Presentation agenda

1. Task Characteristics, Knowledge Sharing and Integration, and Emergency Management Performance: Research Agenda and ChallengesbyIrma Becerra-Fernandez, Weidong XiaArvind Gudi, Jose Rocha Florida International University5th International Conference on Information Systems for Crisis Response and Management Washington, DC, May 4-7, 2008

2. Presentation agenda • Research backgrounds • Disaster management – Unique task characteristics • Key issues that motivate this research • Research objectives • Key concepts • Research framework • Research methods • Preliminary results • Research challenges and strategies • Questions and comments

3. Research backgrounds • Research team • Irma Becerra-Fernandez • Knowledge management (NASA) • Disaster management (Miami-Dade EOC) • Virtual EOC (Project Ensayo) • Weidong Xia • Organizational capabilities and design • IS complexity and flexibility • Innovation adoption and decision • Arvind Gudi and Jose Rocha • Emergency task and knowledge management • Collaborations with • Greg Madey, Notre Dame • Michael Prietula, Emory University • Others: Domingo Rodriguez (UPR), Ricardo Valerdi (MIT)

4. Disaster management – Unique task characteristics • San Diego Fires (2007) • In 4 days: • - burned 410,000 acres • - largest evacuation in • state history (500,000+)

5. Disaster management – Unique task characteristics Hurricane Katrina (2005) • Fatalities • 1,836 total • Damage • $81.2 billion (2005 USD) • $84 billion (2006 USD)

6. Disaster management – Unique task characteristics September 11, 2001

7. Disaster management – Unique task characteristics Hurricane Andrew (1992) • Fatalities • 65 (26 direct, 39 indirect) • Damage • $26 billion (1992 USD) • $37 billion (2006 USD)

8. Disaster management – Unique task characteristics “Press dismay at Katrina chaos” BBC News, 3 September 2005 Lessons Learned from Andrew were the same as Katrina! • Task characteristics • Rare/diverse events • High Impact • Complex and dynamic • Knowledge sharing • Decision coordination • Multiple organizations (public and private) • Different levels and locations • Psychological Impacts on decision making • Learning difficulty 1. Leadership roles and lines of authority not clearly defined Ambiguous procedures for activation and application of National Response Plan 3. Deficient training and exercise programs Response and recovery capabilities need to be strengthen

9. Key issues that motivate this research • Increased importance of effective emergency management • Repeated organizational deficiencies in managing emergency management tasks • Lack of frameworks helping define and assess the complex, dynamic and inter-organizational nature of emergency management tasks • Lack of integrative research between knowledge management literature and emergency management literature

10. Research objectives • Conceptualizing and developing measures of emergency management task complexity and uncertainty • Developing and testing a research model that focuses on the mediating role of knowledge sharing/integration between emergency management task complexity/uncertainty and task performance

11. Key concepts – Task characteristics • Component complexity • Interactive complexity • Procedural rigidity Task complexity Task characteristics • Task novelty • Task un-analyzability • Task significance Task uncertainty Component Complexity- multiplicity of the task components (number of people, organizations, computer systems, and machines) Interactive Complexity - the degree of interactions and interdependencies among the components of the task, Procedural Rigidity - lack of flexibility in terms of the sequencing and durations of the task components Task Novelty - the newness (unexpected and novel events that occur in performing the task) and nonroutineness (exceptional circumstances requiring flexibility) of the task Task Unanalyzability - the degree to which the task is unstructured and the information required to perform the task is equivocal thus leading to conflicting interpretations Task Significance - the urgency and impact of the task Literature bases: Complex systems (Perrow, 1984), complex tasks (Campbell, 1988; Wood, 1986), information processing (Galbraith, 1973; Daft and Lengel, 1986)

12. Key concepts – Knowledge management • Personal interaction vs. written documents • Exploration vs. exploitation Knowledge sharing Knowledge management • Context-specific knowledge • Technology-specific knowledge • Context-and-technology-specific knowledge Knowledge integration Context-specific knowledge- of the particular circumstances of time and place in which work is performed Technology-specific - of the particular scientific or theoretical discipline, which comprises of rules of cause and effect and the tools and techniques used to address problems in that area Context-and technology-specific knowledge - high in both context and technical specificity Knowledge exploration - discovery of new knowledge is required because there is no existing knowledge for performing the tasks at hand (search, experimentation, discovery, or innovation) Knowledge exploitation - a directed search and utilization of existing knowledge Knowledge sharing through personal interactions is appropriate for knowledge that is difficult to codify and hard to formally articulate in writing, and as a result, such knowledge often resides in individuals based on their tacit experiences and social context. Knowledge sharing through written documents is appropriate for explicit knowledge that has been formally codified and written down, and as a result, is available for search and use in the forms of planning guidelines, standard operating procedures, best practices, lessons learned, and after action reports.

