Introducing a Fragmentation Perspective on Coordination in Crisis Management

Abstract

Coordination theories are characterized primarily by a focus on integration, in which coordination is aimed at achieving a coherent and unified set of actions. However, in the extreme settings in which fast-response organizations operate, achieving integration is often challenging. In this study we employ a fragmentation perspective to show that dealing with ambiguity and discontinuity is not only inevitable for these organizations, it is a key characteristic of coordinating. We undertook an inductive, qualitative field study on how officers in command from the fire department, medical services, and police coordinate during emergency response operations. Our data are based on a four-year multi-site field study of 40 emergency management exercises in the Netherlands, combined with 56 retrospective interviews. Our inductive analysis of this data shows that officers use three coordination practices to deal with ambiguity and discontinuity: working around procedures, delegating tasks, and demarcating expertise. We theorize our findings by showing how these practices lead to conditions in which fragmentation can become an effective method of coordination. In doing so, we provide a more complete understanding of the process of coordinating in fast-response settings that will benefit both crisis management practice and organizational theory.

The Coordination‐Information Bubble in Humanitarian Response: Theoretical Foundations and Empirical Investigations

“…In addition, to understand the impact of fragmentation on the emergence of sensemaking, coordination, and decision‐making, traditional coordination theory that focuses on integration and coherence (Wolbers et al. 2018) needs to be extended. Fragmentation here refers to different contextual rationalities at different levels and roles, emerging through disrupted communication or different processes and retained via sensemaking trajectories.…”

Tensions and Dilemmas in Crisis Governance: Responding to Citizen Volunteers

“…Schmidt, A., Boersma, K., & Groenewegen, P. (2018). Management strategies in response to an institutional crisis: The case of earthquakes in the Netherlands.…”

Crisis response team decision‐making as a bureau‐political process

“…Many decisions in the process were made by individual liaisons who claimed authority over a certain topic (e.g., the police on the issue of public order). As organizations were working independently in their own areas of responsibility, the crisis response was always to some degree fragmented and quick (see Wolbers, Boersma, & Groenewegen, ). When collaborative decision‐making took place instead and liaisons contemplated the appropriate course of action (e.g., whether to scale up the response), their exchange of competing ideas on possible crisis response actions ensured careful deliberation (see Rosenthal et al., ).…”