Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

A systematic review of the potential hurdles of interoperability to the emergency services in major incidents: recommendations for solutions and alternatives

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Cognition, Technology & Work Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This study presents a narrative synthesis of a systematic literature review relating to multi-agency interoperability and major incident decision-making in high risk, high stake environments. The review methodology includes the identification of relevant studies, a critical appraisal of the concepts inherent in the main review question and a narrative synthesis of the central themes that relate to the study as a whole. The review firstly outlines what, currently, appear to be the perceived defining features of successful interoperability by using the SAFE-T phase model of major incident decision-making. It then considers whether these defining features are realistically achievable in major incident practice. Findings suggest that the current definition of an interoperable network is too demanding for the inherent complexity and dynamic nature of the major incident task environment. Individual teams tend to focus on agency-specific behaviour, as opposed to coordinated multi-team functioning, and so collective interoperability is not achieved. Inevitably, this reduces the ability to perform collaborative behaviours, including decision-making and action implementation. The paper concludes that aiming for the current conceptualisation of interoperability along a hierarchical command structure may actually inhibit effective decision-making. Instead, multi-agency systems would do better to work towards an improved understanding of a non-hierarchical and decentralised yet interoperable major incident management network. Recommendations include the need to relate theory and practice in the development of multi-agency decision-making via simulation-based training and to deepen our understanding of interoperability to prevent inertia in high risk, high stake major incident environments.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Alberts DS (2007) Agility, focus and convergence: the future of command and control. Int C2 J 1(1):1–30

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Aldunate RG, Pena-Mora F, Robinson GE (2005) Distributed decision making for large scale disaster relief operations: drawing analogies from robust natural systems. Complexity 11(2):28–38

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Alison L (2008) Introduction. In: Alison L, Crego J (eds) Policing major incidents: leadership and major incident management. Willan Publishing, Devon

    Google Scholar 

  • Alison L, Crego J (eds) (2008) Policing major incidents: leadership and major incident management. Willan Publishing, Devon

    Google Scholar 

  • Alison L, Eyre M, Humann M (2010) Losing sight of the ‘golden mean’: accountogenic decisions in UK policing. In: Mosier K, Fischer U (eds) Informed by knowledge: expert performance in complex situations. Psychology Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Alison L, van den Heuvel C, Waring S, Power N, Long A, O’Hara T, Crego J (2012) Immersive simulated learning environments for researching major incidents: A knowledge synthesis of the literature and experience of studying high-risk strategic decision making. J Cogn Eng Decis Mak. doi:10.1177/1555343412468113

  • Alper S, Tjosvold D, Law KS (1998) Interdependence and controversy in group decision making: antecedents to effective self-managing teams. Organ Behav Hum Decis Process 74(1):33–52

    Google Scholar 

  • Anderson C (2003) The psychology of doing nothing: forms of decision avoidance result from reason to emotion. Psychol Bull 129(1):139–169

    Google Scholar 

  • Asch SE (1952) Social psychology. Prentice Hill, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Auf der Heide E (1989) Disaster response: principles of preparation and coordination. C.V. Mosby, UK

    Google Scholar 

  • Axelsson R, Axelsson S (2006) Integration and collaboration in public health: a conceptual framework. Int J Health Plann Manag 21(1):75–88

    Google Scholar 

  • Bain WA (1999) Application of theory of action to safety management: recasting the NAT/HRT debate. J Conting Crisis Manag 07(3):129–140

    Google Scholar 

  • Batson CD (1998) Altruism and prosocial behaviour. In: Gilbert D, Fiske S, Lindzey G (eds) The handbook of social psychology. Oxford University Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Becera-Fernandez L, Xia W, Gudi A, Rocha J (2008) Task characteristics, knowledge sharing and integration, and emergency management performance: research agenda and challenges. In: Proceedings of the 5th international ISCRAM conference Washington DC, pp 88–92

  • Benn J, Healey AN, Hollnagel E (2008) Improving performance reliability in surgical systems. Cogn Technol Work 10:323–333

    Google Scholar 

  • Berger CR, Bradac JJ (1982) Language and social knowledge: uncertainty in interpersonal relationships. Edward Arnold, UK

