Symposium ARPEGE
15 & 16 octobre 2012, Paris
Crisis Management: Theories and Methods
Decision making in crisis situations
Definitions, models, methods and research issues
F. Anceaux* & G. Morel **
*PERCOTEC (LAMIH - UMR 8201 CNRS & UVHC)
**LAB-STICC ( UMR 6285 CNRS & UBS)
« …. Classical science .... rejected the accident,
event, hazard, the individual. Any attempt to
reinstate them could seem anti-scientific under the
old paradigm …. »
Edgar Morin, Introduction to complex thinking
Summary
l
Definition Issues
l
Models & research issues
l
Methods & methods issues
Which speaks about CM?
l
Domains
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
Political
Organization Management
Tourism
Health (Emergency plan,
Epidemiology, …)
Military (C&C, Bioterrorism,
Epidemiology…)
Maritime domain
Civilian security
Aviation (a few)
Networks (material, energy,
information)….
l
Disciplinary Fields
n
Management / Organizations
theories…
n
Sociology
n
Cognitive Sciences (cognitive
engineering , psychology,
ergonomics, Computer
Science, Decision Science
…)
n
Scheduling/ Automation…
Definitions
« Crisis, often reduced to major events…, are traditionely
perceived as exceptional situations. » Roux-Dufort
(2007, p. 105)
l
Hermann (1972) :
“
The crisis situation is a threatening phenomenon, surprising
because non-planned”… A crisis is a situation which
created an abrupt change on one or more variable(s)
key(s) of the system”
«
We propose analyzing crisis as a process of organizational
weakening …. » Roux-Dufort (2007, p. 106)
Definitions
l
Faulkner (2001):
n  A
triggering event, which is so significant that it
challenges the existing structure, routine operations or
survival of the organization
n  High threat, short decision time and an element of
surprise and urgency
n  A perception of an inability to cope…
n  A turning point (Keown & McMullan, 1997)
n  Characterized by fluid, unstable, dynamic situation
(Fink, 1986)
Definitions
l
Rogalski (1996):
n
n
l
« Borderline case» of dynamic environment management
“Overt” environment
Rogalski (2004)
“There is a crisis when a system is confronted with an event,
generally unexpected, of which the consequences are
going to develop in time with a dynamic which can be very
fast, producing significant risks which exceed the preexisting resources in terms of procedures of actions and
actors”
l
Event or Process or twice ?
n  Discrete
or continuous
n  Implies different possible approaches
Are there any common or
shared dimensions?
« Shared » dimensions
l
Triggering event & Uncertainty about evolution
n  Surprise, Threat, Turning point , Dysfunctions' production
l  Hwang & Lichenthal (2000), 2 possible dynamic of crisis’
occurrence
Abrupt crisis (Catastrophes)
n  Cumulative crisis (Ruptures)
n
n  Unpredictable
l  Access to information, planning, …
l
Emergency/ Temporal constraints
l  «
Simple » Emergency
l  Crisis + Emergency
« Shared » dimensions
l
Control
n  Perceived lost of control
l  Before and during crisis
l  On consequences but also on causes
n  Resources overtaking
l  Procedures’ level
n
(Rogalski, 2004)
Distinctions between emergency, crisis, catastrophe & disaster
(Borodzicz & van Haperen, 2002)…
l  Operator’s
n
Processing requirements exceed the individual operator capacity
l  Operators’
n
level
organization level
Unpredicted Situations ð non adapted organizations
Others dimensions
l
Complexity
n  Chaotic
dynamic
n  Multiple parameters
n  Different temporal dynamics
n  Changing high level’s goals
Representation/ Situation Awareness
(individual, team)
Others dimensions
Representation/ Situation Awareness
(compatibility/incompatibility, share/
individual, additional/antagonist)
l  Collective Dimensions
n  Different levels
l  Individual
and team (command and control team)
l  Collective (CC + fields teams)
l  Organizational
l  Socio-cultural
n  Intra/inter organization
l  Distributed knowledge and competences
l  Structure of organizational hierarchy and operational hierarchy
relationships
n
More or less rigid
l  Communications
n
n
flows “doctrines”
Dissociation between 3C & information about actions
Others dimensions
l
Experience
n  Professional vs Novices or Mix
l  Different knowledge, competences,….
l  Asymetry, communication fragmentation, misunterstanding….
n
Knowledge, Mental models,
Procedure, Rules….
(compatibility/incompatibility, share/
individual, additional/antagonist)
CM definition: issues
l
In order to elaborate “well sized” models and
methods
n  Refine typology(s) according to
Implications on
l  Entry levels (individual cognition, distributed cognition,
used methods
operators’ networks, and so on)
l  Dimensions & entry concepts
Uncertainty,
n  Risk, Security, Reliability
on
n Implications
Sensemaking, Representation,
SA, Understanding
n  Adaptation,
Resilience, Robustness
used models
n  Distributed Cooperation
n  Emotions, Stress, Temporal Pressure
n
l  Consequences’
nature of crisis
l  Action’s objects (from material to human)
l  Implications on cognitive processes
2 group of models
1. Systemic/Organizational approach: strategic level
n  Relationships
between management and planning
activities with the crisis’ phases of the crises
l  4
phases (Fink , 1986), :
n
Prodromic phase , acute phase , chronic phase & resolution
phase
l  4
classes of activities (Richardson et Richardson, 1992 ;
Johnson & Scholes, 1993 )
n
Strategic analysis, Strategic choice, Strategies' implementation &
control, the feedback and the evaluation of the organized
strategies
n  Networks &
l  C&C, C3I
collective organization
2 group of models
2. Macrocognition models
n  Cognitive
functions implemented in natural decision
making complex situations
n  Macrocognitive functions and support processes
described by Klein, Ross, Moon, Klein, Hoffman &
Hollnagel (2003) are congruent with main dimensions
of crisis process
Decision models & Understanding models (Chauvin &
Rogalski, 2011)
Macrocognition : Decision Models
l
Klein's RPD : decision induced by pattern
matching
n  Situation
evaluation/ prototype instantiation
n  Action control’s modes/levels (SRK) not taken in
account, (Chauvin & Rogalski, 2011)
Individual cognition
n  How to identify patterns in unknown situation (Flin) ?
