Unpacking the Realities and Complexities of Sensemaking: Government Practitioners’ Experiences of Emergency Risk Communication

Abstract

During public health emergencies, government practitioners must rapidly make sense of the risk to human health and the emergency risk communication (ERC) options available. These practitioners determine what, how, and when information is communicated to the public. Recurring criticism of ERC indicates that the communication is not meeting the needs of the community. To improve ERC practice, it is therefore critical to understand practitioners’ sensemaking in these complex and time‐critical settings. This article unpacks the realities and complexities of sensemaking, the process by which practitioners create meaning from the information they receive about an emergency as it unfolds. Qualitative interviews gathered practitioners’ lived experiences of public health emergencies, namely, smoke events (e.g., wildfires and industrial facility fires), and thematic analysis drew on sensemaking literature. The evidence shows that sensemaking is challenging, as practitioners experience pressure from the emergency context and organizational, political, and social expectations. Sensemaking for ERC comes with an underlying imperative to accurately make sense of the situation, in a timely manner and in a way that leads to the best health outcomes. Practitioners must balance creating plausible meaning (sensemaking) with the accuracy expected by stakeholders. The analysis also highlights how sensemaking scope is delimited by professional expert identities and roles within the emergency management system; that is, practitioners’ understanding of their expertise and role, and that of other practitioners. Past lived experiences are viewed as key facilitators of both individual and collective sensemaking, and the history of similar public health events shapes sensemaking in this context.

Emergency risk communication and sensemaking during smoke events: A survey of practitioners

“…In considering the complexity of emergencies and the limited time practitioners have to make sense of smoke events, a key question is: which factors do practitioners prioritize when sensemaking? Our recent study highlights the key role of past lived experiences in facilitating sensemaking (Thomas et al, 2021). However, these findings are based on one study of 15 practitioners, and as such, the generalizability of these findings is unknown.…”

“…To study sensemaking practice for ERC, the research draws on the theoretical understanding of the practice of risk communication, including Chess et al (1991) and Boholm (2019aBoholm ( , 2019b, and the body of literature exploring sensemaking as a key process of risk-related practice, including Boholm et al (2012), Taarup-Esbensen (2019), and Thomas et al (2021. The study has been designed considering Rickard's (2019) two functions of risk communication, and primarily adopts the pragmatic function, while also considering the constitutive function.…”

“…The existing literature highlights that the individual practitioners' knowledge base is an important factor influencing their sensemaking (Boholm, 2019b;Boholm et al, 2012). Practitioners draw on their academic and professional development training and their past lived experiences of smoke events or other public health events (Boholm, 2019a(Boholm, , 2019bBoholm et al, 2012;Taarup-Esbensen, 2019;Thomas et al, 2021). Our recent research studying practitioners' sensemaking for smoke events in Victoria, Australia showed that the lived experience of working in these settings can be stressful and exhausting (Thomas et al, 2021).…”

“…Practitioners draw on their academic and professional development training and their past lived experiences of smoke events or other public health events (Boholm, 2019a(Boholm, , 2019bBoholm et al, 2012;Taarup-Esbensen, 2019;Thomas et al, 2021). Our recent research studying practitioners' sensemaking for smoke events in Victoria, Australia showed that the lived experience of working in these settings can be stressful and exhausting (Thomas et al, 2021). Practitioners are required to make sense of the situation in tight timeframes and deal with high levels of uncertainty (Weick, 1988).…”

“…Emergency smoke events are complex situations characterized by high levels of uncertainty and an urgency to act. These events require practitioners to urgently make sense of the situation, including the risk to public health and the communication options that are available and required to protect the public (Thomas et al., 2021). Sensemaking —described as an iterative process of creating meaning (Weick, 1988; Weick et al., 2005)—has been established as a key process underpinning the practice of ERC (Boholm et al., 2012; Curnin & Owen, 2013; Taarup‐Esbensen, 2019; Thomas et al., 2021).…”