Abstract
There is a need for collaboration support systems, suited to crisis management, able to sustain collaborations in ever more unstable environments. The organizations involved in a crisis response need support in limiting information overload by accessing information suited to their current needs. The collaboration support system proposed in this paper uses a Common Operational Picture (COP), supported by a Geographical Information System (GIS), that consists of information selected according to (i) the on-going collaboration phase, and (ii) the level of commitment within the collaboration of the current user. Additionally, to validate the proposed classifications, the paper demonstrates how the pre-selection can be applied to support crisis collaborations, operating under high stress and high information load.
You have full access to this open access chapter, Download conference paper PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Keywords
- Collaboration
- Crisis management
- Common Operational Picture
- Information overload
- Model driven engineering
1 Introduction
When gathered inside one room, the partners of a collaboration can directly access large amounts of information [10], enabling them to enhance their collaborative awareness. They can identify common goals, critical partners, or share accurate information.
Because the collaborations tend to extend their geographical reach, they can-not communicate as easily as before. To help them, [19] recommends the use of a common artifact to support cooperative activities that can be both individually conducted and interdependent. The main goal of the artifact is to reduce the complexity of collaborations, including the complexity of their information system due to:
-
The amount of information in our daily lives is continually increasing and is multiplied by existing information systems [11], while our brains can only process a limited amount of complex information;
-
Each partner must be able to access a part of the collaborative awareness adapted to their business and their level of responsibility;
-
Information shared within a collaboration comes from heterogeneous sources, and each has an expiration date before which it must be used.
These three issues are particularly true during a crisis situation where the collaboration aims to respond to every risk and consequences due to the disaster [12, 15, 20]: the crisis cells have to face high information load and high time pressure, within complex communication channels, while the collaboration can easily breakdown due to heterogeneous experiences, information accesses and comprehensions.
To support the partners in managing the information available within the collaboration, we proposed a collaboration support system able to select information according to (i) the on-going collaboration stage and (ii) the level of commitment of the current user, in order to give each user access to a suited Common Operational Picture (COP), supported by a Geographical Information System (GIS).
A COP is, as defined by [16], an operational picture shared by several partners during a particular operation. Its goal is to enable a shared Situation Awareness (SA) within the collaboration. In this case, the term SA can be defined as a model of the environment surrounding the collaboration [9]. This COP can be displayed through the use of a GIS. According to [16], such an information system is a powerful tool to support SA, in particular during crisis situation where almost all relevant information is spatial.
Our goal is to strengthen collaborative awareness in order to enhance the agility of the collaboration (defined in [2]) in the face of new threats or opportunities. The collaboration support system described in this paper includes:
-
A meta-model, as defined by [7], to enable a unified approach of interoperability, and its models modelling the collaborative situation.
-
A GIS that takes the role of a COP to communicate information from the system to the user;
-
An automatic classification by collaboration stages to filter information according to the current phase of the collaboration;
-
An automatic classification by partner roles to filter the information according to the place of the user in the collaboration.
Section 1 presents the collaboration stages and the partners roles classifications that are used to select the information to be displayed on the COP. Section 2 proposes to validate these two classifications by using them in case of a very specific type of collaboration: a crisis collaboration.
2 The Use of a COP to Enhance Collaborative Awareness
The Fig. 1 illustrates how the collaboration support system, proposed in this paper, operates to adapt its COP to is current user and to the current stage of the collaboration. The design of the system involves the definition of a meta-model, several partners’ roles and several collaboration’s stages, that have to be common to every collaboration type:
-
The meta-model (defined in [7]) is used to homogenize and organize available information in models. Such a meta-model, dedicated to collaborations, is described in [3].
-
The role is used to select information, according to the need of the partner, using the collaboration support system.
-
The stage is used to select information over time.
-
The logs are stored to enable future improvements of the collaboration support system.
a. The partners classification to ensure confidentiality
The work of [21], followed by [5], enabled us to identify three partner roles, inspired from the maturity levels of collaborations and described in Table 1. By default, the system does not share information of higher responsibility levels, with lower responsibility levels:
-
A partner P1, with a role R1
-
can reach information shared by a partner P2, with a role R2
-
If only R1 ≥ R2
Furthermore, during an “update()” operation (cf. Fig. 1), a partner can set the default responsibility level of information that he adds to the system. A federated partner can, for example, decide to make its newly added information visible to one, several, or all, open partners (cf. Table 1).
b. The collaboration classification to filter the displayed information
Two previous research works [3, 22] have enabled us to identify five main collaboration stages that are described below in Table 2. Each collaboration stage comes with its own information needs
The Table 3 shows how the concepts of one collaboration meta-model (from [3]) can be classified. For example, the partners of a collaboration need to learn about each other at the beginning of the collaboration during the perception stage (cf. Table 2). Conversely, the goals of the collaboration are set during the convergence stage, when everyone SA is good enough to support this decision.
