A Likert Scale-Based Model for Benchmarking Operational Capacity, Organizational Resilience, and Disaster Risk Reduction

Abstract

Likert scales are a common methodological tool for data collection used in quantitative or mixed-method approaches in multiple domains. They are often employed in surveys or questionnaires, for benchmarking answers in the fields of disaster risk reduction, business continuity management, and organizational resilience. However, both scholars and practitioners may lack a simple scale of reference to assure consistency across disciplinary fields. This article introduces a simple-to-use rating tool that can be used for benchmarking responses in questionnaires, for example, for assessing disaster risk reduction, gaps in operational capacity, and organizational resilience. We aim, in particular, to support applications in contexts in which the target groups, due to cultural, social, or political reasons, may be unsuitable for in-depth analyses that use, for example, scales from 1 to 7 or from 1 to 10. This methodology is derived from the needs emerged in our recent fieldwork on interdisciplinary projects and from dialogue with the stakeholders involved. The output is a replicable scale from 0 to 3 presented in a table that includes category labels with qualitative attributes and descriptive equivalents to be used in the formulation of model answers. These include examples of levels of resilience, capacity, and gaps. They are connected to other tools that could be used for in-depth analysis. The advantage of our Likert scale-based response model is that it can be applied in a wide variety of disciplines, from social science to engineering.

Keywords

Assessment / Disaster risk reduction / Interdisciplinary / Likert scale / Questionnaires / Scales

References

[1] Ahmed, B., I. Kelman, H.K. Fehr, and M. Saha. 2016. Community resilience to cyclone disasters in coastal Bangladesh. Sustainability 8(8): Article 805.

[2] Alexander DE. Confronting catastrophe: New perspectives on natural disasters, 2000, New York, NY: Oxford University Press

[3] Alexander DE. Evaluation of civil protection programmes, with a case study from Mexico. Disaster Prevention and Management, 2015, 24(2): 263-283

[4] Beccari, B. 2016. A comparative analysis of disaster risk, vulnerability and resilience composite indicators. PLoS Currents. https://doi.org/10.1371/currents.dis.453df025e34b682e9737f95070f9b970.

[5] Birkmann J, Kienberger S, Alexander D. Assessment of vulnerability to natural hazards: A European perspective, 2014, San Diego, CA: Elsevier

[6] Brown, S. 2010. Likert scale examples for surveys. Ames, IA: Iowa State University. https://www.extension.iastate.edu. Accessed 1 Apr 2020.

[7] Bryman A. Social research methods, 2016, Oxford: Oxford University Press

[8] BSI (British Standards Institutions) Guidance on organizational resilience BS 6500:2014, 2014, London: BSI Standards Limited

[9] Channon D, Sammut-Bonnici T. Cooper CL. Gap analysis. Wiley Encyclopedia of management, 2014, Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons 1-3.

[10] Chrissis MB, Konrad M, Shrum S. CMMI guidelines for process integration and product improvement, 2003, Boston: Addison-Wesley Longman Publishing Co., Inc

[11] Cremen G, Galasso C. Earthquake early warning: Recent advances and perspectives. Earth-Science Reviews, 2020

[12] Creswell JW. A concise introduction to mixed methods research, 2014, Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications

[13] Croasmun JT, Ostrom L. Using Likert-type scales in the social sciences. Journal of Adult Education, 2011, 40(1): 19-22.

[14] Cutter, S.L., and S. Derakhshan. 2019. Implementing disaster policy: Exploring scale and measurement schemes for disaster resilience. Journal of Homeland Security and Emergency Management 16(3). https://doi.org/10.1515/jhsem-2018-0029.

[15] Frazier TG, Thompson CM, Dezzani RJ, Butsick D. Spatial and temporal quantification of resilience at the community scale. Applied Geography, 2013, 42: 95-107

[16] Gentile R, Galasso C, Idris Y, Rusydy I, Meilianda E. From rapid visual survey to multi-hazard risk prioritisation and numerical fragility of school buildings. Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences, 2019, 19(7): 1365-1386

[17] Hernández-Moreno G, Alcántara-Ayala I. Landslide risk perception in Mexico: A research gate into public awareness and knowledge. Landslides, 2017, 14(1): 351-371

[18] Helbing D. Globally networked risks and how to respond. Nature, 2013, 497(7447): 51-59

[19] ISO (International Organization for Standardization). 2017. ISO 22316:2017. Security and resilience – Organizational resilience – Principles and attributes. Geneva: ISO.

[20] ISO (International Organization for Standardization). 2019. ISO 22301:2019. Security and resilience – Business continuity management systems – Requirements. Geneva: ISO.

[21] Kelman I, Gaillard JC, Lewis J, Mercer J. Learning from the history of disaster vulnerability and resilience research and practice for climate change. Natural Hazards, 2016, 82(1): 129-143

[22] Kostkova P, Mani-Saada J, Madle G, Weinberg J. Moreno A, Nealon JL. Agent-based up-to-date data management in National electronic Library for communicable disease. Applications of software agent technology in the health care domain, 2003, Basel, Switzerland: Springer 105-124

[23] Linkov I, Eisenberg DA, Bates ME, Chang D, Convertino M, Allen JH, Flynn SE, Seager TP. Measurable resilience for actionable policy. Environmental Science & Technology, 2013, 47(18): 10108-10110.

[24] NFPA (National Fire Protection Association). 2019. NFPA 1600-Standard on continuity, emergency, and crisis management. Massachusetts, USA: NFPA. https://www.nfpa.org. Accessed 10 May 2020.

[25] Pescaroli G. Perceptions of cascading risk and interconnected failures in emergency planning: Implications for operational resilience and policy making. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, 2018, 30: 269-280

[26] Pescaroli G, Alexander D. Understanding compound, interconnected, interacting, and cascading risks: A holistic framework. Risk Analysis, 2018, 38(11): 2245-2257

[27] Peterson RA. Constructing effective questionnaires, 2013, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications

[28] Twigg J. Disaster risk reduction, 2015, London: Overseas Development Institute, Humanitarian Policy Group

[29] UNISDR (United Nations International Strategy for Disaster Reduction) Sendai framework for disaster risk reduction 2015–2030, 2015, Geneva: UNISDR

[30] UNISDR (United Nations International Strategy for Disaster Reduction) Disaster resilience scorecards for cities – Preliminary level assessment, 2017, Geneva: UNISDR

[31] Vagias, W.M. 2006. Likert-type scale response anchors. Clemson International Institute for Tourism & Research Development, Department of Parks, Recreation and Tourism Management, Clemson University, Clemson, SC 29634, USA.

[32] Watkins R, Meiers MW, Visser YL. Assessing needs, 2012, Washington, DC: The World Bank

[33] Wiseman S, Jawaheer G, Kostkova P, Madle G. Specialist digital libraries—National Resource for Infection Control (NRIC)—Information overload or underload?. British Journal of Infection Control, 2008, 9(5): 4-9

[34] Yore R, Faure-Walker J. Microinsurance for disaster recovery: Business venture or humanitarian intervention? An analysis of potential success and failure factors of microinsurance case studies. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, 2019, 33: 16-32