Governments in general, react well in a crisis. They loosen the institutional and organizational constraints on working together across organizational boundaries, between public and private organizations, and across levels of government; network leaders emerge, priorities become clear and common, and decision making is streamlined. Sharing information and other resources becomes easier. Interoperability is more readily created within the context of a crisis to share information about victims of the crisis, about the equipment needed to respond and recover, and about the spread of a disease within the context of that crisis. Creating interoperability ahead of time and building capacity to share information in normal times is often viewed as unnecessary and expensive; but in the long run, it may not be.

Immediately following a crisis governments tend to see the value of interoperability and will commit resources to build overall capability. Those involved in the 9/11 and the Tsunami responses saw this need very clearly; those planning for the next pandemic also see it clearly. Unfortunately, diverting resources, scare resources, from other priority programs to create interoperability becomes politically unpopular as soon as memories of the most recent crisis begin to fade.

Lessons from the World Trade Center Reponses - Advance planning during normal times
> Some unexpected needs, such as the need to fly over Ground Zero to capture remote sensing and visual data, were so unusual that no existing legal procedures or routine relationships could be immediately invoked. The process of securing permission and resources to carry out this effort was invented as it unfolded, with frustrating gaps in understanding and overlaps of authority among people and organizations that had never met or worked together before. Because the fly overs involved civilian, military, local, state, and federal authorities, delays and misunderstandings added to the confusion. One person recalled that it took days to get the effort up and running. “I think everyone now recognizes that we’d like to set up contracts in advance, and specs, and have a company ready to go, so that when something happens, [you] lift up the phone, fly, no questions, everyone knows [what’s happening], and they’re up in the air and we’re getting that intelligence back to us.”

Information, Technology, and Coordination: Lessons from the World Trade Center Response, Center for Technology in Government, 2004
http://www.ctg.albany.edu/publications/reports/wtc_lessons

Government leaders alone have the ability to keep a focus on the need for interoperability. They alone can ensure transformation by sustaining investments in the necessary capabilities. They can create an environment that helps cultivate enterprise interoperability for both day-to-day government operations and interactions with citizens as well as emergency management and crisis responses. The benefits are twofold: first, governments end up being more proactive rather than reactive when it comes to crisis response; and second, investing in capabilities that serve both day-to-day and crisis needs demonstrates a more efficient use of scarce resources and produces a more resilient government.

Acknowledgements
This issue brief is based on the findings of a number of research studies conducted by the Center for Technology in Government as well as many government projects involving capability assessment for cross-boundary information sharing and interoperability including: The authors would like to acknowledge the support of Microsoft Corporation in the development of this white paper. In particular, we would like to thank Martha Nalebuff and Lorenzo Madrid for sharing their thoughts and expertise and reviewing earlier drafts of this document. In addition, the authors would like to thank Anna Raup-Kounovsky and Alison Heaphy from CTG for their assistance.