From Observation to Action
Strengthening Information Sharing in Complex Incidents
Have you applied the concepts discussed in “Left of Bang: How the Marine Corps’ Combat Hunter Program Can Save Your Life” in your industry or organization? If so, we would like to hear from you.
In the decade since the book was published, we have heard countless stories of its use in healthcare settings, cybersecurity, every facet of public safety, school districts, business operations, and many more. We’d like to share these stories and use cases with others as they put in the work to position their organizations left of bang.
If you’d like to share your story with us, please send me an email (patrick@cp-journal.com) to schedule a time to chat.
Introduction
Observation without action is meaningless. Yet, too often, in complex and high-pressure situations, critical pieces of information slip through the cracks, either delaying decisions or resulting in inaction.
This is something that organizations should take notice of and think about while preparing for an uncertain future.
When an individual person makes a decision, the process is fairly straightforward. The person observing the situation is often the one making the decision and taking the necessary action. For better or worse, the entire process is often contained within that person. As a result, decisions can be implemented quickly.
But at the organizational level, that process can become much more fragmented. The person observing a situation might be different from the one making the decision, and yet another individual may be responsible for executing the action. This can lead to inaction should the urgency of a situation not be communicated, if leaders don’t recognize why a decision is needed, or if uncertainty or conflicting information or an inability to articulate the situation prevents an executive group from being able to choose a course of action.
Yet, during disasters and large-scale security incidents, it is the speed and effectiveness of organizational decision-making that has an outsized influence on the success of the response.
In these environments, it is also rare that just a single organization is involved. When you add in the many organizations that could have a role – often from every level of government, with multiple agencies from each level of government, the private sector, third-party vendors, and non-profit partners – the complexity of this process goes up significantly. In these moments, information sharing becomes even more critical, yet also more difficult. Misaligned processes can slow decision-making and undermine the effectiveness of the overall response, something that is common when groups (and the individuals representing them on an indent) haven’t worked together before. Varying authorities leads to viewing information through different lenses and adds to a question about whether information should be shared with response partners.
Organizations that are getting left of bang and preparing for an uncertain future are developing information-sharing capabilities before disasters and incidents occur.
The Problem (and Consequences) of Information Sharing Failures
This article is going to recommend an approach that requires time and attention for organizations and their leaders. It doesn't necessarily have to involve money or a financial commitment, but it will require effort and intentionality.
Before I advocate for that, let me explain the problem that is often presented in after-action reviews. When critical information isn’t shared during complex incidents, the consequences for breakdowns in communication and coordination between agencies, organizations, and stakeholders often lead to:
Delayed Decision-Making: Without timely access to the right information, critical decisions like evacuations or resource allocation are delayed, worsening the situation. The lack of access to timely information often reduces the options available to leaders because they don’t have the time available to implement preferred solutions.
Misdirected Resources: Incomplete or inaccurate information leads to resources being sent to areas that don’t need them, while critical areas go underserved.
Increased Loss of Life and Damage: Failing to share vital information can lead to tragic consequences, including preventable loss of life and more severe damage.
Erosion of Trust: A lack of communication between agencies erodes trust, making future collaboration even harder and further siloing crucial information.
Missed Opportunities for Prevention: Information breakdowns can prevent recognition of patterns that could stop a crisis before it happens.
For each of these issues, note that while information sharing was the gap, the problem is that organizations are not accomplishing their goals or achieving the desired outcome. Each organizational leader and agency admin needs to decide that these problems are worth addressing before a decision can be made about how to prevent them from occurring.
Two Approaches to Combine in Capability Building
Organizations building disaster response capabilities need a balanced approach to information-sharing that integrates structured planning for known risks and adaptable systems for unanticipated challenges. This dual approach allows organizations to respond effectively, whether they’re facing predictable scenarios or emerging crises.
First, plan for the way you want your information-sharing capability to work. By developing clear, structured plans for foreseeable scenarios, organizations can ensure that most information-sharing issues are addressed in advance. These systems provide a reliable framework for known disasters, minimizing miscommunication.
Second, plan for what you will do when the information-sharing capability isn’t performing at the level your organization requires. Equipping teams to handle the unexpected means having adaptable systems and strategically placing individuals—like liaisons—who can navigate unforeseen challenges. These people can provide the critical thinking needed to bridge gaps in information during unpredictable crises or times when the plan is not producing the results required.
Combining structured planning for known risks with flexible systems for unknown challenges can build a comprehensive information-sharing capability. Since this can turn observations into actionable decisions and improve the outcomes of complex incidents, I’ll dig into each in greater detail below.
