Skip to content


It’s The Minimum

2 comments

If you didn't have standards, this might be your first out engine.  Swan River, Queensland, Australia 2002

If you didn't have standards, this might be your first out engine. Swan Creek/Emu Creek Bushfire Brigade, Queensland, Australia 2002

Authentic Neapolitan pizzas are typically made with tomatoes and Mozzarella cheese.  Genuine Neapolitan pizza dough consists of high-protein wheat flour (type 0 or 00, or a mixture of both), natural Neapolitan yeast or brewer’s yeast, salt and water. The dough must be kneaded by hand or with a low-speed mixer. After the rising process, the dough must be formed by hand without the help of a rolling pin or other machine, and may be no more than 3 mm (⅛ in) thick. The pizza must be baked for 60–90 seconds in a 485 °C (905 °F) stone oven with an oak-wood fire.[4] When cooked, it should be crispy, tender and fragrant.

Those were just a few of the standards for an authentic Neapolitan pizza (published on Wikipedia), as recognized and protected by the Associazione Vera Pizza Napoletana.  Likewise, most of the things you take for granted in the world, with the exception of things like knock-off Rolexes, are constructed from materials meeting standards, are built to certain standards, and if they carry any kind of guarantee of quality or workmanship, must meet performance standards.

Unless your organization is living in a 1950’s time warp, the people in your community, when they call the fire department for help, expect help for many things that exceed the scope of “firefighting”.  Regardless of whether your community is staffed with a career or a volunteer department, there are increased expectations on the level of service being provided.  I can rationally argue the need for standards on a number of different levels.  I will, however, only provide you with this one today; it’s the minimum.

If you want to call yourself a firefighter, there are certain things you should be able to do.  If you cannot do these things, you run the risk of hurting yourself, not to mention others.  You also run the risk of making an emergency greater than it was when you arrived.  As a reasonable and prudent individual with a duty to act, you agree that your “job” (as a firefighter) entails certain knowledge, skills, and abilities to allow your organization the ability to advertise a product. What that product is in your jurisdiction could be limited to fighting fire or could be all-hazards, or anywhere in between.

Your community, in supporting the “fire department”, does so with the understanding that you are what you say you are.  The community defines that expectation; if their only expectation is that a group of bubbas show up to put out a fire when it occurs, then maybe you don’t need to meet a standard.  If that’s the case though, when insurance companies decide the risk is too great in your community, don’t be surprised when the citizenry can’t get coverage and they hang you (or your chief) in effigy at the town square.  And that may be getting off light.

Minimum standards, among other things, define.  Since a group of individuals representing different aspects of the world affected by a certain thing decided and agreed on a definition, and that group is recognized by the others affected by that thing, the definition becomes a standard.  I could write a standard on constructing nuclear plants and declare it the minimum standard, but since I have no authority or expertise in doing so, my standard would likely be considered meaningless and useless.

For those who aren’t in favor of standards, I’d suggest that it’s not that you aren’t in favor of standards, but what is in those standards and how they came to be.  If that’s the case, I’d say that before you make any proclamations on a standard being a “bad” standard, you seek to understand how that definition came to be and how it happens to be the minimum.  In many cases, I’d bet that you’d find that others wanted a much stricter or more restricting definition and the end result was what everyone on that committee agreed was acceptable for use or was prudent.

Like I tell the people who work with me, don’t complain about anything unless you tried to do something about it.  If you don’t like a standard, feel free to get involved.  But the long and short of it is this: standards exist for at least one primary reason, and that reason is to define what something is.  In the absence of any other meaningful definition, if something close fills that void, that standard will be the one that defines the subject matter.  You can be angry about it if you like, but if you don’t like it, change it.

In the meanwhile, if it’s an accepted standard, you can assume you’ll have to meet it.  You can say all day that you choose not to meet certain standards, but if you are like me, you will understand that to not do so will leave you open to a number of things, including liability.  The only way to escape it is to lay that decision on the people who are at that payscale: the politicians. But that’s a blog post for another day.

