Skip to main navigation menu Skip to main content Skip to site footer

Vol. 4 No. 2 (2024)
INContext: Studies in Translation and Interculturalism

Research Articles

A Crisis Translation Maturity Model for Better Multilingual Crisis Communication

https://doi.org/10.54754/incontext.v4i2.98

Published 2024-11-30

  • Patrick Cadwell
    • ,
  • Sharon O’Brien
    • ,
  • Aline Larroyed
    • ,
  • Federico M. Federici

Patrick Cadwell
Dublin City University

Sharon O’Brien


Aline Larroyed


Federico M. Federici


Abstract

Accurate, timely, and trusted communication in appropriate languages and cultural frames and through appropriate channels is vital to achieving principles of equity and inclusivity in crisis settings. However, organizations engaging in multilingual and multicultural crisis communication can struggle to know how to achieve such communication and assess their communicative capacities. Maturity models are well-established instruments to understand, review, and assess the processes and practices within organizations. This article discusses the development of a crisis translation maturity model to assist organizations to evaluate and improve their multilingual crisis communication efforts. The model presented here builds on a previously published iteration. This second iteration aimed to refine the model and was co-designed with stakeholders from 11 relevant organizations across two design workshops using a multiagency design-thinking methodology. Design thinking was chosen for this research because it is a collaborative approach to problem solving that prioritizes creativity and innovation, user-centeredness and involvement, iteration and experimentation, and interdisciplinary collaboration. This approach allowed us to co-design with stakeholders a model that considers crisis translation capabilities along 17 evaluative categories, with each category described across five maturity levels: ad hoc, repeatable, defined, managed, and optimizing. The categories are all defined in detail and the corresponding maturity levels are explained in a way that permits members of an organization to evaluate their current crisis translation capabilities and discern the changes that would be required to improve their level of crisis translation maturity. The objective of the research described in this article is to present a version of a crisis translation maturity model that will now be field-tested, customized, and refined. We plan to conduct further tests with stakeholders in authentic settings to produce improved versions of the model going forward.

Keywords

crisis translation, maturity models, inclusive societies, multilingual crisis communication, multiagency design-thinking

