How Are Situation Picture, Situation Awareness, and Situation
Understanding Discussed in Recent Scholarly Literature?
Ilkka Tikanmäki
1, 2 a
and
Harri Ruoslahti
1,3 b
1
Security and Risk Management, Laurea University of Applied Sciences, Vanha maantie 8, Espoo, Finland
2
Department of Warfare, National Defence University, Kadettikouluntie 7, Helsinki, Finland
3
Organizational Communication & Public Relations, University of Jyväskylä, Seminaarinkatu 15, Jyväskylä, Finland
Keywords: Situation Picture, Common Situation Picture, Situation Awareness, Situation Understanding.
Abstract: There are several different definitions of situation awareness. However, all of them have in common is
knowing and understanding of what is happening, an understanding of future changes or problems, and the
prediction of the future situation and the decisions to be made on its basis. Situation picture and Situation
Awareness are narrow. Situation understanding of the situation is the understanding of the decision-makers
and their assistants about what has happened, the circumstances that have affected them, the goals of the
different parties and the possible development options of the events needed to make decisions on a particular
issue or subject. The results of this study indicate that the recent discussion in scholarly literature focus on
situation awareness. A further result is that the context of the many of the recent literature are focused on
issues related to cyber security or on intelligent systems, thus on IT systems, which are very relevant to
modern situation awareness and understanding in these modern times where more and more systems become
digitalized and interconnected..
1 INTRODUCTION
The Security Committee of Finland lists elements of
situation leadership. The creation of a situation
picture involves a substantial understanding of the
situation and an assessment of the development of the
situation. Collecting and sharing a situation picture is
a prerequisite for situation management. Decision-
making requires a quick formation of the situation
picture and the creation of situation awareness.
Sharing information and technical solutions require
enabling authorities to collaborate as
comprehensively as possible. (The Security
Committee, 2017).
According to Endsley (2000, pp. 4-5) “Situation
awareness therefore is represented as the main
precursor to decision making, however, many other
factors also come into play in turning good situation
awareness into successful performance”.
In multi-authority operations, the responsible
authority is responsible for operational activities;
other authorities are involved in the operation and
a
https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8950-5221
b
https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9726-7956
provide official assistance to the extent necessary.
Management is based on statutory tasks and
responsibility of the competent authority, and with
the support of other authorities to the competent
authority (The Security Committee, 2017).
It has been, however, noted that a common
situation picture is missing within sectors and
between authorities. Actors look at this from their
own point of view: the data are collected at different
locations and the data are not comparable to each
other, making it difficult to use the information
gathered (FIMAC, 2018).
The development of situational awareness by and
for the participating authorities and respondents are
carried out through joint monitoring and assessment.
Networked cooperation under the collaborative
model is important at both national and international
levels. Creating, and practising situation picture and
situation awareness are important elements (The
Security Committee, 2017).
The research question of this study is: How are
situation picture, situation awareness, and situation
understanding discussed in recent scolarly literature?
Tikanmäki, I. and Ruoslahti, H.
How Are Situation Picture, Situation Awareness, and Situation Understanding Discussed in Recent Scholarly Literature?.
DOI: 10.5220/0008494104190426
In Proceedings of the 11th International Joint Conference on Knowledge Discovery, Knowledge Engineering and Knowledge Management (IC3K 2019), pages 419-426
ISBN: 978-989-758-382-7
Copyright
c
2019 by SCITEPRESS – Science and Technology Publications, Lda. All rights reserved
419
1.1 Structure of This Paper
The second chapter of this study defines common
situation related terms. The third chapter presents the
methods used, the fourth chapter the results, which
are divided into four sections; situation picture,
common situation picture, situation awareness, and
shared situation awareness. The fifth chapter offers
discussion and recommendations for future research.
2 DEFINING SITUATION
RELATED TERMS
Table 1 provides definitions of Oxford and Merriam-
Webster dictionaries for the most common terms in
this study (Oxford Dictionary, 2019; Merriam-
Webster, 2019).
Table 1: Definitions for situation related terms.