    Google Scholar 

  • Bharosa N, Lee J, Janssen M (2010) Challenges and obstacles in sharing and coordinating information during multi-agency disaster response: propositions from field exercises. J Inf Syst Front 12(1):49–65

    Google Scholar 

  • Bier VM (2006) Hurricane Katrina as a bureaucratic nightmare. In: Daniels RJ, Kettl DF, Kunreuther H (eds) On risk and disaster: lessons from Hurricane Katrina. University of Pennsylvania Press, Philadelphia, pp 243–254

    Google Scholar 

  • Bigley GA, Roberts KH (2001) The incident command system: high reliability organisations for complex and volatile task environments. Acad Manag J 44(6):1281–1299

    Google Scholar 

  • Boin A (2004) Lessons from crisis research. Int Stud Rev 6(1):164–194

    Google Scholar 

  • Boin A, ‘t Hart P (2003) Public leadership in times of crisis: mission impossible? Public Adm Rev 63(5):544–553

    Google Scholar 

  • Boin A, ‘t Hart P, Stern E, Sundelius B (2005) The politics of crisis management: public leadership under pressure. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Borodzicz EP (2000) The terminology of dangerous events: implications for key decision maker training. Int J Police Sci Manag 2:348–359

    Google Scholar 

  • Brehmer B (1991) Distributed decision making: some notes on the literature. In: Rasmussen J, Brehmer B, Leplat J (eds) Distributed decision making: cognitive models of cooperative work. Wiley, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Bruner JS, Goodnow JJ, Austin GA (1956) A study of thinking. Wiley, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Buck D, Trainor J, Aguirre B (2006) A critical evaluation of the incident command systems and NIMS. J Homel Secur Emerg Manag 03(03):01–27

    Google Scholar 

  • Cabinet Office (2012) Revision to emergency preparedness: glossary. Civil Contingencies Act Enhancement Programme, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Carley KM, Lin Z (1997) A theoretical study of organisational performance under information distortion. Manage Sci 43(7):976–999

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Carrel LF (2000) Training civil servants for crisis management. J Conting Crisis Manag 8:192–196

    Google Scholar 

  • Castellan J (1993) Current issues in individual and group decision making. Erlbaum, Hillside, NJ

    Google Scholar 

  • Chen R, Sharman R, Rao HR, Upadhyaya SJ (2008) An exploration of coordination in emergency response management. Commun ACM 51(5):66–73

    Google Scholar 

  • Chilcott J, Brennan A, Booth A, Karnon J, Tappenden P (2003) The role of modelling in prioritising and planning clinical trials. Health Technol Assess 7:23

    Google Scholar 

  • Comfort LK (1999) Shared risk: complex systems in seismic response. Pergamon Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Comfort LK (2007) Crisis management in hindsight: cognition, communication, coordination and control. Public Adm Rev 67:189–197

    Google Scholar 

  • Cosgrove J (1996) Decision making in emergencies. Disaster Prev Manag 5(4):28–35

    Google Scholar 

  • Crego J (1996) Major incident management: engendering experience through simulation. PhD Thesis, Salford University

  • Crichton MT, Flin R, Rattray WAR (2000) Training decision makers—tactical decision games. J Conting Crisis Manag 8(4):208–217

    Google Scholar 

  • Cullen, the Right Honourable Lord (1990) The public inquiry into the Piper Alpha disaster. HMSO, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Danielsson M, Ohlsson K (1999) Decision making in emergency management: a survey study. Int J Cogn Ergon 3(2):91–99

    Google Scholar 

  • Dawes S, Creswell A, Cahan B (2004) Learning from crisis: lessons in human and information infrastructure from the World Trade centre response. Soc Sci Comput Rev 22(1):52–66

    Google Scholar 

  • de Bruijn H (2006) One fight, one team: the 9/11 commission report on intelligence, fragmentation and information. Public Adm 84(2):267–287

    Google Scholar 

  • de Dreu CKW (2007) Cooperative outcome interdependence, task reflexivity and team effectiveness: a motivated information processing approach. J Appl Psychol 92:628–638

    Google Scholar 

  • de Greef T, Arciszewski H (2007) A closed loop adaptive system for command and control foundations of augmented cognition, lecture notes in computer science. In: Proceeding FAC’07 proceedings of the 3rd international conference on foundations of augmented cognition, pp 276–285