Stay safe and do the best you can with what you have.  But remember, the standard is what defines you.  If you have no standard, you have no definition, and in that case, a monkey can do your job.  Even pizzas are made to standards.  If having no standard is what your community believes to be okay, then know that you ultimately get what you pay for, and if your community doesn’t support a department with minimum expectations of members, they shouldn’t be surprised when everything within the city limits are a smoking ruin some weekend.

What Does It Take To Be A Firefighter Anyway?

2 comments

Being a firefighter is real work and not for the faint of heart. If dirt bothers you, go get another job.

We should make getting into the fire service at least as hard as trying to get into the NFL. If everyone wanted to be a firefighter when they were growing up, most of us also probably wanted to play football. The NFL has all kinds of hurdles to cross to get a job there: the Wonderlick, the combine, scouting, etc. In some fire departments, all you have to do is fog a mirror, and even then, I wonder if that is even a requirement.

When all hell has broke loose in our lives, who better to see than the fire department?  If the people we are recruiting can’t even solve the simplest of daily problems, what makes us think that at 0200 with the roof falling in on us that there will be sudden improvement in judgement and reasoning?  It again goes to my post of the other day about being cognizant of what we do and don’t know.  Some of these folks are so sure of what they think they know, that it makes them dangerous to those of us who know that we can’t possibly know everything.

Thus the survival instinct of the crustiest among us: situational awareness.  We know that with Murphy lurking around every corner and maintaining a skeptical eye on most every situation, we aren’t entirely surprised when things go wrong, because we figured that they would anyway.  It’s like some of the newer guys I talk to think that just because they studied it at the Fire Academy, it is going to go like the plan at every incident.  I don’t know how you teach someone to be a little less optimistic, but if we can figure out how to do that, we might get some of the problem licked.

But that isn’t all; there’s something to be said about the mentality of “heavy lifting” that escapes some of our new hires around the nation.  They seem to think that the problem is solved when we arrive and that it’s all going to be blood and glory.  Then they become disenchanted when they’re mopping up vomit off of Mrs. Smith’s kitchen floor after the rig has taken her to the hospital.  Our job requires us to tough it up and do what is necessary, whether we like it or not.

A little less bitching and a little more effort would go a long way.  Your truck isn’t running perfectly?  Well, sorry: For years I held apparatus together with duct tape and superglue.  Suck it up and do your job.  If something doesn’t work, roll with it.  I took a lot of pride in knowing that I could do whatever job necessary with whatever I had with me, or at least knowing where I could make something work in the meanwhile.  Nowadays it seems like if the least little thing goes wrong, people are throwing their hands in the air and giving up.

So here’s what it comes down to: We must figure out a way to test individuals for resiliency and determination, while also measuring their ability to understand that if they want the glory job, they should have probably worked harder for that baseball scholarship. There is no glory in our job.  Put away the wacker lights and the Bad-Ass Firefighter t-shirt and know your role.  If you aren’t out running calls, be grateful that you get to have a night of sleep and that no one became homeless last night because their house burned.  And if glory and fame is what you want, go form a posse and hang out with Lindsey Lohan or something.  We’ve got a job to do.

Dedication to Customer Service

7 comments

How dedicated to serving your public are you? We seem to pay a certain amount of lip service to “serving the public, 24/7, 365″ in our mission statements. I always hear how proud we are to “serve”, but do we draw the line at putting out fires? Carting them to a medical facility? Or are you in an organization who will put someone back in bed or stop a leak until a plumber can get there?

I hear about all-hazards response all the time, but do we draw the line at “hazards”, or do we raise the bar a little? While I don’t advocate anyone in our jurisdiction calling 9-1-1 because they need help completing their tax return, if a situation really does affect our customer that they had to dial that number, aren’t we charged with understanding how this is perceived as an emergency before saying we won’t help?