13. Key concepts – Task performance • Schedule • Cost • Resource utilization Task efficiency Task performance • Participant satisfaction • Meet all task requirements • Without negatively affect other tasks Task effectiveness

14. Research framework Complexity of EM tasks - Component complexity - Interactive complexity - Procedural rigidity Knowledge sharing - Personal context vs. written documents - Exploration vs. exploitation Knowledge integration - Context-specific knowledge - Technology-specific knowledge - Context-and-technology specific knowledge Task performance - Effectiveness - Efficiency Uncertainty of EM tasks - Task novelty - Task unanalyzability - Task significance

15. Research methods Background knowledge/experience (literature, field observations, interviews, drill participation, etc.). Context - Miami-Dade County EOC Stage 1 – Conceptual development (reviewing the relevant literature, interviewing emergency managers, and creating and refining the research model) Stage 2 – Measurement development (identifying existing measures from the literature, developing new measures, interviewing emergency managers, sorting procedures to refine the initial pool of measures, pilot tests with emergency managers, and finalizing the instruments) Stage 3 – Survey data collection (obtaining endorsement letter, setting up online survey, mailing survey, sending reminders) Stage 4 – Measurement validation and model testing will be conducted using the survey data Stage 5 – Result dissemination (Executive Summary, paper publications, dissertations)

16. Research context

17. Preliminary results (N = 77) Complexity of EM tasks - Component complexity - Interactive complexity - Procedural rigidity Knowledge sharing - Personal context vs. written documents - Exploration vs. exploitation Knowledge integration - Context-specific knowledge - Technology-specific knowledge - Context-and-technology specific knowledge Task performance - Effectiveness - Efficiency Uncertainty of EM tasks - Task novelty - Task unanalyzability - Task significance

18. Preliminary results (n = 77)

19. Research challenges • Hard to compare the tasks involved in different emergency situations • Researcher can’t control (effectively capture) task characteristics and situational factors • EOC personnel belong to different organizations, difficult to identify appropriate study participants • Ad hoc nature of the task makes it difficult to capture knowledge aspects • Difficult to get high response rate and high quality data

20. Strategies to deal with research challenges • Better design and execute field studies as we continue the current research • Add incentives • Expand to other EOCs • Design and utilize virtual EOC (e.g., Project Ensayo by Becerra-Fernandez, I. Prietula, M., Madey, G., Rodriguez, D., Valerdi, R., Wright, T.)

21. Virtual EOC - Project Ensayo (by Becerra-Fernandez, I. Prietula, M., Madey, G., Rodriguez, D., Valerdi, R., Wright, T.) • Simulator • Test bed • Research platform • Training & education • Knowledge management • Preliminary design • Business process mapping & analysis, and standard operating procedures (SOPs) • Best practices/Best-of-breed • Server infrastructure • Scenarios/scripts • Intelligent agents

22. Strategies to deal with research challenges • Design/utilize the virtual EOC computational infrastructure that simulates the various functions and processes of an emergency management event to conduct experimental studies • control and manipulate the independent (levels of task complexity and uncertainty) and mediating variables (knowledge sharing purposes, type of knowledge integration, mechanisms of knowledge sharing) • capture the outcome dependent variables (task effectiveness and task efficiency) • compare the tasks involved in different emergency situations • control the types and backgrounds of participants involved in EOC tasks • provide training mechanisms to those who are "first time" participants to a particular emergency situation • overcome issues related to low response rate and data quality problems

23. Questions and comments Thank you ! Irma Becerra-Fernandez (becferi@fiu.edu) Weidong Xia (xiaw@fiu.edu) Arvind Gudi (AGudi@aol.com) Jose Rocha (jose.rocha@business.fiu.edu)