Organizational Decision Making

Description

To complete your written assignment for this seminar you will need to address the following four sections. You will notice that the sections that follow should be very familiar to you because they are your course objectives. I expect you to incorporate the knowledge that you have gained from your readings and from each other to construct a 9 – 10 page essay that provides a clear understanding of disaster and hazard management. The key here is to understand the barriers to communication that include how individuals make decisions based upon how they perceive risk. It is very important that you do not simply cut and paste from your discussion boards or reflections essays. You should take the information that you reflect upon to provide a comprehensive academic essay that is completely supported with evidence and contains no personal opinion. Your essay will have six parts. You will begin with an introduction which will be followed by four sections and a conclusion. The first three content sections will accumulate into the fourth section. Again, each section subject should seem very familiar as they are your course objectives. You will notice that each module provides weekly objectives to reach one of the course objectives while each course objective accumulates into the final course objective. Your introduction should tell your reader what you are going to be doing and provide the compelling case as to why your reader should read the essay without being creative or story telling, just the facts. Your conclusion should provide a summary that explains to your reader what you have just done and why your reader should care. For example, what does all of this mean to public administration and the public interest? (or) What does all of this mean to the public administrator? Introduction Section 1: Evaluate the need for understanding risk and risk perception for disaster and hazard management. Section 2: Assess and interpret how risk and risk attitudes impact risk communication before, during, and after a hazard impacts with society. Section 3: Analyze various techniques and tools for dealing with media influence and when protective orders do not make sense. Section 4: Recommend courses of action for improving performance in public organizations for disaster and hazard management through an understanding of individual decision making. Conclusion Your written assignment will be 9 – 10 pages in length. This means that it should be no less than 9 pages and no more than 10 pages. You should use a Cover page and References page which are not counted in your page length requirement. Endnotes, footnotes, and headers do not count for page length and may cause you to fall short if not accounted for. Your written assignment should be typed and double spaced with 12-point font and one-inch margins top, bottom, and side using the Chicago Manual of Style, 16 or newer (Author Date) for citations and references. All sources must be properly, thoroughly, and consistently cited. Careful attention to grammar, spelling, and the mechanics of presentation is expected. Wikipedia is not a reliable source of information. Any citation of Wikipedia, Dictionary.com, E-Encyclopedia, Spark Notes or anything similar in a term paper, discussion forum, or other assignment in this course will result in an automatic score of 0 (zero) on the assignment. References from class readings: Course Week 1 • White, GF (1998). Paths to Risk Analysis. Risk Analysis, 8 (2), 171-175. • Kasperson and Dow (1993). Hazards Perception and Geography. In Behavior and Environment: Psychological and Geographical Approaches. Garling, T and Golledge, RG eds. Pp 193-221 (Attached) • Cutter, Susan (2001). The Changing Nature of Risks and Hazards. In American Hazardscapes: The Regionalization of Hazards and Disasters Susan Cutter ed. Chapter 1, Pgs. 1-12, Joseph Henry Press, Washington DC. (Attached) • Hill, Arleen and Susan Cutter (2001). Methods for Determining Disaster Proneness. In American Hazardscapes: The