Human Capital Management in Extreme Crises: A Sensemaking‑Driven Framework of Leadership, Strategic Communication, and Behavioral Coherence (The 12‑Day War Case Study)

Purpose: This study develops an operational model of human capital management in severe crises grounded in leadership sensemaking and strategic communication. Using the twelve‑day Iran–Israel war as an empirical case, it examines how leadership interpretations and crisis communication mechanisms shape the management of human resources and contribute to maintaining behavioral coherence at the societal level during high‑intensity crises.

Design/Methodology/Approach: The research adopts a qualitative design based on Thematic Analysis. A corpus of 40 official documents, speeches, and statements issued by key political, military, and socio‑cultural actors during the crisis was systematically analyzed. Through an inductive multi‑stage coding process, 563 semantic units were extracted and organized into 20 basic themes, 9 organizing themes, and 4 overarching dimensions representing the causal structure of crisis‑stage human capital management.

Findings: The results reveal a multi‑layered causal model linking leadership cognition, communication processes, organizational practices, and collective behavior. Leadership sensemaking functions as the initiating layer by framing the crisis through enemy construction, identity reinforcement, and legitimacy management. This interpretive layer informs strategic communication processes that manage public perception, construct crisis narratives, and conduct psychological signaling. These communicative mechanisms enable operational human capital management practices focused on personnel continuity, succession mechanisms, and symbolic support for human resources. Together, these processes generate behavioral coherence manifested in societal calmness, reassurance, and strengthened national cohesion.

Originality/Value: By deriving a crisis‑stage human capital management model directly from real‑time crisis discourse, the study extends existing literature beyond administrative HR perspectives and demonstrates how leadership meaning‑making and strategic communication jointly shape collective behavior in severe crises.