According to the International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction (May 2024), almost two-thirds of respondents say they cannot cooperate with non-official responders in such situations. Because of this and a lack of understanding of the difference between emergency and routine channels, cooperation can quickly break down during an emergency.
When that’s the case, how do emergency communications differ from routine communications, and how can you ensure everyone speaks the same language?
Below, we highlight:
- The key differences between these methods
- Why tools help improve emergency communications strategies
- How equipment like MUTUALINK can bridge communication gaps
- Actionable strategies for crisis communication management.
Read on to your communication efforts with the demands of any future event or emergency, and be ready for any scenario.
Key Disparities in Emergency vs. Routine Messaging
One of the main disparities between these two communication styles is the balance between clarity and speed.
Emergency communications prioritize:
- Brevity to convey crucial details fast
- Clarity to ensure details are understood
- Adaptibility for diverse crises
- Specialized systems that are built for such situations
- Critical content instead of polite or formal language
Communication breakdowns during a crisis can have critical consequences and constitute a real threat to life, so these systems are often robust, even under extreme conditions.
Routine communication protocols instead empower:
- Detailed messages that offer more priority to tone
- Planned structures to ensure consistent communication methods
- Allowed time for responses allowing for thoughtfulness
- Use of existing infrastructure reducing costs and effort
Overall, routine communications have much less priority and investment due to the lack of emergency.
How Do Emergency Communications Differ from Routine Communications
Emergency communication strategies often demand more flexible tools that can adapt to the specific needs of an event as it starts to unfold. So, you frequently see that such communication quickly becomes a multi-channel effort to ensure the consistency of messaging across several agencies.
Redundancy systems are often a priority when people begin emergency communication response planning. Tools such as MUTUALINK are perfect in these situations to prevent complete communication failure.
In an emergency, it is also doubtful that you would see any form of communication-method experimentation or testing. As many different departments rely on pre-tested systems to ensure they are operationally ready at all times, this prevents miscommunication, misunderstanding, and mistakes.
Communication Tools and Technology for Emergencies
In an emergency, you are much more likely to see a wide variety of powerful and complex tools used to ensure the safety of life and limb following a crisis.
Common examples include:
- Mobile Command Centers (MCCs)
- MUTUALINK devices
- Portable connectivity tools
- Redundant systems
MCCs can offer fast deployment and act as a central hub for communication. They often provide wireless communications support, such as portable connectivity masts and satellite connectivity, and can store portable communications tools, such as MUTUALINK tools.
Multiple agencies often use an MCC as a meeting space to plan and coordinate ongoing emergency response efforts. While routine meetings are common in the professional world, a quickly-constructed MCC meeting room can act as an ad-hoc effort to perform this role in an evolving situation. Thus, they epitomize the benefits of both complex technology and tools that provide space for planning and organization.
MUTUALINK communications devices can help bridge communication gaps in areas where the local network faces ongoing or regular disruption. Even with a single MUTUALINK device, you can boost interoperability in an area, allowing for more seamless communication between agencies, and with command centers.
In a non-emergency situation, you would often instead be able to wait for repairs or use a slower form of connectivity. Existing infrastructure would prioritize cost-efficiency and long-term stability over fast setup and robust, portable construction.
Messaging Priorities in Emergency Versus Routine Communications
During emergencies, communication often needs to occur both internally within organizations and also to the general public. Therefore, These public-facing messages must set the right tone by balancing clarity with sensitivity and often urgency to ensure a practical message is communicated quickly without causing panic.
However, emergency communication is also very situation-specific. While protocols might include message templates, they will be carefully tailored to specific emergencies to ensure the information is least likely to be misunderstood.
While in-field communication often prioritizes speed, as mentioned above, inter-agency messages may require more standardized message formats to ensure clarity. Teams will determine how necessary this is on a case-by-case basis and will often send multiple messages through different channels to ensure a message gets through even if one channel fails.
Tools like MUTUALINK aid with this by enabling the creation of customized alerts that a user can send to specific groups or regions. It can boost cooperation between different agencies, ensuring better organization and coordination. In some cases, it can even act as an emergency method of contacting authorities for civilian personnel.
Routine Communication as an Operational Intent
Even in routine communication, consistent and reliable information delivery must be ensured, even if the stakes are very different. Instead of redundancy and speed, routine communication formats aim to:
- Streamline workflows
- Reduce misunderstandings
- Ensure smooth long-term operations
- Ensure consistency in message construction
Communications training for routine purposes exemplifies this by teaching personnel to adhere to strict messaging guidelines to ensure all users follow have the same message standards .
Using MMCs even ensures that organized events, such as sports or celebrations, can benefit from smooth day-to-day operations. They also have tools available if a crisis emerges during such an event.
CCS as the Center of Reliable Emergency Communications
How do emergency communications differ from routine communications? As you have read, they do, but both leverage similar tools despite prioritizing different strategies during use. Thus, having the right tools to handle both possibilities reduces the likelihood of additional challenges emerging during operational efforts.
Comprehensive Communication Services (CCS) offers solutions to help your organization handle such situations. By providing tools such as the MUTUALINK communications device and MCCs, CCS can help you with communication efforts even during challenging scenarios.
Contact CCS today to learn more about our full range of tools and discover how our assistance can benefit your organization.