2.2. Establishing networks for promoting inter-organizational collaboration in the management of crises

Provide feedback on this topic

The link takes you to a secure and anonymous Google form.

Open the link in a new tab or window if you want to see the guideline content in parallel

Establishing pre-crisis relationships between the organizations that may be jointly involved in managing a crisis, paves the way for more effective collaboration and communication; building trust and create professional relationship across organisations during and post crisis responses.

Implementation

Introduction

Identifying relevant stakeholder organizations prior to a crisis and cultivating positive relationships with these is extremely important for successful crisis response. Effective crisis response and management require coordinated actions among multiple organizations across many jurisdictions under conditions of urgent stress, heavy demand and tight time constraints. During crises, numerous interdependent organisations—government agencies, private companies, no profit organisations, etc.—are part a common network, as they have to work together towards a common goal.

If inter-organisational relations in the network are too weak, organisations may provide insufficient support, may withdraw it during a crisis, may fail to or may even intensify the threat. Thus, organisations should allocate effort to establishing adequate communication channels and alliances with other organisations during the pre-crises phase.

Once it is established, a collaboration network will create opportunities for both promoting a common ground among different organizations (see Card Promoting Common Ground), and defining agreements for a periodic coordination and continuous crosschecking of the respective roles and responsibilities in the management of a crisis (see Card Roles and Responsibilities).

Healthcare implementation - Introduction

In order to "Establish networks" one actor should be assigned with the responsibility of implement and maintain updated contact details for agencies and actors that potentially can be involved in incident coordination.

This network should jointly meet and discuss important issues. This will enhance the managing of the crisis. The network thereafter analyse the work preformed and examine what can be improved.

Before a crisis

Before any crisis has occurred, a five-step protocol is recommended to establish effective inter-organizational collaboration across the relevant organizations that may have to work together in the management of a crisis or emergency. The protocol is presented from the point of view of each individual organization. Depending on its size and relevance in a specific crisis management domain, the managerial levels of an organization should consider whether they prefer to play an active role in the establishment of the network or to respond to the initiatives of other organizations.

1. Identify the organizations to include in the network. Based on analyses of crisis/emergency scenarios resulting from internal risk assessment activities, identify the relevant organisations with whom collaboration may be necessary at the time of a crisis response. These may be located at International, National, Regional, and local level(s). Looking at the different types of crises that the organization might experience one day, priority should be given to links with the organizations expected to be involved in the largest number of types. However, also the organizations potentially involved only in very specific types of crisis scenarios, who are considered very unlikely to occur, should be taken into consideration, having in mind that the strength of the links to be established can be variable.
2. Specify the rationale for collaborating with an organization. For each organization identified for a potential involvement in your network, specify the rationale for collaborating with it, depending on different types of crisis scenarios. As part of the exercise, clarify as a minimum what are the expectations with respect to the type of cooperation needed with the partner organization and the communication means to be used for establishing and/or maintaining the cooperation.
3. Approach the organization to include in the network. Approach the relevant organisations in order to establish a communication exchange and organize at least a meeting with representatives of the other organizations. Depending on the opportunities and status of relationships the meetings might be either bilateral or multilateral, i.e. involving more than one partner organization at the same time.
4. Establish collaboration terms of reference. Establish Terms of Reference of the collaboration to provide the basis for joint shared actions. Two possible options are envisaged:
   4a. Define a Memorandum of Understanding. Formalise a declaration of intent that clarifies the current rationale (why do we need to collaborate?), objectives (what do we want to achieve?) and mechanisms (how shall we collaborate?) for inter-organisational collaboration. The same declaration should also clarify the potential for future developments (how the scope of the present collaboration may increase in the future?).
   4b. Define a stable framework for collaboration. The framework defines the actual collaboration measures that have to be implemented, including details of resources to be committed, roles involved, type and frequency of meetings, either bilateral or multilateral involving also other organisations. The framework should consider at least one of the mechanisms proposed in the parent CCs 2.1: Promoting common ground and 2.3 Roles and Responsibilities. The first mechanism is particularly recommended if the collaboration has just started and the representatives of the organizations need to better know each other. While the second mechanism should be preferred when there is already a long lasting collaboration and it was possible to design some kind of shared procedure regulating how the organization should operate jointly in different types of crises/emergencies.
5. Maintain a record of the status of inter-organizational relationships. Create and periodically update a record about the status of the relationship with the other organizations.

