Journal and Project

MSE 6301, Risk Management 1

Course Learning Outcomes for Unit V Upon completion of this unit, students should be able to:

2. Examine the risk that disasters present to the community and responders. 2.1 Describe the hazards that may impact a particular community as a result of a natural disaster. 2.2 Outline how a community will prepare for, respond to, and recover from a natural disaster. 2.3 Describe how risks can be mitigated in a community when preparing for future disasters.

3. Assess emergency planning strategies aimed to reduce risk.

3.1 Describe lessons learned after a natural disaster in a community. 3.2 Identify any organizational strengths and weaknesses that may occur before, during, and after

the disaster. 3.3 Describe next steps that should take place when planning and preparing for disasters including

short-term and long-term actions for follow-up.

Course/Unit Learning Outcomes

Learning Activity

2.1

Unit Lesson Chapter 6 Chapter 7 Unit V Project

2.2

Unit Lesson Chapter 6 Chapter 7 Unit V Project

2.3

Unit Lesson Chapter 6 Chapter 7 Unit V Project

3.1

Unit Lesson Chapter 6 Chapter 7 Unit V Project

3.2

Unit Lesson Chapter 6 Chapter 7 Unit V Project

3.3

Unit Lesson Chapter 6 Chapter 7 Unit V Project

Reading Assignment Chapter 6: Emergency and Crisis Management Stakeholders Chapter 7: Decision Making in Managing Disasters and Crises

UNIT V STUDY GUIDE Emergency Management Stakeholders: Networking, Decision Making, and Addressing Challenges

MSE 6301, Risk Management 2

UNIT x STUDY GUIDE

Title

Unit Lesson The United States has a continual network of public agencies, nonprofit organizations, private firms and services, and governmental agencies that are capable of providing services before, during, and after a disaster has taken place. In most of the U.S. states, county governments are normally responsible for handling emergency response operations and funding. Once the local funding and resources have been overwhelmed, then it is up to the state to provide resources to the county/counties that have been impacted. The federal government may intervene if the disaster stretches beyond the resources and the capacity of the state and local governments (Kapucu & Özerdem, 2013; Peerbolte & Collins, 2013). If the disaster becomes a catastrophe, then there will be a coordinated effort from all three levels of the governments in order to provide and distribute resources. Both the National Incident Management System (NIMS) and the National Response Framework (NRF) provide a framework for structuring the emergency management departments that are responding to disasters. During the course of a disaster, it is important to have a combination of local, state, federal, private, and nonprofit sectors participating and allocating resources. The emergency manager is the lead, or primary stakeholder, in the event of a disaster. There are social, economic, and political groups that fall into this category of stakeholders that will be contributing in the event of an emergency. Local community households, community emergency response teams (CERTs), American Red Cross, Salvation Army, and other businesses in the area will be key stakeholders in providing food, shelter, and work for the unemployed. The local political stakeholders may include the emergency manager who will be able to apply for grants regarding disaster relief funding, grants for planning and preparedness, and grants for the recovery efforts that will eventually be needed. The combination of working together from local community representatives, volunteers, and stakeholders is imperative to the success of the total operation. Collaboration is needed with all the agencies, locally and in adjoining jurisdictions, in order to achieve smooth communication, planning and development of operating procedures and other plans, and forming a standardized organizational culture. State and federal government entities should also be asked to participate in meetings and trainings, and offered the opportunity to participate in and critique any exercises that are disaster-related and performed by the community (Kapucu & Özerdem, 2013; Peerbolte & Collins, 2013). The advent of terrorist attacks in the mid-1990s was a key indicator that stakeholders and government agencies alike needed to work alongside one another in the advent of a disaster. Emergency management operations cannot work in the sense of being within a vacuum or working in a linear manner. Emergency preparedness and response requires structural formatting, but also has to include another alternative of flexibility that will not be rigid in following the rules so strictly that it will impact the overall disaster operations. Relationship building and collaboration with the primary stakeholders within the community are key elements the emergency manger should take into consideration. In the event of a disaster, the network that has been formed with the stakeholders will be beneficial not only for the emergency manager, but also for the community, knowing there will be resources, assistance, and cooperation from others in order to minimize the life-safety risk associated with the disaster (Peerbolte & Collins, 2013). Successful collaboration will include sharing a common vision, believing in sharing a common goal, being willing to change linear thinking into more flexible opportunities, continual positive energy, and also being creative (e.g., training and exercises, use of alternative resources for disaster preparedness and response, and policy-making) (Kapucu & Özerdem, 2013). In order to be a successful emergency manager, one must concentrate on sharing the involvement in the disaster preparedness and response with stakeholders. Also, the stakeholders must be willing to share their resources, roles, and involvement in the disaster. Collaborative leadership and having a form of open communication with stakeholders are two areas that will be important to understand how each entity will be able to contribute during a disaster. An example of good collaboration is holding a monthly meeting prior to a disaster occurring. City planners, local politicians, engineers, electric and gas companies, and public works may be included in the discussion of how they will be able to contribute to the return of normalcy in the community. These include the ability to allocate resources, handle the media, return energy to energy–ridden areas impacted by the disaster, and offer thoughts on safe evacuation routes should the situation arise. Emergency mangers need to take into consideration all the stakeholders that can assist in the emergency management cycle and also have them organized into an area where their resources can be utilized. Emergency managers and first responders are faced with challenges when responding to a disaster and also when it requires quick decision-making techniques for the safety of the community. Sound decision-making

