Abstract:
The study seeks to find out how the use of networking
facilitated the successful resolution of the cholera outbreak
that occurred in Paco and San Andres Bukid, Manila in September
1996. It describes the control measures undertaken by the
agencies concerned and determines how their crisis response
involved the use of the networking process. The essential
characteristics of the network are described in terms of its
participants, their specific roles and functions, the structure
of the network, and the channels of communication used. It also
examines which of the crisis management principles recommended
by noted public relation practitioners and crisis experts were
applied by the network participants.
Research data are based on focused interviews with key
informants who were selected through the use of a referral
system. These informants were referred by the top management of
their respective organizations on the basis of their technical
expertise in their field, their particular role and involvement
in the cholera outbreak, and their participation in the
formation of a crisis network to address the outbreak.
Research findings reveal that the entities which actively
participated in the networking process were: the City Government
of Manila, the Department of Health, Metropolitan Waterworks and
Sewerage System, and Ospital ng Maynila. They had clearly
defined roles and functions in the network, which were directed
at simultaneously addressing different aspects of the crisis. The networking process was used by these organizations to
share information, expertise, physical resources, and decision-making.
Communication in the network was mostly done through
face-to-face or interpersonal communication, although written
and machine-assisted communication was occasionally used.
Research data also indicate that the network adhered to some
established principles of crisis management.
The study concludes that networking facilitated the
successful resolution of the cholera crisis by: (1) increasing
the accuracy of information; (2) easing and hastening the flow
of communication and the delivery of programs; (3) encouraging
the maximization of available resources; and ( 4) providing a
cross-disciplinary approach to crisis management.