Regionalization of Hazards and Disasters Susan Cutter ed. Chapter 2, Pgs. 13-36, Joseph Henry Press, Washington DC. (Attached) • Kasperson, R. E., & Pijawka, K. D. (1985). Societal Response to Hazards and Major Hazard Events: Comparing Natural and Technological Hazards. Public Administration Review, 45(Special), 7-18. (Attached) Course Week 2 • Slovic, P. (1987). Perception of Risk. Science, 237 (4799): 280 – 285. • Dombrowski, M., Fischhoff, B., & Fisschbeck, P. (2006). Predicting Emergency Evacuation and Sheltering Behavior: A Structured Analytical Approach. Risk Analysis, 26 (6): 1675 – 1688. • Slovic, P., Fischhoff, B., & Lichtenstein, S. (1979). Rating the Risks. Environment. 21 (3): 14-20; 36-39 • Slovic, P., (1993). Perceived Risk, Trust, and Democracy. Risk Analysis, 13 (6): 675-682 • Siebeneck, L.K., Lindell, MK., Prater, CS., Wu, HC., and Huang, SK. (2013). Evacuees’ Reentry Concerns and Experiences in the Aftermath of Hurricane Ike. Natural Hazards 65 (3): 2267-2286 Course Week 3 • Quarentelli, EL. (1990). The Warning Process and Evacuation Behavior: The Research Evidence. Newark, DE: Disaster Research Center, University of Delaware. • Mileti, and O’Brien. (1992) Warnings During Disaster: Normalizing Communicated Risk. Social Problems. 39(1): 40-57. • Sorenson, JH. (2000). Hazard Warning Systems: Review of 20 Years of Progress. Natural Hazards Review. 1 (2): 119-125 • Morss, RE. and Hayden, MH. (2010) Storm Surge and “Certain Death”: Interviews with Texas Coastal Residents Following Hurricane Ike. Weather, Climate, and Society. 2:174-189 • Lin, CC., Siebeneck, LK., Lindell, MK., Prater, CS., Wu, HC., and Huang, SK. (2013). Evacuees’ Information Sources and Reentry Decision Making in the Aftermath of Hurricane Ike. Natural Hazards, 70 (1): 865-881 • Williams, Brian, Jesus Valero, Kyungwoo Kim (2018) Social Media, Trust, and Disaster: Does Trust in Public and Nonprofit Organizations Explain Social Media Use During a Disaster? Quality and Quantity, 52 (2): 537-550 Course Week 4 • Dow, K. and Cutter, SL. (1998). Crying Wolf: Repeat Responses to Hurricane Evacuation Orders. Coastal Management, (26) 237-252 • Arlikatti, S., Lindell, MK., Prater, CS., & Zang, Y. (2006). Risk Area Accuracy and Hurricane Evacuation Expectations of Coastal Residents. Environment and Behavior, 38(2): 226-247. • Morss, RE. and Hayden, MH. (2010) Storm Surge and “Certain Death”: Interviews with Texas Coastal Residents Following Hurricane Ike. Weather, Climate, and Society. 2:174-189 • Lin, CC., Siebeneck, LK., Lindell, MK., Prater, CS., Wu, HC., and Huang, SK. (2013). Evacuees’ Information Sources and Reentry Decision Making in the Aftermath of Hurricane Ike. Natural Hazards, 70 (1): 865-881 • Sutton, J., Palen, L., & Shklovski, I. (2008). Backchannels on the Front Lines: Emergent Uses of Social Media in the 2007 Southern California Wildfires. In Proceedings of the 5th International ISCRAM Conference (pp. 624 – 632). Washington, DC. Course Week 5 • Quarantelli, EL. (1980) The Study of Disaster Movies: Research Problems, Findings and Implications. Preliminary Paper #64. Disaster Research Center. University of Delaware. Pp 1-30. • Tierney, KJ., Bevc, C., & Kuligowski, E. (2006). Metaphors Matter: Disaster Myths, Media Frames, and Their Consequences in Hurricane Katrina. The Annals of The American Academy of Political and Social Science. 604(1): 57-81 • Lowe, T., Brown, K., Dessai, S., De Franca Doria, M., Haynes, K., (2006). Does Tomorrow Ever Come? Disaster Narrative and Public Perceptions of Climate Change. Public Understanding of Science. 15: 435-457. Course Week 6 • Clarke, L. and Perrow, C. (1996). Prosaic Organizational Failure. American Behavioral Scientist. 30(1): 1040-1056. • Lindell, MK. And Prater, CS. (2007). Critical Behavioral Assumptions in Evacuation Time Estimate Analysis for Private Vehicles: Examples from Hurricane Research and Planning. Journal of Urban Planning and Development, 133(1): 18-29. • Aven, T. (2013). On The Meaning of a Black Swan in a Risk Context. Safety Science, 57:44-51.