This paper presents a framework for reasoning about ‘timely response’, and control versus the temporal organisation of a controlling system. By three empirical examples, we show how a controlling system can be described in terms of perception points, decision points and action points. Our conclusions are that (1) temporal expectancies shape our ability to exercise control at least as much our ability to understand relations and causality, but temporality is rarely part of approaches to modelling human or system performance, (2) temporal organisation of activities shape our ability to exercise control, (3) by utilising the temporal control framework, we can describe important properties of the temporal organisation of a socio-technical system, and (4) the capacity of modelling is limited to what can be known or imagined. Therefore, models describing resilience or stability should include temporality and be based on frameworks generic enough to be applied to a wide variety of situations.

This paper argues that state, system, and process descriptions of situation awareness (SA) are interdependent. Based on SA research from the last 30 years, the paper proposes a holistic SA framework. SA states emerge from processes of exploring situations through SA systems. Reflecting research on safety II (resilience), in describing SA states, the framework distinguishes frames (what situations are considered) from implications (regarding the situations) of objects on and of an event horizon. The paper describes and discusses SA system and process dependencies on SA states. It also describes SA system components as mediators and catalysts for SA, SA system properties (e.g. buffering SA), and dynamic SA system formation. Based on an analysis of four enactments of Air Traffic Control situations, the paper argues that what is domain-characteristic may not characterise all situations in a domain. The SA field could thus benefit from incrementally refining a nuanced cross-domain framework.

Decision support tools for efficient dispatching of fire and rescue resources are developed and evaluated. The tools can give suggestions about which resources to dispatch to new accidents, and help the decision makers in evaluating the current preparedness for handling future accidents. The tools are evaluated using simulation game based experiments, with players from the fire and rescue services. The results indicate that the tools can help the fire and rescue services in identifying the closest resources to new accidents, and to select resources that preserve the preparedness in the area. However, the results also indicate that there is a risk that the tools increase the decision time. 

It has been realized that resilience as a concept involves several contradictory definitions, both for instance resilience as agile adjustment and as robust resistance to situations. Our analysis of resilience concepts and models suggest that beyond simplistic definitions, it is possible to draw up a systemic resilience model (SyRes) that maintains these opposing characteristics without contradiction. We outline six functions in a systemic model, drawing primarily on resilience engineering, and disaster response: anticipation, monitoring, response, recovery, learning, and self-monitoring. The model consists of four areas: Event-based constraints, Functional Dependencies, Adaptive Capacity and Strategy. The paper describes dependencies between constraints, functions and strategies. We argue that models such as SyRes should be useful both for envisioning new resilience methods and metrics, as well as for engineering and evaluating resilient systems.

We present a visualization system for incident commanders in urban search and rescue scenarios that supports the inspection and access path planning in post-disaster structures. Utilizing point cloud data acquired from unmanned robots, the system allows for assessment of automatically generated paths, whose computation is based on varying risk factors, in an interactive 3D environment increasing immersion. The incident commander interactively annotates and reevaluates the acquired point cloud based on live feedback. We describe design considerations, technical realization, and discuss the results of an expert evaluation that we conducted to assess our system.

Dynamisk planering innebär bland annat att brandmännen delar in sig i mindre grupper än traditionellt. Dessa kan då arbeta förebyggande med utbildning eller placeras strategiskt till exempel i närheten av olycksdrabbade vägsträckor, för att snabbare kunna nå fram till en olycksplats. Då en olycka inträffar larmas de brandmän som snabbast kan nå fram, och det kan vara nödvändigt att larma flera olika grupper.

En utmaning vid dynamisk planering är att planeringssituationen blir svårare. Det är inte längre självklart vilka brandmän som ska larmas till en viss olycka. Det kan också vara svårt att hitta de bästa placeringarna för brandmän som snabbt ska kunna göra en insats.

I projektet har vi utvecklat och utvärderat datorbaserade verktyg som kan stödja dynamisk planering av räddningstjänst.