Term
Oxford dictionary
Merriam-Webster
dictionary
Picture
A painting or
drawing, etc. that
shows a scene, a
person or thing
A design or representation
made by various means
such as painting, drawing,
or photography
Situation
All the
circumstances and
things that are
happening at a
particular time and
in a particular place
The way in which
something is placed in
relation to its surroundings
Awareness
Knowing that
something exists
and is important
The quality or state of
being aware: knowledge
and understanding that
something is happening or
exists
Understanding
The knowledge that
somebody has
about a particular
subject or situation
The capacity to apprehend
general relations of
particulars or the power to
make experience
intelligible by applying
concepts and categories
Situation picture, situation awareness and
understanding arise through the acquisition and
interpretation of knowledge (Kuusisto, 2005).
According to Alberts et al., (2001), situational
awareness focuses on what is known about past and
present situations, while situation understanding is
how the situation is or can be formed and how the
different activities affect the developing situation.
3 METHOD
The research was done as a qualitative study, where
according to Yin (2003) the sources of evidence
commonly used in case study are qualitative data,
which can, be collected by observing interactions,
conducting interviews or scrutinising materials
(Denzin and Lincoln 1994). Yin (2003) recommends
using various sources. Data collection methods are
usually combined in case study research and evidence
may be qualitative, quantitative or both (Eisenhardt,
1989). The case study is therefore useful when the
phenomenon is broad and complex when
comprehensive, thorough research is needed (Dubé
and Baré, 2003). Conducting qualitative research is
an information-based process; most of the time,
inductively, empirical observations on more general
theories or methods need to be made (Alasuutari,
2004).
This study is a work in progress, and it uses recent
(past three years) academic (peer-reviewed) literature
sources that were collected in a structured manner by
searching the scientific databases ProQuestCentral
and EBSCO Host with search words that were
directly based on the RQ of this study.
A final sample of 22 papers was selected based on
reading their title and abstract (e.g., 10 papers with a
medical context, 5 with a device level context, and
two with an outer space context were among the
papers that were not included in this final sample).
These 22 articles are then read entirely and relevant
content and mention of situation picture, situation
awareness and situation understanding were extracted
to a data extraction table (DET) that were directly
based on the RQ and one column addressed the
context of the paper.
Material from earlier and further scientific
reports, articles, and a more general literary review
was used to supplement the data collected from the
primary source of structured literature review.
4 RESULTS
The results of this study indicate that the recent
discussion in scholarly literature focus on situation
awareness. Only one paper of the sample was focused
on situation understanding. A further result is that the
context of the many of the recent literature are
focused on issues related to cyber security or on
intelligent systems, thus on IT systems, which are
very relevant to modern situation awareness and
KMIS 2019 - 11th International Conference on Knowledge Management and Information Systems
420
understanding in these modern times where more and
more systems become digitalized and interconnected.
Table 2: The contexts of the sample papers.
Context
Number of papers
Situation awareness within systems
Cyber
5
Intelligent systems
6
Authority situation awareness
Big Data usage
3
Disaster recovery
4
Maritime
3
Police
1
The sample of 22 papers were further classified in
two major categories. There were 11 papers that deal
with how authorities or the military promote situation
picture, awareness, and understanding, and 11 papers
that deal with situation awareness of systems. These
were deemed relevant to the study, as many of today’s
situation picture and awareness systems are cyber-
physical in nature (Rajamäki and Ruoslahti, 2018).
4.1 Situation Picture
Each organization needs information about its
environment and its events, and its impact on their
own activities. Appropriate and rapid situation
awareness, based on correct information and
estimates, are emphasized in situations of disruption,
in which case it is necessary to quickly make
decisions in a very wide range of impressions. The
situation picture is a presentation of the situation or
performance capabilities compiled from the
individual information giving grounds for situational
awareness. (Lehto et al., 2018).
According to Kuusisto (2005), a situation picture
is a real-time picture of current events and includes an
analysis of the current state and an estimate of future
events.
The European Union describe Situational Picture
as “means of graphical interface to present near-real-
time data and information received from different
authorities, sensors, platforms and other sources,
which is shared across communication and
information channels with other authorities in order
to achieve situational awareness and support reaction
capability along the external borders and pre-frontier
area” (European Parliament, 2013 p.14). The
situation picture shall be composed information
collected from a) surveillance systems, b) stationary
and mobile sensors, c) patrols (e.g. vessel, aircraft),
d) command and control centres, e) other authorities
and systems, and f) other sources. (European
Parliament, 2013)
E.g. maritime surveillance data are gathered e.g.
by a) physical observation from vessels and aircrafts;
b) unmanned vehicles and drones; c) remote sensing;
and d) coastal radars and other sensors. Situation
Picture should base on raw data from which each
organisation builds their own Situation picture
according to their needs. A situation picture must be
sharable both nationally and internationally.