Triggering questions

Identifying the organizations to include in the network

• When thinking of a specific type of crisis, are there organizations that may be involved together with us in the management of it. Among these organizations, are there any with whom we do not have any collaboration yet in place?
• If there is no collaboration yet in place, would it be worth establishing it?
• When thinking of new possible collaborations, are we considering all relevant levels, including the local, regional, national and international level?

Specifying the rationale for collaborating with an organization

• What type of collaboration do we expect to have with an organization we have decided to include in our network?
• What do we expect to achieve from the collaboration?
• Which communication modalities do we want to adopt in order to interact with such organizations?

Approaching the organizations to include in the network

• Do we know with which person/s should we get in touch in order to activate the collaboration?
• Do we know if there are interpesonal relationship already established in previous activities that may be exploited to facilitate this process?

Establish Memorandum of Understanding

• Have we clearly defined why we need to collaborate?
• Have we clarified what we expect to achieve from the collaboration?
• Have we defined the specific way we intend to collaborate?
• Have we discussed and agreed with the other organization about possible extensions of the scope of our collaboration in future?

Establish a Framework for Collaboration

• Have we defined how often we should get in touch with the other organization to review reciprocal roles and responsibilities in the management of crises?
• Have we defined shared activities to improve the common ground among us and the other organization in the management of crises (e.g. common training sessions)?
• Have we developed inside our organizations a documentation to record the status of our collaboration with the other organization?

Healthcare implementation - Before

"Establishing networks" could be implemented in the perspective by setting up a strategy for collaboration. For example, a strategy for stakeholder cooperation could be developed in the pre- perspective.

The strategy would include establishing:

• communication protocol which initiate communication and following coordination among agencies during incidents that might require agency-coordination;

• communication channels for initiating coordination should also be established, as for example if Emergency Dispatch Centre should call to a coordination conference on Tetra radio, phone, email or video conference.

• Points of Contacts, alarm protocols and general strategies should be tested and drilled in order to maintain effective communications during incidents. This could be done during coordination exercises in a before-perspective.

Air Traffic Management implementation - Before

When applying the card to the ATM context, it should be considered that this domain is strongly regulated. Since the regulation is shaping all the activities, there might be cases in which the preparation to crisis management requires establishing a link with a new organization to respond to new regulation requirements. It is therefore advisable to add a triggering question such as "Is there any new regulation that requires to extend the existing network to other organizations?"

During a crisis

During the development of crisis requiring the collaboration among different organizations, the conditions to establish a new network of organizations or to reinforce an existing one can be very different, depending on the type of crisis. When the crisis takes the form of an emergency where time is a critical factor, the organization will mostly count on the collaboration network that was established before the crisis itself. On the other side, if the crisis has a longer timeframe (e.g. at least two days, up to several months), it may be necessary to either create an ad-hoc network of collaborations or to extend the existing one to accommodate for specific needs emerged during the development of the crisis. Therefore, limited to the crises with a longer timeframe, the first 4 steps of the protocol designed for the Before Crisis case could be considered:

1. Identify the organizations to include in the network. Based on analyses of the ongoing crisis/emergency scenarios, identify the relevant organizations with whom collaboration is necessary to make the crisis response more effective. These may be located at International, National, Regional, and local level(s).
2. Specify the rationale for collaborating with an organization. For each organization identified for a potential involvement in the network, specify the rationale for collaborating with it, depending on different types of crisis scenarios. As part of the exercise, clarify what are the expectations with respect to the type of cooperation needed with the partner organization and the communication means to be used for establishing and/or maintaining the cooperation.
3. Approach the organization to include in the network. Approach the relevant organizations in order to establish a communication exchange and organize at least a meeting with representatives of the other organizations. Depending on the opportunities and status of relationships the meetings might be either bilateral or multilateral, i.e. involving more than one partner organization at the same time.
4. Establish collaboration terms of reference. Establish Terms of Reference of the collaboration to facilitate joint shared actions. In the During Crisis phase this can be limited to a short Memorandum of Understanding clarifying the current rationale (why do we need to collaborate?), objectives (what do we want to achieve?) and mechanisms (how shall we collaborate?) for inter-organizational collaboration. Once the crisis is terminated the managers of organizations which were engaged in a collaboration should consider whether to upgrade the memorandum of understanding to a stable framework for collaboration.

Triggering questions

Identifying the organizations to include in the network

• When considering the ongoing crisis, are there organizations that may be involved together with us in the management of it. Among these organizations, are there any with whom we do not have any collaboration yet in place?
• If there is no collaboration yet in place, would it be worth establishing it?
• When thinking of new possible collaborations, are we considering all relevant levels, including the local, regional, national and international level?

Specifying the rationale for collaborating with an organization

• What type of collaboration do we expect to have with an organization we have decided to include in our network?
• What do we expect to achieve from the collaboration?
• Which communication modalities do we want to adopt in order to interact with such organizations?

Approaching the organizations to include in the network

• Do we know with which person/s should we get in touch in order to activate the collaboration?
• Do we know if there are interpesonal relationship established in previous activities that may be exploited to facilitate this process?

Establish Memorandum of Understanding

• Have we clearly defined why we need to collaborate?
• Have we clarified what we expect to achieve from the collaboration?
• Have we defined the specific way we intend to collaborate?
• Have we discussed and agreed with the other organization about possible extensions of the scope of our collaboration in future?

Healthcare implementation - During

An implementation of the concept card could be the setting up of an operative coordination staff.

In this group predefined roles (Point of Contact – Designated Duty Officer) should be established within each agency in the event of/or threat of crisis or major incident. The staff assesses the scenario if there is a demand for coordination. The agencies identified as key-actors are notified by emergency dispatch center to participate in a telephone conference initiating coordination. During the conference, the need of inviting additional agencies/actors important to manage the specific scenario is assessed. Emergency dispatch will carry out any of such requests

The actor (Emergency Dispatch Center) has the task to act as:

• a switchboard
• gather all agencies
• as prerequisite for swift initiation of the coordination staff.

This in turn creates necessary conditions for proactive inter-agency coordination.

After a crisis

After a crisis has occurred, the managers of organizations that were collaborating in the response to it may consider whether there is a need to establish a stable framework of collaboration for future needs or to extend the network to new organizations. The following 5 stage process is proposed in order to extend the network of collaboration. The organizations which were already collaborating among them previously to the crisis may consider reinforcing their framework of collaboration by applying only the steps 4b and 5 and reflect on lesson learned about the process of establishing a new network.