  • de Marchi B (1995) Uncertainty in environmental emergencies: a diagnostic tool. J Conting Crisis Manag 8(4):208–217

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Denis H (1995) Coordination in a governmental disaster management meta-organisation. Int J Mass Emerg Disasters 131:25–43

    Google Scholar 

  • Denning PJ (2006) Hastily formed networks. Commun ACM 49(4):15–20

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Desai SB (2005) Solving the interagency puzzle. Policy Rev 129:57–71

    Google Scholar 

  • Drabek TE, McEntire DA (2002) Emergency phenomena in multi organisational coordination in disasters: lessons from the research literature. Int J Mass Emerg Disasters 20(2):197–224

    Google Scholar 

  • Drenvich P, Ramanujam R, Mehta S, Chaturvedi A (2009) Affiliation or situation: what drives strategic decision making in crisis response? J Manag Issues 21(2):216–231

    Google Scholar 

  • Driskell JE, Salas E (1991) Group decision making under stress. J Appl Psychol 76(3):473–478

    Google Scholar 

  • Driskell JE, Salas E, Johnston J (1999) Does stress lead to loss of team perspective? Group Dyn Theory Res Pract 03(04):291–304

    Google Scholar 

  • Drucker PF (2007) Management challenges for 21st century. Harper Business, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Dynes RR (1970) Organised behaviour in disaster. Heath Lexington Books, Massachusetts

    Google Scholar 

  • Eyre M, Alison L, Crego J, McLean C (2008) Decision inertia: the impact of organisations on major incident decision making. In: Alison L, Crego J (eds) Policing major incidents: leadership and major incident management. Willan Publishing, Devon

    Google Scholar 

  • Fennell D (1987) Investigation into the Kings Cross underground fire. HMSO, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Fielding N, Thomas H (2001) Qualitative interviewing. In: Gilbert N (ed) Researching social life. SAGE, London, pp 123–144

    Google Scholar 

  • Fleishman EA, Zaccaro SJ (1992) Toward a taxonomy of team performance functions. In: Swezey RW, Salas E (eds) Teams: their training and performance. Ablex, Norwood, NJ, pp 31–56

    Google Scholar 

  • Flin R (1996) Sitting in the hot seat: leaders and teams for major incident management. Wiley, West Sussex

    Google Scholar 

  • Flin R (2001) Decision making in crises: the Piper Alpha disaster. In: Rosenthal U, Boin AR, Comfort L (eds) Managing crises: threats, dilemma, opportunities. Charles C. Thomas, Springfield, IL, pp 103–118

    Google Scholar 

  • Flin R, Salas E, Strub M, Martin L (eds) (1997) Decision making under stress: emerging themes and applications. Ashgate, Aldershot

    Google Scholar 

  • Flin R, O’Connor P, Crichton M (2008) Safety at the sharp end: a guide to non technical skills. Ashgate, Aldershot

    Google Scholar 

  • Fraser-Mackenzie P, Dror I (2011) Dynamic reasoning and time pressure: transition from analytical operations to experiential responses. Theor Decis 71(2):211–225

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Fukuyama F (1995) The social virtues and the creation of prosperity. Free Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Galbraith JR (1977) Designing complex organisations. Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA

    Google Scholar 

  • Getha-Taylor H (2007) Collaborative governance: lessons from Katrina. Public Manag 36(3):07–11

    Google Scholar 

  • Granovetter M (1973) The strength of weak ties. Am J Sociol 78(6):1360–1380

    Google Scholar 

  • Grant JM, Mack DA (2004) Preparing for the battle. Organ Dyn 33:409–425

    Google Scholar 

  • Grimshaw J (2000) How to find information: social sciences. British Library, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Hallet, the Right Honourable Lady Justice (2011) Inquest into the London bombings of 7 July 2005. HMSO, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Hardin R (1982) Collective action. Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore

    Google Scholar 

  • Harrison Y, Horne J (1999) One night of sleep loss impairs innovative thinking and flexible decision making. Organ Behav Human Decis Process 78:128–145

