Crisis Managers’ Workload Assessment During a Simulated Crisis Situation

  • Clément JudekEmail author
  • Frédéric Verhaegen
  • Joan Belo
  • Thierry Verdel
Conference paper


Crisis situations are known to be very complex situations to manage by an organisation. Beyond its complex nature, there is a crucial need for crisis managers to efficiently cope with the situation in order to regain normal operating condition. Characteristics of the crisis situation as well as characteristics of the managers’ reaction influence psychological behaviours such as mental load and consequently the effectiveness and the performance of decision makers. Therefore, within a crisis unit, it seems relevant to assess how does the individual and collective perceived workload evolve during the management of a crisis situation. Crisis simulations have been carried out based on the approach proposed by iCrisis simulation which allows to recreate as accurately as possible a crisis situation built on both crisis situation and reaction to crisis characteristics. A subjective and multidimensional assessment of the individual and collective workload has been done with the Nasa-TLX and TWLQ tools on participants playing roles of decision makers at a strategic level. Results state that the perceived workload evolves during a crisis situation and a difference can be made whether it is from an individual or collective perspective. Crisis managers could use these findings in order to make them being aware of this constraint.


Crisis situation Mental workload Crisis simulation 


  1. 1.
    Lagadec, P.: Learning processes for crisis management in complex organizations. J. Conting. Crisis Manag. 5, 24–31 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Pearson, C., Clair, J.: Reframing crisis management. Acad. Manag. Rev. 23, 59–76 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    O’Donnell, R.D., Eggemeier, F.T.: Workload assessment methodology. In: Boff, K.R., Kaufman, L., Thomas, J.P. (eds.) Handbook of perception and human performance, Cognitive processes and performance, vol. 2, pp. 1–49. Wiley, Oxford (1986)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Sellers, J., Helton, W.S., Näswall, K., Funke, G.J., Knott, B.A.: Development of the Team Workload Questionnaire (TWLQ). Proc. Hum. Factors Ergon. Soc. Annu. Meet. 58, 989–993 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Ilies, R., Schwind, K.M., Wagner, D.T., Johnson, M.D., DeRue, D.S., Ilgen, D.R.: When can employees have a family life? The effects of daily workload and affect on work-family conflict and social behaviors at home. J. Appl. Psychol. 92, 1368–1379 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Peck, S.L.: Simulation as experiment: a philosophical reassessment for biological modeling. Trends Ecol. Evol. 19, 530–534 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Verdel, T., Tardy, A., Lopez, P., Hansen, C., Deschanels, J.-L.: Crisis™: un dispositif original de simulation de gestion de crise. Presented at the 17e Congrès de Maîtrise des Risques et de Sûreté de Fonctionnement October 5 (2010)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Hart, S.G., Staveland, L.E.: Development of NASA-TLX (Task Load Index): results of empirical and theoretical research. Adv. Psychol. 52, 139–183 (1988)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Hart, S.G.: Nasa-Task Load Index (NASA-TLX); 20 Years Later. Proc. Hum. Factors Ergon. Soc. Annu. Meet. 50, 904–908 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Clément Judek
    • 1
    Email author
  • Frédéric Verhaegen
    • 2
  • Joan Belo
    • 1
  • Thierry Verdel
    • 1
  1. 1.GeoRessourcesUniversité de LorraineNancyFrance
  2. 2.APEMACUniversité de LorraineVandœuvre-lès-NancyFrance

Personalised recommendations