1. Identify new organizations to include in the network. Based on analyses of the recently occurred crisis, identify the relevant organizations with whom collaboration is necessary to make the crisis response more effective in future occasions. These may be located at International, National, Regional, and local level(s).
2. Specify the rationale for collaborating with an organization. For each new organization identified for a potential involvement in the network, specify the rationale for collaborating. As part of the exercise, clarify a what are the expectations with respect to the type of cooperation need with the partner organization and the communication means to be used for establishing and/or maintaining the cooperation.
3. Approach the new organization to include in the network. Approach the relevant organizations in order to establish a communication exchange and organize at least a meeting with representatives of the other organizations. Depending on the opportunities and status of relationships the meetings might be either bilateral or multilateral, i.e. involving more than one partner organization at the same time.
4. Establish collaboration terms of reference. Establish Terms of Reference of the collaboration to facilitate joint shared actions in future occasions. Two possible options are envisaged:
   4a. Define a Memorandum of Understanding. Formalize a declaration of intent that clarifies the current rationale (why do we need to collaborate?), objectives (what do we want to achieve?) and mechanisms (how shall we collaborate?) for inter-organisational collaboration. The same declaration should also clarify the potential for future developments (how the scope of the present collaboration may increase in the future?);
   4b. Define a stable framework for collaboration. The framework defines the actual collaboration measures that have to be implemented, including details of resources to be committed, roles involved, type and frequency of meetings, either bilateral or multilateral involving also other organizations. The framework should consider at least one of the two mechanisms proposed in the parent CCs 2.1 Promoting common ground and 2.3 Roles and Responsibilities. The first mechanism is particularly recommended if the collaboration has just started and the representatives of the organizations need to better know each other. While the second mechanism should be preferred when there is already a long lasting collaboration and it was possible to design some kind of shared procedure regulating how the organization should operate jointly in different types of crises/emergencies.
5. Maintain a record of the status of inter-organizational relationships. Create and/or periodically update a record about the status of the relationship with the other organizations.

Triggering questions

Identifying the organizations to include in the network

• When thinking of a recently occurred crisis, are there organizations that may be involved together with us in the management of it. Among these organizations, are there any with whom we do not have any collaboration yet in place?
• If there is no collaboration yet in place, would it be worth establishing it?
• When thinking of new possible collaborations, are we considering all relevant levels, including the local, regional, national and international level?

Specifying the rationale for collaborating with an organization

• What type of collaboration do we expect to have with a new organization we have decided to include in our network?
• What do we expect to achieve from the collaboration?
• Which communication modalities do we want to adopt in order to interact with such organizations?

Approaching the organizations to include in the network

• Do we know with which person/s should we get in touch in order to activate the collaboration?
• Do we know if there are interpesonal relationship established after the crisis that may be exploited to facilitate this process?

Establish Memorandum of Understanding

• Have we clearly defined why we need to collaborate?
• Have we clarified what we expect to achieve from the collaboration?
• Have we defined the specific way we intend to collaborate?
• Have we discussed and agreed with the other organization about possible extensions of the scope of our collaboration in future?

Establish a Framework for Collaboration

• Have we defined how often we should get in touch with the other organization to review reciprocal roles and responsibilities in the management of crises?
• Have we defined shared activities to improve the common ground among us and the other organization in the management of crises (e.g. common training sessions)?
• Have we developed inside our organizations a documentation to record the status of our collaboration with the other organization?

Healthcare implementation - After

The implementation of the concept card could be carried out by:

• having an inter-agency after action review during meetings on coordination scheduled on monthly basis. Incidents that has demanded coordination would be subject for discussions. The purpose of these reviews would:
• identify strengths and weaknesses in the joint management of the incidents.

On these meetings, communication and points of contacts should be debated, whereby uncertainties are clarified and associated protocols revised.

