Research demonstrates that information sharing is facilitated by familiarity, and having a common understanding of problems, use of lexicon, and semantic meaning. These factors can be difficult to develop within extreme environments such as disasters as members of the multi‐agency system that responds often have limited experience of working together. Public inquiries repeatedly highlight the impact of information sharing difficulties on public safety, but limited academic research has focused on identifying concrete behaviours that facilitate interteam information sharing within such environments. This paper presents a case study of a national disaster response exercise involving 1,000 emergency responders. Data consist of structured observations, recordings of interteam meetings, and interviews with emergency responders. Results of mixed‐method analysis indicate that interteam information sharing is delayed by limited situation awareness and poor articulation. Conversely, adopting behaviours that promote common frames for understanding interteam capabilities and information requirements improves information sharing and potentially reduces cognitive effort required to process information. Findings contribute to interteam communication theory by highlighting that in complex, time‐constrained environments, having a shared understanding of responsibilities and information requirement is important for minimizing redundant deliberation and improving relevance and speed.Practitioner points Facilitating the exchange and interpretation of relevant information is important for improving situation assessment, decision‐making, and the implementation of appropriate actions for addressing risks.Interteam information sharing can be particularly challenging when teams are comprised of members from across different organizations with different language and cultures that must form ad hoc to rapidly respond to problems in extreme environments.Adopting communication strategies that develop common frames‐of‐reference can facilitate information sharing and interteam responses to disasters.

No abstract

Individuals responsible for decision-making during critical incidents must wrestle with uncertainty, complexity, time pressure, and accountability. Critical incidents are defined as rare events where demand outstrips resources and where there are high stakes, uncertainty, and dynamic and ever-shifting elements that frustrate clear predictions. This paper argues that critical-incident decision-making is highly complex because many critical incidents have no such analogue, and thus there is no prior experience to draw upon. Further, while prescriptive models argue for a selection of a "best" outcome, rarely in critical incidents is there a "best" outcome and, instead, more likely a "least-worst" one. Most options are high risk, most will carry negative consequences, and many will be immutable and irreversible once committed to. This paper analyzes data collected from critical decision method interviews with members of the United States Armed Forces to explore the psychological processes of making (or not making) least-worst decisions in high-consequence situations. Specifically, and based on thematic analysis of interviews with those who have made least-worst decisions while serving as part of the Armed Forces, we identify a host of exogenous (external to the incident such as resources, political agendas) and endogenous factors (features of the incident itself-size, scale, duration) that affect the decision-making process. These factors have, to date, not been factored into theoretical models of how high-stakes decisions are made under conditions of uncertainty.Keyword Decision-making . Decision inertia . Choice . Uncertainty . Least-worst decisions When the Camp fire barreled toward this Sierra foothill town last Thursday morning, officials had a crucial choice to make right away: How much of Paradise should be evacuated? . . . So, this time, they decided not to immediately undergo a full-scale evacuation, hoping to get residents out of neighborhoods closest to the fires first before the roads became gridlocked. . . . But it soon became clear that the fire was moving too fast for that plan, and that the whole town was in jeopardy. A full-scale evacuation order was issued at 9:17 a.m., but by then the fire was already consuming the town.

This chapter examines the impact of the UK National Counter-Terrorism Training program (Alcyone). Alcyone is a 6-day course that provides the following: (1) psychological training in Observing Rapport Based Interpersonal Techniques (ORBIT), (2) input on pre-interview briefing, and (3) legislation and input on safety interviewing. Approximately 80% of the course involves scenario-based role-play with additional knowledge checks and short lecture inputs. The chapter details the analysis used to assess the program’s impact. Multivariate analysis of variance revealed that Alcyone-trained officers showed a significantly greater reliance on adaptive interpersonal skills that had been taught in the course and demonstrated significantly fewer maladaptive interpersonal behaviors that they had been taught to avoid. There was also a significant increase in the use of rapport-based behaviors and a greater extraction of information from the suspects. Although several other factors may also account for an increase in yield, the increase in all the aspects that these officers had been taught in the course provides support that the course had a positive impact. This has implications for interview training programs and for the dissemination of evidence-based practice for counterterrorism interviewing.

This paper explores the current state of automated systems in the Royal Navy (RN), as well as exploring where personnel view systems would have the most benefit to their operations in the future. In addition, personnel’s views on the current consultation process for new systems are presented. Currently serving RN personnel ( n = 46) completed a questionnaire distributed at the Maritime Warfare School. Thematic analysis was conducted on the 5,125 words that were generated by personnel. Results show that RN personnel understand the requirement to utilize automated systems to maintain capability in the increasingly complex environments they face. This requirement will increase as future warfare continues to change and increasingly sophisticated threats are faced. However, it was highlighted that current consultation and procurement procedures often result in new automated systems that are not fit for purpose at time of release. This has negative consequences on operator tasks, for example by increasing workload and reducing appropriate system use, as well as increasing financial costs associated with the new systems. It is recommended that an increase in communication and collaboration between currently serving personnel and system designers may result in preventing the release of systems that are not fit for purpose.