Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Enhancing Network Centric Operations Doctrine to Support Civil Military Cooperation in Disaster Management

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
NL ARMS Netherlands Annual Review of Military Studies 2016

Part of the book series: NL ARMS ((NLARMS))

Abstract

Network Centric Operations is a promising command doctrine in both military operations and during civil disaster management. As both sectors started intensifying their joint operational capacity through civil-military collaboration, it becomes increasingly relevant to address the different command doctrines underlying Network Centric Operations in both sectors. In this Chapter I explore the origins of network governance in both sectors and argue what steps need to be taken in order overcome the differences. I argue that governing the heterogeneous set of organizations that operate in disaster response networks requires a new approach for Network Centric Operations that does not only rely upon information sharing and self-synchronization. Instead, it requires negotiation, sensemaking, and network switching in order to overcome the different functional, normative and knowledge boundaries that come into play in heterogeneous disaster response networks.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 49.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 64.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Comfort and Kapucu 2006.

  2. 2.

    Houghton et al. 2008.

  3. 3.

    Comfort and Kapucu 2006.

  4. 4.

    Committee Oosting 2001.

  5. 5.

    Committee Alders 2001.

  6. 6.

    Committee Alders 2001, p. 215.

  7. 7.

    Committee Oosting 2001, p. 162 and p. 270.

  8. 8.

    Boom 2000.

  9. 9.

    Remkes and Kamp 2006.

  10. 10.

    Boersma et al. 2012.

  11. 11.

    Endsley 1995; Perry et al. 2002; Houghton et al. 2006.

  12. 12.

    Fewell and Hazen 2003.

  13. 13.

    Hayes 2007.

  14. 14.

    Houghton et al. 2008.

  15. 15.

    Van Bezooijen and Kramer 2015.

  16. 16.

    Morris et al. 2007.

  17. 17.

    Van Creveld 1989.

  18. 18.

    Shamir 2010.

  19. 19.

    Von Clausewitz 1873.

  20. 20.

    Keithly and Ferris 1999.

  21. 21.

    Alberts and Hayes 2003.

  22. 22.

    Alberts and Hayes 2003.

  23. 23.

    Hayes 2007.

  24. 24.

    Comfort 2007.

  25. 25.

    Provan and Kenis 2008; Moynihan 2009.

  26. 26.

    Boersma et al. 2014.

  27. 27.

    Quarantelli and Dynes 1977.

  28. 28.

    Helsloot and Ruitenberg 2004.

  29. 29.

    Solnit 2010.

  30. 30.

    Tierney et al. 2006.

  31. 31.

    Comfort 2007; Tierney et al. 2006.

  32. 32.

    Dynes 1994.

  33. 33.

    Helsloot and Ruitenberg 2004.

  34. 34.

    Hayes 2007; Moynihan 2009.

  35. 35.

    Boin and ’t Hart 2003; Dynes 1970; Tierney and Trainor 2004.

  36. 36.

    Scholtens 2008.

  37. 37.

    Provan and Kenis 2008.

  38. 38.

    Fewel and Hazen 2003, p. 2.

  39. 39.

    Fewel and Hazen 2003, p. 2.

  40. 40.

    Fewel and Hazen 2003, p. 2.

  41. 41.

    Wolbers 2016.

  42. 42.

    Hsiao et al. 2012; Carlile 2002; Bechky 2003; Levina and Vaast 2005.

  43. 43.

    Barley and Kunda 2001.

  44. 44.

    Watson-Manheim et al. 2012.

  45. 45.

    Rico et al. 2008.

  46. 46.

    Okhuysen and Bechky 2009.

  47. 47.

    Bigley and Roberts 2001; Moynihan 2009; Comfort 2007; Majchrzak et al. 2007.

  48. 48.

    Kapucu 2006; Comfort 2007; Moynihan 2009.

  49. 49.

    Bigley and Roberts 2001.

  50. 50.

    Okhuysen and Bechky 2009.

  51. 51.

    Kellogg et al. 2006.

  52. 52.

    Vaughan 1999.

  53. 53.

    Alberts et al. 2001.

  54. 54.

    Wolbers and Boersma 2013.

  55. 55.

    Weick et al. 2005; Maitlis and Sonenshein 2010.

  56. 56.

    Weick et al. 2005.

  57. 57.

    Taber et al. 2008.

  58. 58.

    Weber and Glynn 2006.

  59. 59.

    Faraj and Xiao 2006.

  60. 60.

    Faraj and Sproull 2000.

  61. 61.

    Topper and Carley 1999.

  62. 62.

    Comfort and Kapucu 2006.

  63. 63.

    Castells 1996.

  64. 64.

    Castells 1996.

  65. 65.

    Wolbers et al. 2013.

