"Why is it so difficult to draw lessons from crises and to make organizational changes as a result of these lessons? The main reasons advanced are as follows: (1) the time or temporal framework of the crisis analysis is too limited (Bourrier, 2002); (2) the issue does not remain a priority once the immediate crisis has passed (Petak, 1985; Lagadec, 1996; Rosenthal & Kouzmin, 1996; Nathan, 2000); (3) after having experienced a crisis, the area is too sensitive for any discussions (Lagadec, 1996; Bourrier, 2002); (4) the pressure of managing day-to-day affairs resurfaces and tends to eclipse the period which could be devoted to post-crisis reflection (Rosenthal & al., 1989; and Rosenthal & Kouzmin, 1996); (5) the manager is avoiding his or her responsibilities (Lagadec, 1991, 1996); (6) managers tend to pass this off to the experts (Rosenthal & Kouzmin, 1996; Bourrier, 2002) and to use them for political ends (Hart & al., 2001); (7) administrators and interveners do not envisage the transferability of experiences during a crisis to routine practices (Roux-Dufort, 2000; Bourrier, 2002). These experiences are seen as eminently contingent with their own idiosyncrasies; (8) there is a lack of sharing of experiences in crisis management across organizations (Bourrier, 2002), between sectors of activities and amongst countries (Hart & al., 2001)". (Lalonde, Crisis Management and Organizational Development...", 2007, p. 509)