Understanding the context

Detailed objectives

Rationale. Identifying relevant stakeholder organisations prior to a crisis and cultivating positive relationships with these is extremely important for successful crisis response (Kapucu 2006). Effective crisis response and management require coordinated actions among multiple organizations across many jurisdictions under conditions of urgent stress, heavy demand and tight time constraints (Comfort and Kapucu 2006). During crises, numerous interdependent organisations—government agencies, private companies, no profit organisations, etc.—are part a common network, as they have to work together towards a common goal. The need to establish an effective pre-crisis network is also exacerbated by the large the scale of recent emergencies such as pandemics, cyber-attacks and prolonged critical infrastructure failure, which have large scale impact and accentuate the challenge that public and private organisations have to jointly address (Ansell & c. 2010). If inter-organisational relations in the network are too weak, or there is insufficient reciprocal trust, organisations may provide insufficient support, may withdraw it during a crisis or may even intensify the threat (Ulmer 2001). Thus, organisations should allocate effort to establishing adequate communication channels and alliances with other organisations during the pre-crises phase. Once it is established, a collaboration network will create opportunities for both establishing a common ground among different organizations (see CC 2.1 Promoting Common Ground ) and defining agreements for a periodic coordination and continuous crosschecking of the respective roles and responsibilities in the management of a crisis (see CC 2.3 Roles and Responsibilities). Therefore, the present card has limited applicability to the situations in which a stable network of organization is already in place and in which the efficacy of the response to a crisis largely depends on the quality of the relationship and on the mutual understanding of respective roles and responsibility.

Targeted actors

The card is directed to top management roles involved in strategic decision making (e.g., executive management, policy makers), and indirectly this will affect operational levels.

Healthcare actors

Down below is example of actors that may be jointly involved in managing a crisis:

• health care
• police
• rescue services
• municipality
• county concil
• military
• refugee agency
• joint rescue coordination and airborne evacuation coordination

National level - Policymakers - National Board of Health and Welfare: responsible for policy and national coordination. E.g. supporting coordination among counties but primarily by requesting a situation report that is then relayed to the Ministry of Health and the Government. This level is also active in strategic decision making during a crisis.

Regional level - The Regional medical major incident management: manage resources in order to optimize response with respect to the situation. They have mandate to command all available resources within affected county according to the scenario. This level is also active in strategic decision making on the regional level during a crisis.

Local level - First responders are prehospital command and control: responsible to managing the incident scene regarding casualty treatment and coordination with other agencies at the scene.

These actors may be involved during mass-Casualty events such as fire, train crash, terrorist attacks, traffic accidents and ship accidents.

Air Traffic Management actors

In the ICAO Crisis Management Framework Document, several networks are identified at National (NN), Regional (RN) and beyond national and regional boundaries (Inter-Regional Network - IRN). They are listed hereafter (non-exhaustive lists):

Relevant stakeholder

• Aircraft operators (both commercial and non-commercial) including operators of State Aircraft (NN, RN)
• Air Navigation Service Providers at aerodromes, in the Terminal Areas and in the Area Control Centres (NN, RN),
• Airport operators (NN, RN),
• Military (NN, RN),
• Appropriate Ministries (NN),
• Civil Aviation Authority and/or appropriate National Supervisory Authorities (NN, RN)
• EACCC (RN),
• EASA (RN),
• EU Council of Ministers (RN),
• European Commission (RN),
• ICAO EUR/NAT Regional Office (RN),
• International organisations (RN), e.g. IATA, ACI, CANSO, etc.
• Main ATM Centre (MATMC) (RN),
• Network Manager (RN), etc
• FAA and NAV Canada in North America (IRN),
• ISAVIA in Iceland (IRN),
• adjacent ICAO Regional Offices (mainly ASIA/PAC, MID and AFI), ASECNA in Africa, etc.

Knowledge centres/Agencies

• EC Emergency Response Coordination Centre (ERCC) managed by DG ECHO with its expertise in management of events requirement humanitarian aid or involving civil protection activities (RN),
• Manufacturing industry (RN)
• Volcanic Ash Advisory Centres (VAAC) in London and Toulouse in the event of volcanic ash episodes (RN),
• Other United Nations Agencies (e.g. World Health Organisation, International Atomic Energy Agency, etc.) which have a responsibility to deal with crisis management,etc (RN).
• in USA: NOAA, NASA, etc. (IRN)
• Other United Nations Agencies (e.g. World Health Organisation, etc.) (IRN)

Crisis Focal Points

• A network of Aviation Crisis State Focal Points has been established in the framework of EACCC (RN)
• States in the EUR region outside the EACCC context should consider establishing the appropriate liaison at the national level to serve as the focal point in aviation crisis management (RN).

