What are the critical issues that are common in a disaster

(and what does that tell us about designing and implementing standard systems for

humanitarian relief)?

Professor Mark Haselkorn

Interdisciplinary Program in Humanitarian Relief

University of Washington

markh@u.washington.edu

Why listen to me?

I’ve never been at the front lines of an international emergency relief effort.

Mark Haselkorn, IPHR, University of Washington

Why listen to me?

I’ve never been at the front lines of an international emergency relief effort.

Although…

Mark Haselkorn, IPHR, University of Washington

Y2K

Mark Haselkorn, IPHR, University of Washington

Front line operations are highly visible, but they are the “tip of the iceberg.” People balancing on that tip don’t have the time or perspective to see the rest of the iceberg.

Need to focus on the whole iceberg. Interdependencies are critical.

I study and teach about and work on strategic management of complex systems, particularly systems within organizational environments that are under stress and that have information and communication components.

Mark Haselkorn, IPHR, University of Washington

What is my answer based on?

Initial analysis of interviews, questionnaires, field studies, partnered projects, structured meetings and informal discussion

Conducted over the past year across four research projects (Ethiopia, Kenya, Mozambique, HROs) and IPHR development activities

Of people and systems with varying roles, purposes and locations involving more than 60 organizations conducting ongoing international humanitarian relief efforts, including:

Mark Haselkorn, IPHR, University of Washington

1. Catholic Relief Services (Kenya)

2. Catholic Relief Services (Ethiopia)

3. CARE (HQ)*4. CARE (Ethiopia)5. CARE (Kenya)6. Christian Relief and

Development Association7. Clearing, Forwarding and

Warehousing (Kenya)8. Consortium of Reproductive

Health Associations9. DKT (social marketing-

Ethiopia)10. Endanger Health (Ethiopia)11. Ethiopian MOH: HMIS12. Ethiopian Ministry of Health:

Pharm. Admin and Supply Service (PASS)

13. Family Guidance Association (Ethiopia)

14. Food for the Hungry (Kenya)15. Fritz Institute16. Food Security Analysis Unit

(Somalia)17. GOAL (Ethiopia)18. International Committee of the

Red Cross (Ethiopia)19. IFRC (Kenya)20. International Medical Corps

(Ethiopia)21. International Medical Corps

(HQ)*22. International Rescue

Committee (Ethiopia)23. International Rescue

Committee (Kenya)24. John Snow, Inc. (HQ)25. John Snow, Inc. (Deliver—

Ethiopia)Mark Haselkorn, IPHR, University of Washington

26. KPA (Port of Mombasa)27. Management Sciences for Health

(Ethiopia)28. John Snow, Inc. (Deliver,

Ethiopia)29. Menshen for Menshen (Ethiopia)30. Mercy Corps (HQ)*31. Mozambique Health Ministry32. MSF (France)33. MSF (Holland)34. MSF-H (Kenya)35. Norwegian People's Aid (Kenya)36. Oxfam GB (Kenya)37. Pathfinder (Ethiopia)38. Plan International (Ethiopia)39. Population Services International

(Ethiopia)40. Relief Society of Tigray

(Ethiopia)

26. Save the Children (HQ)*42. Save the Children (Rapid

Response Team)43. Save the Children—USA44. Save the Children—UK (Kenya)45. SPHERE46. UNICEF (including OLS—

Kenya)47. UNICEF (Ethiopia)48. UNJLC49. UNOCHA50. USAID*51. VillageReach (HQ)52. VillageReach (Mozambique)53. World Food Programme54. World Vision (HQ)55. World Vision (Ethiopia)56. World Vision (Kenya)57. Vets without Borders (Kenya)

Mark Haselkorn, IPHR, University of Washington

What else is my answer based on?

More than 20 years of designing, developing, assessing, managing and studying information and communication products and systems, particularly for government-related organizations such as:

United States Air Force

Veteran’s Health Administration

Washington State Department of Transportation

Washington State Department of Social and Health Services (Environmental Protection Section)

Mark Haselkorn, IPHR, University of Washington

• Units responsible for fielding new systems: “We need to do a lot of work on PC and server common operating environments. Because we are finding out that servers have different disk drives on them, different versions of Oracle, different versions of the operating system. And as a result of that we can’t distribute software in a rational manner.”

• Units responsible for security:“From the [security] perspective diversity is not such a bad thing. If every piece of software is absolutely standardized, one hole gets you in everywhere. When an adversary has to figure out which executable is on which computer among 1,300 possible options, that makes his targeting problem hugely more difficult. That’s a fundamental point that’s almost always missed.”

Mark Haselkorn, IPHR, University of Washington

• Units responsible for rapid response in the field: “There is a general disconnect between systems mandated at HQ and the availability or usability of those systems in the field. This has evolved because it is easy to mandate down to the field and it is sometimes hard for HQ to understand how things work in the field—the realities on the ground. HQ has an interest in the field perspective, but there is also a lack of understanding… The regulatory environment is diverse and inconsistent and that’s far more of a concern than technology issues.”

• Units responsible for HQ Resource Coordination:“You cannot let country offices go off on their own; they need guidance and oversight. We provide technical assistance on tracking and monitoring of losses. We make sure that [resources are] made available to the right people at the right time at the right price… In order to aid with coordination we have developed standardized tools to help with forecasting and analysis…Regulations give structure to people’s jobs; they know what needs to be done… ”

Mark Haselkorn, IPHR, University of Washington

Uniformity

Centralization

Strategic Management

Standards

Institutional Knowledge

Accountability

Common Systems

Diversity

Local Autonomy

Programmatic Action

Flexibility

Individual Expertise

Rapid Reaction

Localized Systems

Tensions between “Goods”

Mark Haselkorn, IPHR, University of Washington

Common issues across commercial and humanitarian sectors, though they play

out in different ways

For example, tension between funding and strategic, cross-organizational IT management

– In industry, sound financial management of IT projects works against cross-organizational IT management

– In humanitarian relief organizations, project-based funding and handling IT as overhead works against cross-organizational IT management

Mark Haselkorn, IPHR, University of Washington

What are the critical issues that are common in a disaster?

Whether one is at HQ or in the field; at a country office or a distribution point; doing assessment, response, or tracking; in a large or small organization; whatever the country or the donor—specific actions, decisions and strategies are being made more difficult because they occur within a larger system of interdependent goals, tensions and environmental factors.

These difficulties are not generally about taking the correct, as opposed to the incorrect, action, nor are they about eliminating the tensions.

Rather, these difficulties stem from inherent complications and competing desirable ends.

Mark Haselkorn, IPHR, University of Washington

For example, a standardized tracking system

+-Donor requirements

Lessons learned

Increased efficiency

Institutional knowledge

Professionalization

Development of new supporting IT systems

Rapid response

No time for training or data capture

Reports required but not used or visibly relevant or of high priority

Lack of a “data culture”

Project-based focus

Supporting IT systems as overhead

Diversity and inconsistency of regulations

Mark Haselkorn, IPHR, University of Washington

How is this useful?• Points towards a process for clarifying and addressing

challenges to design and implementation of standard systems

• More about “tending” than “fixing”• Tensions embraced, not eliminated• Dynamic process over product (an ongoing balancing act)• HQ owns “the space between” (what makes it strategic),

not the parts• HQ brings the right people to the table and guides and

empowers the conversation (stakeholders own the issue; HQ facilitates/guides/fosters implementation)

• A central strategy for empowering local activity (flexible, not ad hoc)

• Strategic management in a non-strategic environmentMark Haselkorn, IPHR, University of Washington

Mark Haselkorn, IPHR, University of Washington