The Disaster Management - Report Example

Fire Service Name: University of affiliation In the current world, all business organizations are faced with uncertainties. It is for this reason that there is need to come up with models that would allow strategic managers predict the future and apply these expectations together with the analysis of their organizations based on the culture, tasks, strengths and weaknesses while defining strategic matters. The strategic managers are also faced with the challenge of charting the way forward through the development of strategic vision and policy, defining how they would be implementing the abovementioned plans as well as specifying how they would be evaluating how well their implementation plans are. Since the world is under constant change as we continue moving forward in the upcoming expectation, the strategic managers face the challenge of developing an iterative strategic plan. When unexpected calamities face the business organizations and result to losses, it is the strategic managers who stand to be blamed for their lack of good planning. However, activities within the business organization, are very unpredictable and sometimes, the losses faced by the businesses should not be straightforwardly be associated with the strategic managers (Larson and Enander, 1997). A crisis has four major features, that is, low probability, high effect, doubtful causes and impacts and has differential perceptions. Incidences of high level of crisis affect the well being, safety, environment and national security. Crisis management helps in prevention, survival and bringing successful outcomes. Strategic management is an approach used in the creation of suitable future and helping the organizations to excel. In the move of creating the abovementioned favorable future, the strategic managers are put to test on how they incorporate the stakeholders of their organizations (i.e., the workers who are interested in achieving the goals of the organization) as they envision the most favorable future and later collaborating with them while working towards making the vision a reality. The strategic managers have to be aware that the determining factor in the strategic management is that they have to understand that once people communicate and work together, are likely to create this future (Tun and Pairote, 2006). What are the steps used in risk management procedure? In the context of emergency management, the first step is whereby the strategic manager identifies, analyzes and evaluates risk in the scope of hazard possibility and organization susceptibility. Secondly, the risks which are evaluated get a referral to appropriate policy-makers for evaluation and ranking. In case it has been decided that the risks are not to be handled then they have to be kept an eye on and on a regular basis reviewed together with their current control measures; and if it has been determined that the risks will have to be subjected to treatment, then treatment approach are developed and put into practice as a way of reducing the risks through the modification of the characteristics of the hazard, the population and the environment. The risk cutback might impact susceptibility, probability or consequences. The risks remaining following the viable prevention/mitigation approach have been put into place (‘residual risks’), are then subjected to assessment and suitable preparations, responses and recovery strategies and preparations are put implemented as an approach of dealing with them (EMA, 2008). Tun and Pairote (2006) carried out an exhaustive case study on tsunami with the aim of identifying particular problems that were related to the system of management of natural calamities in Thailand. The research established that Thailand did not have a good master plan in regard to the management of natural disaster, for instance, predicting, warning, mitigating and readiness. The study also established that there was unspecified in charge governmental authorities, unclear lines of authority, unsuccessful collaborations amongst institutions within various levels. It was evident that the local and global NGOs were not effectively encouraged to participate, there also lacked education and know-how in regard to tsunami within the potential disaster effected localities, and insufficient information management and database system. Therefore, it is clear that, though various organizations have different forms of disaster management, there are some of them that lack effective management systems due to the unpredictable human behaviors and chaotic environment. How have researchers attempted to come up with models on risk management? Kelly (1998) asserts that exhaustive and clear models about disaster management are of significant benefit since they help in facilitating the progress of sustenance for disaster management activities. Therefore, disaster management requires formal systems, or models, as a way of managing and possibly reducing the negative impacts of the disaster. Kimberly (2003) gives a definition of mitigation, preparation, reaction and recovery as the four stages during disaster management. His system is portraying reaction as the major and most noticeable stage during the progress of disaster management. The model is placing mitigation and preparation