1. 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

2. Why listen to me? I’ve never been at the front lines of an international emergency relief effort. Mark Haselkorn, IPHR, University of Washington

3. 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

4. Y2K Mark Haselkorn, IPHR, University of Washington

5. 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

6. 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

7. 1.Catholic Relief Services (Kenya) 2.Catholic Relief Services (Ethiopia) 3.CARE (HQ)* 4.CARE (Ethiopia) 5.CARE (Kenya) 6.Christian Relief and Development Association 7.Clearing, Forwarding and Warehousing (Kenya) 8.Consortium of Reproductive Health Associations 9.DKT (social marketing- Ethiopia) 10.Endanger Health (Ethiopia) 11.Ethiopian MOH: HMIS 12.Ethiopian Ministry of Health: Pharm. Admin and Supply Service (PASS) 13.Family Guidance Association (Ethiopia) 14.Food for the Hungry (Kenya) 15.Fritz Institute 16.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

8. 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 Ministry 32.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—USA 44.Save the Children—UK (Kenya) 45.SPHERE 46.UNICEF (including OLS— Kenya) 47.UNICEF (Ethiopia) 48.UNJLC 49.UNOCHA 50.USAID* 51.VillageReach (HQ) 52.VillageReach (Mozambique) 53.World Food Programme 54.World Vision (HQ) 55.World Vision (Ethiopia) 56.World Vision (Kenya) 57.Vets without Borders (Kenya) Mark Haselkorn, IPHR, University of Washington

9. 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

10. 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

11. 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

12. 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

13. 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

14. 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

15. 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

16. 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 environment Mark Haselkorn, IPHR, University of Washington