## 3 Data Analysis Results and User Feedback
### Review of ZKI Products
The ACs could combine the flood extent layer with a wide range of authoritative geodata available to them through the map capabilities of LCMS. Records show that this has been realized by the practitioners in the trial. In this case, receiving information purely on the flood extent in shorter response times (in simulation time: Scenario block 3 of the trial) outweighs the additional support through professionally pre-interpreted information in form of maps that came with the drawback of multiple hours delay in provisioning time (in simulation time: Beginning of scenario block 4 of the trial) due to the additional expense of value-adding. This drawback of using the map products compared to the flood extent layer is clearly reflected in the efficiency evaluation (Figure 5, usability). In the case of 3D maps, the lack of water depth in the flood extent layer that was also integrated in the map product again negatively affects its application potential in CM as 3D content was limited to terrain and buildings only. The presumed additional support provided by a 3D view for external practitioners could not be approved as the involved practitioner teams in the trial were all locally based. Overall, the support of module ZKI for the CM functions of needs assessment and damage assessment still scored predominantly in the positive range, with the latter being slightly better assessed (Figure 5, CM function support). In line with that, it was concluded also by the trial innovation line assessment that overall module ZKI enabled a common understanding of the magnitude of the crisis and improved support capacities by providing a large-scale, continuous and unambiguous picture of the flood's geographic extent. Therewith, ZKI contributed greatly to situational awareness. Further, the module demonstrated its benefit to speed up interagency information sharing by supporting net-centric data exchange and to strengthen informed decision making, e.g., on an effective deployment of human resources and equipment. In view of the assessment of ZKI differentiated only by product type, a very ambivalent pattern of opinions emerges. The diverging stacked bar charts shown in Figures 5 and 15 are based on a summary of all ratings regardless of the user's affiliation. Separating the results by AC/CT affiliation  
Figure 5: Results for the variables usability, learning, utility, and crisis management (CM) function support for module ZKI differentiated by product type. instead, the resulting graphs provide better insights on the individual needs of each user group of the ZKI module. The differentiated approach distinguishing between affiliations draws on a very small sample size and does not allow for generic statements. It reveals, however, that results must be seen in context of the trial scenario and especially specific user roles, tasks, and the ability to quickly acquire new skills from the condensed training and apply them in practice. The results presented in Figure 6 range from almost exclusively consenting appraisal (Figure 6, AC Fire services) to predominantly critical opinions (Figure 6, AC Medical services). Also, some contrasting opinions within one team can be observed (Figure 6, AC Police) or the distinct preference for one of the products to support a certain task verified (Figure 6, Evacuation Table). This indicates that the perceived added value from the ZKI products in CM is very task dependent. By providing multiple sequential products as demonstrated in the trial, one can complement the other to reach a wide variety of the heterogenic target group. It further strengthens the service-oriented approach of ZKI to focus on customized products through personal consultancy. Figure 6: Exemplary results of individual participant groups for module ZKI differentiated by product type.