Extreme events such as large-scale natural disasters create the need for cooperation within and among responding organizations. Activities to mitigate the effects of these events can be expected to range from planned to improvised. This paper presents a methodology for describing both the context and substance of improvisation during the response phase. The context is described by (i) analyzing communication patterns among personnel in and among responding organizations and (ii) determining the appropriateness of existing plans to the event. The substance of improvisation within this context is described by modeling the behavior and cognition of response personnel. Application of the methodology leads to descriptions of improvisation and its context that may be stored in machine-readable format for use either by researchers, responding organizations or designers of computer-based tools to support improvised decision making. Data collection strategies for implementing the methodology are discussed and selected steps illustrated using a data set from a large-scale natural disaster. Responding to Extreme Events Extreme events such as large-scale disruptions following natural or technological disasters create the need for coordinated and collaborative response activities both within and among organizations. Response personnel may act alone or within ad hoc or established organizations; they may also adhere to or depart from their expected roles (Bosworth and Kreps 1986; Kreps and Bosworth 1993), undertaking activities that range from planned to improvised. When improvisation by individuals or groups takes place within either established or ad hoc organizations, it may be seen as organizationally-situated. The study of improvisation as a situated activity is particularly a...

Emergency response organizations are faced with complex, unprecedented events with the potential for catastrophic losses. To assist emergency response organizations in responding to unprecedented events, new models must be developed and the traditional command and control structure of decision making must be revised to accommodate greater flexibility and creativity by teams. In this paper we propose the concept of decision support for improvisation in emergency management. The concept is based on the paradigm of operational risk management and is motivated by the observation that emergency response organizations must be prepared to improvise during response activities. The process of emergency response in light of this new concept is first discussed and opportunities for supporting the process identified. We conclude with a review of a project at the Port of Rotterdam, where we are currently assessing this new decision making approach for emergency management.

Extreme events such as natural or technological disasters challenge society's capabilities for planning and response. While advanced technologies and modeling techniques continue to expand how society can limit and manage extreme events, flexibility and an ability to improvise remain crucial in responding to them. By analyzing a case from the response to the 2001 World Trade Center attack, this paper develops a set of requirements for computer-based systems intended to support improvisation in response to extreme events. The particular goal of this analysis is to identify methods for providing cognitive-level support for organizations in determining when and how to improvise. Key Words Extreme Events, Improvisation, Emergency Response To appear in Decision Support Systems 323 Martin Luther King, Jr. Blvd, Newark, NJ 07102. Email: mendonca@njit.edu 1

Abstract — Modern society depends on the operations of civil infrastructure systems, such as transportation, energy, telecommunications and water. Clearly, disruption of any of these systems would present a significant detriment to daily living. However, these systems have become so interconnected, one relying on another, that disruption of one may lead to disruptions in all. The focus of this research is on developing techniques which can be used to respond to events that have the capability to impact interdependent infrastructure systems. As discussed in the paper, infrastructure interdependencies occur when, due to either geographical proximity or shared operations, an impact on one infrastructure system affects one or more other infrastructure systems. The approach is to model the salient elements of these systems and provide decision makers with a means to manipulate the set of models, i.e. a decision support system. 1

Abstract: This study investigates impacts of the 2001 World Trade Center attack on critical infrastructure systems in the New York City metropolitan area. Of particular interest are the physical or logical connections—also known as interdependencies—among these systems, and the impacts of the attack on them. This study extends knowledge about the behavior of complex and interdependent infrastructures systems following a significant disruption. The results depict impact to all infrastructure systems as a result of the attack, with disruptions reported throughout the 3 month study period. Approximately 20 % of these disruptions involved interdependencies, and a majority of infrastructure systems were involved in at least one interdependency. The results therefore suggest that interdependence is a pervasive condition of New York City’s critical infrastructures. Accordingly, approaches to planning for and managing infrastructure-related disruptions, particularly those involving interdependency, are discussed.

Extreme events such as natural or technological disasters challenge society's capabilities both for planning and response. While information technologies and advanced modeling techniques continue to expand how society can limit and manage extreme events (Rinaldi, Peerenboom, and Kelly 2001), flexibility remains crucial to the success of planning and response operations (Mileti 1999; Stewart and Bostrom 2002). Non-routine situations (i.e., those which require responding organizations to develop and deploy new procedures in real-time) pose a challenge not only to decision makers but to designers of decision support systems. One approach to addressing this challenge is to develop decision support systems which incorporate cognitive-level models of decision making and which can assist decision makers in real-time compilation of new procedures. Some of the prospects, challenges and opportunities for developing these types of systems are discussed. An example from the 2001 World Trade Center attack is used to clarify some of these challenges, and to suggest how future work might address them. 1 Flexibility through Improvisation Due to their size, complexity and rarity, extreme events such as natural or technological disasters challenge society's capabilities both for planning and response. While information technologies and advanced modeling techniques continue to expand how society can limit and manage extreme events (Rinaldi, Peerenboom, and Kelly 2001), flexibility remains crucial to organizational resilience when responding to these events (Mileti 2 1999; Stewart and Bostrom 2002). The response to the 2001 World Trade Center offers numerous examples of how flexibility may contribute to resilience: subway maintenance workers joined the response effort to remove obstacles ...

Observations of group decision at the frontier of human experience promise insights into how human collectives anticipate and respond to highly non-routine events. In the case of decision making by emergency response organizations, prior experience is expected to be relevant, despite the sometimes considerable difference between those experiences and the emergency situation at hand (Earley 1985;

Recent research has argued forcefully and persuasively that to understand creative thinking it is necessary to investigate both convergent and divergent thinking processes. In the context of group decision making in emergency response, the link between these processes is particularly relevant, since stakes are high and, by definition, thinking must conclude with decision. This study investigates convergent and divergent thinking processes in the context of group decision making during the response to two simulated emergency events. The results suggest that level of event severity had little appreciable effect on these processes in one group’s response to two non-routine simulated emergencies.

would like to acknowledge several people whose contributions and encouragement deserve special thanks. The members of my dissertation committee have offered valuable comments on this research. My adviser and dissertation committee chair, Kathleen Tierney, has always set a high standard of scholarship and professionalism for her students. She has helped to make me a better writer, teacher, and researcher. She has shaped my approach to scholarship. I thank her not only for her comments on this dissertation, but also for her continual support and encouragement in my career. Over the years, Gary Webb has served as model for mentorship and teaching. Joanne Nigg has provided guidance while at the same time has encouraged me to follow my own vision. E.L. Quarantelli and Russell Dynes have shown enthusiasm for my work, have been quick to point to opportunities, and have always had an opened door to discuss my research. I continue to admire their ongoing commitment to the sociology discipline and the field of disaster research for over forty years. A true collaborative partner in my work on the World Trade Center is James