References

  • Alberts DS, Garstka JJ, Hayes RE, Signori DA (2001) Understanding information age warfare. Assistant Secretary of Defense C3I Command and Control Research Program, Washington DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Alberts DS, Hayes RE (2003) Power to the edge: command and control in the information age. Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense Washington DC Command and Control Research Program (CCRP), Washington DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Barley SR, Kunda G (2001) Bringing work back in. Organ Sci 12:76–95

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bechky BA (2003) Sharing meaning across occupational communities: the transformation of understanding on a production floor. Organ Sci 14:312–330

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boersma FK, Wagenaar P, Wolbers JJ (2012) Negotiating the trading zone. creating a shared information infrastructure in the Dutch safety sector. J Homel Secur Emerg Manage 9:1–26

    Google Scholar 

  • Boersma FK, Ferguson J, Groenewegen P, Wolbers JJ (2014) Beyond the myth of control: toward network switching in disaster management. In: Hiltz SR, Pfaff MS, Plotnick L, Robinson AC (eds) Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Information Systems for Crisis Response and Management ISCRAM 2014. University Park, Pennsylvania, pp 125–129

    Google Scholar 

  • Boin A, ‘t Hart P (2003) Public Leadership in Times of Crisis: Mission Impossible. Public Adm Rev 63:544–553

    Google Scholar 

  • Boom BE (2000) Atoomgevaar? dan zeker BB: de geschiedenis van de Bescherming Bevolking. Sdu Uitgevers, The Hague

    Google Scholar 

  • Carlile PR (2002) A pragmatic view of knowledge and boundaries: boundary objects in new product development. Organ Sci 13:442–455

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Castells M (1996) The rise of the network society. Blackwell, Malden

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Comfort LK, Kapucu N (2006) Inter-organizational coordination in extreme events: the World Trade Center attacks, September 11, 2001. Nat Hazards 39:309–327

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Committee Alders (2001) Cafebrand in Volendam. Rotterdam

    Google Scholar 

  • Committee Oosting (2001) De Vuurwerkramp, Eindrapport. Enschede/The Hague

    Google Scholar 

  • Dynes RR (1970) Organized behavior in disasters. Heath Lexington Books, Lexington, MA

    Google Scholar 

  • Dynes RR (1994) Community emergency planning: false assumptions and inappropriate analogies. Int J Mass Emerg Disasters 12:141–158

    Google Scholar 

  • Endsley MR (1995) Toward a theory of situation awareness in dynamic systems. Hum Factors J Hum Factors Ergon Soc 37:32–64

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Faraj S, Sproull L (2000) Coordinating expertise in software development teams. Manage Sci 46:1554–1568

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Faraj S, Xiao Y (2006) Coordination in fast-response organizations. Manage Sci 52:1155–1169

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fewell MP, Hazen MG (2003) Netcentric warfare, its nature and its modeling. Department of Defence Australia, DSTO Systems Sciences Laboratory

    Google Scholar 

  • Hayes RE (2007) It’s an Endeavor, not a Force. Int C2 J 1:145–176

    Google Scholar 

  • Helsloot I, Ruitenberg A (2004) Citizen response to disasters: a survey of literature and some practical implications. J Contingencies Crisis Manage 12:98–111


    Google Scholar 

  • Houghton RJ, Barber C, McMaster R, Stanton NA, Salmon P, Stewart R, Walker GH (2006) Command and control in emergency services operations; a social network analysis. Ergonomics 49:10–22

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Houghton RJ, Barber C, Cowton M, Walker GH, Stanton NA (2008) WESTT (workload, error, situational awareness, time and teamwork): an analytical prototyping system for command and control. Cogn Technol Work 10:199–207

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hsiao RL, Tsai DH, Lee CF (2012) Collaborative knowing: the adaptive nature of cross-boundary spanning. J Manage Stud 49:463–491

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kapucu N (2006) Interagency communication networks during emergencies: boundary spanners in multiagency coordination. Am Rev Public Adm 36:207–225

    Google Scholar 

  • Keithly DM, Ferri SP (1999) Auftragstaktik, or directive control, in joint and combined operations. Parameters 29:118–133

    Google Scholar 

  • Kellogg KC, Orlikowski WJ, Yates J (2006) Life in the trading zone: structuring coordination across boundaries in postbureaucratic organizations. Organ Sci 17:22–44

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Levina N, Vaast E (2005) The emergence of boundary spanning competence in practice: implications for implementation and use of information systems. MIS Q 29:335–363

    Google Scholar 

  • Maitlis S, Sonenshein S (2010) Sensemaking in crisis and change: inspiration and insights from Weick (1988). J Manage Stud 47:551–580

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Majchrzak A, Jarvenpaa SL, Hollingshead AB (2007) Coordinating expertise among emergent groups responding to disasters. Organ Sci 18:147–161

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morris JC, Morris ED, Jones DM (2007) Reaching for the Philosopher’s Stone: Contingent Coordination and the Military Response to Hurricane Katrina. Public Adm Rev 67:94–106

    Google Scholar 

  • Moynihan DP (2009) The network governance of crisis response: case studies of incident command systems. J Public Adm Res Theor 19:895–915