Figure 1 shows the European maritime user
communities that the Common Information Sharing
Environment (CISE) better interlinks with one
another for an integrated maritime surveillance across
the entire European maritime domain, and the waters
leading to it. However yet, “In the area of maritime
surveillance, there is no inherent complexity, which
is due to the fact that numerous systems are not yet
interconnected and operate simultaneously”
(Tikanmäki, 2017, p. 288).
Figure 1: The Common Information Sharing Environment
(CISE) interlinks user communities for integrated maritime
surveillance (Tikanmäki and Ruoslahti 2017, p. 392).
4.2 Common Situation Picture
According to Horsmanheimo et al., (2017), a
Common Situation Picture should consist of the most
important requirements presented in Table 3.
So far, achieving coherence between the many
different national Member State processes has been
challenging. Crossing sectorial borders can be even
more difficult than crossing national ones. A lack of
integrated mechanisms for distributing information
prevents spreading situational awareness to all who
need it in the case of a crisis (Tikanmäki and
Ruoslahti, 2017).
According to United States Department of
Defence (2017, p. 212) Common operational picture
is “A single identical display of relevant information
shared by more than one command that facilitates
collaborative planning and assists all echelons to
achieve situational awareness. Also called COP”.
European Union and national authorities may gain
“faster recognition, assessment, planning, and
How Are Situation Picture, Situation Awareness, and Situation Understanding Discussed in Recent Scholarly Literature?
421
reaction capabilities, which lead to a safer, more
secure European maritime domain” (Ruoslahti and
Tikanmäki, 2017, p. 273).
Table 3: Major important requirements for Common
Situation Picture (Horsmanheimo, et al., 2017).
No
Requirement
1
A Situation Picture is a series of presentations
whose form does not matter. It is essential that
someone manages it, makes analysis and decisions.
2
Information is produced in collaboration with the
Situation Picture system. Each actor independently
responds to the production and correctness of the
information in its field of expertise.
3
The information must be processed, analysed and
understandable. It must play a role both for itself
and for other recipients.
4
The information should be presented visually and
clearly.
5
The information must be presented without
unnecessary technical details. The information
must be understandable to people from other
domains.
6
The data should be automatically transferred
between the systems. This reduces the problems
caused by human errors.
7
Situation Picture system should be dynamic and
tailored to the user groups or domain. The
information should have different levels of views.
8
Terminology and classifications should be
harmonized.
9
Situation Picture system should be incorporated
into the processes of organizations so that there is
no additional task to maintain it.
10
Different actors should be able to define what
information they need and what information they
are able to enter the system.
11
Situation Picture system should be able to
exchange information between different actors at
different organizational levels. Information should
also be shared with supervising organizations.
12
Situation Picture system should provide
predictions about what happens in 3, 6, and in 12
hours.
13
Situation Picture system should be able to present
the temporal dimension of how things have
evolved - whether they are going in the wrong or
better direction.
The national situational picture is composed of
information collected from the i.e. sources presented
in the following Table 4.
Table 4: Sources of information (European Parliament,
2013).
No
Source
1
The national surveillance system in accordance with
national law
2
Stationary and mobile sensors operated by national
authorities with a responsibility for external border
surveillance
3
Surveillance patrols and other monitoring missions
4
Local, regional and other situation centres;
5
Other relevant national authorities and systems,
including operational centres and contact points
6
National situation/operations centres in other Member
States
7
Authorities of third countries, on the basis of bilateral
or multilateral agreements and regional networks;
8
Ship reporting systems in accordance with their
respective legal bases
9
Other relevant European and international organisations
10
Other sources
4.3 Situation Awareness
Endsley (1988) defines situation awareness as “the
perception of the elements in the environment within
a volume of time and space, the comprehension of
their meaning and the projection of their status in the
near future”. Situation awareness enables preliminary
information gathering and information exchange and
is applicable mechanism for real-time monitoring and
anomaly detection. Thus, situation awareness is the
process of being aware of what is happening in the
surroundings. (Ferreira et al., 2017).
