A REAL TIME ONLINE DELPHI DECISION SYSTEM, V 2.0:

CRISIS MANAGEMENT SUPPORT DURING EXTREME EVENTS

A MODULE CONTRIBUTION TO

 1

Connie White Murray Turoff Roxanne Hiltz Jacksonville State University New Jersey Institute of Technology Jacksonville, Alabama, USA Newark, New jersey, USA

2

http://demo.sahanapy.org

How to make better decisions managing disasters

3

Lithia Springs, Georgia, 2009WICKED PROBLEMS

Chaos Time Critical High Stress Information Overload Lack of Resources Lack of Information Situational Assessment Uncertainty Need Feedback Congested Quarters Disorganization Who’s In Charge?

4

How to organize, manage and prioritize all

risk?

5

Present Working Environment

Internet Access

Browser – pc or smart phone

Collaboration

Collective Intelligence

6

Dynamics of Group Membership

Not all members have to participate in order for results to be ongoing, real time and reflected.

System can be used by members anytime

System can be used from anywhere there is the Internet and a browser- Android phone

Moderator can change who is in the group and modify the individual’s privileges.

Delphi Technique Characteristics

ANONYMITY FEEDBACK SINGLE GROUP CALCULATION

8

Designed System based on Delphi Technique

Anonymity Voting is anonymous Item creation is anonymous

Individual input results in a single group opinion Users enter opinions as independent ranked list Sub-item selection, muddling through

Feedback Scale of results

Visual Interpretation of the data – Comparative Judgment yields more precise representation of expert’s opinion and group’s opinion

Forum Discussion Interaction between crisis managers

Provides more information Exposes and resolves ambiguities Exposes and focuses on true uncertainties for input Reduces information overload

Constructs

10

Design Science Research1st Iteration: Campus Threat Assessment Agreement

11

Severe Weather Top Threat Central Alabama

12

Agreement and Disagreement

13

Design Science Research

2nd Iteration: Top Excuses Why Students Miss Midterms

14

Version 2.0: Five Tools Provided

1. Problem Management1. Add New2. View Existing3. Add members

2. Solution List 1. Generation 2. Select subgroup of items for consideration

3. Voting1. Input expert opinion through paired comparison

4. Visual Scale 1. quick interpretation of data providing more information due to

distance between alternatives

5. Unique Group Creation1. 4 Roles Supported: moderator, contributor, guest, participant

15

Problem Management Tool

16

Solution List Generation Tool

17

Item Selection: Muddling Through

18

Voting Tool: paired comparisons

19

Reasons behind usingPaired Comparisons for Voting

High stress Information overload Memory capacity Sleep deprivation

Paired Comparisons provide a more accurate reflection of the expert’s opinion with > 7 items in current memory.

20

Scale of ResultsThurstone’s Law of Comparative Judgment

21

Thurstone’s Law of Comparative Judgment

Visual interpretation of information reduces information overload, quicker to interpret

Better than a priority ranked list of equal intervals in that each solution is in proximity to the other solutions indicating ‘how much more’ one solution is preferred to another by the group.

22

Groups and Membership Roles

23

USING EXPERTS DECREASES

UNCERTAINTY

24

Need Practitioner’s Input

Need Large Groups of Experts to Test System

Can this be used during any phase of EM? Mitigation Preparedness Response Recovery

What exercises/problem types should be used to test the system?

25

FUTURE MODIFICATIONS

• Normalization of Scale• Reduce total number of paired comparisons

• Transitivity• What changes need to be made so that this will work in the real world?• Other suggestions of additional tools needed?

26

Questions? Comments?

Play around with the system at:

http://delphi.sahanafoundation.org/

For additional help contact: Connie Whiteconnie.m.white@gmail.com

THANK YOU

Special Thanks to the Sahana FoundationIn particular: Fran Boon, site mentor Reza Mohammadi, program developer