Bland verktygen finns en beredskapskalkylator med tillhörande visualisering, vilken beräknar beredskapen som en funktion av tiden det tar för de nödvändiga resurserna att nå fram till en viss typ av olycka och sannolikheten för att olyckan ska inträffa i närområdet. Ett annat verktyg kan ge förslag på vilka resurser som bör skickas till en olycksplats för att de ska komma fram så fort som möjligt. Ett tredje verktyg kan ge förslag på hur fordon och personal dynamiskt bör placeras för att beredskapen ska förbättras, dvs. de ska kunna nå fram så fort som möjligt till de platser där det är störst sannolikhet att en olycka kommer att inträffa.

Verktygen har utvärderats genom två experimentserier. I experimenten testades mänskligt beslutsfattande i en simulerad räddningstjänstmiljö. I den första serien fick personal från olika räddningstjänster prova på dynamisk planering utan hjälp av de datorbaserade verktygen. I den andra serien fick andra räddningstjänster köra samma scenarier, men då ta hjälp av de i projektet utvecklade verktygen.

Resultaten visar att verktygen kan hjälpa räddningstjänsten med planeringen av beredskapen, men också att det finns risk att detta sker på bekostnad av att planeringen tar något längre tid. En tydlig majoritet av de deltagande räddningstjänstbefälen var positivt inställda till de utvecklade verktygen och tyckte verktyg av detta slag skulle kunna hjälpa dem i det dagliga arbetet.

Resultaten tydliggör också att olika personer – till och med nära kollegor inom samma räddningstjänst – uppfattar begreppet beredskap på olika sätt. Det visade sig dock att beredskapsvisualiseringen kan bidra till att denna skillnad i uppfattning minskar; i den andra experimentserien, där de hade tillgång till detta verktyg, minskade variationerna i bedömningarna och deltagarnas uppfattningar stämde bättre överens med den beräknade beredskapen.

In presenting examples from the most extensive and demanding fire in modern Swedish history, this paper describes challenges facing hastily formed networks in exceptional situations. Two concepts that have been used in the analysis of the socio-technical systems that make up a response are conversation space and sensemaking. This paper argues that a framework designed to promote understanding of the sensemaking process must take into consideration the time at which as well as the location in which an individual is engaged in an event. In hastily formed networks, location is partly mediated through physical systems that form conversation spaces of players and their interaction practices. This paper identifies and discusses four challenges to the formation of shared conversation spaces. It is based on the case study of the 2006 Bodträskfors forest fire in Sweden and draws on the experiences of organised volunteers and firefighters who participated in a hastily formed network created to combat the fire. 

Following the Asian Tsunami of 2004 and during the Israel-Lebanon Crisis of 2006, Sweden sent small crisis response teams to support civilians. The small size of the teams, combined with situations that did not always play out according to expectations and plans, presented a challenge to their resilience-their ability to adapt to circumstances outside of plans made in advance. In this paper, we analyze the experiences of 14 members of Swedish field teams involved in the crises response, based on focus group discussions. We describe a cycle of preparing for role improvisation, of taking improvised roles, of working in them, and of getting out of them when they are no longer a benefit. The discussions revealed that although role improvisation was seen as necessary to get the work done, they also saw a need to manage negative side effects and vulnerabilities of role improvisation in various ways. We discuss training goals based on their experiences, to address perceived strengths and vulnerabilities of role improvisation. We also discuss factors affecting role improvisation, such as a resilience climate of shared attitudes. Our results can be useful for organizations that have or that plan to adopt flexible crisis response teams. Our results can also be of interests to a more general audience with an interest in how practices necessary for resilience can bring negative side effects, for instance, resilience loss in the organization after an initial adaptive stage.

Managing complexity and uncertainty in high risk, socio-technical, systems requires people to continuously adapt. Designing resilient systems that support adaptive behaviour requires a deepened understanding of the context in which the adaptations take place, enablers for successful adaptations and their affect the overall system. Also, it requires a focus on how people actually perform, not how they are presumed to perform according to textbook situations. We propose a framework to analyse adaptive behaviour in everyday situations where systems are working near the margins of safety. The examples that underlie the framework are derived from nine focus groups with representatives working with safety related issues in different work domains, including health care, nuclear, transportation and emergency services. Further, the variety space diagram is developed as a means to illustrate how system variability, disturbances and constraints affect work performance.