This forum joins communication researchers who explore high reliability organizations (HROs) and teams to discuss the communicative foundations of HRO. We argue that organizational communication researchers can make meaningful contributions to present challenges in HRO research. These challenges include (1) HRO’s focus on organizations versus processes of organizing, (2) tensions in defining success and failure to create reliability, and (3) the privileging of rational thought patterns and communication over emotional and care-centered communication. The authors in this forum push boundaries around organization types, consider overlooked and obscured knowledge, and question the role of power and materiality in HROs. Together, the forum advocates for the unique contributions organizational communication scholars can make to the study of HRO and, just as significantly, what HRO theorizing can contribute to organizational communication.
AllenJ. A.Reiter-PalmonR.CroweJ.ScottC. (2018). Debriefs: Teams learning from doing in context. American Psychologist, 73(4), 504–516. https://doi.org/10.1037/amp0000246
2.
AnsellJ.EvansJ.RangersA.RangersA. S.RangersD.RangersJ.RangersM.RangersN. N.RangersW.RangersY.RangersY. M. (2020). Contemporary Aboriginal savanna burning projects in Arnhem land: A regional description and analysis of the fire management aspirations of traditional owners. International Journal of Wildland Fire, 29(5), 371–385. https://doi.org/10.1071/WF18152
3.
ArgyrisC. (2004). Reasons and rationalizations: The limits to organizational knowledge. Oxford Press.
4.
AshcraftK. L. (2005). Resistance through consent?: Occupational identity, organizational form, and the maintenance of masculinity among commercial airline pilots. Management Communication Quarterly, 19(1), 67–90. https://doi.org/10.1177/0893318905276560
5.
AshcraftK. L. (2013a). Feminist theory. In PutnamL. L.MumbyD. K. (Eds.), The Sage handbook of organizational communication (Vol. 3, pp. 127–150). Sage.
6.
AshcraftK. L. (2013b). The glass slipper: “Incorporating” occupational identity in management studies. Academy of Management Review, 38(1), 6–31. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2010.0219
7.
AultM.BrandleyB. (2023). The human cost of chronic mindfulness in US law enforcement: Toward a more nuanced understanding of HRO theory. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 51(1), 18–36. https://doi.org/10.1080/00909882.2022.2118547
8.
BarbourJ. B.GillR. (2014). Designing communication for the day-to-day safety oversight of nuclear power plants. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 42(2), 168–189. https://doi.org/10.1080/00909882.2013.859291
9.
BigleyG. A.RobertsK. H. (2001). The incident command system: High-reliability organizing for complex and volatile task environments. Academy of Management Journal, 44(6), 1281–1299. https://doi.org/10.5465/3069401
10.
BiselR. (2018). Organizational moral learning: A communication approach. Routledge.
11.
BiselR. S. (2010). A communicative ontology of organization? A description, history, and critique of CCO theories for organization science. Management Communication Quarterly, 24(1), 124–131. https://doi.org/10.1177/0893318909351582
12.
BiselR. S.AdameE. A. (2019). Encouraging upward ethical dissent in organizations: The role of deference to embodied expertise. Management Communication Quarterly, 33(2), 139–159. https://doi.org/10.1177/0893318918811949
13.
BiselR. S.MessersmithA. S.KelleyK. M. (2012). Supervisor-subordinate communication: Hierarchical mum effect meets organizational learning. Journal of Business Communication, 49(2), 128–147. https://doi.org/10.1177/0021943612436972
14.
BlackA. E.HayesP.StricklandR. (2020). Organizational learning from prescribed fire escapes: A review of developments over the last 10 years in the USA and Australia. Current Forestry Reports, 6(1), 41–59. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40725-019-00108-0
15.
BoinA.SchulmanP. (2008). Assessing NASA’s safety culture: The limits and possibilities of high-reliability theory. Public Administration Review, 68(6), 1050–1062. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6210.2008.00954.x
BuzzanellP. M.HoustonJ. B. (2018). Communication and resilience: Multilevel applications and insights—A journal of applied communication research forum. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 46(1), 1–4. https://doi.org/10.1080/00909882.2017.1412086
18.
CrossanM. M.LaneH. W.WhiteR. E. (1999). An organizational learning framework: From intuition to institution. Academy of Management Review, 24(3), 522–537. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.1999.2202135
19.
DekkerS. (2019). Foundations of safety science: A century of understanding accidents and disasters. Routledge.
