|
|
Ivan Boissières, & Eric Marsden. (2005). Organizational factors of robustness. In B. C. B. Van de Walle (Ed.), Proceedings of ISCRAM 2005 – 2nd International Conference on Information Systems for Crisis Response and Management (pp. 117–122). Brussels: Royal Flemish Academy of Belgium.
Abstract: In complex socio-technical systems, robustness is achieved through interaction between the technical structure of the system and the social and organizational structure of the operators who run the system. While the need for human oversight of complex systems is widely recognized, the impact of organizational factors on the effectiveness of the oversight function is not well understood. We have studied the social interactions between supervision and maintenance operators of the largest French telecom operator, using techniques from the sociology of organizations. Detailed analysis of the social network formed by these operators has allowed us to identify a number of factors that contribute positively or negatively to the robustness of the system.
|
|
|
|
Louise K. Comfort, Milos Hauskrecht, & Jeen-Shang Lin. (2008). Dynamic networks: Modeling change in environments exposed to risk. In B. V. de W. F. Fiedrich (Ed.), Proceedings of ISCRAM 2008 – 5th International Conference on Information Systems for Crisis Response and Management (pp. 576–585). Washington, DC: Information Systems for Crisis Response and Management, ISCRAM.
Abstract: Modeling the interaction between interdependent systems in dynamic environments represents a promising approach to enabling communities to assess and manage the recurring risk to which they are exposed. We frame the problem as a complex, adaptive system, examining the interaction between transportation and emergency response as a socio-technical system. Using methods of spatial and statistical analysis, we overlaid the engineered transportation system on the organizational emergency response system to identify the thresholds of fragility in each. We present a research design and preliminary results from a small-scale study conducted in the Pittsburgh Metropolitan Region that examined the interaction between the transportation and emergency response systems. These results informed the design of a Situational Assessment Module for emergency managers, currently under development at the University of Pittsburgh.
|
|
|
|
Daniel Auferbauer, Christoph Ruggenthaler, Gerald Czech, & Ivan Gojmerac. (2019). Taxonomy of Community Interaction in Crises and Disasters. In Z. Franco, J. J. González, & J. H. Canós (Eds.), Proceedings of the 16th International Conference on Information Systems for Crisis Response And Management. Valencia, Spain: Iscram.
Abstract: Taxonomies are integral to systems engineering, as they structure our knowledge of a field and so provide the
foundation for technological development. We contribute such taxonomies for the field of Community
Interaction and Engagement in Crisis and Disaster Management, which represents the interface between
members of the public who commit to relief efforts and established organisations that have a pre-defined role in
crisis management. These actors are unified in their purpose to help those in need, but also set apart by their
organisational structures and modes of operation. We classify the actors of Community Interaction and
Engagement, as well as the interactions between them. Our contribution outlines areas where the application of
Information and Communication Technology can offer benefits to Community Interaction and Engagement.
|
|
|
|
Josune Hernantes, Jose M. Torres, Ana Laugé, Jose Mari Sarriegi, Iztok Starc, Eva Zupancic, et al. (2010). Using GMB methodology on a large crisis model. In C. Zobel B. T. S. French (Ed.), ISCRAM 2010 – 7th International Conference on Information Systems for Crisis Response and Management: Defining Crisis Management 3.0, Proceedings. Seattle, WA: Information Systems for Crisis Response and Management, ISCRAM.
Abstract: Mitigating, detecting, evaluating, responding and recovering from crises are highly complex tasks that involve many decision makers (agents). As a consequence using collaborative methods that allow the cooperation among these agents during the crisis management strategy and procedures design is of significant importance. Group Model Building (GMB) is a robust collaborative methodology that has been successfully used for modelling several complex socio-technical problems, where different agents may have diverse perspectives or interests in the problem under analysis. Through the development of a series of exercises, GMB allows the integration of these initially fragmented perspectives. Modellers translate the knowledge elicited from experts during GMB workshops into simulation models that reproduce the behaviour of the problem. This paper presents the use and adaptation of the GMB methodology in a research project about large pan European crises due to outages in the electricity sector.
|
|
|
|
Katelynn Amaris Kapalo, Pamela Wisniewski, & Joseph J. LaViola Jr. (2019). First In, Left Out : Current Technological Limitations from the Perspective of Fire Engine Companies. In Z. Franco, J. J. González, & J. H. Canós (Eds.), Proceedings of the 16th International Conference on Information Systems for Crisis Response And Management. Valencia, Spain: Iscram.
Abstract: The cognitive demands and skills required of a fire engine company when assessing the scene of an incident and
the systems they use to manage this information are a matter of life or death. We conducted a case study with an
entire fire battalion in Florida (35 firefighters at varying levels of command) to assess their routine technology
needs. Using a cognitive work analysis approach, we found that the firefighters in our study relied on mission
critical systems that often failed, as well as disparate secondary systems that lacked integration. Capability gaps
and inaccessible data also increased the likelihood of errors, creating frustration in the systems that both helped
and hindered these firefighters in their daily job tasks. We describe what firefighters need from technology in its
present state and we outline usability issues for technology designers and practitioners to leverage in the design
of future systems.
|
|