My wife owns a flooring company. While a floor product delivery may not constitute an emergency issue to you, to her company, when a customer needs a product someplace at sometime, if it isn’t there, it creates issues that may effectively stop the completion of the project, be it a remodel or new construction.  This week, a delivery had to go from the manufacturer directly to the project location in another state.  To the trucking company, excellent customer service was a non-issue: After neglecting to send the materials in a truck with a lift gate, they decided, “Oh well, you’ll just have to wait until we can get a truck to do that later.”  Later being three days later.

They had a pretty blase attitude about the whole thing, despite the fact that they were contracted to deliver something, they had an obligation to deliver it at a certain time and place, and being the subject matter experts on shipping, should have probably realized that they weren’t going to just hand-carry 3900 pounds of product off the truck (especially since they had to use a fork-lift to get it on there). Then to compound the issue, they weren’t very careful about how the product was loaded and they damaged some of the pieces. Again, “Oh, well…”

Dedication to customer service requires a “can do” attitude; it might seem to be outside your scope of practice, but depending on what your marketing strategy happens to be – and make no mistake about it, your mission statement and vision is your marketing strategy when you are fighting for ever-dwindling tax funds or donations – your organization will be faced with very specific situations in which you will have to stretch your resources to “make it happen”.  In our case, we rented a truck, picked up the material from the trucking company and delivered it ourselves.  The customer was completely thrilled.

In my wife’s company, we hope our efforts will be recognized in customer loyalty and a willingness to pass the word on. In emergency services, we hope that the care we take with each challenge is shared loudly when budget time or the annual fundraiser comes around.  You can draw the line where you choose, but in these times of limited funds, can you afford to ignore the added value of extraordinary customer service? It is extra effort that will distance you from the rest of the pack.  When a decision must be made between funding an analysis of the migratory path of earthworms in your community and cutting firefighters, that’s ammo you can’t afford to ignore. The next time you are drooling over your wish list and realizing you can’t afford things, remember the choices you made as to where you drew that customer service line.

Here’s To Freethinkers

1 comment

A long time ago, a bunch of guys weren’t happy with the status quo.  They felt like the current situation was unfair, they didn’t have any say in the way things were going, and the ultimate authority was some guy who was appointed to his position and wasn’t necessarily the most qualified individual.

So, since there really wasn’t an existing model for what they desired, they developed a vision.  They committed the vision to paper, they sent it around for buy-in and enough people found their option to be better than the current one, so they chose to follow that dream.

After that, enough of them were so committed to that vision that they literally laid their lives down to move the cause forward.  When all was said and done, they prevailed, then had the chance to stop, look around, and then say, “Now what?”  We still ask that question today, 234 years later.  It’s a long running experiment, and its come a long way, but we have a long way still to go.  God Bless the United States of America.  Happy Birthday, Feliz Compleanos, and all that other stuff.  We love you and we’re glad we could be here to celebrate it with you.  Sometimes we’re a mess, but when the day is done, we’re still Americans and damn proud of it.  God Bless you, we wouldn’t have it any other way.

FHZ Does “Sharing The Wealth” – First Due Blog Carnival

1 comment

Chief Harry DiezelI can’t begin to name all the people who have shared their knowledge with me over the years.  I have probably mentioned a time or two that I was fortunate to have been given an early education in the “family business”.  While I have never fought a fire with my father nor my grandfather, I have heard the stories, and in fact, a few of the firefighters who have fought fire for both of them actually moved to Hilton Head Island and fought fire for me.  I joked with one of our family friends who fit this description that he had the “honor of being a subordinate to three generations of the Mayers family”.  If you can’t take that kind of love in a firehouse, you are doomed.

At every opportunity, I formalized my training by attending as many fire schools as possible with some of the finest firefighters in the nation.  I have had the chance to talk HAZMAT over beers with Greg Noll, and likewise talk Rescue with the late, great Chief Ray Downey.  As a young officer I got to hang out with Chief Brunacini for the day when he was teaching on the Island.  And later in my career, I have had the amazing honor of working side by side as a committee officer with Carl Goodson, one of the finest leaders I have ever met.  I have had many other, lesser known, but quite inspirational and educated instructors and mentors along the line.  I have also worked directly for and with chiefs of local departments who continue to share their immense knowledge and insight with me.