stages at the bottom, giving a suggestion that the two are driving forces that make reactions to be effective. The recovery stage is located at the top since it is the phase that remains following the reaction. In addition, the recovery phase has the largest share of time and is the most expensive. The drawback of this system is that it is too concentrated on emergency management in the hospital sectors and can’t be effectively used in other sectors. Due to the fact that this system of disaster management is limited to the emergency management in hospitals, its capacity is inadequate. Kelly (1998) put forth a circular system to be used in the management of disasters. The model aids in reducing the intricacy of disasters and also tackles the non-linear state of disaster incidences. This system focuses, considerably, on practical disaster management necessities compared to other disaster management systems. The model is based on its capability to help define and elaborate the correlation between the inputs and effects instead of simply classifying disaster phases. The major feature of this system is its capability of learning from real disasters. The integrated disaster management system attempts to offer solution to disaster management. The model starts with hazard assessment that issues with the required information for the subsequent stage, risk management. This yields to decisions in regard to the balancing of mitigation and preparedness reactions required in the addressing of the risks (Manitoba-Health-Disaster-Management, 2002). This system has a total of six independent components such as the strategic planning, hazard assessments, hazard management, mitigations, preparedness, monitoring and evaluation. All the six components observe their individual boundaries and involve their individual set of activities and procedures. These abovementioned components depend on each other on how they provide support and can be broken down further into layers of sub-elements. The improvement of this system is that it offers a balance between preparedness and flexibility so as to react fluidly to the precise requirements of a disaster. Since this system yields the correlation between the actions and events regarding the disasters, such relations might be tight or not. For instance, it strongly connects hazard to risk management processes, though, fails in providing a tight link between the four phases of disaster management that are fundamental components within a disaster management procedure. Crunch model yields to a structure for comprehending the causes of disasters (ADPC, 2000; Marcus, 2005). The process of susceptibility of a society is unearthed and any basic cause that fails to meet the needs of individuals is highlighted. The system then extends to the estimation of the dynamic pressure and hazardous situation. On the other hand, pressure and release model (ADPC, 2000; Heijmans, 2001; Marcus, 2005) has been established to be the reverse of the abovementioned crunch model. This phenomena of this model being the reverse of the Crunch model, is an indication of how the issue of risk management is a chaotic adventure. This model shows how the risk of hazards can be decreased through the application of preventive and mitigation mechanisms. The system commences by addressing the fundamental causes, and analyzes the nature of disasters. This results to safer situations that would be of help in the preparation of a community on how to tackle hazards. The Indian Ocean Tsunami and its impacts on more than a million of individuals within the region exhibit the high susceptibility of individuals within the disaster scenarios whenever various the present predisposing aspects are also in place (Blaikie et al., 2005). Keller and Al-madhari (1996) put forward a system of a probabilistic prediction of hazard intensity impacts and return period. This model is of great significance in the sense that it is an effective approach to obtain risk profiles. Turner (1976) elucidated the sequence of events that form the foundation of development of an hazard. These phases are as follows: (i) notionally normal starting points; (ii) incubation periods, (iii) precipitation events; (iv) onset; (v) rescuing and salvaging and (vi) fully cultural re-adjustment. Larson and Enander (1997) came up with a theoretical two-dimensional model that investigated what people were set to accomplish as a method of disaster preparedness and examining how these assessments might result to personal aspects and attitude. In summary, there are various models meant to tackle the uncertainty of disasters that have been projected by various researchers and agencies. The importance and helpfulness of these different models have been analyzed above, stressing the situations and areas in which they are applicable. How is media used in disaster response? Since disaster management is a major challenge and complicated field with dynamic requirements and an adaptive nature (Schneid, 2001). Media is a suitable approach that can be of help in tackling the existing needs and points of concern since the characteristics associated with disaster management, for example, the worldwide perception, dynamic decision support requirements, the complicated aspect and voluminous of data are spread at numerous global locations. With