从计划到实践:从政府指导方针和飓风事件中的实际合作看组织间危机应对网络

IF 2.6 3区 管理学 Q3 MANAGEMENT Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management Pub Date : 2024-07-27 DOI:10.1111/1468-5973.12601
Ly Dinh, Pingjing Yang, Jana Diesner
{"title":"从计划到实践:从政府指导方针和飓风事件中的实际合作看组织间危机应对网络","authors":"Ly Dinh,&nbsp;Pingjing Yang,&nbsp;Jana Diesner","doi":"10.1111/1468-5973.12601","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Crisis response involves extensive planning and coordination within and across a multitude of agencies and organisations. This study explores how on-the-ground crisis response efforts align with crisis response guidelines. These guidelines are key to the effectiveness of crisis response. To this end, we construct, analyse and compare emergency response networks by using network analysis and natural language processing methods. Differences between plans and practice, that is, false positives (actions delivered but not prescribed) and false negatives (actions prescribed but not delivered), can impact response evaluation and policy revisions. We investigate collaboration networks at the federal, state and local level extracted from official documents (prescribed networks) and empirical data (observed networks) in the form of situational reports (<i>n</i> = 109) and tweets (<i>n</i> = 28,050) from responses to major hurricanes that made landfall in the United States. Our analyses reveal meaningful differences between prescribed and observed collaboration networks (mean node overlap ~9.94%, edge overlap ~3.94%). The observed networks most closely resemble federal-level networks in terms of node and edge overlap, highlighting the prioritisation of federal response guidelines. We also observed a high ratio of false positives, that is, nongovernmental, nonprofit and volunteer organizations, that play a critical role in crisis response and are not mentioned in response plans. These findings enable us to evaluate the current best practices for response and inform emergency response policy planning.</p>","PeriodicalId":47674,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"From plan to practice: Interorganizational crisis response networks from governmental guidelines and real-world collaborations during hurricane events\",\"authors\":\"Ly Dinh,&nbsp;Pingjing Yang,&nbsp;Jana Diesner\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/1468-5973.12601\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>Crisis response involves extensive planning and coordination within and across a multitude of agencies and organisations. This study explores how on-the-ground crisis response efforts align with crisis response guidelines. These guidelines are key to the effectiveness of crisis response. To this end, we construct, analyse and compare emergency response networks by using network analysis and natural language processing methods. Differences between plans and practice, that is, false positives (actions delivered but not prescribed) and false negatives (actions prescribed but not delivered), can impact response evaluation and policy revisions. We investigate collaboration networks at the federal, state and local level extracted from official documents (prescribed networks) and empirical data (observed networks) in the form of situational reports (<i>n</i> = 109) and tweets (<i>n</i> = 28,050) from responses to major hurricanes that made landfall in the United States. Our analyses reveal meaningful differences between prescribed and observed collaboration networks (mean node overlap ~9.94%, edge overlap ~3.94%). The observed networks most closely resemble federal-level networks in terms of node and edge overlap, highlighting the prioritisation of federal response guidelines. We also observed a high ratio of false positives, that is, nongovernmental, nonprofit and volunteer organizations, that play a critical role in crisis response and are not mentioned in response plans. These findings enable us to evaluate the current best practices for response and inform emergency response policy planning.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47674,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"91\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1468-5973.12601\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"管理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"MANAGEMENT\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1468-5973.12601","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"MANAGEMENT","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

危机应对涉及众多机构和组织内部和之间的广泛规划和协调。本研究探讨了实地危机应对工作如何与危机应对指南保持一致。这些指导方针是危机应对工作取得成效的关键。为此,我们使用网络分析和自然语言处理方法构建、分析和比较了应急响应网络。计划与实践之间的差异,即假阳性(已采取但未规定的行动)和假阴性(已规定但未采取的行动),会影响响应评估和政策修订。我们调查了从官方文件(规定网络)和经验数据(观察网络)中提取的联邦、州和地方层面的协作网络,这些数据以情况报告(n = 109)和推特(n = 28,050)的形式出现,均来自对登陆美国的重大飓风的响应。我们的分析表明,规定的协作网络与观察到的协作网络之间存在显著差异(平均节点重叠~9.94%,边缘重叠~3.94%)。在节点和边缘重叠方面,观察到的网络与联邦级网络最为相似,这凸显了联邦应对指南的优先性。我们还观察到高比例的假阳性,即非政府组织、非营利组织和志愿者组织,它们在危机响应中发挥着关键作用,但在响应计划中并未提及。这些发现使我们能够评估当前的最佳应对措施,并为应急政策规划提供信息。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
From plan to practice: Interorganizational crisis response networks from governmental guidelines and real-world collaborations during hurricane events

Crisis response involves extensive planning and coordination within and across a multitude of agencies and organisations. This study explores how on-the-ground crisis response efforts align with crisis response guidelines. These guidelines are key to the effectiveness of crisis response. To this end, we construct, analyse and compare emergency response networks by using network analysis and natural language processing methods. Differences between plans and practice, that is, false positives (actions delivered but not prescribed) and false negatives (actions prescribed but not delivered), can impact response evaluation and policy revisions. We investigate collaboration networks at the federal, state and local level extracted from official documents (prescribed networks) and empirical data (observed networks) in the form of situational reports (n = 109) and tweets (n = 28,050) from responses to major hurricanes that made landfall in the United States. Our analyses reveal meaningful differences between prescribed and observed collaboration networks (mean node overlap ~9.94%, edge overlap ~3.94%). The observed networks most closely resemble federal-level networks in terms of node and edge overlap, highlighting the prioritisation of federal response guidelines. We also observed a high ratio of false positives, that is, nongovernmental, nonprofit and volunteer organizations, that play a critical role in crisis response and are not mentioned in response plans. These findings enable us to evaluate the current best practices for response and inform emergency response policy planning.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.40
自引率
12.90%
发文量
51
期刊介绍: The Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management is an invaluable source of information on all aspects of contingency planning, scenario analysis and crisis management in both corporate and public sectors. It focuses on the opportunities and threats facing organizations and presents analysis and case studies of crisis prevention, crisis planning, recovery and turnaround management. With contributions from world-wide sources including corporations, governmental agencies, think tanks and influential academics, this publication provides a vital platform for the exchange of strategic and operational experience, information and knowledge.
期刊最新文献
Insights into decision-maker's perceptions of good versus bad decisions in emergency services—A modified Delphi study Collective response capacity: Developing crisis leadership in organisations Compound crisis communication and household preparedness: Examining the effects of evidence type and crisis message fatigue Leveraging NLP for crisis communication management: A case study of news media analysis of the COVID-19 pandemic in two Nordic countries The impact of crisis leadership on the performance in public sector: The mediation role of trust and knowledge sharing
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1