Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here for more information

CiteULike is a free service for managing and discovering scholarly references - click here to get started.

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Organization & Environment
This Article
Right arrow Free Full Text (Free PDF) Free
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in Web of Science
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Web of Science (1)
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Rosa, E. A.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Celebrating a Citation Classic—and More

Symposium on Charles Perrow’s Normal Accidents

Eugene A. Rosa

Washington State University

The purpose of this commentary is to provide a review and preliminary assessment of Perrow’s Normal Accident Framework (NAF) as a theoretical statement and compare it with the High Reliability Organization Framework (HROF). Given the tendency of risk analysts to reduce complex systems to psychological processes and phenomena, it is suggested that continuing work with both the NAF and the HROF is important. These frameworks provide macroconstructs (power and culture, respectively) that could be integrated and that are essential for sociological analysis of complex systems. Investigations that expand the cases of analyses to include both systems with accidents and systems without is necessary for theory building that relies on the principle of falsification.

Key Words: complex systems • normal accidents • high reliability organizations • theory development • psychological reductionism • sociology of risk

Organization & Environment, Vol. 18, No. 2, 229-234 (2005)
DOI: 10.1177/1086026604270873
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Human RelationsHome page
S. Shrivastava, K. Sonpar, and F. Pazzaglia
Normal Accident Theory versus High Reliability Theory: A resolution and call for an open systems view of accidents
Human Relations, September 1, 2009; 62(9): 1357 - 1390.
[Abstract] [PDF]