Situation awareness (also called as situational
awareness) is the result of a situation picture and its
analysis. The situation picture and situation
awareness are limited concepts and should strive
towards a broader concept of situation understanding.
Situation awareness and situation understanding
require collaboration and knowledge that enable
comprehensive monitoring of the operating
environment, analysis, and compilation of
information, and sharing of information. (Lehto et al.,
2018). The absence of an integrated information
sharing mechanism prevents the dissemination of the
situation awareness to those in need. (Vuorisalo,
2012).
Individuals and organisations are developing new
ways to execute their mission by utilising the power
of knowledge and applying network-centric concepts.
Three domains: physical, information and cognitive
must be covered to understand how information
influence the capacity to execute operations. The
physical is the domain where e.g. manoeuvres take
place across environments (ground, sea, air, space),
and connected by physical platforms and
communications networks.
Information is created, manipulated and shared,
and command and control are communicated in the
information domain. All information is influenced by
the interaction within the information domain. In the
cognitive domain perceptions, awareness,
understanding, beliefs, and values underlie, and as a
result of sense making, decisions are made. (Alberts,
Garska, Hayes, and Signori, 2001).
KMIS 2019 - 11th International Conference on Knowledge Management and Information Systems
422
Alberts and Hayes (2003) add the social domain
as the fourth domain of command and control.
According to Alberts and Hayes “… the interactions
between and among individuals and entities that
fundamentally define organization and doctrine exist
in the social domain”. (Alberts and Hayes, 2003, p.
45).
According to Smith and Hancock (1995, p. 2),
“Situational awareness is the invariant in the agent-
environment system that generates the momentary
knowledge and behaviour required to attain the goals
specified by an arbiter of performance in the
environment”. According to Endsley (2000),
Situation Awareness is “Most simply put, SA is
knowing what is going on around you” (Endsley,
2000, p. 2). Situational awareness bases on perceived
information, and the information features affect how
information is transmitted (Seppänen, 2015).
Basically, SA levels explain: where have we been,
where are we now and where are we going?
Perla, Markowitz, Nofi and Weuve (2000, p. 9)
define Situation awareness as “a sense of knowing
what’s going on in our current environment, what
could happen next, what options we have for action,
and what the possible outcomes of those actions
might be”. Simply said, “A team must share to
understand what’s going on, why it’s going on, and
how will it affect their mission” (Perla et al., p. 34).
Nofi (2000) describes situation awareness as “the
result of a dynamic process of perceiving and
comprehending events in one's environment, leading
to reasonable projections as to possible ways that
environment may change, and permitting predictions
as to what the outcomes will be in terms of
performing one's mission.” (Nofi, p. 5)
There are three main schools of thought on
explaining Situation Awareness. Endsley (1999) has
a three-level model in information processing
approach, Smith and Hancock (1995) use the model
of the perceptual cycle, while Bedny and Meister
(1999) use the model of activity theory to describe SA
(Salmon et al., 2007). Endsley (1999) divides SA into
three levels.
Table 5: Levels of Situation awareness.
Situation awareness (SA)
Level 1
Perception of the elements in the environment
Level 2
Comprehension of the current situation
Level 3
Projection of the future status
The first step in achieving SA Level 1 is to
discover the state, characteristics, and dynamics of
relevant environmental elements. SA Level 2 bases
on a synthesis of Level 1 elements. Level 3 SA
projects future actions and forms third level SA
(Endsley, 1999). Smith and Hancock (1995) consider
SA to be a knowledge creation and knowledge-based
process. Their description bases on the model of the
perceptual cycle, which describes the interaction of
an individual's interaction with the world and the
influence of the models in our role.
Bedny and Meister (1999) describe SA as an
activity theory outlining various cognitive processes
related to human behaviour. Activity theory strives to
ensure that individuals have goals, which represent an
ideal image or the desired end state, motives that
guide them in the final state and the policies (or
action) that allow for the achievement of these
objectives. (Salmon et al., 2007).
