Combining Structural Forms in the Search for Policy Tools: Incident Command Systems in U.S. Crisis Management

As governments search for policy tools to deliver public services, two choices—hierarchy or network—are portrayed as stark alternatives. The U.S. Department of Homeland Security has adopted a practitioner-based innovation known as the Incident Command System (ICS) that assumes that crises require a network of responders, but that these networks should be managed by a hierarchy. While the ICS illustrates the potential for mixing hierarchies and networks, it was mandated by policymakers willing to make broad assumptions about the applicability of the ICS on limited evidence. An overdependence on practitioner claims displaced careful analysis of the underlying logics vital to understanding the operation of the policy tool. A case study of the ICS in managing an exotic animal disease outbreak points to the importance of crisis characteristics and management factors as contingencies affecting the operation of the ICS.

[1]  Vikas Singh,et al.  National Incident Management System , 2007 .

[2]  E. Quarantelli.  DISASTER CRISIS MANAGEMENT: A SUMMARY OF RESEARCH FINDINGS , 1988 .

[3]  Thad E. Hall,et al.  Structures for Policy Implementation , 2000 .

[4]  Donald P. Moynihan,et al.  Learning Under Uncertainty: Networks in Crisis Management , 2008 .

[5]  Karlene H. Roberts,et al.  The Incident Command System : High Reliability Organizing for Complex and Volatile Task , 2007 .

[6]  Dana Cole,et al.  Incident Command System: A 25-Year Evaluation by California Practitioners , 2000 .

[7]  B. Verbeek.  The Politics of Crisis Management. Public Leadership Under Pressure , 2006 .

[8]  E. Stern.  Crisis and Learning: A Conceptual Balance Sheet , 1997 .

[9]  M. Bovens,et al.  Analysing governance success and failure in six European states , 2001 .

[10]  Karen M. Hult,et al.  Organizing the White House: Structure, Environment, and Organizational Governance , 1987 .

[11]  R. Gulati.  Does Familiarity Breed Trust? The Implications of Repeated Ties for Contractual Choice in Alliances , 1995 .

[12]  A. Boin.  Public Leadership in Times of Crisis: Mission Impossible? , 2003 .

[13]  M. Beck,et al.  Public Administration, Science, and Risk Assessment: A Case Study of the U.K. Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy Crisis , 2005 .

[14]  W. Eggers,et al.  Governing by Network: The New Shape of the Public Sector , 2004 .

[15]  A. Zaheer,et al.  Does Trust Matter? Exploring the Effectsof Interorganizational and Interpersonaltrust on Performance , 1998 .

[16]  R. Gulati,et al.  The Architecture of Cooperation: Managing Coordination Costs and Appropriation Concerns in Strategic Alliances , 1998 .

[17]  H. Rainey,et al.  Galloping Elephants: Developing Elements of a Theory of Effective Government Organizations , 1999 .

[18]  M. Feldman,et al.  Order without Design: Information Production and Policy Making , 1991 .

[19]  E. Stern,et al.  Managing Asymmetrical Crisis: Sweden, the USSR, and U-137 , 1992 .

[20]  R. Turner,et al.  Organized Behavior in Disaster. , 1972 .

[21]  C. Hood,et al.  Intellectual Obsolescence and Intellectual Makeovers: Reflections on the Tools of Government after Two Decades , 2007 .

[22]  K. Provan,et al.  Modes of Network Governance: Structure, Management, and Effectiveness , 2007 .

[23]  Eugene Bardach,et al.  Developmental Dynamics: Interagency Collaboration as an Emergent Phenomenon , 2001 .

[24]  Christine M. Pearson,et al.  Reframing Crisis Management , 1998 .

[25]  Tom Forester,et al.  States of emergency: Technological failures and social destabilization , 1991 .

[26]  E. Klijn,et al.  Managing Uncertainties in Networks a Network Approach to Problem Solving and Decision Making , 2004 .

[27]  M. Bovens,et al.  Success and Failure in Public Governance , 2001 .

[28]  Thomas E. Drabek,et al.  Emergency Management: Strategies for Maintaining Organizational Integrity , 1989 .

[29]  Michael McGuire,et al.  Big Questions in Public Network Management Research , 2001 .

[30]  Bradley H. Patterson.  The ring of power : the White House staff and its expanding role in government , 1990 .

[31]  M. Shaw.  Avoiding war: problems of crisis management , 1992 .

[32]  L. O'toole.  Treating networks seriously: Practical and research-based agendas in public administration , 1997 .

[33]  T. Laporte,et al.  Working in Practice But Not in Theory: Theoretical Challenges of “High-Reliability Organizations” , 1991 .

[34]  Keith G. Provan,et al.  Governing the Hollow State , 2000 .

[35]  Pierre Lascoumes,et al.  Introduction: Understanding Public Policy through Its Instruments—From the Nature of Instruments to the Sociology of Public Policy Instrumentation , 2007 .

[36]  Donald P. Moynihan,et al.  Homeland Security and the U.S. Public Management Policy Agenda , 2005 .

[37]  Keith G. Provan,et al.  Do networks really work? A framework for evaluating public-sector organizational networks , 1999 .