Of all of these, however, until I met Chief Harry Diezel, who at the time was the Chief of the Virginia Beach Fire Department, I didn’t really have a vision of what my future in the fire service would be. What’s funny about it is that he was able to inspire a young officer candidate in sixteen hours of a seminar, by exposing to him to the potential of emergency services from an entirely different model than ever envisioned.

I have always had a strong work ethic and I thought I was a decent officer.  While was insistent on my crew being well prepared and well trained, in my early years as a company officer, my battles with management were often visible, bloody, and engaged head-on with no regard to the bigger picture.  Think “irresistible force meets immovable object”.  I knew I was good, I had swagger, and I had total confidence.  I was moving up the food chain rapidly because I was a John Wayne, no-nonsense, this-is-the-way-to-do-it kind of officer and in the ‘80’s, this was the personification of the model company officer.

As you also might have suspected, in the ‘80’s the notion of taxpayers as “customers” in the fire service was not widely accepted.  In fact, it was meeting pretty serious resistance, as it still does in certain areas.  I was no exception to the norm.  When it came to dealing with the public, I enjoyed delivering the emergency service, but as far as I was concerned, if you weren’t with us, you were against us.  After all, as taxpayers, you don’t have a choice in how emergency services are provided, do you?  If an issue came up in regard to providing fire protection, our take was, “Just listen to us, we know what we are doing, and we’ll tell you how to do it correctly”.

So when I had a chance to sit in a room over two days with Chief Diezel and learn about “paradigms” (BEFORE they became a cheap buzzword) and to learn about thinking with new perspective (again, before “outside the box” became clichéd), it was revolutionary.  When we talked about political strategy, it was fresh air and realization of a whole new approach toward selling service delivery.  When he suggested we read (and understand) “The Art of War”, not as a study in warcraft but as a guide for strategic living, it was before anyone else was suggesting any of these options.

Looking back on it, the things we talked about that weekend were shown to us as being “fresh” ideas ten and even twenty years later.  In some communities, when I come in and discuss a “vision for emergency services”, sometimes I get blank stares.  When I ask an officer candidate in another department what he or she sees in the future of emergency services, and they answer, “New trucks” or “more people”, I’m wondering why someone hasn’t tried to get them to see that our industry is affected globally, not just at city hall.

Harry got at least this one officer to embrace change, to accept that there might be alternatives to what we perceived as being the sole answer, and gave me the spark to explore and understand.  When I had the veil of ignorance lifted, it was like an entirely new beginning to my career.  I took classes on psychology and sociology to better understand the people both in the organization and in the community that I would have to motivate.  I enrolled in programs that were sponsored by the chamber of commerce and attended seminars offered to private businesses, and began to serve on boards and panels.  I realized in the ‘80’s that networking was a key element in political survival and marketing your organization wasn’t a bad thing.

Of all things, Chief Diezel got me to see that people do have a choice.  They may not have the ability to decide what agency comes when they call for help, but they have a choice in who is employed in that agency.  They also have a say in whether or not you get the apparatus and tools for the job, the fire stations to put the apparatus and tools in, and whether or not you get people to put on those resources.  These people also have the ability to put people in office who support you, and they can put people in office who will make your life miserable.

I have resolved to share this wealth with others through Firehouse Zen.  I have a vision of emergency services reborn, of revolutionary change in the way we operate and in the way that we engage the public to minimize injury and loss.  There are so many “leaders” out there who still have that veil over their eyes and have never understood the potential of a fully engaged organization.  Until they do, their department is condemned to being ordinary and marginal.  If there’s anything in this world I don’t want to be, it’s ordinary and marginal.

Learn to really be at the front of the pack and learn how to guide and push toward a goal of really effective service delivery.  More importantly, though, find someone who needs guidance, some young officer, and mentor them.  Give them the gift of vision and foresight and help them to prepare for all of the changes that will surely come in next generations.  Nothing you have gained is worth a cent if you don’t share it with others.

