arbiter
JournalsPricingAccount

A Comparative Analysis of Classical Models for Crisis Management

Ionica Simbanu & Liliana Mihaela Moga

Economics and Applied Informatics2025https://doi.org/10.35219/eai15840409501article
ABDC C
Weight
0.50

What the paper says

This article presents a comparative analysis of two significant theoretical models from decision-making literature.The models analyzed are the decision strategy selection model developed by Beach and Mitchell, and the strategic decision-making model in crisis conditions developed by Hofer and Schendel.The research examines how each model addresses essential factors such as reaction time, level of uncertainty, emotional involvement, decision structure, and the degree of formalization of the decision-making process.The research is based on a literature review in strategic management, organizational psychology, and crisis communication and uses item comparison as the research method.While Beach and Mitchell offer a rational and deliberative framework suitable for stable contexts, the Hofer and Schendel model is adapted for crisis situations, where decisions must be made quickly, often under stress and high pressure.

Open paper page →

Cite this paper

https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.35219/eai15840409501

Or copy a formatted citation

@article{ionica2025,
  title        = {{A Comparative Analysis of Classical Models for Crisis Management}},
  author       = {Ionica Simbanu & Liliana Mihaela Moga},
  journal      = {Economics and Applied Informatics},
  year         = {2025},
  doi          = {https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.35219/eai15840409501},
}

Paste directly into BibTeX, Zotero, or your reference manager.

Flag this paper

A Comparative Analysis of Classical Models for Crisis Management

Flags are reviewed by the Arbiter methodology team within 5 business days.

Evidence weight

0.50

Balanced mode · F 0.40 / M 0.15 / V 0.05 / R 0.40

F · citation impact0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20
M · momentum0.50 × 0.15 = 0.07
V · venue signal0.50 × 0.05 = 0.03
R · text relevance †0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20

† Text relevance is estimated at 0.50 on the detail page — for your query’s actual relevance score, open this paper from a search result.