MSE 6301, Risk Management 3

UNIT x STUDY GUIDE

Title

processes are imperative to the success of the overall operations. There is a need to make quick decisions in the event of a disaster. If the emergency manager or leader of the operation makes a hasty decision, it may result in the deaths of many within the population and may create a crisis, intensifying the consequences that may result from poor decision-making. The emergency manager and the decision-making process are synchronous with the type of disaster that is taking place, the characteristics of the disaster, the type of environment the emergency manager is facing, and the risks that are involved (Kapucu & Özerdem, 2013; Peerbolte & Collins, 2013). Emergency managers will face uncertainty when the disaster is occurring and have to handle situations that may compromise the community. Decision makers in the field may encounter different types of uncertainty impacting the outcome of their final communication: (a) lack of knowledge pertaining to the event; (b) autonomy and handling the situation through self-direction; and (c) the differences in norms, values, and moral and ethical decision-making. Time pressure and overall risk during the disaster can also have an impact on the emergency manager and how the final decision is made (Kapucu & Özerdem, 2013). Time pressure for the allocation of resources, the distribution of food, the need for more logistical support, and also being able to handle multiple scenarios at one time can lead to incomplete thoughts and unsophisticated decision-making processes. Furthermore, risk is another influencing factor that may impede the clarity needed to make a swift decision in the midst of a disaster and chaotic situations. Uncertainty within the ranks of the organization is one of the determining factors that impedes progress (Kapucu & Özerdem, 2013). Risk must be assessed and minimized prior to the disaster when dealing with planning and preparedness phases of emergency management. Internal and external stressors may also lead to premature closure of a decision being made, a disorganized assessment may be relayed to the leader/emergency manager, and these may create an inability to think clearly and to allocate resources. Effective emergency management can be accomplished by the minimization of message and communication distortion. If the message that is being delivered is clear and transparent, the likelihood of the operation being a success will increase. Good communication is necessary for any event, but it is also important during training and exercises (Peerbolte & Collins, 2013). Previous experience in the disaster field and training will also have a bearing on the types of decisions being made along the way. Simulations, for example, assist in creating a real-life scenario for the leader, but also create an atmosphere where decision-making is taking place immediately through the use of performance- enhanced videos. The importance of simulations, regularly scheduled trainings, and other types of disaster exercises will decrease the likelihood of rushing into poor decision making. Emergency managers will undergo three different phases of decision making regarding disaster management: disaster decision making prior to the event, during the event, and after the event (Peerbolte & Collins, 2013). An emergency manger has the benefit of time, more deliberate thinking, and the ability to communicate more effectively with those in the command structure in a non-threatening environment. On the other hand, emergency managers should be aware of facing challenges dealing with the unknown during the crisis. Both the acceptance and urgency of the situation are indicators of how the emergency manager/leader is adapting to the disaster (Peerbolte & Collins, 2013). Good communication during this phase of decision making will create effective decision making for the groups involved in the response. Finally, decisions that are made after the disaster are related to both relief and recovery. The lessons learned will be key indicators of how well the leadership made decisions throughout the processes. Effective decision making by emergency managers and leaders can be difficult due to the complex situations that are presented; however, when tough decisions need to be made, it is up to the emergency manager to have obtained proper training, use past experiences for the benefit of leadership decision making, and reflect on the management of that specific incident (Peerbolte & Collins, 2013).

MSE 6301, Risk Management 4

UNIT x STUDY GUIDE

Title

References Kapucu, N., & Özerdem, A. (2013). Managing emergencies and crises. Burlington, MA: Jones & Bartlett. Peerbolte, S. L., & Collins, M. L. (2013). Disaster management and critical thinking skills of local emergency

managers: Correlations with age, gender, education, and years in occupation. Disasters, 37(1), 48- 60. Retrieved from https://libraryresources.columbiasouthern.edu/login?auth=CAS&url=http://search.ebscohost.com/logi n.aspx?direct=true&db=a9h&AN=83928099&site=ehost-live&scope=site

Suggested Reading Critical thinking skills are associated with both emergency management and emergency managers during disasters. This study looks at some of the psychological correlations regarding emergency managers and their decision-making processes. Peerbolte, S. L., & Collins, M. L. (2013). Disaster management and the critical thinking skills of local

emergency managers: Correlations with age, gender, education, and years in occupation. Disasters, 37(1), 48-60. Retrieved from https://libraryresources.columbiasouthern.edu/login?auth=CAS&url=http://search.ebscohost.com/logi n.aspx?direct=true&db=a9h&AN=83928099&site=ehost-live&scope=site