THE REACTION TO THE UNEXPECTED IN CULTURAL INSTITUTIONS

M.Laura Frigotto

PhD Candidate, University Cà Foscari of Venice

Member of Cifrem, Dep. of Management and Computer Science, University of Trento

Abstract
My research proposal is focused on organizational reaction to unexpected environmental shocks
and its strategic implications. I propose an empirical study which inquiries processes of recognition
of such events through their categorization, and of organization of action in cultural institutions.
Organizational responses are investigated through case study research, emphasizing both
behavioural and cognitive dynamics.

Keywords
Management of arts and cultural institutions, Design and adaptation process, Unexpected events,
Decision making process

Research Proposal
This research proposal aims to a better understanding of adaptation of how organizations
face unexpected events, that are exogenous environmental shocks which have not been planned
and which do not match with expectations.
Unexpected events have long interested organization theorists and their cause continues to
be an active area of inquiry, fundamentally, because they are not expected, and they produce
“unpleasant experiences” (Weick and Sutcliffe, 2001, p. 39). On one hand, they show the low rate
of world predictability, on the other hand, they highlight the ineffectiveness of “detectors of
divergence” in organizations. This phenomenon is particularly risky because organizations are
unprepared to react to such events, as they build their abilities with respect to expectations.

In general, research on these topics has been carried out in extreme situations, in which the
vulnerability and resilience of organizations are more apparent. As a matter of fact, the literature is
rich of case study inquiries into accidents, catastrophes and disasters. The negative impact of
these unexpected events and the risk of being unprepared, highlighted by these situations, where
organizations face a life peril and tension for good results, is extremely high. Moreover,
unexpected events, which have a negative impact on the organization, have been investigated in
industry and firm crisis issues, as well (see for example the issue of JMS July 1988).
However, not any unexpected event leads organizations to the risk of death. Some of them
are clearly negative: Bhopal disaster or Mann Gulch disaster are examples. Others have had
positive influence on organizational life (see for example Berkowitz, 1992).
Serendipitous innovations are unexpected events which provide development opportunities.
The fact of receiving a lot of e-mails is an event which is not expected and that can hinder planned
activities, but it does not represent a real threat to survival.
Other times, events are ambiguous and the context is not an efficient tool for recognizing
the direction of the effect (positive or negative). The same phenomenon could be considered as
threats or opportunities at the same time. To give an example, the strength of the euro against the
dollar is a great threat for export based businesses, but it is a great opportunity for import based
businesses.

Igor Ansoff (1975) spoke about generic “warnings”, either positive or negative, and he
considered them both dangerous, because they hit the organization when it was not prepared to
react. However, in proceeding from “before the fact” issues to “after the fact” issues, literature has
neglected the positive side of the unexpected.
It appears that academic research, has been affected by Kahneman and Tversky’s
asymmetric perception of risk (1979). They have only focused the attention on negative

1
possibilities trying to point out adequate tools for defending organizations life. However, the
positive side of the unexpected needs to be addressed as well.

Positive unexpected events (we will call these unexpected events with positive effects) are
not threatening and therefore they are also less dangerous. However, this does not mean that
organizations are able to respond them well, nor to seize the consequent opportunities that flow
from them.

Positive unexpected events seem to play a crucial role to cultural organizations, which are
devoted to the recovery and enhancement of cultural findings. The surfacing of the Bronzes of
Riace in the waters of Reggio Calabria or the finding of the medieval galley which lies on the floor
of the Venetian lagoon, are typical unexpected events for cultural institutions.
One should expect that this kind of unexpected event be included in the core business of
cultural institutions, and that these organizations have the expertise to find the best and the more
rapid solution for the scientific and cultural exploitation of the findings. However, in the first
mentioned case, the decision regarding the destination of the discovery took about 10 years, and
in the second case, the recovery has not taken place yet, because the discussion over the
destination of the findings remains open.

Management studies regarding the sector of arts and culture have assumed other aims.
Managerialism (Zan, 2000a, 2000b) which has already affected other typical fields of public
management (the popularity of New Public Management is related to this process), has led the
world of arts to focus on particular “tools and solutions” for effective management. These
successful strategies have been translated into pivot criteria for the acceptance or refusal of
cultural projects. However, looking at the above mentioned cases, one of the normative criteria for
success, that is, accurate planning, does not seem to be able to support cultural institutions in
facing the unexpected.

In this research, we attempt to raise some relevant issues on the way cultural organizations
face unexpected events, because in these organizations such phenomena are involved in their
core business. In this way, we want to highlight the analytical characters of the unexpected and
basic issues of the response to these unplanned shocks. Finally we expect to extend those results
and to compare them to the context of firms.

We will use a descriptive perspective upon inquiry into this subject, through the method of
case study research (Eisenhardt, 1989). The setting for the analysis is given by several
unexpected events which are typical of cultural institutions. One case study will be taken from a set
of unexpected events which is very common for Italian cultural institutions, i.e., an archaeological
finding. Nevertheless, the relevance of this issue is ever more significant. Finally, typical examples
of unexpected opportunities which will be selected are structures to be exploited (e.g. the
Gesualdo Theatre in Avellino – Finamore and Romano, 2004) or building restorations that cannot
be delayed any longer, and which require a practical function to justify the intervention.