The classifications are used to identify the “default information” to be first displayed on the COP, for one given user:
-
If a partner needs additional information,
-
the system does not refer to the collaboration classification,
-
but only to the partners classification that manage responsibility levels
To sum up, the pair <collaboration stage, user role> enables the generation of a view of the model, suited to the current collaborative situation, in order to feed the COP displayed by the GIS. The Fig. 2 shows how information is selected according to the need of the user. This follows the recommendations of Mica Endsley [9] about goal-directed task analyses.
3 The Case of Crisis Collaboration
In the aftermath of a disaster, a crisis response requires the collaboration of numerous, heterogeneous partners, under high stress and high time pressure [18]. This paper unfolds the scenario of a 100-year flood provided by the ANR GéNéPi project. It allowed for the interview of many practitioners often involved in crisis collaborations. The results, recorded in specifications [17], underlines the issues still faced by practitioners during crisis responses:
-
Much of the information available is unclear, outdated or unreliable, and only the partners with high expertise can get by;
-
The diagnosis of the impacted territory and the analysis of the vulnerable assets at stake remains difficult;
-
Due to the number of partners involved, it is hard to take into account all possibilities of response process, and even harder to find the optimal response process.
The collaboration support system proposed in this paper can support them in dealing with:
-
The issues due to the instability of the crisis, thanks to the COP that display the information contains in a model that can be continuously updated, as in [1];
-
The issues faced during the understanding phase, thanks to the capacity of the COP to enhance collaborative awareness, as underlined by [4, 6];
-
The issues due to information overload thanks to the collaboration and partners classifications, as described in Sect. 1.
In order to enable the collaboration support system, illustrated in Fig. 2, to generate views of crisis situations, the classifications of collaboration stages and partners’ roles dedicated to crisis collaboration still need to be defined.
a. The partners classification adapted to crisis collaboration support
In France, in case of a 100-year flood, the organization involves four different responsibility levels [8]
-
Local level;
-
County level;
-
Zonal level;
-
National level.
The hierarchies in place, corresponding to the crisis partners’ roles, impose a dedicated information management. For example, a prefect (county level), aiming to communicate to the press, needs to know about the number of people without electricity supply in the county. Conversely, the power supplier (local level), aiming to ensure the continuity of their network, needs to know the exact locations of cut points on their network.
b. The collaboration classification adapted to crisis collaboration support
Like the collaboration stages proposed in this paper, several crisis collaboration phases have been defined over time. Among the first to distinct four phases were Rosenthal and Kouzmin [18]: “Crises […] may be considered in terms of circular processes involving mitigation and preparation, response as well as recovery and rehabilitation”. Inside the response phase, a French official document [14] recognizes five more phases:
-
The confirmation of the alert (Ca): “Is there a disaster? What is its scale?”;
-
The alert (Al): “What are the concerned organizations that will take part in the collaboration?”;
-
The characterization of the crisis (Cc): “Where are the assets vulnerable to the consequences of this crisis?”;
-
The evaluation phase (Ev): “Where are the damaged assets? Where are the threatened assets?”;
-
The follow-up phase (F l) that consists of “thoughtful actions” to anticipate long-term consequences.
All the concepts from a meta-model dedicated to collaborative crisis management, as the one described in [3], can be linked to these crisis response phases. The obtained table (an extract is given in Table 4), along with the meta-model from [3], is used by the collaboration support system instead of the Table 2 suited to all kind of collaboration.
Rationally, the links (•) from Table 3, can easily be applied to the crisis concepts of Table 4 because they all inherit from one concept of Table 3. For example, information concerning a new event, useful during the evaluation phase of a crisis, are also useful during the monitoring phase of the collaboration, because an event is considered as a fact.
Thanks to these new crisis collaboration response phases, and new crisis partners’ roles, a collaborative support system, as the one presented in Fig. 2, can select the information to be displayed to its user according to their relevance, and therefore decrease information load of the partners involved in a crisis situation.
4 Conclusion
This paper offers to use a collaboration support system to display relevant information, via a Common Operational Picture (COP) based on a Geographical Information System (GIS) and describing the collaborative situation.
To further limit information overload and to take into account the different responsibility levels involved, the paper proposes two classifications, dedicated to collaborations:
-
The collaboration classification to adapt the COP to the current collaboration stage that is either the perception, the comprehension, the understanding, the convergence or the monitoring stage.
-
The partners classification to adapt the view to the goal of the current user. It consists of three categories: communicating, open or federated partners.
To extend the proposed classifications, we have checked that these solutions, dedicated to collaborations, apply to crisis collaborations: collaboration in highly unstable environment, under high-stress and time pressure.