Expected benefits

Improved ability to respond, adapt and learn from a crisis, thanks to a more effective inter-organizational collaboration and communication, both during and after the concerned crisis.

Relation to adaptive capacity

Relation to risk management

This card requires an internal risk management approach sensitive enough to detect crisis situations in which collaboration is needed. The card brings and added value in that it increases the likelihood of successful implementation of the measures that may be defined in a risk management framework, especially those measures that are shared with or are dependent on the resources of other organizations.

Illustration

Healthcare illustration

Fire in buildings illustrates the importance of Establishing networks. In order to efficiently handle a fire in a building with many people, contacts and identified responsibilities among different actors should be identified prior to the event. Actors managing the crisis have different responsibilities, skills and resources that affect their approach. It is of importance that these factors are examined before the event since it will facilitate the managing of the crisis.

Fire at a hotel or at a refugee housing results in many severe burn injuries. For example, in the Region Ostergötland in Sweden, Point of Contacts and communication protocols are communicated and implemented well in advance in order to ensure a rapid all-agencies coordination. Any agency should be able to request and initiate multi-agency coordination.

The case illustrates the need of establishing pre-crisis relationships among the organizations that may be jointly involved in managing a crisis (in this case Firebrigade/ Police/ EMS - Emergency Medical Serivices). Example of outcome of pre-crisis relationships could be predefined liaison channels and procedures for collaboration. When the involved actors have agreed on rules and structure for collaboration, they can focus on identifying operational goals and action plans for network.

In case of fire in a refugee housing, successful management involves relevant stakeholders in migration management, municipality Authorities, County Councils and first responders who take care of casualties and provide for the psychosocial support of the victims.

This is a prerequisite for effective collaboration and communication during crisis and post crisis responses across organisations.

Air Traffic Management illustration

2010 Icelandic Volcano Eruption. Following the eruption of Icelandic volcano Eyjafjalläjokull on 14 April 2010, a cloud of ash quickly spread across Europe, helped by favourable winds, bringing an unprecedented level of disruption on the air transport industry (10). Most European civil aviation authorities closed their respective airspaces. On the 17th of April, the n. of actual flight x day in Europe was reduced to 5,335, from an average of 28,000. The national measures were based on the scientific advice provided by the Volcanic Ash Advisory Centre, London (VAAC) and EUROCONTROL. In reaction to the flying bans, all major airlines claimed that authorities had been overly cautious by overestimating the extent of the ash cloud and the hazard it represented for jet engines, in the name of the precautionary principle. In particular, airlines considered inadequate the hazard model used by VAAC. On the other hand, the authorities claimed they acted consistently with ICAO guidelines. One week after the crisis began the situation did not improve, as the ash cloud did not move. Eventually, the EU and EUROCONTROL took over, and proposed the adoption of a coordinated EUROPEAN action in response to the crisis. Ultimately the crisis “demonstrated the vulnerability of the European aviation system in terms of pan-European coordination between States for emergency situations affecting safety.” (11). In more general terms, the event showed that a cross-organisational coordinated approach is crucial in minimizing the impact of the crisis, as it protect networks against the inefficiencies of fragmented response.

Implementation considerations

Challenges

This card has two main prerequisites:

• The existence of internal risk management framework sensitive enough to identify scenarios in which inter-organisational crisis collaboration may be needed (see CC Adaptation_relative_to_events).
• A continuous commitment of senior management over the practices mandated by this card.

Implementation cost

Healthcare implementation considerations

Associated Challenges The need for multiple actors from different sectors and jurisdictions to rapidly form a network to coordinate the response, stress the need of previously established structures for a successful management of crisis. The actors need to invest time and effort to establish these structures but will in turn save valuable time in critical stages in mobilizing a crisis response.