    Google Scholar 

  • Healey MP, Hodgkinson GP, Teo S (2009) Responding effectively to civil emergencies: the role of transactive memory in the performance of multi team systems. In: Proceedings of NDM9 the 9th international conference on naturalistic decision making, pp 53–59

  • Helsloot I (2005) Bordering on reality: findings on the bonfire crisis management simulation. J Conting Crisis Manag 13(4):156–169

    Google Scholar 

  • Hodgkinson GP, Healey MP (2008) Cognition in organizations. Annu Rev Psychol 59:387–417

    Google Scholar 

  • James EH, Wooten LP (2005) Leadership as (un)usual. Organ Dyn 34:141–152

    Google Scholar 

  • Janis IL, Mann L (1977) Emergency decision making: a theoretical analysis of responses to disaster warnings. J Human Stress 3(2):35–48

    Google Scholar 

  • Janssen M, Lee J, Bharossa N (2009) Advances in multi-agency disaster management: key elements in disaster research. Springer, The Netherlands

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnston JH, Driskell JE, Salas E (1997) Vigilant and hyper vigilant decision making. J Appl Psychol 82(4):614–622

    Google Scholar 

  • Junglas I, Ives B (2007) Recovering IT in a disaster: lessons learned from Hurricane Katrina. MIS Q Exec 6(1):39–51

    Google Scholar 

  • Kapucu N (2005) Interorganisational coordination in dynamic context: networks in emergency response management. Connections 26(2):33–48

    Google Scholar 

  • Kapucu N (2008) Collaborative emergency management: better community organising, better public preparedness and response. Disasters 32(2):239–262

    Google Scholar 

  • Kapucu N, Garayev V (2011) Collaborative decision making in emergency and disaster management. Routledge, UK

    Google Scholar 

  • Katzenbach JR, Smith DK (1993) The wisdom of teams: creating the high performance organisation. Harvard Business School, Harvard

    Google Scholar 

  • Klein G (1989) Recognition-primed decision (RPD) model of rapid decision making. In: Klein G, Orasanu J, Calderwood R, Zsambok CE (eds) Decision making in action: models and methods. Ablex Publishing Corporation, Norwood, NJ, pp 138–147

    Google Scholar 

  • Klein G (1997) The recognition primed decision (RPD) model: looking back, looking forward. In: Zsambok C, Klein G (eds) Naturalistic decision making. Erlbaum, Mahwah, NJ, pp 285–292

    Google Scholar 

  • Klein G (1998) Sources of power: how people make decisions. MIT Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Koppenjan JFM, Klijn E (2004) Managing uncertainties in networks: a network approach to problem solving and decision making. Routledge, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Kowalski KM, Vaught C (2003) Judgement and decision making under stress: an overview for emergency managers. Int J Emergency Manage 1(3):278–289

    Google Scholar 

  • Kreps GA, Bosworth SL (1993) Disaster, organising and role enactment: a structural approach. Am J Sociol 99(2):428–463

    Google Scholar 

  • Kroon MBR, ‘t Hart P, van Kreveld D (1991) Managing group decision making processes: individual versus collective accountability and groupthink. Int J Confl Manag 2:91–115

    Google Scholar 

  • Kruke BI, Olsen OE (2012) Knowledge creation and reliable decision making in complex emergencies. Disasters 36(2):212–232

    Google Scholar 

  • LePine J, Piccolo RF, Jackson CL, Mathieu JE, Saul JR (2008) A meta analysis of teamwork processes: test of a multidimensional model and relationships with team effectiveness criteria. Pers Psychol 61:273–307

    Google Scholar 

  • Lindblom CE (1968) The policy making process. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ

    Google Scholar 

  • Lipshitz R, Strauss O (1997) Coping with uncertainty: a naturalistic decision making analysis. Organ Behav Human Decis Process 69:149–163

    Google Scholar 

  • Loewenstein G, Weber E, Hsee C, Welch E (2001) Risk as feelings. Psychol Bull 127:267–286

    Google Scholar 

  • March JG (1988) Decisions and organisations. Blackwell, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • March JG, Simon HA (1958) Organisations. Wiley, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Marks MA, Mathieu JE, Zaccaro SJ (2001) A temporally based framework and taxonomy of team process. Acad Manag Rev 26(3):356–376