the adoption of media infrastructure, organizations are likely to get solutions to some matter such as: dynamic and the worldwide monitoring of hazards, collection and incorporation of the scattered data, communication and cooperation, worldwide perspective in regard to environmental changes and the sharing of the decision-making in the management of crisis. The current threats of man-made tragedies, for example, terrorism and the existing impacts related to disaster management, for example, worldwide monitoring, communication, cooperation, and environmental dynamics, have made a reaffirmation on the roles of an emerging media in responding to these abovementioned events and issues. For instance, cyber-infrastructure has been pointed by Hunter et al. (2004) as an example of how media can be used in disaster management. Cyber-infrastructure refers to the interconnected computer, information and communication technology that provides the ground on which newer forms of scientific and engineering knowledge settings are built that would aid the conduction of researches in newer approach and with increased competence. Cyber-infrastructure makes use of more comprehensive, distributed information as well as other resources while managing traditional tragedies. Since globalization and development in information technology have facilitated the increased frequencies in particular tragedies (particularly the man-made for example terrorism) the very new technology could be of significant impact while counteracting such disasters. The concept of cyber-infrastructure, when incorporated in hazard management systems, enhances the availability of suitable data in the post-tragedy lessons-learnt examination and for the training uses. Cyber-infrastructure offers a fulfillment of the necessity of harmonization and communication as well as providing effective, dependable and protected exchanging and processing of the required information and data. In conclusion, the paper has established how various studies have unearthed the reason as to why the phenomenon of disaster management seems to be unpredictable and chaotic. The world is under constant change as we continue moving forward in the upcoming expectation, thus, strategic managers face the challenge of developing an iterative strategic plan. It is clear that, though various organizations have different forms of disaster management, there are some of them that lack effective management systems due to the unpredictable human behaviors and chaotic environment. Various disaster management models have shown how the issue of disaster management seems to be a complicated issue due to the logistics associated with its relevant factors such as people and environment. Media is also an essential tool in disaster management since data can be retrieved globally and be of use in post-tragedy lessons-learnt examination and for the training uses. Reference list ADPC. (2000). Community Based Disaster Management (CBDM): Trainer's Guide, Module 4: Disaster Management. Asian Disaster Preparedness Center (ADPC). Bangkok, Thailand. Blaikie P., Mainka S. and McNeely J. (2005). The Indian Ocean Tsunami Reducing Risk and Vulnerability of Future Natural Disasters and Loss of Ecosystem Services. An Information Paper: The World Conservation Union (IUCN), Switerzerland, Feb. 2005. EMA. (2008). Emergency management in Australia concepts and principles. Available https://www.em.gov.au/Documents/Manual01-EmergencyManagementinAustralia-ConceptsandPrinciples.pdf Heijmans A. (2001). Vulnerability: A Matter of Perception, Disaster Management Working Paper 4/2001, Benfield Greig Hazard Research Centre University College of London. Hunter J., Cook R. and Pope S. (2004). E-Research Middleware: The Missing Link in Australia's Research Agenda. Available: www.dstc.edu.au/publications/eReseachMiddleware.pdf. Keller A. Z. and Al-madhari A. F. (1996). Risk Management and Disasters. Disaster Prevention and Management 5(5): pp. 19-22 Kelly C. (1998). Simplifying Disasters: Developing a model for Complex Non-linear Events. Proceedings of International Conference on Disaster Management: Crisis and Opportunity: Hazard Management and Disaster Preparedness in Australasia and the Pacific Region, Cairns, Queensland, Australia, pp. 25-28, 1-4 November, 1998. Kimberly A. (2003). Disaster Preparedness in Virginia Hospital Center-Arlington after Sept 11, 2001. Disaster Management and Response 1(3): pp. 80-86. Larson G. and Enander A. (1997). Preparing for Disaster: Public Attitudes and Actions. Disaster Prevention and Management 6(1): pp. 11-21. Manitoba-Health-Disaster-Management. (2002). Disaster Management Model for the Health Sector: Guideline for Program Development. Version 1, November 2002. Marcus O. (2005). A Conceptual Framework for Risk Reduction. World Conference of Disaster Reduction, Kobe, Japan, 18-22 January 2005. Schneid D., and Collins L. (2001). Disaster Management and Preparedness. New York: Lewis Publisher. Turner B. A. (1976). The organizational and Interorganizational Development of Disasters. Administrative Science Quarterly 21: pp. 379-397. Tun L and Pairote P. (2006). Disaster Prevention and Management: An International Journal 15:3 , 396-413, available http://www.emeraldinsight.com/action/showCitFormats?doi=10.1108%2F09653560610669882 Read More