DESIGN FOR IMPROVISATION IN COMPUTER-BASED EMERGENCY RESPONSE SYSTEMS

This paper explores the design of training environments in which emergency response professionals can use information technologies to train for responding to unplanned-for situations. This approach—designing for improvisation—is fundamentally different than designing for plan execution. In this paper, we identify three dimensions of this difference and outline a set of research questions that are intended to lead to a better understanding of the role of improvisation in emergency response, as well as how it can be trained for and supported. Both questions are intertwined, since without a firm understanding of how improvisation occurs it is difficult to train for and support it.

[1]  Gary A. Kreps,et al.  Disaster, Organizing, and Role Enactment: A Structural Approach , 1993, American Journal of Sociology.

[2]  Martin Molina,et al.  A Multi-agent System for Emergency Decision Support , 2003, IDEAL.

[3]  Franck Guarnieri,et al.  Intelligent software agents for forest fire prevention and fighting , 2001 .

[4]  Enrico L Quarantelli,et al.  Disaster Studies: An Analysis of the Social Historical Factors Affecting the Development of Research in the Area , 1987, International Journal of Mass Emergencies & Disasters.

[5]  C. Smart,et al.  Designs for crisis decision units. , 1977, Administrative science quarterly.

[6]  Jacquelyn L. Monday.  Beyond September 11th : an account of post disaster research , 2003 .

[7]  D. Mileti.  Disasters by Design: A Reassessment of Natural Hazards in the United States , 1999 .

[8]  K. Weick.  Improvisation as a Mindset for Organizational Analysis , 1998 .

[9]  Adrian R. Pearce,et al.  RescueModel: A Multi-Agent Simulation of Bushfire Disaster Management , 2000, RoboCup.

[10]  Steffen Straßburger,et al.  Distributed simultation based on the high level architecture in civilian application domains , 2001 .

[11]  Robert D. Miewald.  Administrative Science Quarterly , 1981 .

[12]  Michael Greenberg,et al.  Beyond September 11th: An Account of Post‐Disaster Research , 2004 .

[13]  David Mendonça,et al.  Evaluating support for improvisation in simulated emergency scenarios , 2003, 36th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, 2003. Proceedings of the.

[14]  David Mendonça,et al.  Assessing Group Decision Support Systems for Emergency Response Using Gaming Simulation , 2001 .

[15]  G. Klein,et al.  A recognition-primed decision (RPD) model of rapid decision making. , 1993 .

[16]  E. Salas,et al.  The science of training: a decade of progress. , 2001, Annual review of psychology.

[17]  Hiroaki Kitano,et al.  The RoboCup-Rescue project: a robotic approach to the disaster mitigation problem , 2000, Proceedings 2000 ICRA. Millennium Conference. IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation. Symposia Proceedings (Cat. No.00CH37065).

[18]  Margaret A. Boden.  Agents and creativity , 1994, CACM.

[19]  Farhi Marir,et al.  Case-based reasoning: A review , 1994, The Knowledge Engineering Review.

[20]  William A. Wallace,et al.  Operational risk management: a new paradigm for decision making , 1994 .

[21]  Roger Smith.  The Application of Existing Simulation Systems To Emerging Homeland Security Training Needs , 2003 .

[22]  Gary R. Webb,et al.  ROLE IMPROVISING UNDER CONDITIONS OF UNCERTAINTY: A CLASSIFICATION OF TYPES , 1999 .