Poster presented at the ISCRAM2009 Student poster session in Gothenburg, Sweden on May 10, 2009 on Willem Muhren's PhD research entitled "Sensemaking Support Systems for Humanitarian Disaster Response".

1. Sensemaking Support Systems for
Humanitarian Disaster Response
Willem Muhren, PhD Student, Tilburg University
Problem description
Natural disasters or complex emergencies often result
in humanitarian disasters. The crisis environments in
What should
which humanitarian organizations work are we do?
First stage of the research
characterized by ambiguity and equivocality, and
various types of information problems complicate their What is
In order to find out how people in crisis situations handle and process information, we
work. This poses difficulties for humanitarian actors in going
conducted four case studies using an interpretive approach, interviewing people who
making sense of what is going on and taking on?
are working in different crisis situations:
appropriate action. Our goal is to find out how
pp p g
information systems can support humanitarian actors Humanitarian assistance in the Democratic Republic of Congo
If we do
in making sense of their environment. this, what Airplane crash rescue exercise by the countries around the Barents Sea
will
The yearly recurring forest fires in Portugal
happen?
The European police mission in Bosnia
In these case studies we used Karl Weick’s Sensemaking constructs to understand
and analyze how information is processed in crisis situations [1],[2]. Next, we
placed the constructs in a communication perspective, and found that
people engage in three Sensemaking communication activities [3].
Humanitarian disaster response team Noticing is the activity of how people sense what is ‘out there’.
Conceptual model There are five types of interacting. First, there is interaction
Second research stage to update understanding of the situation, to stay informed
situation informed.
The second reason for interaction is to inquire about
specific things people want to know. Furthermore,
In our case studies on Sensemaking in crises, we
people engage in contact with other people to
noticed that the social context of people plays an
triangulate information and negotiate on what is
important role in their Sensemaking activities. In Group Process GSS
going on. People also interact to verify
the second stage of our research, we specifically
Characteristics Characteristics information. Finally, interaction occurs to reflect
focus on Sensemaking by groups of people
with colleagues on what to do and the decisions
- humanitarian disaster response teams – and
they need to make. The last Sensemaking
how the design of information systems can
communication activity is enacting, as people
support this. For this purpose we have
enact the environments which constrain them. [3]
conducted an exploratory case study of a
crisis situation in which Sensemaking and
group processes play an important role and
role,
where Sensemaking is not yet sufficiently
Group
supported by information systems: information
management in the United Nations Disaster Sensemaking
Assessment and Coordination (UNDAC) team
and the needs assessment process during the
humanitarian TRIPLEX exercise. There, we
specifically focused on the group processes in the
assessment teams and the interaction with the
information managers in the On Site Operations and
Coordination Centre (OSOCC), and were able to gain
insights into how information systems can support these
Group Performance
group Sensemaking processes [4] [4].
Future research
Through the insights we gained in the previous stages of (GSS) (the characteristics of the information system that the first time that Sensemaking is measured, and Karl
our research, we created the conceptual model on group was available and/or used during the mission) on Weick’s Sensemaking theory is quantitatively validated, in
Sensemaking support, shown in the center of the poster. Sensemaking (the level of Sensemaking the team a humanitarian disaster response situation. This will
We will test this model through survey research in achieved when dealing with the disaster situation) by provide us with insights into what kind of GSS design and
disaster response teams. The model investigates the teams and consecutively on their performance. We will which group structure and group processes will support
influence of group processes (e.g. type of coordination, use Item Response Theory (IRT) to measure the level of Sensemaking for humanitarian disaster response teams,
discussion, group size) and Group Support Systems Sensemaking a team has achieved at a mission. It will be and whether that will lead to a better performance.
Further information
Acknowledgement
Selected publications on this research
The research reported here is part of the
[1] Muhren W.J., Van Den Eede G., and Van de Walle B. (2008). Sensemaking and Implications for Information Systems Design: Interactive Collaborative Information
Findings from the Democratic Republic of Congo’s Ongoing Crisis. Information Technology for Development, 14(3), pp. 197-212. Systems (ICIS) project
(http://www.icis.decis.nl/), supported by
[2] Muhren W.J., Van Den Eede G., and Van de Walle B. (2008). Sensemaking as a Methodology for ISCRAM Research: Information
the Dutch Ministry of Economic Affairs,
Processing in an Ongoing Crisis. Proceedings of ISCRAM2008 (Washington DC).
grant nr: BSIK03024.
[3] Muhren W.J., Van Den Eede G., and Van de Walle B. Making Sense of Media Synchronicity in Humanitarian Crises. IEEE
Contact
Transactions on Professional Communication (Accepted for publication).
[4] Muhren W.J., and Van de Walle B. (2009). Sensemaking and Information Management in Humanitarian Disaster Response: Willem Muhren, Tilburg University
Observations from the TRIPLEX Exercise. In Proceedings of ISCRAM2009 (Gothenburg).