Introduction

critical incident technique (or CIT) is a set of procedures used for

collecting direct observations of human behavior that have critical
significance and meet methodically defined criteria. These observations
are then kept track of as incidents, which are then used to solve practical
problems and develop broad psychological principles. A critical incident
can be described as one that makes a contribution—either positively or
negatively—to an activity or phenomenon. Critical incidents can be
gathered in various ways, but typically respondents are asked to tell a
story about an experience they have had.

CIT is a flexible method that usually relies on five major areas. The first
is determining and reviewing the incident, then fact-finding, which
involves collecting the details of the incident from the participants. When
all of the facts are collected, the next step is to identify the issues.
Afterwards a decision can be made on how to resolve the issues based
on various possible solutions. The final and most important aspect is the
evaluation, which will determine if the solution that was selected will
solve the root cause of the situation and will cause no further problems.

History
The studies of Sir Francis Galton are said to have laid the foundation for
the critical incident technique, but it is the work of Colonel John C.
Flanagan, that resulted in the present form of CIT. [1] Flanagan defined
the critical incident technique as:

[A] set of procedures for collecting direct observations of human

behaviour in such a way as to facilitate their potential usefulness in
solving practical problems and developing broad psychological principles
... By an incident is meant any specifiable human activity that is
sufficiently complete in itself to permit inferences and predictions to be
made about the person performing the act. To be critical the incident
must occur in a situation where the purpose or intent of the act seems
fairly clear to the observer and where its consequences are sufficiently
definite to leave little doubt concerning its effects.[2]
Flanagan's work was carried out as part of the Aviation Psychology
Program [3] of the United States Army Air Forces during World War II,
where Flanagan conducted a series of studies focused on differentiating
effective and ineffective work behaviors. Flanagan went on to
found American Institutes for Research continuing to use the critical
incident technique in a variety of research.[4] Since then CIT has spread
as a method to identify job requirements, develop recommendations for
effective practices, and determine competencies for a vast number of
professionals in various disciplines. In particular, it has been used in
service research.[5]

Principal uses
CIT can be used in training, systems design and accident investigation.
It is an integral part of large scale task analysis. It identifies the most
costly happenings in a complex environment where people and
machines work as a system. Its origin in investigating pilot errors in
wartime,[2]328 et seq and other life-and-death situations, means it identifies
top priorities in a man-machine system or other complex action-oriented
situation. These priorities then feed into procedures for selection and
training, and also (continuing the pilot example) into cockpit instrument
design.[6][7]

In healthcare, CIT is used in situations where direct examination of

clinical staff and researchers can help them better understand their roles
and help them solve practical problems. CIT allows clinical staff to better
understand their roles in the clinical setting. Another advantage is that it
helps them gain better knowledge about their interactions with patients
and other clinicians. It also helps clinical staff better understand their
practice from a variety of roles (e.g., physician, nurse, clinical educator,
nurse informatician, faculty member). In healthcare research, CIT can be
a good resource in identifying the experiences of a patient in the
healthcare setting, exploring the dimensions of patient–provider
interactions and determining patient responses to illnesses and
treatments.

CIT is also widely used in organizational development as a research

technique for identification of organizational problems and is suitable for
knowledge management in project-based organizations.[8] CIT is used as
an interview technique, where the informants are encouraged to talk
about unusual organizational incidents instead of answering direct
questions. Using CIT deemphasizes the inclusion of general opinions
about management and working procedures, instead focusing on
specific incidents.
In market research, CIT has been used more frequently in the last ten
years. Although the CIT method first appeared in the marketing literature
thirty years ago, the major catalyst for use of the CIT method in service
research appears to have been a Journal of Marketing study conducted
by Bitner, Booms, and Tetreault (1990) that investigated sources of
satisfaction and dissatisfaction in service encounters. Since the Bitner et
al. article, nearly 200 CIT studies have appeared in marketing-related
literature.[9]

CIT has also been used in studies of information-seeking behavior.[10][11]

[12]

The employment of CIT may also allow construction of typical scenarios

of user behavior when they interact with various technologies including
information systems. For this, researchers should solicit:

1. the cause, description and outcome of a critical incident;

2. users' feelings and perceptions of the situation;
3. actions taken during the incident;
4. changes (if any) in their future behavior.
The typical scenarios may be presented visually as a diagram or
a causal model.[13]

Advantages and disadvantages

By identifying possible problems associated with major user–system or
product complications, CIT recommendations try to ensure that the same
type of situations do not result in a similar loss. There are both
advantages and disadvantages to using this method, as shown below.
[citation needed]
Overall, however, CIT has been demonstrated to be a sound
method since first presented in 1954.[citation needed] Relatively few
modifications have been suggested to the method in the more than 50
years since it was introduced, and only minor changes have been made
to Flanagan's original approach, indicating reasonable robustness.
Advantages

 Flexible method that can be used to improve multi-user systems.

 Data is collected from the respondent's perspective and in his or her
own words.
 Does not force the respondents into any given framework.
 Identifies even rare events that might be missed by other methods
which only focus on common and everyday events.
 Useful when problems occur but the cause and severity are not
known.
 Inexpensive and provides rich information.
 Emphasizes the features that will make a system particularly
vulnerable and can bring major benefits (e.g. safety).
 Can be applied using questionnaires or interviews.
 Easy to understand.
Disadvantages

 A first problem comes from the type of the reported incidents. The
critical incident technique will rely on events being remembered by
users and will also require the accurate and truthful reporting of them.
Since critical incidents often rely on memory, incidents may be
imprecise or may even go unreported.
 The method has a built-in bias towards incidents that happened
recently, since these are easier to recall.
 Respondents may not be accustomed to or willing to take the time to
tell (or write) a complete story when describing a critical incident.
 Since this method is based on incidents it does not say anything
about the everyday situation so it is not very representative.
References

1. ^ Flanagan, John C. Psychological Bulletin, Vol. 51, No. 4, July

1954.
2. ^ Jump up to:a b Page 327.
3. ^ "Charged with recruiting other psychologists, Dr. Flanagan was
asked to develop the Army Air Corp's program, and, by the end of
the war, he had overseen the commissioning of over 150
psychologists. Within its ranks were some of the finest
psychologists of the day, including five forthcoming presidents of
the American Psychological Association and 11 members of its
board of directors. Toward the close of the war, this group of
psychologists was involved not only in conducting research
regarding the selection and classification of aviators but was also
involved in developing training programs and human factors
engineering." http://www.apadivisions.org/division-19/publications/
newsletters/military/2014/04/aviation-psychology.aspx, paragraph
6
4. ^ A Timeline of AIR History, American Institutes for
Research http://www.air.org/page/air-history
5. ^ Lisch, Ralf (2014). Measuring Service Performance. Practical
Research for Better Quality. Routledge. pp. 147, 150–
152. ISBN 9781472411914.
6. ^ Fitts P.M. & Jones R.E 1947. Psychological aspects of
instrument display: I. Analysis of 270 "pilot-error" experiences in
reading and interpreting aircraft instruments. U.S. Air Forces
Materiel Command, Report No. TSEAA-694-12A.
7. ^ Chapanis, Alphonse 1959. Research techniques in human
engineering. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins Press, Chapter 3, Methods
for the study of accidents and near-accidents.
8. ^ Haussner et al (2018). "Exploring Internationally Operated
Construction Projects through the critical incident
technique". Journal of Management in Engineering 34(5).
9. ^ Gremler's article in Journal of Service Research, Vol. 7, No. 1,
August 2004.
10. ^ "How senior managers acquire and use information in
environmental scanning" by Ethel Auster and Chun Wei Choo
(1996).
11. ^ "Information sources used by lawyers in problem-solving:
An empirical exploration" by Margaret Ann Wilkinson (2001).
12. ^ "When Is 'Enough' Enough? Modeling the Information-
Seeking and Stopping Behavior of Senior Arts Administrators" by
Lisl Zach (2004).
13. ^ Serenko, A. (2006). "The use of interface agents for email
notification in critical incidents". International Journal of Human-
Computer Studies 64(11): 1084–1098.