Sensemaking on the Bridge: A Theoretical Approach to Maritime Information Design

  • Brit-Eli DanielsenEmail author
Conference paper
Part of the Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing book series (AISC, volume 876)


In the maritime sector 75–96% of accidents have been attributed to “human error”. Behind the label “human error” there are humans struggling to make sense of their environment, which is often a complex system comprising people, organizations and technology. Sensemaking is a concept that can help us understand human behavior in organizations. Knowledge about humans’ capabilities and limitations are crucial for designing resilient systems. The majority of sensemaking research has focused on the cognitive and linguistic sphere. However, an emerging topic in the sensemaking literature is embodied sensemaking, which looks into how also intuitive and bodily sensations and emotions are influencing how we interpret and act in the world. Embodied sensemaking may be especially relevant in the maritime sector where the environment is highly dynamic. This article forms a foundation for further research on sensemaking and maritime information design.


Sensemaking Maritime information design Human factors 


  1. 1.
    AGCS, Safety and Shipping Review 2017. An annual review of trends and developments in shipping losses and safety (2017).
  2. 2.
    Porathe, T., et al.: At least as safe as manned shipping? Autonomous shipping, safety and “human error”. European Safety and Reliability Conference. Taylor & Francis Group (2018)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Sjøfartsdirektoratet (Norwegian Maritime Authority). Fokus på riskiko 2018 (2018).
  4. 4.
    Dhillon, B.S.: Human Reliability and Error in Transportation Systems. Springer Science & Business Media, London (2007)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Reason, J.: Human Error. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1990)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Oltedal, H.A., Lützhöft, M.: Managing Maritime Safety. Routledge, London (2018)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Woods, D.D., et al.: Behind Human Error, 2nd edn. Ashgate Publising Ltd., UK (2010)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Salvendy, G.: Handbook of Human Factors and Ergonomics, 4th edn. John Wiley & Sons Inc., New Jersey (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Grech, M., et al.: Human Factors in the Maritime Domain. CRC Press, Boca Raton (2008)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Weick, K.E.: Sensemaking in Organizations. Sage, Thousand Oaks (1995)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Kilskar, S.S. et al.: Sensemaking and resilience in safety-critical situations: a literature review. In: European Safety and Reliability Conference. Taylor & Francis Group (2018)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Maitlis, S., Christianson, M.: Sensemaking in organizations: taking stock and moving forward. Acad. Manag. Ann. 8(1), 57–125 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Snook, S.A.: Friendly fire: The accidental shootdown of U.S. Black Hawks over Northern Iraq, pp. 1–257. Princeton University Press (2000)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Ware, C.: Information Visualization, 3rd edn., pp. 1–30. Morgan Kaufmann, Boston (2013)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Sandberg, J., Tsoukas, H.: Making sense of the sensemaking perspective: its constituents, limitations, and opportunities for further development. J. Organ. Behav. 36, S6–S32 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Maitlis, S., Sonenshein, S.: Sensemaking in crisis and change: inspiration and insights from Weick (1988). J. Manag. Stud. 47(3), 551–580 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Weick, K.E.: Enacted sensemaking in crisis situations. J. Manag. Stud. 25(4), 305–317 (1988)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Wicks, D.: Institutionalized mindsets of invulnerability: differentiated institutional fields and the antecedents of organizational crisis. Organ. Stud. 22(4), 659–692 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Kayes, D.C.: The 1996 Mount Everest climbing disaster: the breakdown of learning in teams. Hum. Relat. 57(10), 1263–1284 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Dunbar, R.L.M., Garud, R.: Distributed knowledge and indeterminate meaning: the case of the Columbia shuttle flight. Organ. Stud. 30(4), 397–421 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Vendelø, M.T.: Disasters in the sensemaking perspective: the Præstø Fjord accident. In: Disaster Research, pp. 190–202. Routledge (2015)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Weick, K.E.: Reflections on enacted sensemaking in the Bhopal disaster. J. Manag. Stud. 47(3), 537–550 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Weick, K.E.: The vulnerable system: an analysis of the tenerife air disaster. J. Manag. 16(3), 571–593 (1990)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Weick, K.E.: The collapse of sensemaking in organizations: the mann gulch disaster. Administrative Science Quarterly pp. 628–652 (1993)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Weick, K.E.,Sutcliffe,K.M.: Hospitals as cultures of entrapment: a reanalysis of the Bristol Royal Infirmary. Calif. Manag. Rev. 45(2), 73–84 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Fahim, M., Rezanejad, A.: An introduction to embodied cognition. Int. J. Lang. Linguist. 2(4), 283–289 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Niedenthal, P.M.: Embodying emotion. Science 316(5827), 1002–1005 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Cunliffe, A., Coupland, C.: From hero to villain to hero: making experience sensible through embodied narrative sensemaking. Hum. Relat. 65(1), 63–88 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Roberts, B.: Recasting Odysseus: embodied sensemaking among seafaring leaders. Aust. J. Maritime Ocean Affairs 10(1), 19–34 (2018)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Prison, J., Dahlman, J., Lundh, M.: Ship sense-striving for harmony in ship manoeuvring. WMU J. Maritime Affairs 12(1), 115–127 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Prison, J., Lützhöft, M., Porathe, T.: Ship sense - What is it and how does one get it? RINA, Human Factors in Ship Design. Safety and Operation, London (2009)Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Porathe, T., Prison, J., Man, Y.: Situation awareness in remote control centres for unmanned ships. Human Factors in Ship Design & Operation, 26–27 February, London, UK (2014)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of DesignNTNU Norwegian University of Science and TechnologyTrondheimNorway

Personalised recommendations