Thanks, Chief Diezel, for unwittingly inspiring me.  It was a great weekend.

Conflict

1 comment

web reddrive download 411Conflict is inevitable. Conflict will come regardless of how much you try to avoid it. Because it is inevitable, as a leader, you need to know how to deal with it. There are resources out there to point you in a direction, but really, experience is an excellent teacher as well, provided you work hard at understanding the underlying cause of conflict, how each of the parties involved in conflict create escalation, and how conflict can be effectively be used to direct issues.

I was listening today to a reflection on Lena Horne’s life today on NPR Radio; an author of a recent biography (James Gavin) spoke of her difficulties in having a mixed marriage in the Civil Rights Era.  While I don’t know if it was live or not, when someone like Dr. Maya Angelou calls in (and she did), it’s pretty interesting, especially when she calls to dispute the biographer’s take on the situation. I listened to her dissect most of what Gavin was saying about Lena’s struggles at that time. Judging from the silence, I could sense that Gavin was either humiliated, or coiling for a fight. After the commercial break, Gavin came back at the esteemed Dr. Angelou with a point-by-point rebuttal of her criticism of his own research. Did I see that coming? Certainly. When someone has just written a book on a subject and professes to have some  expertise on Lena Horne’s life is contradicted on National Radio, even by someone as reputable as Maya Angelou, you know he’s not going to let it stand. Have you ever experienced this same type of situation, either on the giving or the receiving end?

We can all sense tension when conflict is present. Some of us are more perceptive of the tension than others. The ability to be perceptive is an excellent asset to have. When another party is uncomfortable with a given situation, if you are in a position of negotiating with that individual, knowing how to defuse their anxieties can win them over. And as a leader, your job, like it or not, is a never-ending series of negotiations; getting people to do this, to not do that, inspiring people to create, talking people out of bad decisions, and any number of interactions. Thus, it is significantly valuable to be able to not only plan and direct actions, but to be able to read and interpret subtleties that translate into whether or not you are going to achieve success with those plans and directions.

Teaching someone how to intuitively perceive tension is like trying to explain that air has mass to a three-year old; we can feel it, but you can’t see it and it certainly defies explanation, so how do you explain that to them? We all know what it feels like in a tense situation, we can all agree on what it looks like when people are acting under conflict, but to be able to describe it to the uninitiated, well, it’s tough.

Likewise, when you are explaining to someone that they are obviously acting in a manner that is creating tension and conflict is nearly impossible. They may not feel like they are doing this and in fact, your suggesting it might just make the situation that much more untenable. I have found that when working with people like this, I even get defensive and sometimes say things that aren’t exactly contributing toward meaningful dialogue (actually, more often than not).

It sounds pretty cynical to suggest that you treat every exchange and interaction as a negotiation, but in reality, it is. I’m not suggesting that everyone you encounter is simply out for their own agenda, but realistically, you have no idea what the motivation is of the individual you are having an interaction with. I don’t care if it is your spouse, their motive may be entirely altruistic, but you have no way of knowing that for sure, unless you happen to be a mind-reader (which I am definitely not). Therefore, any interchange you approach must not just include what you expect to occur, but unless the return is apparent, explaining what they will get out of the situation will minimize the conflict as well, because in some cases, it leads toward more discussion of the benefits of the desired action and lends toward open communication.

Half of the problem, in fact, is determining what motivates the other party. Again, it may be obvious, and again, maybe not. Treating people with respect and understanding goes a long way toward finding out the needs of the people involved.

Another big factor in the equation is knowing conflict typology and by understanding how various types of conflicts evolve, using specific techniques to direct the argument toward a positive outcome for everyone involved. A great tool I have used is the University of Colorado Peace Study Center’s website “Beyond Intractability”, which gives you many resources to study conflict management and resolution.

