following people for their support during the PhD journey: • Professor Cynthia Hardy, University of Melbourne (Supervisor) • Assoc. Prof. Susan Ainsworth, University of Melbourne (Supervisor) • Professor Graham Sewell, University of Melbourne (Supervisor) • Ms. Monique Shears, University of Melbourne • Ms. Denise Simon, University of Melbourne • Ms. Jennifer Decolongon, University of Melbourne • Associate Professor Michael Dowling, Rennes School of Business • Associate Professor Sally Young, University of Melbourne • Mr. Phillip Gardner, University of Melbourne • Mr. John Schauble, Emergency Management Victoria • Dr. Holly Foster, Emergency Management Victoria • Dr. Warren Staples, RMIT University • Ms. Lyndsey Wright, Bushfire & Natural Hazards Co-operative Research Centre • Ms. Sharon Rawlings, Department of Environment, Land Planning & Water I would also like to acknowledge the scholarships I received from the University of Melbourne and the Bushfire & Natural Hazards Co-operative Research Centre while completing this study. 4 Finally, a very special thanks and my deep appreciation to the interviewees from ORG A & ORG B who participated in this study. I am very grateful to each of you for sharing your story and offering my study the enormous wealth of your knowledge and experience. 5 Preface The material pertaining to the pilot study in this thesis has been published in a peer reviewed journal paper and has been appropriately referenced. The author of this thesis was responsible for the ideas in this paper which make a contribution to theory in relation to organisational sensemaking and learning. The author provided more than fifty percent of the content in this paper. The complete published paper is provided in Appendix Five of this thesis. 6 Contents Chapter 1: Introduction ............................................................................................................ 10 1.1 What happens afterwards? ................................................................................................. 12 1.2 Thesis outline ..................................................................................................................... 15 1.3 Contributions ...................................................................................................................... 18 Chapter 2: Literature review .................................................................................................... 22 2.1 What is sensemaking? ........................................................................................................ 24 2.2 Equivocality and sensemaking ........................................................................................... 32 2.3 What happens after disaster and public inquiry sensemaking? ......................................... 37 2.4 Sensemaking and emotion ................................................................................................. 39 2.5 Conclusion ......................................................................................................................... 43 Chapter 3: Research methods ................................................................................................... 45 3.1 Methodology ...................................................................................................................... 46 3.2 Research setting ................................................................................................................. 47 3.3 The pilot study ................................................................................................................... 52 3.4 The main study ................................................................................................................... 56 3.5 Conclusion ......................................................................................................................... 64 Chapter 4: Sensemaking and learning from public inquiries ................................................... 66 4.1 Findings of the pilot study ................................................................................................. 66 4.2 Conclusion ......................................................................................................................... 75 Chapter 5: Sensemaking and learning in emergency management organisations ................... 76 5.1 Recommendation 1: Victoria’s bushfire safety policy ....................................................... 77 5.2 The organisational sensemaking and learning process ...................................................... 80 5.3 Double-loop and reflective learning ................................................................................ 102 5.4 Discussion and conclusions ............................................................................................. 106 Chapter 6: Emotion and sensemaking .................................................................................... 112 6.1 Emotions and the bushfires .............................................................................................. 114 6.2 The Royal Commission .................................................................................................... 122 6.3 Discussion and conclusion ............................................................................................... 137 Chapter 7: Discussion and conclusions .................................................................................. 145 7.1 A model of post-inquiry sensemaking ............................................................................. 148 7.2 Theoretical contributions ................................................................................................. 150 7.3 Limitations and future research ....................................................................................... 165 7.4 Practical contributions ..................................................................................................... 167 7.5 Personal reflection ........................................................................................................... 173 7 References .............................................................................................................................. 178 Appendices ............................................................................................................................. 190 Appendix 1: Ethics Approval ................................................................................................. 190 Appendix 2: Plain Language Statement ................................................................................. 191 Appendix 3: Consent form ..................................................................................................... 193 Appendix 4: Interview schedule ...........................................................................................