According to (Nofi, 2000, p. 71). SA is “the result
of a dynamic process of perceiving and
comprehending events in one’s environment, leading
to reasonable projections as to possible ways that
environment may change, and permitting predictions
as to what outcomes will be in terms of performing
one’s mission”.
4.4 Shared Situation Awareness
In cooperation with expert organizations, each
organization has its own specified goals and tasks.
The collaboration of expert organizations does not
require common situational awareness. In co-
operation, a common understanding of the conceptual
level is needed. Co-operation can be described by the
concept of shared situation awareness. The pursuit of
common situation awareness may even be
detrimental to the quality and effectiveness of
cooperation. Cooperation between expert
organisations arises from the task of tied situation
awareness and communication. (Luokkala, 2009).
Shared Situation Awareness (SSA) is defined as
“the degree to which team members have the same
SA on shared SA requirements” (Endsley and Jones,
2001, p. 48). In co-operation, a common
understanding of the conceptual level is needed. Co-
operation can be described by the concept of shared
situation awareness (Luokkala, 2009).
Shared Situation Awareness has several
alternative terms: Common Understanding, Team
Shared Awareness, Shared Understanding,
Distributed Cognition, Distributed Understanding,
Group Situational Awareness, Shared Cognition,
Shared Visualization, Team Awareness and Coherent
Tactical Picture. Despite these terms, SSA seems to
remain the term of preference. (Nofi, 2000).
SSA requires building individual SA, sharing
individual SA, and developing the group’s SSA. We
are building individual SA all the time. The most
How Are Situation Picture, Situation Awareness, and Situation Understanding Discussed in Recent Scholarly Literature?
423
critical issue in creating SSA is sharing individual
SA: it integrates the individual model into a shared
model. Building SSA integrates the different
individual mental models of the situation. (Perla et al.,
2000).
There are clear efforts toward authorities working
together on different levels (Table 6 below).
Table 6: Concepts related to how authorities work together
(Modified from Frey, Lohmeier, Lee and Tollefson, 2006).
Network
Coordination
Collaboration
Co-creation
Share
information for
common good
Modify
operations to
reach common
goals
Share resources
to reach common
goals
Develop
common
capabilities to
reach common
goals
In the simplest form, authorities network to share
information and their plans. This may then evolve
into coordinating plans and operations to reach
common goals, and to collaborate on a resource
sharing level, and finally to co-create common
capacities and innovation (Ruoslahti and Tikanmäki,
2017). In seeking to gain understanding of the process
of co-creation of knowledge for innovation, Ruoslahti
(2017) finds, by exploring current insights in
academic literature on co-creation, that multi-
stakeholder networks can be structured for different
aims, and four categories of projects were identified.
Co-creation projects may benefit the organization
that drives the project, or, secondly, a value chain
network (and especially its main driver), a public
entity spearheading the co-creation, or in some cases
quite evenly the stakeholders of the innovation
network. This network cooperation may evolve
between these four categories.
Maritime security and its actors are linked to
economic and political development (Bueger, 2015).
Practices, such as surveillance activities at sea, law
enforcement, coordination and naval diplomacy or
capacity building may raise the risk of cyber-attacks
against shipping and maritime infrastructure. The
European Union (EU) raises the potential impacts of
natural disasters, extreme events and climate change
as security threats on the maritime domain (European
Union, 2014). Maintaining a situation picture of these
risks help prevent them.
5 CONCLUSIONS
One conclusion is that organizations need
information from the environment and events
surrounding them and their impact on their own
activities. Graphical interfaces that present near real-
time information can be shared with other authorities
and relevant actors to support reaction capabilities.
Situation picture provides a real-time picture of the
current situation and an estimate what is going to
happen in near future. The United States Department
of Defence (2017), for example, describe the
Common Situation Picture as an identical display of
relevant information shared by multiple commands,
which facilitates interactive planning and assists all in
the management of situational awareness.
Secondly, there are differences in the definitions
of situation awareness, however, what all of them
have in common are knowing and understanding of
what is happening, and an understanding of possible
future changes or problems, predictions of future
situations and making decisions on these bases.
Situation picture and Situation Awareness are narrow
concepts, instead, we recommend (e.g. Lehto et al.,
2018), using a broader concept Situation
understanding.