EdmondsonA. C. (1996). Learning from mistakes is easier said than done: Group and organizational influences on the detection and correction of human error. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 32(1), 5–28. https://doi.org/10.1177/0021886396321001
EnglishA. (2016). Knowing fire: Exploring the scope and management of the tacit fire knowledge of agency staff. Australian Journal of Emergency Management, 31(2), 7–12. https://doi.org/10.3316/ielapa.330864114857454
24.
FilteauM. R. (2014). Who are those guys? Constructing the oilfield’s new dominant masculinity. Men and Masculinities, 17(4), 396–416. https://doi.org/10.1177/1097184X14544905
25.
FordJ. L. (2018). Revisiting high-reliability organizing: Obstacles to safety and resilience. Corporate Communications: An International Journal, 23(2), 197–211. https://doi.org/10.1108/CCIJ-04-2017-0034
26.
FraherA. (2011). Hero-making as a defense against the anxiety of responsibility and risk: A case study of US Airways flight 1549. Organisational and Social Dynamics, 11(1), 59–78. https://doi.org/10.33212/osd.v11n1.2011.59
27.
GardeM.Lofty NadjamerrekB.KolkkiwarraM.KalarriyaJ.DjandjomeerJ.BirriyabirriyaB.BilindjaR.KubarkkuM.BilessP. (2009). The language of fire: Seasonality, resources and landscape burning on the Arnhem Land Plateau. In Russell SmithJ. (Ed.), Culture, ecology and economy of fire management in north Australian savannas: Rekindling the wurrk tradition (pp. 1–93). CSIRO Publishing.
28.
GnoniM. G.TorneseF.GuglielmiA.PellicciM.CampoG.De MerichD. (2022). Near miss management systems in the industrial sector: A literature review. Safety Science, 150(10), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2022.105704
29.
GoldenharL. M.BradyP. W.SutcliffeK. M.MuethingS. E. (2013). Huddling for high reliability and situation awareness. BMJ Quality and Safety, 22(11), 899–906. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjqs-2012-001467
30.
GrabowskiM.RobertsK. H. (1999). Risk mitigation in virtual organizations. Organization Science, 10(6), 704–721. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.10.6.704
31.
GranbergR. M.ShenT.PearsonS. W.VerbleR. M. (2023). Occupational and environmental factors influencing morale of United States federal wildland firefighters. International Journal of Wildland Fire, 32(12), 1663–1676. https://doi.org/10.1071/WF22098
32.
GreyS. H. (2007). Wounds not easily healed: Exploring trauma in communication studies. Annals of the International Communication Association, 31(1), 174–222. https://doi.org/10.1080/23808985.2007.11679067
33.
HarrisonT. R.WilliamsE. A.ReynoldsA. R. (2020). The intersections of organizations, health, and safety: Designing communication for high reliability organizations. In O’HairD.O’HairM. J. (Eds.), The handbook for applied communication research (pp. 279–296). Wiley. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119399926.ch17
34.
HatherleyE.HowardT.ArmstrongR. (2018). Managing fire: Supporting traditional owners in aerial burning. In McGlashanH.CoateK.GreshamJ.HartR. (Eds.), The natural world of the Kimberley (pp. 234–251). Kimberley Society Inc.
35.
HollnagelE. (2014). Safety-I and safety-II: The past and future of safety management. Ashgate.
HowardT.LeavesleyA. (2020). Managing the risk of escapes from prescribed burns. In LeavesleyA.WoutersM.ThorntonR. (Eds.), Prescribed burning in Australasia: The science, practice and politics of burning the bush (pp. 170–185). Australasian Fire and Emergency Service Authorities Council. https://doi.org/10.1071/WFv29n9_BR
38.
HoweW. T.BiselR. S. (2024). Veteran contempt for civilian communication scale: Development and validation. Management Communication Quarterly, 38(2), 249–278. https://doi.org/10.1177/08933189231186149
39.
HoweW. T.HartsoughL. L. (2024). U.S. military service members and romantic relationships: Identity gaps, mindfulness, and relational quality. International Journal of Communication, 18, 5199–5221. https://ijoc.org/index.php/ijoc/article/view/21718.
40.
