The chapter analyses knowledge management paradigms for the understanding and prioritisation of risks (risk assessment), leading to decision- making amongst policy makers. Studies and approaches on knowledge-based risk assessment, and in general risk management, vary depending on perceptions of risk, and these perceptions affect the knowledge scope and, ultimately, affect decisions on policy. Departing from the problems of big data in aviation, the shortcomings of the existing knowledge management paradigms and the problems of data conversion to knowledge in aviation risk management approaches are discussed. The chapter argues that there is a need for transciplinarity and interdisciplinarity for greater understanding of context, deriving from the challenges in the big data era and in aviation policy making. In order to address the challenging dynamic context in aviation, the chapter proposes a strength/knowledge-based inquiry that involves public sector and high-power organisations, in order to gain holistic knowledge and to aid the decision analysis of policy makers.
In my view, organisations are playing an ever-larger role with and in these changes. This is why we need organisations that are not afraid to express and give concrete meaning to their innovative views on economic and social themes. These are organisations that dare to break out of the old thought and behavioural patterns in order to create room for change and renewal. They are guided by an innovative philosophy and mode of thinking, and show this leadership by translating this body of thought into concrete actions and results. This is why, in the professorship, we call these organisations ‘thought leaders in a society of change’.
In January 2017, relations between Greece and Turkey were under severe strain when warships from both sides engaged in a brief standoff near a pair of uninhabited Greek ‘islets’ in the Aegean, whose sovereignty is disputed by Turkey. Theoretically informed by the literature of foreign policy analysis, we examine how the Greek diplomats, military officers and political analysts interpreted Turkey’s behaviour at that particular time. The article considers the following research question: which factors, from a Greek point of view, explain Turkey’s foreign policy in the Aegean in January 2017? Our theoretical expectation is that, in the aftermath of the coup attempt in Turkey, Greek diplomats, military officers and political analysts would ascribe domestic calculations into Turkey’s activities. We employed Q- methodology to uncover socially shared perspectives on this topic. Based on our findings, we uncovered two viewpoints: (1) Turkey’s diachronic strategy in the Aegean and (2) the strongman style. According to the former and most widely shared viewpoint, a consistent ‘rationalist’ strategy to change the status quo in the Aegean explains Turkey’s behaviour. According to the second one, the belief system of Turkey’s leadership legitimises the use of force in the conduct of foreign policy.
MULTIFILE