Designed to aid students in studying conflict management, I have found the links to literature on the site extremely valuable. By understanding how misunderstandings occur, you can head off certain problems at the pass. Likewise, any texts you can find on strategic living, like The Art of War, The Book of Five Rings, or The Seven Characteristics of Successful People, are popular because they direct readers on methods to solve conflict. In reading The Art of War, you really have to get farther into the meaning of each interaction between adversaries, but in each situation, if you were to treat the “armies” in the context of opposing forces, you’ll find that there are a lot of lessons to be learned, as well as shared with your subordinates.

If you could come to work and engage others the entire day without conflict, there wouldn’t be any need for supervisors. Our job is to make sure that we further the mission and vision of the organization and that the resources allocated to make that happen are utilized to the most advantageous and efficacious means. Since the presence of more than two individuals means that at some point there will be a misunderstanding, a misinterpretation, or a disagreement on how to achieve those means, someone needs to be the deciding party. And even if you work alone, you are likely going to encounter friction and conflict with customers, suppliers, regulators, or others at some point. If you don’t take the time to understand what strategies solve problems in the most effective manner, you can go about finding these answers the hard way: by experimentation. All of these battles have been fought before, they are just framed differently. Don’t continually reinvent the wheel; learn about the classic conflicts, understand personality and motivation, and use the experience of many to leverage an advantage. By doing so you can develop excellent relationships, cause others to see you as a “uniter” rather than a “divider”, and impress everyone with your ability to solve problems.

International Influence

1 comment
Understanding other cultures sometimes involves local customs.  I like any local custom that involves drinking.  Me with the Australia GSE 2002.

Understanding other cultures sometimes involves local customs. I like any local custom that involves drinking. Me with the Australia GSE 2002.

We’re getting ready to leave the Sunshine State and return to the sunshine Island, but I’m reflecting on some moments from our psuedo-vacation. While Orlando has always impressed me as a fun place to go, I continue to be impressed with the number of opportunities I have while I am here to engage with people from all around the world.

I know that to many of us, the nightmares of traveling through “It’s A Small World” end up with our humming the tune for weeks, unable to get it out of our head, but this time around, I actually took the cotton out of my ears and tried to get some inspiration from the surroundings. I probably should have done that a long time ago, because it seems that with the political fight going on over immigration law right now, along with some of the less-than-cooperative international feelings toward one another, we seem to have lost sight of the fact that we are all human, we all endure many of the same hardships, and we also enjoy many of the same things. We really should try to spend a little more time thinking about our similarities rather than dwelling on what divides us.

I have said this many times about our interaction with each other in the emergency service community, but it seems that our little problems are just a small slice of a bigger societal issue, and that is, the reluctance of so many to observe some tolerance and willingness to appreciate other cultures, as well as concern for the things we hold valuable to us: our language and our own culture, our religious beliefs, our security as a nation, and our jobs, to name a few.

Over the years, I have learned that to know someone better is to understand their point of view better, and subsequently, for them to know us better also lends toward improved relations.  I have quoted this article before, but I continue to encourage it so you see what I am talking about; I really recommend that you read the article The Military Utility of Understanding Adversary Culture, by Montgomery McFate, as published in Joint Forces Quarterly.  Being open minded doesn’t mean you have to have a big campfire and sing Kumbaya (I’m not a Kumbaya, group-hug kind of guy).  It means that you maintain an open mind to how others think so that you can avoid misunderstandings and yes, this leads to improved relations, but also yes, it leads to improved ability to achieve your vision.

Lt. Tom over at the 12-Lead Prehospital EKG Blogspot and I were having a conversation the other day about Myers-Briggs personality profiles.  If you only know me from reading certain excerpts from Firehouse Zen, you might think I’m a crunchy granola kind of guy.  I’m not.  I test routinely as a Extroverted Intuitive Thinking Judger, an “ENTJ“.  I was joking about the “group hug” thing one time with someone and I think I said, “I’ll do one, but it’s only me sizing you up to see what I’ll have to do to kill you later”.  Okay, so that’s a little overboard, but the truth of the matter is, I have to resist my urge to tell people how and what to do all the time and allow people to find themselves.