Thirdly, Endsley’s situation awareness theory can
be seen as a fundamental way to make decisions and
actions in dynamically changing environment – to
realise situation understanding. Organisational
theories and models have become an important
research challenge, and cybernetics and situation
awareness theory relationship is useful to solve issues
related to situation awareness-based systems. (e.g.
Anjaria and Mishra, 2018). Shared situation
awareness remains a reference term, even though it
has several synonyms such as common
understanding, team shared awareness, shared
understanding, distributed cognition, distributed
understanding, group situational awareness, shared
cognition, shared visualisation, team awareness and
coherent tactical picture.
Fourthly, situation understanding of the situation
is the understanding of the decision-makers and their
assistants about what has happened, the
circumstances that have affected them, the goals of
the different parties and the possible development
options of the events needed to make decisions on a
particular issue or subject. (e.g. Lehto et al., 2018).
A further conclusion is that the relative lack of
papers dealing with how authorities or the military
promote situation picture, awareness, and
understanding would seem to indicate that there is a
need to further investigate this area. This work is in
KMIS 2019 - 11th International Conference on Knowledge Management and Information Systems
424
progress with systematic searches from master’s and
PhD level studies and scientific reports. Much is
about systems and cyber security of these systems.
This is, however, very relevant with today’s cyber-
physical systems. This work in progress yet lacks an
in-depth analysis of the 22 sample articles. This will
follow and be published as an extended paper in the
near future. Further study of the relevant military
context and the study of inter-authority and inter-
sector collaboration and co-creation are also
recommended.
REFERENCES
Alasuutari, P., 2004. The Globalization of Qualitative
Research. In: Clive Seale et al: Qualitative Research
Practice. London: Sage, pp. 595-608.
Alberts, D. S., Hayes, R. E., 2003. Power to the Edge. In
Command...Control... in the Information Age.
Washington DC: Office of the Assistant Secretary of
Defense (OASD), Command &Control Research
Program (CCRP), Washington, DC,20301.
Alberts, D., Garska, J., Hayes, R., Signori, D., 2001.
Understanding Information Age Warfare. Washington
D.C.: Assistant Secretary of Defence (C3I/Command
Control Research Program.
Anjaria, K., Mishra, A., 2018, "Relating Wiener's
cybernetics aspects and a situation awareness model
implementation for information security risk
management", Kybernetes, vol. 47, no. 1, pp. 58-79.
Bueger, C., 2015. What is maritime security? Marine Policy
Volume 53, March 2015, Pages 159-164.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2014.12.005
Dubé, L., Baré, G., 2003. Rigor in Information Systems
Positivist Case Research: Current practises, trends, and
recommendations. MIS Quarterly Vol. 27 No. 4, pp.
597-635.
Eisenhardt, K., 1989. Building Theories from Case Study
Research. Academy of Management. The Academy of
Management Review. Vol. 14 No. 4 pp. 532-550.
Endsley, M. R., 1988. Design and Evaluation for Situation
Awareness Enhancement. Human Factors Society
Annual Meeting (pp. 97-101). SAGE Journals.
Endsley, M. R., 1999. Situation Awareness in Aviation
Systems. In D. W. Garland, Handbook of Aviation and
is Human Factors (pp. 257 - 276). Mahwah, NJ:
Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Endsley, M. R., 2000. Theoretical underpinning of situation
awareness: A critical review. In Endsley, M.R. &
Garland, D. J. (Eds.) (2000). Situation Awareness
Analysis and Measurement. Mahwah NJ: Taylor &
Francis.
Endsley, M. R., Jones, W. M., 2001. A model of inter- and
intrateam situation awareness: Implications for design,
training and measurement. In M. McNeese, E. Salas, &
M. Endsley (Eds.), New trends in cooperative
activities: Understanding system dynamics in complex
environments (pp. 46–67). Santa Monica, CA: Human
Factors and Ergonomics Society.
European Parliament, 2013. Establishing the European
Border Surveillance System (Eurosur). Official Journal
of the European Union, L295(11).
European Union, 2014. European Union maritime security
strategy. Council of the European Union Doc. 11205/14
European Union, Brussels (2014).