References
Barthe-Delanoë, A.M., Bénaben, F., Carbonnel, S., Pingaud, H.: Event-driven agility of crisis management collaborative processes. In: Proceedings of the 9th International ISCRAM Conference, Vancouver BC, Canada (2012). http://www.iscram-live.org/ISCRAM2012/proceedings/124.pdf
Barthe-Delanoë, A.M., Truptil, S., Bénaben, F., Pingaud, H.: Event-driven agility of interoperability during the Run-time of collaborative processes. Decis. Support Syst. 59, 171–179 (2014). http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167923613002868
Benaben, F., Montarnal, A., Truptil, S., Lauras, M., Fertier, A., Salatge, N., Rebiere, S.: A conceptual framework and a suite of tools to support crisis management, Hawaii (2017). https://scholarspace.manoa.hawaii.edu/bitstream/10125/41178/1/paper0029.pdf
Björkbom, M., et al.: Localization services for online common operational picture and situation awareness. IEEE Access 1, 742–757 (2013)
Bénaben, F.: Conception de Système d’Information de Médiation pour la prise en charge de l’Interopérabilité dans les Collaborations d’Organisations. thesis, Institut National Polytechnique de Toulouse, October 2012. https://hal-mines-albi.archives-ouvertes.fr/tel-01206234/document
Bunker, D., Levine, L., Woody, C.: Repertoires of collaboration for common operating pictures of disasters and extreme events. Inf. Syst. Front. 17(1), 51–65 (2015)
Bézivin, J.: On the unification power of models. Softw. Syst. Model. 4(2), 171–188 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10270-005-0079-0
DSC: Organisation de la réponse de sécurité civile. Technical reports (2004)
Endsley, M.R.: Design and evaluation for situation awareness enhancement. In: Proceedings of the Human Factors Society Annual Meeting, vol. 32, pp. 97–101. SAGE Publications, Los Angeles (1988). http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/154193128803200221
Jongsawat, N., Premchaiswadi, W.: A study towards improving web-based collaboration through availability of group awareness information. Gr. Decis. Negot. 23(4), 819–845 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10726-013-9349-3
Karlsson, M.: Challenges of Designing Augmented Reality for Military use (2015)
Klein, G., Feltovitch, P., Bradshaw, J., Woods, D.: Common ground and coordination in joint activity. In: Organizational Simulation, vol. 44, pp. 139–185. Wiley (2005). http://www.jeffreymbradshaw.org/publications/Common_Ground_Single.pdf
Lauras, M., Truptil, S., Bénaben, F.: Towards a better management of complex emergencies through crisis management meta-modelling. Disasters 39(4), 687–714 (2015)
Le Cedre: ORSEC Zonal et départemental, disposition spécifique POLMAR/Terre (2015)
Lee, J., Bharosa, N., Yang, J., Janssen, M., Rao, H.R.: Group value and intention to use — A study of multi-agency disaster management information systems for public safety. Decis. Support Syst. 50(2), 404–414 (2011). http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167923610001776
Luokkala, P., Nikander, J., Korpi, J., Virrantaus, K., Torkki, P.: Developing a concept of a context-aware common operational picture. Saf. Sci. 93, 277–295 (2017). http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0925753516304647
Renou, T., Dolidon, H.: Cahier des charges à l’origine du projet GéNéPi. Technical report, CEREMA & IDETCOM, Loire Moyenne (2015)
Rosenthal, U., Kouzmin, A.: Crises and crisis management: toward comprehensive government decision making. J. Public Adm. Res. Theory 7(2), 277–304 (1997). https://academic.oup.com/jpart/article-abstract/7/2/277/957517
Schmidt, K., Simonee, C.: Coordination mechanisms: Towards a conceptual foundation of CSCW systems design. Comput. Support. Coop. Work (CSCW) 5(2–3), 155–200 (1996)
Shen, M., Carswell, M., Santhanam, R., Bailey, K.: Emergency management information systems: Could decision makers be supported in choosing display formats? Decis. Support Syst. 52(2), 318–330 (2012). http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167923611001552
Touzi, J., Benaben, F., Pingaud, H., Lorré, J.P.: A model-driven approach for collaborative service-oriented architecture design. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 121(1), 5–20 (2009). http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0925527309001005
Warner, N., Letsky, M., Cowen, M.: Cognitive model of team collaboration: macro-cognitive focus. Proc. Hum. Fact. Ergon. Soc. Annu. Meet. 49(3), 269–273 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1177/154193120504900312
Acknowledgements
This work would have not been possible without the GéNéPi project research team, or the computer engineers team from the industrial engineering center of IMT Mines Albi.
Funding
This work was supported by the French National Research Agency, through the GéNéPi project funding (program: Resilience and crisis management [DS0903] 2014; project ID: ANR-14-CE28-0029).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2018 IFIP International Federation for Information Processing
About this paper
Cite this paper
Fertier, A., Montarnal, A., Barthe-Delanoë, AM., Truptil, S., Bénaben, F. (2018). Reducing Information Load to Enhance Collaborative Awareness Thanks to a Pre-selection of Information. In: Camarinha-Matos, L., Afsarmanesh, H., Rezgui, Y. (eds) Collaborative Networks of Cognitive Systems. PRO-VE 2018. IFIP Advances in Information and Communication Technology, vol 534. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-99127-6_25
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-99127-6_25
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-99126-9
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-99127-6
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)