    Google Scholar 

  • Mathieu JE, Marks MA, Zaccaro SJ (2001) Multi team systems. In: Anderson N, Ones D, Sinangil HK, Viswesvaran C (eds) International handbook of work and organisational psychology. Sage, London, pp 289–313

    Google Scholar 

  • Mayer RC, Davis JH, Shoorman DF (1995) An integrative model of organizational trust. Acad Manag Rev 20(3):709–734

    Google Scholar 

  • McEntire DA (2008) Issues in disaster relief: progress, perpetual problems and prospective solutions. Disaster Prev Manag 8:351–361

    Google Scholar 

  • McNeill P, Chapman S (2005) Research methods. Routledge, Oxon

    Google Scholar 

  • Mellers BA (2000) Choice and the relative pleasure of consequences. Psychol Bull 126(6):910–924

    Google Scholar 

  • Mendonca D, Jefferson T, Harrald J (2007) Collaborative adhocracies and mix and match technologies in emergency management: using the emergency interoperability approach to address unanticipated contingencies during emergency response. Commun ACM 50(3):45–49

    Google Scholar 

  • Meyer JP, Mulherin A (1980) From attribution to helping: an analysis of the mediating effects of affect and expectancy. J Pers Soc Psychol 39(2):201–210

    Google Scholar 

  • Mintzberg H (1979) The structuring of organisations. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ

    Google Scholar 

  • Moynihan DP (2008) Learning under uncertainty: networks in crisis management. Public Adm Rev 68(2):350–365

    Google Scholar 

  • National Policing Improvement Agency (2009a) Guidance on emergency procedures. HMSO, London

    Google Scholar 

  • National Policing Improvement Agency (2009b) Guidance on multi-agency interoperability. HMSO, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Northcroft GB, Polzer JT, Neale MA, Kramer RM (1995) Diversity, social identity and performance: emergent social dynamics in cross-functional teams. In: Jackson SE, Ruderman MN (eds) Diversity in work teams: research paradigms for changing workplace. APA, Washington, DC, pp 69–97

    Google Scholar 

  • O’Connor N, Kotze B, Wright M (2012) Blame and accountability 2: on being accountable. Australas Psychiatry 19(2):119–124

    Google Scholar 

  • Office for Nuclear Regulation (2011) Japanese earthquake and tsunami: implications for the UK nuclear industry. HSE, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Osgood CE, Suci GJ, Tannenbaum PH (1957) The measurement of meaning. University of Illinois Press, Urbana, IL

    Google Scholar 

  • Pan S, Pan G, Devadoss P (2005) E-government capabilities and crisis management: lessons from combating SARS in Singapore. MIS Q Exec 4(4):385–397

    Google Scholar 

  • Paton D (2003) Stress in disaster response: a risk management approach. Disaster Prev Manag 12(3):203–209

    Google Scholar 

  • Paton D, Flin R, Violanti J (1999) Incident response and recovery management. In: Violanti JM, Paton D (eds) Police trauma: psychological aftermath of civilian combat. Charles C. Thomas Publisher Ltd, Springfield, IL

    Google Scholar 

  • Pena-Mora F, Chen A, Aziz Z, Soibelman L, Liu LY, El-Rayes K, Arboleda CA, Lantz TS Jr, Plans AP, Lakhera S, Mathur S (2010) Supporting civil engineering emergency response operations. J Comput Civ Eng 24(3):302–312

    Google Scholar 

  • Penrose JM (1999) The role of perception in crisis planning. Public Relat Rev 26:155–171

    Google Scholar 

  • Perrow C (1999) Normal accidents: living with high risk technologies. Princeton University Press, Princeton

    Google Scholar 

  • Petticrew M, Roberts H (2006) Systematic reviews in the social sciences: a practical guide. Blackwell Publishing, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Pierce JL, Kostova T, Dirks K (2001) Toward a theory of psychological ownership in organisations. Acad Manag Rev 26:298–310

    Google Scholar 

  • Pigeau R, McCann C (2000) Redefining command and control. In: McCann C, Pigeau R (eds) The human in command. Kluwer Academic/ Plenum Publishers, New York, pp 163–184