HoweW. T.HinderakerA. (2018). “The rule was the rule”: New member socialization in rigidly structured totalistic organizations. Atlantic Journal of Communication, 26(3), 180–195. https://doi.org/10.1080/15456870.2018.1472093
HoweW. T.WilsonS. (2024). Military exit and reentry to family, society, and work. In MillerV.PooleM. S. (Eds.), Handbook of organizational communication theory and research (pp. 565–583). DeGruyter.
43.
IshakA. W.WilliamsE. A. (2018). A dynamic model of organizational resilience: Adaptive and anchored approaches. Corporate Communications: An International Journal, 23(2), 180–196. https://doi.org/10.1108/CCIJ-04-2017-0037
44.
JahnJ. (2010). Social bodies: Bringing materiality into theorizing about high reliability organizations. In National Communication Association Conference, San Francisco, CA, November 2010.
45.
JahnJ. L. S. (2017). High reliability organizations. In ScottC. R.BarkerJ. R.KuhnT.LewisM. S.KeytonJ. R. (Eds.), The international encyclopedia of organizational communication (Vol. 1, pp. 1–8). Wiley. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118955567.wbieoc096
46.
JahnJ. L. S.BlackA. E. (2017). A model of communicative and hierarchical foundations of high reliability organizing in wildland firefighting teams. Management Communication Quarterly, 31(3), 356–379. https://doi.org/10.1177/0893318917691358
47.
JahnJ.RiceR. M. (2022). Constituting hazards and action through communication: A CCO view of high-reliability organizing. In JoëlleB.NicolasB.TimothyK. (Eds.), The routledge handbook of the communicative constitution of organization (pp. 496–508). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003224914-37
48.
JonesM. W.AbatzoglouJ. T.VeraverbekeS.AndelaN.LasslopG.ForkelM.SmithA. J. P.BurtonC.BettsR. A.van der WerfG. R.SitchS.CanadellJ. G.SantínC.KoldenC.DoerrS. H.Le QuéréC. (2022). Global and regional trends and drivers of fire under climate change. Reviews of Geophysics, 60(3), Article e2020RG000726. https://doi.org/10.1029/2020RG000726
49.
KuhnT. (2008). A communicative theory of the firm: Developing an alternative perspective on intra-organizational power and stakeholder relationships. Organization Studies, 29(8–9), 1227–1254. https://doi.org/10.1177/0170840608094778
50.
McAllumK. (2020). Delegation-based and directive mentoring relationships in high reliability organizations: Negotiating the reliability-resilience tension in ambulance work. Communication Monographs, 87(2), 200–222. https://doi.org/10.1080/03637751.2019.1677926
51.
McAllumK.FoxS.FordJ. L.RoederA. C. (2023). Communicating compassion in organizations: A conceptual review. Frontiers in Communication, 8, Article 1144045. https://doi.org/10.3389/fcomm.2023.1144045
52.
MineiE.BiselR. (2013). Negotiating the meaning of team expertise: A firefighter team’s epistemic denial. Small Group Research, 44(1), 7–32. https://doi.org/10.1177/1046496412467830
NovakJ. M.SellnowT. L. (2009). Reducing organizational risk through participatory communication. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 37(4), 349–373. https://doi.org/10.1080/00909880903233168
55.
PenneyG.SmithG.RidgeS.CattaniM. (2022). A review of the standard of care owed to Australian firefighters from a safety perspective—The differences between academic theory and legal obligations. Fire, 5(3), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.3390/fire5030073
56.
RiceR. M. (2021a). Feminist theory and interorganizational collaboration: An ethnographic study of gendered tension management. Communication Monographs, 88(4), 530–548. https://doi.org/10.1080/03637751.2021.1931703
57.
RiceR. M. (2021b). Communicating authority in interorganizational collaboration. Routledge.
58.
RiceR. M. (2023). Constituting absence as reliability: The case of COVID-19 response networks. Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management, 32(1), Article e12505. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-5973.12505
59.
RichardsonN. M.LamsonA. L.SmithM.EaganS. M.ZvonkovicA. M.JensenJ. (2020). Defining moral injury among military populations: A systematic review. Journal of Traumatic Stress, 33(4), 575–586. https://doi.org/10.1002/jts.22553
60.
RidgewayC. L.CorrellS. J. (2004). Unpacking the gender system: A theoretical perspective on gender beliefs and social relations. Gender & Society, 18(4), 510–531. https://doi.org/10.1177/0891243204265269
61.
