There are many different things that a crisis will test. For instance, the speed with which you can act to respond. Obviously, that power rests with the leader/s in an organisation or nation/state.
Second, getting advice from the right people. If the leader has no expertise in a given matter (and he/she can't possibly be an expert in everything, by definition), he must know who the expert is, and get them on board on his side.
Some anticipation of what different options will result in. A cause and effect prediction-not just one, but for at least 3-4 options. Typically what we do in a case analysis pioneered by Harvard University, and now copied worldwide. Except that it's more complicated in a crisis. Multiple actions may be needed on many fronts.
Another option is using simulation, where multiple scenarios instead of only a few, can be used for scenario-building, with consequences that can be debated. Any scenario can be tackled if you know it's probability. It keeps you much better prepared.
Firmness or decisiveness once the discussions are over and done with, willingness to try one option out, while keeping your mind open if anything unexpected happens, are some other desirable qualities.
Yes, this second wave of COVID is what inspired this post. No blame game, but an academic point of view.