    Google Scholar 

  • Okhuysen GA, Bechky BA (2009) Coordination in organizations: an integrative perspective. Acad Manage Ann 3:463–502

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Perry W, Button RW, Bracken J, Sullivan T, Mitchell J (2002) Measures of effectiveness for the information-age navy: the effects of network-centric operations on combat outcomes. Report MR-1449-NAVY of the RAND Corporation, Santa Monica, California

    Google Scholar 

  • Provan KG, Kenis P (2008) Modes of network governance: structure, management and effectiveness. J Public Adm Res Theor 18:229–252

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Quarantelli EL, Dynes RR (1977) Response to social crisis and disaster. Annu Rev Sociol 3:23–49

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Remkes J, Kamp H (2006) Rapportage Intensivering Civiel-militaire Samenwerking, letter to the Parliament about intensifying civil-military collaboration. Department of the Interior and Ministry of Defence, The Hague

    Google Scholar 

  • Rico R, Sánchez-Manzanares M, Gil F, Gibson C (2008) Team implicit coordination processes: a team knowledge–based approach. Acad Manag Rev 33:163–184

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scholtens A (2008) Controlled collaboration in disaster and disaster management in the Netherlands, history and practice of an overestimated and underestimated concept. J Contingencies Disaster Manage 16:195–207

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shamir E (2010) The long and winding road: the US Army managerial approach to command and the adoption of Mission Command (Auftragstaktik). J Strateg Stud 33:645–672

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Solnit R (2010) A paradise built in hell: the extraordinary communities that arise in disaster. Viking, New York

    Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tierney KJ, Bevc C, Kuligowski E (2006) Metaphor matters: disaster myths, media frames, and their consequences in Hurricane Katrina. Ann Am Acad Polit Soc Sci 604:57–81


    Google Scholar 

  • Tierney K, Trainor J (2004) Networks and Resilience in the World Trade Center Disaster. Research Progress and Accomplishments, vol. 6. Multidisciplinary Center for Earthquake Engineering Research, Buffalo, NY

    Google Scholar 

  • Topper CM, Carley KM (1999) A structural perspective on the emergence of network organizations. J Math Sociol 24:67–96

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Bezooijen B, Kramer EH (2015) Mission command in the information age: a normal accidents perspective on networked military operations. J Strateg Stud 38:445–466

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Creveld ML (1989) Technology in war. The Free Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Vaughan D (1999) The role of organization in the production of techno-scientific knowledge. Soc Stud Sci 29:913–943

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Von Clausewitz C (1873) On war. Trübner & Company, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Watson-Manheim M, Chudoba B, Crowston K (2012) Perceived discontinuities and constructed continuities in virtual work. Inf Syst J 22:29–52

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weber K, Glynn MA (2006) Making sense with institutions: context, thought and action in Karl Weick’s theory. Organ Stud 27:1639–1660

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weick KE, Sutcliffe KM, Obstfeld D (2005) Organizing and the process of sensemaking. Organ Sci 16:409–421

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wolbers JJ (2016) Drawing the line. Cross-boundary coordination processes in emergency management, Ph.D. Thesis VU Amsterdam. Ridderprint, Ridderkerk

    Google Scholar 

  • Wolbers JJ, Boersma FK (2013) The common operational picture as collective sensemaking. J Contingencies Crisis Manag 21:186–199

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wolbers JJ, Groenewegen P, Molle J, Bim J (2013) Incorporating time dynamics in the analysis of social networks in emergency management. J Homel Secur Emerg Manage 10:1–31

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Faculty of Social Sciences, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands

    Jeroen Wolbers

Authors
  1. Jeroen Wolbers
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jeroen Wolbers .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Faculty of Military Sciences, Netherlands Defence Academy Faculty of Military Sciences, Breda, The Netherlands

    Robert Beeres

  2. Faculty of Military Sciences, Netherlands Defence Academy Faculty of Military Sciences, Breda, The Netherlands

    Gwendolyn Bakx

  3. Faculty of Military Sciences, Netherlands Defence Academy Faculty of Military Sciences, Breda, The Netherlands

    Erik de Waard

  4. Faculty of Military Sciences, Netherlands Defence Academy Faculty of Military Sciences, Breda, The Netherlands

    Sebastiaan Rietjens

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2016 T.M.C. Asser press and the authors

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Wolbers, J. (2016). Enhancing Network Centric Operations Doctrine to Support Civil Military Cooperation in Disaster Management. In: Beeres, R., Bakx, G., de Waard, E., Rietjens, S. (eds) NL ARMS Netherlands Annual Review of Military Studies 2016. NL ARMS. T.M.C. Asser Press, The Hague. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-6265-135-7_6

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-6265-135-7_6

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: T.M.C. Asser Press, The Hague

  • Print ISBN: 978-94-6265-134-0

  • Online ISBN: 978-94-6265-135-7

  • eBook Packages: Law and CriminologyLaw and Criminology (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Societies and partnerships

Search

Navigation