The paper tested the hypothesis that, in compliance enhancing organizations like the police and the army, a resilience strategy of delegation and flexibility for countering…
Abstract
Purpose
The paper tested the hypothesis that, in compliance enhancing organizations like the police and the army, a resilience strategy of delegation and flexibility for countering external threats might be a better strategy for reducing risk perception among employees than an anticipation strategy of centralization and formalization. The research aim is to provide an empirical model that can help risk exposed and compliance enhancing organizations operating in turbulent environments design optimal organizational solutions.
Design/methodology/approach
Officers in an army and a police organization in Norway were examined. The selection strategy ensured representation from all levels and units. Hierarchical regression analyses were applied to test the hypothesis.
Findings
Data analyses showed that an anticipation strategy increased employees' perception of risk, while a resilience strategy reduced their perception of risk. No significant difference between the two organizations was revealed.
Research limitations/implications
Common method bias may reduce data validity. Police and army units may not be representative for compliance enhancing organizations due to their specific training and culture.
Practical implications
Training, organizing, and leadership concepts should consider the fact that employees in compliance enhancing organizations seem to deal with risk best through delegation and freedom of action.
Originality/value
Few, if any, previous studies have examined how strategies or coping with external threats at the organizational level may affect employees' perception of risk. This paper reports that two well‐known strategies for coping with external threats may influence employees' risk perception in entirely different ways.