How crisis groups turn chaos into coordinated action
When formal systems fall short in a crisis, volunteers often step in and organize quickly. New research by Postdoctoral Researcher Ricardo Coelho da Silva shows how loosely connected groups turn confusion into coordinated action by starting with what they have and learning as they go.
When the COVID-19 pandemic disrupted global supply chains, thousands of volunteers came together online to design and deliver essential medical supplies. These emergent response groups operated without formal hierarchies, yet many scaled rapidly and delivered real impact.
A new study from the House of Innovation and collaborators examines how this was possible. Looking at eight large volunteer groups across Europe and the US, the researchers show that success did not come from careful prior planning. Instead, it came from taking action. Specifically, from making do with whatever resources were available at the time.
“People often think you need clear plans and structures to coordinate large efforts,” says Ricardo Coelho da Silva, postdoctoral researcher at the House of Innovation. “But in these groups, coordination emerged through action. By trying things out, participants created shared understanding step by step.”
The study focuses on a concept called “bricolage,” a simple idea with practical implications. It means using what you already have, even if it was not designed for the task. During the pandemic, this included turning everyday materials into face shields or repurposing existing networks to organize production.
At first, these groups faced extreme uncertainty. Members were often not sure about what goals to prioritize, or even which resources were useful. The researchers describe this as “equivocality,” or a situation where multiple interpretations seem equally valid.
From confusion to coordination
Instead of waiting for clarity, participants acted. They built prototypes, shared ideas, and tested solutions in real time. These small actions helped reduce uncertainty by showing what worked and what did not.
For example, a simple face shield design made from easily available materials quickly became a shared reference point. It helped align efforts, clarified goals, and showed which resources mattered. In this way, action created direction.
“Each experiment acted like a signal,” says Coelho da Silva. “It helped people understand the situation and align with others. Coordination didn’t come first, it followed from doing.”
This process also helped the groups grow. Early solutions attracted more volunteers and resources, which in turn created new possibilities. While this sometimes increased confusion, it also expanded what the groups could achieve.
Why this matters for practitioners
The findings challenge a common assumption: that improvisation limits growth. In these crisis settings, the opposite was true. Bricolage helped groups scale quickly by lowering barriers to participation and enabling fast decisions.
For practitioners, the message is clear. In uncertain environments (e.g. crisis, startup phase, or during rapid change), waiting for perfect information can slow progress. Starting with available resources and testing ideas in practice can help teams align faster.
At the same time, the study highlights a balance. Too many ideas or resources can overwhelm coordination. Successful groups managed this by gradually introducing simple structures, such as regular meetings or shared guidelines, while keeping the bias for action.
In short, organization can emerge from doing, not just from planning. And in fast-moving situations, that can make all the difference.
Read the full study: “Bricolage as enacted sensemaking in emergent response groups.”
