In the case of crisis techniques, additional problems appear, i.e. a lack of clarity in both conceptual and theoretical contexts. It is best initially to conceive of crises in a purely formal way from a temporal perspective as a phase in the process carrying exceptional dangers and, as a consequence of this, exceptional possibilities. The complexity of the possible is then not attributed simultaneously to the system but is illustrated on the time axis as a sequence of differences – between, on the one hand, normal situations with little power and with remote possibilities, which for the time being are not really possible, and, on the other, crisis situations in which situational specific power and power relating to a particular subject-matter can be activated, and to which temporally limited special conditions of structural compatibility apply. In this way advantages in temporal differentiation can be gained by suspending accepted premises of conduct.

DEFINE: The author defines crises formally on a temporal axis rather than attributing complexity to a system, distinguishing normal and crisis phases by their power dynamics.

Niklas Luhmann, Trust and Power, loc. 760