The current state and future needs of decision making: knowledge, practice, tools and training options

Abstract

Decision making in emergency management (EM) is challenging. Australian EM organisations need to ensure that they appropriately train, develop and support their personnel so that they can make effective decisions in challenging situations. This report synthesizes the findings from the first phase of the Natural Hazards Research Australia (NHRA) decision making research project and provides a situational analysis of operational EM decision making in Australia. The report first summarises three literature reviews that examine: emerging issues (stress and fatigue, interoperability and ethical decision making) (Butler et al., 2024); use of cognitive aids (Penney et al., 2024); and EM decision making training (McLennan et al., 2024). The results of a survey and a series of semi-structured interviews are presented, providing a detailed examination of EM decision making
in Australia. One-hundred and fifty-four participants completed all of the questions in the survey (84 per cent of the participants were male, 15.5 per cent were female and 0.5 per cent were non-binary). Thirty-six people participated in the semi-structured interviews (86 per cent of the participants were male and 14 per cent were female). The data showed:

1. There is a clear opportunity to enhance EM decision making training. While the majority of participants felt that the general training they had received from their organisation had improved their ability to make safe and effective operational decisions, it was clear that the majority of participants also felt that the approach to operational decision making taught during any training was sometime or mostly ineffective.

2. The large majority of participants follow their organisations’ rules and procedures, however there can sometimes be a mismatch between what the rules and procedures say and the best decision based on participants’ knowledge, experience and training. This and lack of resources were major reasons why participants sometimes didn’t follow organisational policies and procedures.

3. EM decision makers generally use a combination of recognitional and analytical processes to make decisions. While some participants identified problems with using recognitional and analytical processes, most seem to be unaware of the strengths and limitations of the different types of decision making and how they work together to create decisions.

4. While the majority of participants thought that decision making tools provided by their organisation were clear and easy to use, a number of problems with such tools were identified (such as taking too long, being difficult to use and not applying in most situations). Based on these findings, ideas about options that can be used to enhance EM decision making training and practice are proposed.