The choice of communication modes also depends on the emergency management concept. The possibility to exchange larger volumes of data inevitably increases the risk of micro-management of response from "outside". The fax allows the easy forwarding of raw data, shifting decisions from the emergency manager at the site of an event to a higher level such as the headquarters of a relief organization.

Emergency managers are managers, not reporters. The general tendency is delegation of decisions to the lowest appropriate level rather than encouraging micro-management by decision-makers at headquarters. The reason can be illustrated with the following typical example:

An emergency manager, coordinating response at the site of an earthquake, receives requests for emergency shelter materials from different sides: The representative of the municipality estimates the need for tents to 500 units. The local Red Cross team estimates the requirements at 50 units, and the civil defence asks for 5000 tents.

Others specify different types of tents: One source of information recommends family tents for an average family size of 6 persons, another group states that family tent size should be 12 persons, given the local predominance of large families. A demand for largest possible tents, accommodating everybody, independently of family situation - is very much contradicted by the leader of a religious community. Each request and view is presented on a paper. The coordinator is tempted to simply fax all these raw inputs to the institution dispatching relief goods from abroad.

However: Only the emergency manager on-site can establish the actual needs, as he or she is the only one who has direct access to the sources of the requests and can really assess the situation. Only the person in direct contact with the locally involved partners can know, why the requests are so different from each other:

The municipality might have the best knowledge of population figures, the red cross is already deploying tents from existing own stocks, and the request from the civil defence commander includes anticipated accommodation needs of an army unit possibly brought in from its base in a neighbouring province. Similarly, the on-site coordinator can interpret the local situation governing the appropriate size of tents and know enough about restrictions, which local social structures and culture may impose in respect to acceptable forms of temporary accommodation.

The decision maker at headquarter levels cannot decide on the appropriateness of the requests. What he would need would be a consolidated request from the field, indicating quantity and type of tents needed. He or she will also need information about the logistics capacity on site, how the site can best be reached, and what transport and storage capacities are available along the chain of transport. The question, if the interpretation of data by the on-site manager was correct, can be discussed in the de-briefing after the operation, and lessons can be learned from this.

Lesson learned: Telecommunication links need to correspond to the emergency management concept of those responding. Increasing the capacity does not necessarily facilitate the decision-making process but encourages micro-management." Passing the buck" is not a solution, when an emergency situation requires rapid and appropriate response from far away.