My point is that not only do we have cultural differences that we can’t count on stereotypically, we can’t count on personality differences based on our perception either.  We have to seek to understand deeper before we can determine and judge.  In the process, we might also gain more information on subject matter that we didn’t have the answers to before.  As leaders, we need to listen more and talk less.  We need to use tools like the qualitative interview to get better understanding, to find out what motivates others to do or to act, and employ those motivators toward furthering our vision and the organizational goals.

Everyone brings something to the table, regardless of their ethnicity, their religion, their sex, or any other characteristic that makes them different from us.  Once you can peel back the differences and get to the heart of the issues, you can better find out how to solve our challenges and to employ the gifts others have toward making those challenges into opportunities.  If we can see what others see, it is one more set of eyes on the problem and will lend toward resolving conflict by showing people that if they win, we win.  Let’s all do a better job of working together to lighten our universal load.  As someone famous once said, “Be the change you wish to see in the world” (that would be Gandhi, if you didn’t know).  Have a safe day.

Tolerance

2 comments
Take the time to understand others' points of view.

Take the time to understand others' points of view.

There is a great deal of controversy on the internet at any given time, but the postings between people we should be working with are getting to the point where they are troubling.  Heated rhetoric, personal attacks, and just out and out anger are more commonplace now then ever.

I posted this on my Firefighter Nation profile the other day in response to some of the discussions I have seen on other blogs lately.  If there’s anything I learned from doing research, is that even the military has come to understand that if combatants don’t appreciate adversary culture, they are likely to make assumptions that could jeopardize their mission. As a result, enlightened commanders take the time to immerse themselves in cultural education and counterintelligence to fully comprehend the aspect in which an adversary may approach a problem.  As a born cynic, my first viewpoint was that the understanding could be utilized to manipulate weakness or strength to be used against one’s adversary, but as I have grown older (and hopefully, wiser), I have found that in conflict management, many arguments could be simply defused by just toning down the language and accepting others’ viewpoints for what they are: opposing viewpoints.

This text was shared with me by a friend some time ago, but I wanted share it with you all in the hopes that maybe it could provide some perspective:

(Paraphrased from Dhammavadaka):

Remember always that you are just a visitor here, a traveler passing through. Your stay is but short and the moment of your departure unknown.

Speak quietly and kindly and be not forward with either opinions or advice. If you talk much, this will make you deaf to what others say, and you should know that there are few so wise that they cannot learn from others.

Be near when help is needed, but far when praise and thanks are being offered.

Take small account of might, wealth and fame, for they soon pass and are forgotten. Instead, nurture love within you and and strive to be a friend to all. Truly, compassion is a balm for many wounds.

Treasure silence when you find it, and while being mindful of your duties, set time aside, to be alone with yourself.

Cast off pretense and self-deception and see yourself as you really are.

Despite all appearances, no one is really evil. They are led astray by ignorance. If you ponder this truth always you will offer more light, rather then blame and condemnation.

Maybe some of you will take this for what it is worth and be a little less likely to fight with one another. Maybe you will continue to disregard any advice toward making peace with your brother firefighters and EMTs. But maybe if some of us kept our mouths shut and listened more, we might learn something. And further, maybe we need to be tolerant with some of the newbies and try to encourage their learning.

There is always a place for understanding the culture and approach of others, because you can then frame your discussion in terms which they can understand.  Be more open to ideas and accepting of others, and in the end, you will reach them because you can appreciate where they are coming from and they will appreciate that you took their sides under consideration.

Mixing EMS and The Fire Service

14 comments
Two of Hilton Head Island Fire & Rescue's ten advanced life support medic units.

Two of Hilton Head Island Fire & Rescue's ten advanced life support medic units.

When I hear anyone suggest that the merger of fire and EMS is a mistake because “firefighters lack the skills to provide paramedic care”, I am highly insulted.

When I hear the ex-chief of a metropolitan department regretting decisions to bring medical providers and fire services together, I wonder aloud how he can continue to stomach the fact that it isn’t the inmiscible nature of these professions that caused the problem but the culture that the “leaders” of these organizations permitted to continue and encourage.

