What’s the Problem? Local Officials’ Conceptions of Weaknesses in Their Municipalities’ Crisis Management Capabilities
What’s the Problem?
Local Officials’ Conceptions of Weaknesses in their
Municipalities’ Crisis
Management Capabilities
Jerry Nilsson
Department of Fire Safety Engineering and Systems Safety, Lund University Centre for Risk Analysis and
Management (LUCRAM), Lund University, PO Box 118, SE-221 00 Lund, Sweden.
E-mail: jerry.nilsson@brand.lth.se
It is becoming increasingly common for local-government officials (civil servants and political appointees) to take part in vulnerability analyses to assess their municipality’s capacity to withstand various crises. The question of how such groups conceive of problems concerning their municipality’s crisis management capabilities (CMC) is largely unexplored. The aim of this study is to analyse the conceptions that groups of civil servants and political appointees engaged in vulnerability analyses have of weaknesses in their organizations’ CMC. The attempt is to identify themes in how problems are described, as well as to compare how often the problems may be associated with different elements that constitute an organization and the different crisis management processes an organization needs to be involved in to manage crises. Ten vulnerability analyses, conducted in seven municipalities, and in one case at a county level, are analysed. The results are discussed in terms of what they indicate concerning the understanding these officials had of the organizations’ CMC.
1. Introduction
Local governments tend in many respects to be key players in the management of societal crises. They almost inevitably become involved, reacting to the needs both of their citizens and of society at large. In
Sweden, local governments are required to engage in preparedness activities to ensure that if a crisis occurs, the responses that the organization makes are effective.
The risk and vulnerability analyses carried out aim at identifying hazards and pinpointing weaknesses in the crisis management system, as well as
Local Officials’ Conceptions of Weaknesses in their
Municipalities’ Crisis
Management Capabilities
Jerry Nilsson
Department of Fire Safety Engineering and Systems Safety, Lund University Centre for Risk Analysis and
Management (LUCRAM), Lund University, PO Box 118, SE-221 00 Lund, Sweden.
E-mail: jerry.nilsson@brand.lth.se
It is becoming increasingly common for local-government officials (civil servants and political appointees) to take part in vulnerability analyses to assess their municipality’s capacity to withstand various crises. The question of how such groups conceive of problems concerning their municipality’s crisis management capabilities (CMC) is largely unexplored. The aim of this study is to analyse the conceptions that groups of civil servants and political appointees engaged in vulnerability analyses have of weaknesses in their organizations’ CMC. The attempt is to identify themes in how problems are described, as well as to compare how often the problems may be associated with different elements that constitute an organization and the different crisis management processes an organization needs to be involved in to manage crises. Ten vulnerability analyses, conducted in seven municipalities, and in one case at a county level, are analysed. The results are discussed in terms of what they indicate concerning the understanding these officials had of the organizations’ CMC.
1. Introduction
Local governments tend in many respects to be key players in the management of societal crises. They almost inevitably become involved, reacting to the needs both of their citizens and of society at large. In
Sweden, local governments are required to engage in preparedness activities to ensure that if a crisis occurs, the responses that the organization makes are effective.
The risk and vulnerability analyses carried out aim at identifying hazards and pinpointing weaknesses in the crisis management system, as well as
References: Alexander, D.E. (2002), Principles of Emergency Planning and Management, Oxford University Press, Oxford, USA. Alexander, D.E. (2004), ‘Cognitive Mapping as an Emergency Management Training Exercise’, Journal of Contingencies and Alexander, D.E. (2007), ‘Misconception as a Barrier to Teaching about Disasters’, Prehospital and Disaster Medicine., Amabile, T.M. (1996), Creativity in Context, Westview Press Inc., Boulder, Colorado. American Heritage Dictionary (2000), Dictionary of the English Language (4th edn), American Heritage Dictionary, http:// www.bartleby.com/61/ (accessed 19 November 2008). Axelrod, R. (1984), The Evolution of Cooperation, Basic Books Inc., New York. Cannon-Bowers, J.A. and Salas, E. (2001), ‘Reflections on Shared Cognition’, Journal of Organizational Behavior, Volume Comfort, L. (2007), ‘Crisis Management in Hindsight: Cognition, Communication, Coordination and Control’, Public Constable, M. (2008), ‘Disaster Mythology: Looting in New Orleans’, Disaster Prevention and Management., Volume 17, Coppola, D.P. (2007), Introduction to International Disaster Management, Butterworth-Heinemann, Elsevier, Burlington, Daft, R.L. (2004), Organization Theory and Design (8th edn), Vanderbilt University Dausey, D.J., Buehler, J.W. and Lurie, N. (2007), ‘Designing and Conducting Tabletop Exercises to Assess Public Health Dynes, R.R., Quarantelli, E.L. and Kreps, G.A. (1981), A Perspective on Disaster Planning (3rd edn), Disaster Research Fischer III, H.W. (1998), Response to Disaster: Fact Versus Fiction & its Perpetuation (2nd edn), University Press of America Hallin, P.-O., Nilsson, J. and Olofsson, N. (2004), Kommunal sa°rbarhetsanalys Høyland, A. and Rausand, M. (1994), System Reliability Theory: Models and Statistical Methods, John Wiley & Sons Inc., Klein, G., Moon, B. and Hoffman, R.R. (2006), Making Sense of Sensemaking 1: Alternative Perspectives, IEEE Intelligent Kreps, G.A. (1991), ‘Organizing for Emergency Management’, in Drabek, T., Hoetmer, G Lagadec, P. (2002), ‘Crisis Management in France: Trends, Shifts and Perspectives’, Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Quarantelli, E.L. (1997), ‘Ten Criteria for Evaluating the Management of Community Disasters’, Disasters, Volume Rollenhagen, C. (1997), Sambandet Ma¨nniska, Teknik och Organization – en introduktion (in Swedish) SFS (2006), Lag (2006:544) om kommuners och landstings a°tga¨rder info¨r och vid extraordina¨ra ha¨ndelser i fredstid och Strauss, A.L. and Corbin, J. (1990), Basics of Qualitative Research: Grounded Theory Procedures and Techniques, Sage, Swedish Emergency Management Agency (2006), Risk- och sa°rbarhetsanalyser t’Hart, P., Rosenthal, U. and Kouzmin, A. (1993), ‘Crisis Decision Making: The Centralization Thesis Revisited’, Weick, K.E. and Sutcliffe, K.M. (2005), ‘Organizing and the Process of Sensemaking’, Organization Science, Volume 16, Westin, J. and Sjo¨ berg, E. (2007), Kreativitet som hot och mo¨jlighet i ka¨rnverksamheten (in Swedish)