    Google Scholar 

  • Quarantelli EL (1988) Disaster crisis management: a summary of research findings. J Manage Stud 25(4):373–385

    Google Scholar 

  • Rao HR, Chaudhury A, Chakka M (1995) Modelling team processes: issues and a specific example. Inf Syst Res 6(3):255–285

    Google Scholar 

  • Reagans R, McEvily B (2003) Network structure and knowledge transfer: the effects of cohesion and range. Adm Sci Q 48:240–267

    Google Scholar 

  • Reicher SD (1987) Crowd behaviour as social action. In: Turner JC (ed) Rediscovering the social group: a self categorisation theory. Blackwell, Oxford, pp 171–202

    Google Scholar 

  • Ritov I, Baron J (1990) Reluctance to vaccinate: omission bias and ambiguity. J Behav Decis Mak 3:263–277

    Google Scholar 

  • Robert B, Lajtha C (2002) A new approach to crisis management. J Conting Crisis Manag 10:181–191

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosen MA, Salas E, Wilson K, King H, Salisbury M, Augenstein JS, Robinson DW, Birnbach DJ (2008) Measuring team performance in simulation based training: adopting best practices for healthcare. Simul Healthc 3(1):33–41

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosenthal U, Kouzmin A (1997) Crisis and crisis management: toward comprehensive government decision making. J Public Adm Res Theory 7(2):277–305

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosenthal U, Boin RA, Comfort LK (2001) From crises to contingencies: a global perspective. Charles C. Thomas, Springfield, IL

    Google Scholar 

  • Rouse WB (1991) Design for success. Wiley, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Rouse WB, Cannon-Bowers JA, Salas E (1992) The role of mental models in team performance in complex systems. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern 22:1296–1308

    Google Scholar 

  • Salas E, Cannon-Bowers JA (2001) The science of training: a decade of progress. Annu Rev Psychol 52:471–499

    Google Scholar 

  • Schroder HM, Driver MJ, Sreufert S (1967) Human information processing. Holt, Rinehart and Winston, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Select Bipartisan Committee (2006) Failure of initiative—final report of the select bipartisan committee to investigate the preparation for the response to Hurricane Katrina. US Government Printing Office, Washington

    Google Scholar 

  • Sellnow TL, Seegar MW, Ulmer RR (2002) Chaos theory, informational needs, and natural disasters. J Appl Commun Res 30(4):269–292

    Google Scholar 

  • Serfaty D, Entin EE, Volpe C (1993) Adaption to stress in team decision making and coordination. In: Proceedings from the human factors and ergonomics society 37th annual meeting

  • Sherif M (1962) Intergroup relations and leadership. Wiley, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Simon HA (1982) Models of bounded rationality. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA

    Google Scholar 

  • Slovic P, Finucane M, Peters E, MacGregor D (2001) The affect heuristic. In: Gilovich T, Griffin D, Kahneman D (eds) Intuitive judgement: heuristics and biases. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith W, Dowell J (2000) A case study of coordinative decision making in disaster management. Ergonomics 43(8):1153–1166

    Google Scholar 

  • Stephenson M (2005) Making humanitarian relief networks more effective: operational coordination, trust and sense making. Disasters 29(4):337–350

    Google Scholar 

  • Stokes AF, Kemper K, Kite K (1997) Aeronautical decision making: cue recognition and expertise under time pressure. In: Zsambok C, Klein G (eds) Naturalistic decision making. Lawrence Erlbaum, Mahwah, NJ, pp 183–196

    Google Scholar 

  • Stout RJ, Cannon-Bowers JA, Salas E, Milanovich DM (1999) Planning, shared mental models, and coordinated performance: an empirical link is established. Hum Factors 41:61–71

    Google Scholar 

  • Streufert S (2005) Emergency decision making and metacomplexity. In: Proceeding of the 2nd international ISCRAM conference. Brussels, Belgium

  • Streufert S, Streufert SC (1978) Behaviour in the complex environment. Wiley, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Streufert S, Nogami GY, Swezey RW, Pogash RM, Piasecky MT (1988) Computer assisted training of complex managerial performance. Comput Human Behav 4:77–88

