**8. The BOSS effect**

As shown in **Table 14**, the effects of the BOSS are summarized in terms of quality, cost (burden), and period (working time).

#### **Administrator**

• As the person in charge of the command confirms, the next work to be done is precise, and if there is a shortage or mistake in the work I did, it will be pointed out immediately and as a position to engage in the shelter for the first time.

**8.1 Improvement in work quality by increasing the number of works**

*Disaster Management Process Approach: Case Study by BOSS for Disaster Response under…*

**8.2 Reduction of the burden on the operator (C: Cost)**

**8.3 Reduction of working time (D: Period)**

overall working time in the BOSS team.

the effects and issues of using the BOSS.

**9. Conclusions**

workflow.

**125**

In both the 1st and 2nd cases, the BOSS team performed more tasks than the manual team as a whole. In both cases, the BOSS team spent less time doing the same job with multiple people. Since many tasks were performed, it is considered that the number of functions that could be performed increased by sharing the jobs efficiently. Also, many jobs might have been performed because there were few omissions of works. For the BOSS team only, members' tasks include checking the status of the toilet and setting up an emergency room, which will improve the

The use of the BOSS clarified the instructions of the leader. Under clear instructions, it is considered that the staff can move quickly, and it is unlikely that there will be a difference in movement due to experience. Therefore, it will be easier to grasp the workflow of the whole work, and it will be possible for even inexperienced leaders to give appropriate instructions. Thus, the BOSS workflow, which is the axis of action, can be useful and can reduce the mental burden on the operator.

The BOSS team used fewer work-hours to complete their tasks. This is because the number of people engaged in one work is reduced by appropriately sharing the work under the leader's direction, and the work as a team is small. Also, in both cases, the BOSS team spent less time doing no work and had less rework. By eliminating waste and increasing efficiency, the overall working time could be shortened. The BOSS team's general work-hours for evacuation centers were shorter for the first experiment and longer in the second experiment than for the manual team. By doing so, the BOSS team achieved a reduction in overall working time, even though it does more work than the manual team. Although in the first appearance, the manual team had previously trained in the same workflow and remembered the workflow well, so it was impossible to see the effect of shortening the

This study compared and verified the disaster response process management system BOSS activities, or without BOSS, the manual for evacuation shelter management operations under COVID-19. Two experiments were conducted to clarify

As a result, by utilizing the BOSS, the leader gave instructions to the members to clarify their roles. The members shared the work efficiently without duplication, waiting for instructions, and what to do next. The BOSS team had little waiting time (retention) without hesitation about what to do, there were few omissions of work, and many kinds of works were completed during the experiment time compared to the manual team. The leader's remarks were instructed and commanded for the members. It was also found that even young leaders who have no actual disaster response experience can take the minimum response by checking the BOSS

**(Q: Quality)**

*DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.94954*

quality of life of evacuees.


Visitor


#### **Table 13.** *Opinions of participants.*


**Table 14.** *Opinions of the BOSS effect.* *Disaster Management Process Approach: Case Study by BOSS for Disaster Response under… DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.94954*