Further purposes Disaster medicine doctrines should rely on an all-hazard approach (see CC Adaptation_relative_to_events) where there are the same designated point of contact at each agencies who is contacted regardless of incident scenario. Otherwise there is a risk that time is wasted on figuring out who should be contacted depending on the scenario.

===Minimum viable solution=== Expected benefit/ results To implement the concept "Establish network", all agencies´PoCs should attend a conference call when each PoC can inform about potential contributions that can be made to the joint response. For example, a fire with a large number of casualties and potential antagonistic aspects needs to be managed by several agencies. These agencies need well established communication protocols in order to act proactively in a joint effort. The communication protocols should support coordination relating to: - Scene safety - Fire management - Care for injured - Care of uninjured - Evacuation within and between counties/regions - Information management between agencies

Air Traffic Management implementation considerations

In the European ATM context, the networks are already established, organizations like EUROCONTROL, CANSO, ICAO, etc join the different ATM actors in order to encourage collaboration and the exchange of information. Each organization appoints its representing member at international tables and working groups.

For example, EUROCONTROL proposes to its members several programmes and projects aiming at “building a pan-European single sky that delivers the highest air traffic management performance”. Also, in the airport context, it is the mandatory regulation (Reg. 139/2014 [1]) that makes organizations (e.g. ANSP and aerodromes) creating a network. “ADR.AR.B.005 Management system (c) The Competent Authority shall establish procedures for participation in a mutual exchange of all necessary information and assistance of other competent authorities concerned”.

On the European Commission website International cooperation is promoted: Aviation safety is influenced by the inherently international nature of the aviation industry. International cooperation is thus essential to ensure network safety and development of globally agreed standards. The EU is actively engaged in strengthening aviation safety at the international level, notably through its work with the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO [2]), implementation of technical cooperation projects, and negotiation of aviation safety agreements with key partners in Europe and Beyond [3].

ICAO in the Crisis Management Framework Document (EUR Doc 031) (see document here) states "Building partnerships with relevant stakeholders at national, regional and beyond national and regional boundaries is an essential step in the preparation for an effective crisis management. " Moreover [...] As crisis often spills over the boundaries of States or Regions, in addition to partnerships established at the national and regional level, it is essential to establish close cooperation with key stakeholders beyond the boundaries of the Region, in this particular case beyond ICAO EUR Region.

Relevant material

Relevant Practices, Methods and Tools

Practices

• Establishment of a European Aviation Crisis Coordination Cell. Following the Icelandic volcano eruption in May 2010, the EU has established the European Aviation Crisis Coordination Cell (EACCC) .The EACCC is in fact a network that includes representatives of EU, EUROCONTROL, EASA, airspace users, air navigation service providers, military and airport. The creation of the EACCC ensures both improved preparedness and coordination support at the time of the crisis. https://www.skybrary.aero/index.php/European_Aviation_Crisis_Coordination_Cell_(EACCC)

• Establishing collaboration terms of reference. In a study of three Swedish municipalities (Nohrstedt 2013), the clarifications of terms of collaboration was identified as an important component of effective crisis management network: “The cases show that if the network participants collectively agree on rules and structures for collaboration, they can move on to identify operational goals and action plans for the network. But if the initial terms of collaboration remain undefined, the formulation of common goals will be difficult. Uncertainty may feed frustration and increase doubts among participants regarding the benefits of networking”. The creation of effective network requires the clarification of collaborations terms of reference.

Healthcare Practices, Methods and Tools

In the Healthcare domain, several organizations have implemented the concept cards "Establishing networks". The Swedish Civil Contingencies Agency's Common Ground for Command and Coordination is an example of an all-agency coordination doctrine. Such doctrines should guide actors how to establish networks by sharing common language, communication structures and common networking events.

This will lead to common understanding on terminology, work approaches and management. Implementation and operationalization of this program will create necessary conditions for more inter-agency activities in all phases (before, during, after).

