More and more network interventions are developing at neighborhood level, with the aim of strengthening the network (in the neighborhood) of people with a disability. Some interventions are of a temporary nature, while others are structurally In this study, the various neighborhood-oriented network interventions are examined to discover what works well. With this information, more general guidelines can be set up for current and future social professionals on how to work on neighborhood networks for people with disabilities in an effective way. In this research project, various research methods, including social professionals, management, participants of the network interventions, neighbors, are involved to determine meaningful actions within each intervention. For the interviews with participants, we work together with experienced experts (People with disabilities, and participants of the interventions). These were trained by one of our research partners, to help both with the development of the research tools as well as conducting the interviews. In this presentation we want to exchange our experiences in cooperating with experienced experts on research.
Risk matrices have been widely used in the industry under the notion that risk is a product of likelihood by severity of the hazard or safety case under consideration. When reliable raw data are not available to feed mathematical models, experts are asked to state their estimations. This paper presents two studies conducted in a large European airline and partially regarded the weighting of 14 experienced pilots’ judgment though software, and the calculation of agreement amongst 10 accident investigators when asked to assess the worst outcome, most credible outcome and risk level for 12 real events. According to the results, only 4 out of the 14 pilots could be reliably used as experts, and low to moderate agreement amongst the accident investigators was observed.
In case of a major cyber incident, organizations usually rely on external providers of Cyber Incident Response (CIR) services. CIR consultants operate in a dynamic and constantly changing environment in which they must actively engage in information management and problem solving while adapting to complex circumstances. In this challenging environment CIR consultants need to make critical decisions about what to advise clients that are impacted by a major cyber incident. Despite its relevance, CIR decision making is an understudied topic. The objective of this preliminary investigation is therefore to understand what decision-making strategies experienced CIR consultants use during challenging incidents and to offer suggestions for training and decision-aiding. A general understanding of operational decision making under pressure, uncertainty, and high stakes was established by reviewing the body of knowledge known as Naturalistic Decision Making (NDM). The general conclusion of NDM research is that experts usually make adequate decisions based on (fast) recognition of the situation and applying the most obvious (default) response pattern that has worked in similar situations in the past. In exceptional situations, however, this way of recognition-primed decision-making results in suboptimal decisions as experts are likely to miss conflicting cues once the situation is quickly recognized under pressure. Understanding the default response pattern and the rare occasions in which this response pattern could be ineffective is therefore key for improving and aiding cyber incident response decision making. Therefore, we interviewed six experienced CIR consultants and used the critical decision method (CDM) to learn how they made decisions under challenging conditions. The main conclusion is that the default response pattern for CIR consultants during cyber breaches is to reduce uncertainty as much as possible by gathering and investigating data and thus delay decision making about eradication until the investigation is completed. According to the respondents, this strategy usually works well and provides the most assurance that the threat actor can be completely removed from the network. However, the majority of respondents could recall at least one case in which this strategy (in hindsight) resulted in unnecessary theft of data or damage. Interestingly, this finding is strikingly different from other operational decision-making domains such as the military, police and fire service in which there is a general tendency to act rapidly instead of searching for more information. The main advice is that training and decision aiding of (novice) cyber incident responders should be aimed at the following: (a) make cyber incident responders aware of how recognition-primed decision making works; (b) discuss the default response strategy that typically works well in several scenarios; (c) explain the exception and how the exception can be recognized; (d) provide alternative response strategies that work better in exceptional situations.