    Google Scholar 

  • Taber N, Plumb D, Jolemore S (2008) ‘Grey’ areas and ‘organised chaos’ in emergency response. J Workplace Learn 20(4):272–285

    Google Scholar 

  • Taylor, the Right Honourable Lord Justice (1989) Inquiry into the Hillsborough stadium disaster. HMSO, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Therrien MC (1995) Interorganisational networks and decision making technological disasters. Saf Sci 20:101–113

    Google Scholar 

  • Thomson AM, Perry JL (2006) Collaboration processes: inside the black box. Public Adm Rev 66(1):20–32

    Google Scholar 

  • Useem M, Cook JR, Sutton L (2005) Developing leaders for decision making under stress: wildland fire-fighters in the South Canyon Fire and its aftermath. Acad Manag Learn Educ 4(4):461–485

    Google Scholar 

  • Uzzi B (1997) Social structure and competition in interfirm networks: the paradox of embeddedness. Adm Sci Q 42:35–67

    Google Scholar 

  • van de Ven AH, Delbecq AL, Koenig R (1976) Determinants of coordination modes within organisations. Am Sociol Rev 41:322–338

    Google Scholar 

  • van den Heuvel C (2011) Inaction in action: how task and team uncertainty ‘derail’ strategic decision making and create implementation failures in critical and major incident management. Unpublished PhD Thesis, University of Liverpool

  • van den Heuvel C, Alison L, Crego J (2012) How uncertainty and accountability can derail strategic ‘save life’ decisions in counter-terrorism simulations: a descriptive model of choice deferral and omission bias. J Behav Decis Mak 25:165–187

    Google Scholar 

  • van den Heuvel C, Alison L, Power N (2012) Coping with uncertainty: police strategies for resilient decision-making and action implementation. Cogn Technol Work, online first. doi: 10.1007/s10111-012-0241-8

  • van den Heuvel C, Alison L, Power N (2013) The role of endogenous and exogenous uncertainty in critical incident decision making: an example from hostage negotiation. International conference on naturalistic decision making, pp 22–24

  • von Lubitz DK, Beakley JE, Patricelli F (2008) All hazards approach to disaster management: the role of information and knowledge management. Disasters 32(4):561–585

    Google Scholar 

  • Wallace WA, De Balogh F (1985) Decision support systems for disaster management. Public Adm Rev 45:134–146

    Google Scholar 

  • Waring SK, Alison LJ, Cunningham S, Whitfield KC (2013) The impact of accountability on motivational goals and the quality of advice provided in crisis negotiations. Psychol Public Policy Law. doi:10.1037/a0030629

  • Waugh WL, Streib G (2006) Collaboration and leadership for effective emergency management. Public Adm Rev 66(1):131–140

    Google Scholar 

  • Webb GR (2004) Role improvising during crisis situations. Int J Emergency Manage 2:47–61

    Google Scholar 

  • Weiner B (1980) Human motivation. Holt, Rinehart & Winston, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Weisaeth L, Knudsen O Jr, Tonnessen A (2002) Technological disasters: crisis management and leadership stress. J Hazard Mater 93:33–45

    Google Scholar 

  • Wickens CD (1992) Engineering psychology and human performance. Harper Collins, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Wildman JL, Thayer AL, Rosen MA, Salas E, Mathieu JE, Rayne SR (2012) Task types and team-level attributes: synthesis of team classification literature. Hum Resour Dev Rev 11(1):97–129

    Google Scholar 

  • Zeelenberg M (1999) Anticipated regret, expected feedback and behavioural decision making. J Behav Decis Mak 12(2):93–106

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Liverpool Institute for Risk and Uncertainty, Centre for Critical and Major Incident Psychology, University of Liverpool, Eleanor Rathbone Building, Bedford Street South, Liverpool, L69 7ZA, UK

    Adrian House, Nicola Power & Laurence Alison

Authors
  1. Adrian House
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Nicola Power
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Laurence Alison
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Laurence Alison.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

House, A., Power, N. & Alison, L. A systematic review of the potential hurdles of interoperability to the emergency services in major incidents: recommendations for solutions and alternatives. Cogn Tech Work 16, 319–335 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10111-013-0259-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10111-013-0259-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation