Effective decision-making in crisis events is challenging due to time pressure, uncertainty, and dynamic decisional environments. We conducted a systematic literature review in PubMed and PsycINFO, identifying 32 empiric research papers that examine how trained professionals make naturalistic decisions under pressure. We used structured qualitative analysis methods to extract key themes. The studies explored different aspects of decision-making across multiple domains. The majority (19) focused on healthcare; military, fire and rescue, oil installation, and aviation domains were also represented. We found appreciable variability in research focus, methodology, and decision-making descriptions. We identified five main themes: (1) decision-making strategy, (2) time pressure, (3) stress, (4) uncertainty, and (5) errors. Recognition-primed decision-making (RPD) strategies were reported in all studies that analyzed this aspect. Analytical strategies were also prominent, appearing more frequently in contexts with less time pressure and explicit training to generate multiple explanations. Practitioner experience, time pressure, stress, and uncertainty were major influencing factors. Professionals must adapt to the time available, types of uncertainty, and individual skills when making decisions in high-risk situations. Improved understanding of these decisional factors can inform evidence-based enhancements to training, technology, and process design.
Despite the increased importance attributed to distributed improvisation in major crises, few studies investigate how central authorities can promote a harmonic, coordinated national response while allowing for distributed autonomy and improvisation. One idea implicit in the literature is that central authorities could help track and tackle common decision bottlenecks as they emerge across "improvising" local authorities as a result of shared, dynamic external constraints. To explore this idea we map central functions needed to roll-out vaccines to local populations and identify and classify bottlenecks to decision-making by local authorities managing COVID-19 vaccine roll-out in Norway. We found five bottlenecks which emerged as vaccine roll-out progressed, three of which could feasibly have been addressed by changing the local authorities' external constraints as the crisis developed. While the national crisis response strategy clearly allowed for distributed improvisation, our overall findings suggest that there is potential for central authorities to address external constraints in order to ease common bottlenecks as they emerge across local authorities responding to the crisis. More research is to explore alternative centralized response strategies and assess how well they effectively balance centralized and distributed control. The study contributes to the growing literature examining the interaction between local and centralized response in crisis management.
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：