RobertsK. H. (2018). Advancing organizational reliability. In RamanujamR.RobertsK. H. (Eds.), Organizing for reliability: A guide for research and practice (pp. 3–16). Stanford University Press. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctvqsf15f.4
62.
RoederA. C.BiselR. S. (2024). Managing disruption(s) at work: A longitudinal study of communicative resilience and high-reliability organizing. Communication Monographs, 91(1), 56–78. https://doi.org/10.1080/03637751.2023.2242918
63.
RoederA. C.BiselR. S.HoweW. T. (2021). High-reliability organizing and communication during naturalistic decision making: U.S. National Weather Service (NWS) forecasting teams’ use of ‘floating. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 49(4), 441–459. https://doi.org/10.1080/00909882.2021.1907855
ScottA. L.HoweW. T.BiselR. (2022). Reviewing high reliability team (HRT) scholarship: A 21st century approach to safety. Small Group Research, 54(1), 3–40. https://doi.org/10.1177/10464964221116349
67.
ScottC. W.TretheweyA. (2008). Organizational discourse and the appraisal of occupational hazards: Interpretive repertoires, heedful interrelating, and identity at work. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 36(3), 298–317. https://doi.org/10.1080/00909880802172137
StevensonL. (2020). Restoring trust: COVID-19 and the future of long-term care. Royal Society of Canada. https://rsc-src.ca
70.
StohlC.CheneyG. (2001). Participatory processes/paradoxical practices: Communication and the dilemmas of organizational democracy. Management Communication Quarterly, 14(3), 349–407. https://doi.org/10.1177/0893318901143001
71.
SutcliffeK. M.PaineL.PronovostP. J. (2017). Re-examining high reliability: Actively organizing for safety. BMJ Quality and Safety, 26(3), 248–251. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjqs-2015-004698
72.
TannenbaumA. S. (1968). Control in organizations. McGraw-Hill.
Van GilderB. J. (2018). Femininity as perceived threat to military effectiveness: How military service members reinforce hegemonic masculinity in talk. Western Journal of Communication, 83(2), 151–171. https://doi.org/10.1080/10570314.2018.1502892
75.
VogusT. J.SutcliffeK. M. (2007). Organizational resilience: Towards a theory and research agenda. In Conference Proceedings - IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man and Cybernetics, Montreal, QC, Canada, 02 January 2008, pp. 3418–3422. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICSMC.2007.4414160
76.
VogusT. J.WelbourneT. M. (2003). Structuring for high reliability: HR practices and mindful processes in reliability-seeking organizations. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 24(7), 877–903. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.221
77.
WeickK. E.RobertsK. H. (1993). Collective mind in organizations: Heedful interrelating on flight decks. Administrative Science Quarterly, 38(3), 357–381. https://doi.org/10.1177/0094582X11408560
78.
WeickK. E.SutcliffeK. M. (2001). Managing the unexpected: Assuring high performance in an age of complexity(pp. xvi, 200). Jossey-Bass.
79.
WeickK. E.SutcliffeK. M. (2007). Managing the unexpected: Resilient performance in an age of uncertainty (2nd ed.). Jossey-Bass.
80.
WeickK. E.SutcliffeK. M. (2015). Managing the unexpected: Sustained performance in a complex world. Wiley.
81.
WeickK. E.SutcliffeK. M.ObstfeldD. (1999). Organizing for high reliability: Processes of collective mindfulness. In SuttonR. S.StawB. M. (Eds.), Research in organizational behavior (Vol. 1, pp. 81–123). Jai Press.
82.
WeickK. E.SutcliffeK. M.ObstfeldD. (2005). Organizing and the process of sensemaking. Organization Science, 16(4), 409–421. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1050.0133
83.
WestreichS.PerlmanY.WinklerM. (2021). Analysis and implications of the management of near-miss events: A game theoretic approach. Reliability Engineering & System Safety, 212(45), Article 107645. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ress.2021.107645
84.
WilliamsE. A.DonovanJ.GilesL.McKelfreshD. (2023). High reliability organizing through an extended crisis: A case study of a U.S. University during COVID-19. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 50(6), 655–672. https://doi.org/10.1080/00909882.2022.2141066
85.
WilliamsE. A.LinvillJ. A.Ojeda-HechtE.CosgroveM. R.BuzzettaA.KonkleA. (2024). The structuration of positive communication experiences: The case of the Great Resignation. International Journal of Business Communication, 61(4), 805–830. https://doi.org/10.1177/23294884241263553
