Adam: There is a much larger pool of people with pertinent information that we could solicit help from than I originally envisioned. I learned a lot about what organizations we can contact, how we can frame our problem to them, and how they can help us.
Emma: Digging deeper into an interviewee’s experiences are critical to gaining more useful information. We realized that shifting our focus to man-made disasters as opposed to natural disasters was a potential we had not really thought about but should definitely explore.
Jackie: Specificity is key; try to get a “day in the life” perspective. We also learned that we needed to narrow our problem down, which we did- to information sharing (What), state level (Where), and during the disaster (When).
Cesar: Learning the thought process of people in disasters was an eye opener. Most people want to help and its not just first responders; some locals want to help as well. The only thing that holds most people back is not knowing what to do. This is where communication plays a key role. By us streamlining it and making it better we can make a real difference.
Will: We can’t solve every problem associated with a disaster. While interviewing three contacts this week, the issue of unreliable communication was echoed again and again. This reaffirmed our decision to focus on the issue of improving information exchange. We have the bodies and resources to respond a lot better than we are, but our inability to communicate the proper orders impedes our effort.
JMU X-Labs
4-VA