• Before: Workshops, education programs, development of management strategies
• During: Effective inter-agency management with common grounds
• After: Inter-agency after action review based on qualitative indicators for joint incident management.

Air Traffic Management Practices, Methods and Tools

PRACTICES

In most ATM international organizations websites (i.e. EASA, Eurocontrol, etc) there are specific sections dedicated to "Current and upcoming events". Usually some events are upon invitation only, but information is available upon request. These events offer opportunities to create networks.

TOOLS

In ATC domain, at the moment the most used tool in the context of "Establishing Networks" is the mailing list which is used to disseminate information, and possibly involve different actors in briefing and meeting related to the matter.

References

• A. Alemanno, ‘The European regulatory response to the volcanic ash crisis between fragmentation and integration’, Eur J Risk Reg, p. 101, 2010.

• Ansell C., Boin A., and Keller A. (2010), ‘Managing transboundary crises: Identifying the building blocks of an effective response system’, J. Contingencies Crisis Manag., vol. 18, no. 4, pp. 195–207, 2010.

• Cavallo, A. and Ireland, V. (2014), Preparing for complex interdependent risks: A System of Systems approach to building disaster resilience. In International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, Volume 9, September 2014, Pages 181-193.
• Comfort L. K. and Kapucu N. (2006), ‘Inter-organizational coordination in extreme events: The World Trade Center attacks, September 11, 2001’, Nat. Hazards, vol. 39, no. 2, pp. 309–327, 2006.
• Djalante, R., Holley, C., Thomalla, F. and Carnegie, M. (2013), Pathways for adaptive and integrated disaster resilience. In Natural Hazards, Volume 69, Issue 3, December 2013, Pages 2105-2135
• Kapucu, N.,‘Interagency communication networks during emergencies boundary spanners in multiagency coordination’, Am. Rev. Public Adm., vol. 36, no. 2, pp. 207–225, 2006.
• Moynihan D. P., ‘The network governance of crisis response: Case studies of incident command systems’, J. Public Adm. Res. Theory, p. mun033, 2009.
• Nohrstedt D., ‘Networking and Emergency Management Performance: A Nested Analysis of Local Level Collaborations in Sweden’, in International Conference on Public Policy, 2013, pp. 26–28.
• Ulmer R. R., ‘Effective Crisis Management through Established Stakeholder Relationships: Malden Mills as a Case Study’, Manag. Commun. Q., vol. 14, no. 4, pp. 590–615, May 2001.
• SKYbrary Aviation Safety. European Aviation Crisis Coordination Cell (EACCC). https://www.skybrary.aero/index.php/European_Aviation_Crisis_Coordination_Cell_(EACCC). [Accessed: 05-sep-2018].

Healthcare references

• Samverkan Östergötland (Inter-agency Coordination County Östergötland):

http://www.samverkan-ostergotland.se/SiteCollectionDocuments/Samverkan%20Östergötland%20Strategi.pdf

• MSB´s Gemensamma grunder för samverkan och ledning vid samhällsstörningar (Civil Contigencies Agency Common Ground for Command and Coordination): https://www.msb.se/sv/Produkter--tjanster/Publikationer/Publikationer-fran-MSB/Gemensamma-grunder-for-samverkan-och-ledning-vid-samhallsstorningar/
• Samverkan Stockholm (Inter-agency Coordination Stockholm): http://www.samverkanstockholmsregionen.se/
• Socialstyrelsens föreskrift 2013:22 (National Board of Health and Welfare doctrine) https://www.socialstyrelsen.se/Lists/Artikelkatalog/Attachments/19138/2013-5-46.pdf

Terminology

Navigate in the DRMG

• Parent theme: Supporting coordination and synchronisation of distributed operations

• Resilience abilities
  • Contributes to: Respond and Adapt
  • Supported by:
• Categories: Collaboration, Communication
• Functions of crisis management: BEFORE, Preparation, Cooperation and coordination