l
Rasmussen “extended” models
n  Tactical
Reasoning (Rogalski & Samurçay, 1991;
Rogalski, 2004):
l  SRK levels of control
l  In “overt” dynamic environments
l  Representation elaboration’s loops
goals
which integrate
operators
Macrocognition :
Individual and team SA
Understanding
Focus onmodels
situation
l
Endsley’s SA model
l
Rasmussen “extended” models
n  Hoc
l
& Amalberti (DSM, 1995 & Cognitive Control, 2007)
NDM’s Sensemaking
n  Klein
Mental representation
“leads” cognitive control
Focus on control levels
(2006) :
“Sensemaking is a motivated continuous effort to
understand connections (which can be among people,
places, and events) … in order to anticipate their
trajectories and act effectively”
Data-frame theory
How to study a situation of crisis
management: method and tools
Methods
EAST method
Event Analysis for Systemic Teamwork
Stanton et al., 2005 ; Walker et al. 2009
è Method developed by the HFI DTC (Human Factors Integration Defence
Technology Center)
è Method used to study the command and control sociotechnical networks (C2)
è  Describe the emergent properties of a sociotechnical network arising from
interaction between its different components (Humans/technical devices)
è  This method has been implemented to analyze and model sociotechnical
networks. This method allows to model three networks (The aim of the method)
è  This method is operationalized by using the WESTT software (also developed
by the HFI DTC)
è  The main studies were interested in characterizing the impact of new
technologies on the Distributed Situation Awareness (DSA) (i.e. central
dimension regarding quality of the decision-making process) (Salmon et
al., 2010 ; Walker et al., 2009)
è  DSA concept is central to the EAST method (Stanton et al., 2006)
è  DSA is systemic (unlike the SA which is focused on the individual,
Endsley, 1997)
è  According to these authors, DSA is "the activation of an appropriate
knowledge for a specific task within a network ».
è  In a crisis situation, the performance of the network depends directly on
the quality of the DSA.
è  Measuring the DSA is useful to predict the network performance
è  Task Network : chronological
representation of performed
operations (OSD : Operation
Sequence Diagram )
è  Social Network : it represents a
modeling of the relationships
between actors.
è  Propositional Network (= Knowledge Network) :
-  Interaction between agents and the knowledge objects (i.e. information
that circulates within the network)
-  Modeling the flow of information within the network : Agent A –
knowledge objects Z – Agent B / Informational artefact S
-  The propositional network is used to characterize the flow of information
within a network (information required to decision making). This network
is therefore relevant to study the DSA.
Phase N°1
Phase N°2
Phase N°3
Phase N°4
Exemple: The Specialized
Aerodrome Emergency Plan
Phase N°1
Phase N°2
Phase N°3
Phase N°4
WESTT & MARS
Phase N°2 : live observation
8 Cameras + micros
6 dictaphones
14 Observateurs
Phase N°2 : Verbal transcripts
Phase N°2 : CDM
Critical Decision Method
(Klein et al., 1989)
Phase N°3 : Social Network Analysis
Phase N°3 : Social Network Analysis
Phase N°4 : the networks & metrics
WESTT (Workload, Error, Situational awareness, Time and Timework) Houghton et al. 2008
è WESTT offers a set of metrics (metric: an indicator designed to measure a
property of the sociotechnical network) useful to characterize the
sociotechnical network : workload, error, situation awareness, time,
“teamwork*” (centrality, sociometric status, network density)
✖ WESTT was tested for the PSSA exercise. Results were not conclusive
because of the limitations of the software
!
!
Phase N°4 : the networks & metrics
Phase N°4 : the networks & metrics
Phase N°4 : the networks & metrics
Phase N°4 : the networks & metrics
!
Filtering by knowledge objects : AVAILABLE
è E AST method is appropriate to study crisis
management
è Many difficulties have been found:
u Requires important technical and human resources
u EAST method is difficult to implement to study large
networks
u Verbal transcripts: it takes a very long time !
u Coupling of different databases: very difficult to do !
u How to represent several flows of communication
that occur at the same time, by different agents that
are located in different places?
u Tools such as WESTT and MARS are undersized
u More fundamentally, is it relevant to study a crisis
simulation while we know in advance what it will
happen (scenario pre-established)? We should
study a real crisis in order to capture the real
functioning of the sociotechnical system
« ….thank you for your attention…. »
Many thanks to
Janine Rogalski & Christine Chauvin
& all participants of 2009/06/16 meeting
(Hervé
Chaudet, Gilles Coppin, Charlotte Gaudin, Laurent Karsenty,
Liliane Pellegrin, Sylvie Molenda, Guillaume Philippe, Agnes van
Daele ….)