|Home||<< 1 >>|
David Mendonça, & Frank Fiedrich. (2004). Design for improvisation in computer-based emergency response systems. In B. C. B. Van de Walle (Ed.), Proceedings of ISCRAM 2004 – 1st International Workshop on Information Systems for Crisis Response and Management (pp. 99–104). Brussels: Royal Flemish Academy of Belgium.
Abstract: This paper explores the design of training environments in which emergency response professionals can use information technologies to train for responding to unplanned-for situations. This approach – designing for improvisation – is fundamentally different than designing for plan execution. In this paper, we identify three dimensions of this difference and outline a set of research questions that are intended to lead to a better understanding of the role of improvisation in emergency response, as well as how it can be trained for and supported. Both questions are intertwined, since without a firm understanding of how improvisation occurs it is difficult to train for and support it. Â© Proceedings ISCRAM 2004.
Keywords: Information systems; Multi agent systems; Computer based training; Distributed simulations; Emergency response; Emergency response systems; Improvisation; Plan execution; Research questions; Three dimensions; Emergency services
Monika Magnusson, & Lena-Maria Öberg. (2015). Crisis Training Software and User Needs ? Research Directions. In L. Palen, M. Buscher, T. Comes, & A. Hughes (Eds.), ISCRAM 2015 Conference Proceedings ? 12th International Conference on Information Systems for Crisis Response and Management. Kristiansand, Norway: University of Agder (UiA).
Abstract: Crisis management training software is gaining researchers? as well as practitioners? interest. In order to truly support organizations it is important that such software responds to actual user needs. The aim of this study is to compare existing initiative described in research with the needs of the users and to identify possible research directions for forthcoming studies. The literature review shows that discussions on users? needs are superficial at best. The software described in research mainly focus on co-located execution of exercises, often in the form of simulations. Furthermore, a ?right or wrong? behavior is usually built-in. Empirical data from a web survey indicate that flexibility in time and space during training is a fundamental user need. This is not particularly acknowledged in earlier research. Neither is the users? wish for better support in designing exercises. We propose that system flexibility, modularity and pedagogy for computer based crisis training are urgent issues for future research.
Keywords: Computer Based Training; Crisis Management; Crisis Training Software; Emergency Management; User Needs