PDF

References

  1. Ambrose, Gavin and Paul Harris. (2009). Basics Design 08: Design Thinking. Bloomsbury Publishing.
  2. Bititci, Umit S., Patrizia Garengo, Aylin Ates and Sai S. Nudurupati. (2015). Value of maturity models in performance measurement. International Journal of Production Research, 53(10), 3062-3085. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207543.2014.970709
  3. Buchanan, Richard. (1992). Wicked problems in design thinking. Design Issues, 8(2), 5-21.
  4. Caralli, Richard, Mark Knight and Austin Montgomery. (2012). Maturity models 101: A primer for applying maturity models to smart grid security, resilience, and interoperability [White paper]. Carnegie Mellon University.
  5. Carvalho, João Vidal, Álvaro Rocha and António Abreu. (2016). Maturity models of healthcare information systems and technologies: A literature review. Journal of Medical Systems, 40(6), 131. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10916-016-0486-5
  6. Coombs, Timothy W. and Elina R. Tachkova. (2023). Extending the value of crisis translation in crisis communication. In Sharon O’Brien & Federico M. Federici (Eds.), Translating Crises (pp. 37-48). Bloomsbury Academic.
  7. European Union Agency for Cybersecurity. (2022). ENISA CSIRT Maturity Framework: Updated and Improved. European Union Agency for Cybersecurity.
  8. Federici, Federico M, Sharon O’Brien, Patrick Cadwell, Jay Marlowe, Brian Gerber and Olga Davis. (2019). International network in crisis translation: Recommendations on policies. Retrieved August 9, 2024 from https://doras.dcu.ie/23880/
  9. Frisk, Jane Elisabeth and Frank Bannister. (2022). Applying design thinking to the decision-making process: A field study in Swedish local authorities. Management Decision, 60(1), 66-85. https://doi.org/10.1108/MD-03-2020-0384
  10. Gholamizadeh, Kamran, Esmaeil Zarei, Saman Poursiahbidi and Omid Kalatpour. (2022). A hybrid framework to analyze crisis management system maturity in sociotechnical systems. Journal of Safety Science and Resilience, 3(4), 302-320. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jnlssr.2022.06.00
  11. Gimenez, Raquel, Leire Labaka and Josune Hernantes. (2017). A maturity model for the involvement of stakeholders in the city resilience building process. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 121, 7-16. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2016.08.001
  12. Humphrey, Watts S. (1988). Characterizing the software process: A maturity framework. IEEE Software, 5(2), 73-79.
  13. Katuu, Shadrack. (2019). Diverse Applications and Transferability of Maturity Models. IGI Global. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-5225-7080-6
  14. Liedtka, Jeanne. (2015). Perspective: Linking design thinking with innovation outcomes through cognitive bias reduction. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 32(6), 925-938. https://doi.org/10.1111/jpim.12163
  15. McConnell, Allan and Lynn Drennan. (2006). Mission impossible? Planning and preparing for crisis. Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management, 14(2), 59-70. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-5973.2006.00482.x
  16. Micheli, Pietro, Sarah J. S. Wilner, Sabeen Hussain Bhatti, Matteo Mura and Michael B. Beverland. (2019). Doing design thinking: Conceptual review, synthesis, and research agenda. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 36(2), 124-148. https://doi.org/10.1111/jpim.12466
  17. Mintrom, Michael and Joannah Luetjens. (2016). Design thinking in policymaking processes: Opportunities and challenges. Australian Journal of Public Administration, 75(3), 391-402. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8500.12211
  18. Mohamed, Sherif and Xiaobo Qu. (2018). Organisational Maturity for Disaster Preparedness. Sustainable Built Environment National Research Centre.
  19. Mulder, Femke. (2020). Humanitarian data justice: A structural data justice lens on civic technologies in post‐earthquake Nepal. Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management, 28(4), 432-445. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-5973.12335
  20. O’Brien, Sharon. (2022). Crisis translation: A snapshot in time. INContext: Studies in Translation and Interculturalism, 2(1), 84-108. https://doi.org/10.54754/incontext.v2i1.12
  21. O’Brien, Sharon and Patrick Cadwell. (2022). Communicating COVID-19 in multiple languages: A maturity model assessment of Ireland’s crisis communication practice. Revista de Llengua i Dret [Journal of Language and Law], 77, 1-17. https://doi.org/10.2436/rld.i77.2022.3630
  22. O’Brien, Sharon, Patrick Cadwell and Alicja Zajdel. (2021). Communicating Covid-19: Translation and trust in Ireland’s response to the pandemic. Dublin City University. https://www.dcu.ie/sites/default/files/inline-files/covid_report_compressed.pdf
  23. O’Brien, Sharon, Federico M. Federici, Patrick Cadwell, Jay Marlowe and Brian Gerber. (2018). Language translation during disaster: A comparative analysis of five national approaches. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, 31, 627-636. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijdrr.2018.07.006
  24. O’Mathúna, Dónal P., Carla Parra Escartín, Proinsias Roche and Jay Marlowe. (2020). Engaging citizen translators in disasters: Virtue ethics in response to ethical challenges. Translation and Interpreting Studies, 15(1), 57-79. https://doi.org/10.1075/tis.20003.oma
  25. Office of the Commissioner of Official Languages of Canada. (2023). Official Languages Maturity Model (OLMM). Office of the Commissioner of Official Languages of Canada. Retrieved August 9, 2024 from https://www.clo-ocol.gc.ca/en/tools-resources/official-languages-maturity-model-olmm
  26. Orru, Kati, Margo Klaos, Kristi Nero, Friedrich Gabel, Sten Hansson and Tor‐Olav Nævestad. (2023). Imagining and assessing future risks: A dynamic scenario‐based social vulnerability analysis framework for disaster planning and response. Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management, 31(4), 995-1008. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-5973.12436
  27. Peffers, Ken, Tuure Tuunanen, Marcus A Rothenberger and Samir Chatterjee. (2007). A design science research methodology for information systems research. Journal of Management Information Systems, 24(3), 45-77. https://doi.org/10.2753/MIS0742-1222240302
  28. Reed, Mark. (2022, August 9, 2024). Should we banish the word “stakeholder”? Fast Track Impact. https://www.fasttrackimpact.com/post/why-we-shouldn-t-banish-the-word-stakeholder
  29. Reynolds, Barbara and Matthew W. Seeger. (2005). Crisis and emergency risk communication as an integrative model. Journal of Health Communication, 10(1), 43-55. https://doi.org/10.1080/10810730590904571
  30. Rosenstock, Christian, Robert S Johnston and Larry M Anderson. (2000, September 7-16). Maturity model implementation and use: A case study. Proceedings of the Project Management Institute Annual Seminars & Symposium, Houston, TX. https://www.pmi.org/learning/library/maturity-model-implementation-case-study-8882
  31. Ruohonen, Heini and Klas Backholm. (2023). Matter of trust: How to include digital volunteers in crisis management. Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management, 31(4), 843-852. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-5973.12484
  32. Treurniet, Willem and Jeroen Wolbers. (2021). Codifying a crisis: Progressing from information sharing to distributed decision‐making. Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management, 29(1), 23-35. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-5973.12323
  33. United Nations General Assembly. (2015). Transforming Our World: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. Resolution A/RES/70/71. Retrieved August 9, 2024 from https://sdgs.un.org/publications/transforming-our-world-2030-agenda-sustainable-development-17981
  34. Wendler, Roy. (2012). The maturity of maturity model research: A systematic mapping study. Information and Software Technology, 54(12), 1317-1339. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.infsof.2012.07.007
  35. World Health Organization. (2023). WHO Principles for Effective Communications. Retrieved August 9, 2024 from https://www.who.int/about/communications/principles

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.