Home > Research > Publications & Outputs > Analysing the risks of individual and collectiv...

Electronic data

Links

Text available via DOI:

View graph of relations

Analysing the risks of individual and collective intentionality

Research output: Contribution to journalJournal article

Published

Standard

Analysing the risks of individual and collective intentionality. / Busby, J S; Bennett, S A.

In: Journal of Risk Research, Vol. 11, No. 6, 2008, p. 797-819.

Research output: Contribution to journalJournal article

Harvard

Busby, JS & Bennett, SA 2008, 'Analysing the risks of individual and collective intentionality', Journal of Risk Research, vol. 11, no. 6, pp. 797-819. https://doi.org/10.1080/13669870802056896

APA

Vancouver

Author

Busby, J S ; Bennett, S A. / Analysing the risks of individual and collective intentionality. In: Journal of Risk Research. 2008 ; Vol. 11, No. 6. pp. 797-819.

Bibtex

@article{349cbf55f95c4f79ac27ade8cf4d8e57,
title = "Analysing the risks of individual and collective intentionality",
abstract = "The risk assessment of complex systems often seems to neglect the way in which intentions, collective and individual, are central to our explanations of how risk arises in such systems. Contradictions among the intentions of different actors, for example, are typically an important part of our understanding of how organizations break down. Moreover, risk assessment practice pays little attention to the reflexive problem of how intentions for the risk assessment itself can themselves become problematic. This study was an attempt to develop a framework to support reasoning about intentionality, both individual and collective, during risk assessment. The framework broadly follows a process of 1) identifying the main social objects in a system, 2) asking what are the collective intentions for these objects in terms of the functions that are conferred on them, 3) asking what obligations and powers these create, and 4) asking what risks of organizational dysfunction can then arise. The approach was applied in a case study of aviation ramp operations. Its main value is as a formative rather than a summative kind of analysis.",
author = "Busby, {J S} and Bennett, {S A}",
year = "2008",
doi = "10.1080/13669870802056896",
language = "English",
volume = "11",
pages = "797--819",
journal = "Journal of Risk Research",
issn = "1366-9877",
publisher = "Routledge",
number = "6",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Analysing the risks of individual and collective intentionality

AU - Busby, J S

AU - Bennett, S A

PY - 2008

Y1 - 2008

N2 - The risk assessment of complex systems often seems to neglect the way in which intentions, collective and individual, are central to our explanations of how risk arises in such systems. Contradictions among the intentions of different actors, for example, are typically an important part of our understanding of how organizations break down. Moreover, risk assessment practice pays little attention to the reflexive problem of how intentions for the risk assessment itself can themselves become problematic. This study was an attempt to develop a framework to support reasoning about intentionality, both individual and collective, during risk assessment. The framework broadly follows a process of 1) identifying the main social objects in a system, 2) asking what are the collective intentions for these objects in terms of the functions that are conferred on them, 3) asking what obligations and powers these create, and 4) asking what risks of organizational dysfunction can then arise. The approach was applied in a case study of aviation ramp operations. Its main value is as a formative rather than a summative kind of analysis.

AB - The risk assessment of complex systems often seems to neglect the way in which intentions, collective and individual, are central to our explanations of how risk arises in such systems. Contradictions among the intentions of different actors, for example, are typically an important part of our understanding of how organizations break down. Moreover, risk assessment practice pays little attention to the reflexive problem of how intentions for the risk assessment itself can themselves become problematic. This study was an attempt to develop a framework to support reasoning about intentionality, both individual and collective, during risk assessment. The framework broadly follows a process of 1) identifying the main social objects in a system, 2) asking what are the collective intentions for these objects in terms of the functions that are conferred on them, 3) asking what obligations and powers these create, and 4) asking what risks of organizational dysfunction can then arise. The approach was applied in a case study of aviation ramp operations. Its main value is as a formative rather than a summative kind of analysis.

U2 - 10.1080/13669870802056896

DO - 10.1080/13669870802056896

M3 - Journal article

VL - 11

SP - 797

EP - 819

JO - Journal of Risk Research

JF - Journal of Risk Research

SN - 1366-9877

IS - 6

ER -