LIT 2 - Wolbers: understanding distributed sensemaking in crisis management

Question 1

Wolbers: What is distributed sensemaking in the context of crisis management, and why is it often a challenge?

Answer 1

Distributed sensemaking occurs when different groups or teams, often at various locations, develop partial understandings of a complex and unfolding situation. It’s a challenge because these segmented pieces of information need to be brought together to form a coherent picture and enable a coordinated response. Think of it like a jigsaw puzzle where different people have different groups of pieces and need to work together to see the whole image. In a crisis, if these pieces aren’t shared effectively, the overall picture can remain unclear, leading to a less effective response.

Question 2

Wolbers: What is frame fixation in crisis management, and what makes it difficult to overcome?

Answer 2

Frame fixation happens when crisis managers become stuck on an initial interpretation or understanding of the situation, even when new information contradicts it. It’s difficult to overcome because once a frame takes hold, people tend to interpret new cues in a way that confirms the existing frame and may overlook or dismiss contradictory information. This can be compounded by the escalation of commitment to the initial frame as time progresses. It takes a conscious effort and mechanisms to encourage doubt and alternative perspectives to break free from a dominant frame.

Question 3

Wolbers: How do different types of interdependence between teams affect distributed sensemaking in a crisis?

Answer 3

The way teams work together (interdependence) significantly influences how information is shared and understood. The source highlights three types: Pooled interdependence: Teams work independently with little direct contact. This can lead to a lack of information sharing and different understandings of the situation across teams.

Sequential interdependence: Teams rely on a one-way flow of work. While there’s a connection, it might not allow for much back-and-forth questioning or sharing of nuances.

Reciprocal interdependence: Teams work closely together, with mutual adjustments and information sharing. This type is more conducive to challenging assumptions and building a shared understanding, but it can be resource-intensive and may decrease as more teams get involved.

Question 4

Wolbers: Explain the importance of sensitivity to operations for effective distributed sensemaking in crisis management.

Answer 4

Sensitivity to operations refers to decision-makers having a good understanding of what’s happening on the ground or at the frontline of the crisis response. It’s crucial because new and often critical information that challenges existing understandings often emerges from the direct actions and observations of frontline units. If strategic teams become too detached from the operational realities, they may miss these crucial cues and remain stuck in outdated frames. Think of it like trying to guide someone through a maze without knowing what they are seeing at each turn.

Question 5

Wolbers: What is the difference between a logic of accuracy and a logic of plausibility in crisis sensemaking, and why is plausibility important initially?

Answer 5

A logic of accuracy prioritises validated and confirmed information. While important in the long run, focusing solely on this can lead to delays in understanding a rapidly evolving situation. A logic of plausibility focuses on creating a reasonable and understandable account of what might be happening based on the initial cues, even if all details aren’t fully confirmed. Plausibility is vital initially because it drives action and the search for further information. It encourages people to engage with the situation and make sense of it in real-time. Waiting only for fully accurate information can lead to inaction and missed opportunities in the early stages of a crisis.

Question 6

Wolbers: How can organisational hierarchy and identity both help and hinder distributed sensemaking during a crisis?

Answer 6

Hierarchy: While it can provide structure and authority, it can also hinder the challenging of initial frames if lower-ranking individuals are hesitant to question the assumptions of senior leaders, even if they have contradictory information. The assumption might be that higher ranks have a better overall view, which isn’t always the case. Identity: The established ways of working and priorities (identity) of different responding teams can lead to conflicts and a breakdown of information sharing if these identities are perceived as being in opposition. For instance, one team’s focus on immediate action might clash with another’s emphasis on thorough investigation, hindering a unified understanding of the situation.

Question 7

Wolbers: What are the five factors that hamper or stimulated distributed sensemaking

Answer 7

Flashcard (Front): What are the five key factors that can either help or hinder distributed sensemaking in a crisis situation, according to the study of the Utrecht terrorist attack?

Flashcard (Back):

Here are the five factors identified in the study that influence the quality of distributed sensemaking:

• Type of Interdependence: The way different teams need to work together.
  
  • Reciprocal interdependence (working back and forth, mutually adjusting) tends to stimulate doubt, questioning, and a variety of viewpoints, which is good for updating sensemaking.
  • Pooled interdependence (working independently with little contact) can limit the capacity of teams to question the information they receive and can lead to different understandings.
• Sensitivity to Operations: How aware decision-makers are of what’s happening on the ground.
  
  • Retaining a view of frontline actions is important for discovering new cues that might challenge existing understandings.
  • Being too detached can lead to strategic teams remaining fixed on an initial frame, missing crucial updates.
• Plausibility: The extent to which an interpretation seems reasonable and understandable.
  
  • A focus on plausibility drives action and the search for more information, which is vital in the early stages of a crisis.
  • Over-reliance on only validated information can lead to a detached understanding where context is lost.
• Hierarchy: The formal structure and authority within the organisation.
  
  • Hierarchy can hinder the challenging of dominant frames if lower-ranking individuals are reluctant to voice concerns or question the assumptions of those higher up, even with contradictory information.
  • Breaking away from a lingering frame may require a high-ranking individual to confidently present an alternative perspective.
• Identity: The established ways of working, beliefs, and priorities of different teams.
  
  • Strong team identities can lead to conflicts and a breakdown in sensemaking and information sharing if different teams perceive each other’s approaches as conflicting (e.g., rapid intervention vs. thorough investigation).