Developing Plans for Effective Information Sharing
Building an effective information-sharing capability starts with planning how you want your system to operate. Structured plans for foreseeable situations allow organizations to address potential information-sharing gaps in advance, creating a foundation that works during anticipated disasters or incidents. By establishing these frameworks, you can prevent critical data from getting lost, reduce miscommunication, and ensure everyone involved knows their role.
Recommended Actions for Improving Information Sharing
1. Implement a Consistent Situation Report (Sit Rep): The sit rep is a standardized tool that brings clarity to information-sharing efforts by defining what information needs to be collected, who is responsible for updates, and how often they should be shared. This report centralizes essential data, keeping decision-makers informed and ready to act. Developing a reliable sit rep protocol ensures that information flows smoothly, minimizing the risks of delay or miscommunication. Think of it as a “snapshot” to keep everyone on the same page, especially when timelines and accuracy are crucial.
For those interested in a deeper dive into creating effective sit reps, Academy subscribers can access an additional discussion and sit rep template here. This article walks through the core components of a strong situation report, with examples and tips for tailoring it to your organization's needs. By following these best practices, you can establish a sit rep protocol that enhances clarity and keeps your team informed when it matters most.
2. Create a Framework for Real-Time Information Updates. Beyond planned sit reps, organizations need to be agile in handling and disseminating new information as it arises. This involves having pre-established channels and trusted points of contact within the command post or field teams. Establish essential information elements and be prepared to adapt the flow of updates to capture critical changes. By enabling real-time adjustments and a pathway to relay urgent information to leadership, organizations can make informed decisions as situations evolve, without missing opportunities for timely response.
Building Systems for the Unanticipated
While predefined plans address many scenarios, organizations also need strategies to handle unpredictable situations. In these “unknown unknowns” environments, the flexibility and adaptability of both systems and individuals are paramount. This is where liaison roles and adaptive structures are essential—they create real-time solutions and help bridge communication gaps as new challenges emerge.
Why This Matters. In unforeseen crises, simply following a plan isn’t enough. Situations evolve quickly, and effective response depends on systems that accommodate adaptability and critical thinking. Strategic liaison roles are key here, as these individuals build and maintain strong interagency relationships, positioning themselves to “run the seams” and handle the nuanced gaps formal systems may miss. Their networked relationships, trust, and ability to think on their feet ensure that even unanticipated challenges are managed smoothly.
Actions to Enhance Resilience for the Unexpected
Conduct a Stakeholder Mapping Exercise. Begin by identifying key organizations and partners—internal and external—you may need to connect with during a crisis. This includes local, state, federal, and private sector entities. Understanding who your primary stakeholders are is the first step in making sure critical information flows where it’s needed during a crisis.
Assess Relationships with Individuals. Once you’ve identified partner organizations, go deeper by mapping out specific individuals within those groups who will be key in a crisis. Identify who within your organization currently has relationships with these people and assess the strength of these connections. This often requires people with positions of authority (those who can make decisions) and who can influence leaders. It is rare for it to be the junior person in the organization who is best positioned for the responsibilities associated with a liaison/relationship leader.
Build and Maintain Relationships in Downtime. Effective partnerships take time, and high-stakes environments are not ideal for forming new relationships. Use quieter periods to develop these relationships through regular meetings, informal updates, or collaborative efforts on smaller projects. Building rapport beforehand creates a foundation for effective crisis response.
Deepen Connections Through Events. Relationships are tested and strengthened through action. Seek opportunities to work together through exercises or drills, community service projects, or anything else that introduces a bit of tension to mirror real-world problem-solving. This builds trust and creates a foundation of shared experience that will be invaluable when faced with unpredictable challenges.
Conclusion: Turning Observations into Action
Turning observations into action requires that organizations build relationships, establish clear plans, and embed adaptable systems before the crisis hits. The stakes are too high to allow critical information to be lost or delayed. Since this isn’t information sharing for the sake of information sharing, taking these steps now lays the groundwork for an effective response and a path for each agency to accomplish its goals collaboratively.
The steps outlined—from stakeholder mapping to deepening relationships—are not just tactical actions; they are investments to ensure that the organization can collect the dots, connect them, and then take action more quickly, smarter, and effectively.
The time to build these systems is before the crisis hits. What steps will you take to ensure your organization is prepared?
Whenever you’re ready, there are 3 ways I can help:
1. The Tactical Analysis Online Course: Join over 4,000 students who have learned how to read behavior, establish baselines, and recognize threats using the approach written about in Left of Bang: How the Marine Corps’ Combat Hunter Program Can Save Your Life.
2. Subscribe to the Left of Bang Academy: Access the tools and resources needed by professional emergency managers and homeland security professionals to prepare their organizations for future disasters, disruptions, and crises.
3. Share the Left of Bang newsletter with friends and colleagues to help your organization prepare for an uncertain future.