Prioritisation of resilience criteria and performance indicators for road emergencies crisis response: an analytic hierarchy process (AHP) approach

Abstract

Purpose This paper aims to develop a crisis readiness framework for road traffic crisis response for law enforcement agencies in the United Arab Emirates (UAE). Design/methodology/approach A Delphi method was used that combined questionnaire-based survey and the analytical hierarchy process to collect quantitative and qualitative data from an expert panel of crisis readiness professionals on how they prioritise and weigh the different strategic criteria, sub-criteria and performance indicators in the context of law enforcement agencies’ traffic response. Findings The findings of this paper resulted in the identification, ranking and validation of ten key dimensions of crisis readiness clustered into three distinct sets of priority rankings: response planning, resources, training and coordination; information management and communication and risk and hazard assessment; and early warning, legal and institutional frameworks, recovery initiation and property protection. The results additionally established the relative priority of sub-criteria for each criterion and validated a broad set of key performance indicators (KPIs) for the top six ranked criteria. Research limitations/implications The findings are based on a single case study focused on a specific area of operation within crisis response and one group of organisations of the UAE police sector. This potentially places a constraint on the wider generalisation of the findings to different operational areas and agencies, as they may have different priorities or organisational conditions that have implications for the framework application and the relative importance of certain criteria and sub-criteria. Practical implications This paper provides strategic guidance in the form of a prioritised list of criteria, sub-criteria and KPIs that can direct efforts to optimise different dimensions of crisis readiness at a strategic and operational level. Originality/value This paper makes an original contribution in identifying the key criteria and performance indicators of crisis readiness for road traffic situations. The findings contribute a comprehensive strategic readiness framework that supports planning and decision-making for the development of organisational capacities that can enhance response times of police to road traffic crises. This framework ranks dimensions of crisis readiness and key sub-criteria in order of priority and validates the key components of crisis readiness that can support practitioners to structure, standardise and benchmark key processes and elements of crisis response.

Analysis of Resilience and Competence on Employee Performance through Intervening Key Performance Indicator Variables

“…The next study from (Karl et al, 2018) with the aim of research to examine the impact of non-financial key performance indicators (KPIs) on supply chain sustainability, with the results of KPI research that significantly affect sustainability including order and delivery times, on-time delivery, supplier delivery, and customer satisfaction, further studies from (Aziz et al, 2022) The purpose of this study is to develop a road traffic accident management emergency preparedness framework for law enforcement agencies in the United Arab Emirates, the results of the study ten important aspects of emergency preparedness are identified, classified and validated. These aspects are then grouped into three distinct target groups: response planning, resources, training and coordination; information and communication management; risk and threat assessment; and early warning, legal and institutional frameworks, asset recovery and protection initiatives.…”

Assessing the Operational Capability of Disaster and Emergency Management Resources: Using Analytic Hierarchy Process

“…Emergency resource planning is critical to managing crisis [28]. Aziz et al [29] identified the prioritization of resilience criteria and performance indicators for road emergency crisis response, and response planning was the highest ranked criterion overall, with joint response planning and resource planning being equally prioritized sub-criteria. Zhai and Lee [10] constructed evaluation indexes for the disaster preparedness capacity of local governments, with three sub-criteria of disaster risk assessment, disaster response planning, and the preparation and approval of planning included in the planning.…”

“…[10, [29][30][31][32][33][34][35] Demand assessment Evaluate potential demand in emergency situations and provide data support for plan formulation.…”

Old Wine in New Bottles? Understanding Infrastructure Resilience: Foundations, Assessment, and Limitations

“…MCDA is designed to manage decisional processes characterised by multiple dimensions. MCDA methods, such as the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) (Aziz et al, 2022;Mukesh et al, 2022;Chavoshy et al, 2018;Morshed et al, 2020), Analytic Network Process (ANP) , the Technique for Order of Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution (TOPSIS) (Tang et al, 2022b;Zhang and Ng, 2021), Principal Components Analysis (PCA) (Mohammed et al, 2022), Best-Worst method (Khan et al, 2022;Khan et al, 2023), Structural Equation Model (Zhang et al, 2022b), and Grey Relational analysis (Hu et al, 2020) are used to evaluate and rank the critical influential factors of system resilience. The fuzzy logic analysis is often used to convert qualitative descriptions of these factors into quantitative evaluation for assessing the performance of the factors (Jiao et al;Lad et al, 2022;Tang et al, 2022b) and the entropy weight method is adopted to allocate weights to the factors (Jiao et al;Li et al, 2022;Zhang and Ng, 2021).…”