Ferreira, C., Guardalben, L., Gomes, T., Sargento, S.,
Salvador, P., Robalo, D., Velez, F.J., 2017, "Supporting
Unified Distributed Management and Autonomic
Decisions: Design, Implementation and Deployment",
Journal of Network and Systems Management, vol. 25,
no. 2, pp. 416-456.
FIMAC, 2018. Finnish Maritime Authorities Cooperation.
(I. Tikanmäki, Interviewer)
Frey, B.B., Lohmeier, J.H., Lee, S.W., Tollefson, N., 2006.
Measuring collaboration among grant partners.
American Journal of Evaluation, 27(3), 383-392.
Horsmanheimo, S., Kokkoniemi-Tarkkanen, H., Kuusela,
P., Tuomimäki, L., Puuska, S., Vankka, J. (2017).
Situational awareness of critical infrastructure. The
Prime Minister's Office.
Kuusisto, R, 2005. From Common Operational Picture to
Precision Management. Managemental Information
Flows in Crisis Management Network. Helsinki:
Ministry of Transport and Communications.
Lehto, M., Limnéll, J., Kokkomäki, T., Pöyhönen, J.,
Salminen, M., 2018. Strategic management of cyber
security in Finland. Helsinki: Prime Minister´s Office.
Luokkala, P., 2009. Jaetut kontekstit METO-yhteistyössä
(Shared Contexts in METO-Co-operation). Faculty of
Engineering and Architecture. Espoo: Helsinki
University of Technology.
Merriam-Webster, 2019. https://www.merriam-
webster.com/ Accessed: 27.6.2019.
Nofi, A. A., 2000. Defining and measuring shared
situational awareness. Alexandria, Virginia: Center For
Naval Analyses.
Oxford Dictionary, 2019. https://www.oxford
learnersdictionaries.com/definition/english/. Accessed:
27.6.2019.
Perla, P., Markowitz, M., Nofi, A., Weuve, C, 2000.
Gaming and Shared Situation Awareness. Alexandria,
Virginia: Center for Naval Analyses.
Rajamäki, J., Ruoslahti, H., 2018. Educational competences
with regard to critical infrastructure protection. In A.
Jųsang (Ed.), ECCWS 2018: Proceedings of the 17th’
European Conference on Cyber Warfare and Security
(pp. 415-423). Academic Conferences International.
Ruoslahti, H., 2017. Co-creation of Knowledge for
Innovation requires Multi-Stakeholder Public
Relations. In Sarah Bowman, Adrian Crookes, Stefania
Romenti, Øyvind Ihlen (ed.) Public Relations and the
Power of Creativity (Advances in Public Relations and
Communication Management), Volume 3, Emerald
Publishing Limited, pp.115 - 133
Salmon, P. M., Stanton, N. A., Ladva, D., Jenkins, D. P.,
Walker, G. H., Rafferty, L., 2007. Measuring Situation
Awareness during Command and Control Activity: A
How Are Situation Picture, Situation Awareness, and Situation Understanding Discussed in Recent Scholarly Literature?
425
Comparison of Measures Study. Human Factors
Integration Defence Technology Centre. Somerset:
Human Factors Integration Defence Technology.
Seppänen, H., 2015. Defining critical information
requirements and quality in cooperative disasters
management. Aalto University, School of Engineering,
Department of Real Estate, Planning and
Geoinformatics. Helsinki: Unigrafia Oy.
Smith, K., Hancock, A,.1995. Situation Awareness is
Adaptive, Externally Directed Consciousness. The
Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society.
Volume: 37, Issue:1, pages:137-148.
Tikanmäki, I., Ruoslahti, H., 2017. Increasing Cooperation
between the European Maritime Domain
Authorities. International Journal of Environmental
Science, Volume 2, pp. 392-399.
The Security Committee, 2017. The Security Strategy for
Society. Helsinki: The Security Committee.
The United States Department of Defence, 2017. Joint
Operations. Joint Publication 3.0. 17 January 2017.
Vuorisalo, V., 2012. Developing Future Crisis
Management. University of Tampere, School of
Management. Tampere: Tampereen Yliopistopaino -
Juvenes Print.
Yin, R., 2003. Case Study Research: Design and Methods.
3
rd
edition. London: Sage Publications.
KMIS 2019 - 11th International Conference on Knowledge Management and Information Systems
426