I admit that I know people with what could be termed the “fire” mentality and those with the “EMS” mentality.  But these individuals seem to be the minority now, rather than the majority.  Fortunately, I work with a lot of people who have the “Fire & EMS” mentality; people who are open to the belief we can do both well, we can exceed at the skills, we can meet our customers’ needs, and we can enjoy the diversity that having two “jobs” rolled into one provides on a daily basis.

I happen to work in an organization that merged fire and EMS together in 1993.  Prior to that, the two fire departments provided first responder service to our community to supplement the response of our local rescue squad.  Ultimately, with the merger, we took all three of these agencies and combined them into an outstanding example of emergency medical service delivery.  EVERY line employee is required to be at the MINIMUM a nationally registered EMT-Basic and of those personnel, over 40 of them are National Registry Paramedics as well.  This doesn’t count each of our chief and administrative officers who were all certified EMTs as well, and also doesn’t count our Training Division officers, who are both NREMT Paramedics as well.  Our organization provides a highly-recognized service to this world-class resort community and has incorporated 12-lead ECG monitoring and interpretation along with telemetry to reinforce our STEMI recognition program, among other programs like Island-wide AED promotion and education, public CPR and First Aid programs, car seat installation, and many, many other efforts.  I honestly work with some of the most outstanding EMS personnel in the nation and I’d be honored to let them work on anyone in my family, which is good, because I live in this community as well.

I have had it with anyone who suggests that EMS should be the exclusive domain of the third-party providers, especially since, with rare exception, a good number of these “non-fire service” providers don’t seem to provide any better of a service than the fire department EMS providers.  In fact, I know that our agency is an excellent EMS provider and is right now striving to be more than just excellent, but to be “state-of-the-art”.  With leaders like Lt. Tom over at the EMS 12-Lead ECG Blog, and Pete at the Star of Life EMS legal blog, we have a very good chance of putting ourselves in the position of being innovators and setters of the gold standard.

I would never suggest that fire-based EMS is the ONLY solution, but there are a few dinosaurs out there who continue to insist that EMS can only be effectively provided by non-fire department providers.  Apparently, stuffing themselves in their too-tight BDUs and hanging out at the local donut shop has occluded some sort of cerebral perfusion.  I hope they are watching carefully as the rest of us, the people who desire to have community-based EMS delivered by competent and caring providers, regardless of agency affiliation, kick them to the curb.

Your agency can only be as good as the personnel you retain; if you continue to recruit people who can’t do the job, the community shouldn’t be surprised if the situation won’t work.  Volunteer or career, you get what you pay for, and if the community doesn’t invest in good training, good equipment, good leadership, and good methods of keeping personnel, they shouldn’t be surprised if all they get is a crappy EMS system.

Almost Good Enough

1 comment
Pseudoladder.  Could pass as a truck company in some places.

Pseudoladder. Could pass as a truck company in some places.

What does it mean to be “good enough”? Is being good enough sufficient to meet the needs of our customers? Is it good enough to meet safety requirements? Is being “good enough” good enough to keep civilians from being killed, much less firefighters?

When we establish a standard, the document is a minimum definition of what is “good enough”.  While standards may prove irksome to people, those standards keep what is featured in the attached picture from being termed a “truck company” in some communities.  When we have standards it keeps the old “five bubbas, a pound hound and a pickup truck” example that I like to use from time to time from being called an “urban search and rescue task force”.

As an officer, and more accurately, a leader, what is “good enough” for you to proclaim that title?  Is it a minimum standard of education and experience?  Or was it that you had the lowest social security number?  Or even worse, was it because you are a “nice guy”?  That would be the ol’ elected standard, in some places.

In most businesses, unless you are related to the boss by blood or marriage, there are certain standards required for achieving the pinnacle of success in your company.  It may very well have been that you were the person who lasted the longest, but chances are that you had some kind of a spark of leadership somewhere if someone decided to put you in charge.  Fogging a mirror might not be the only criteria, but if you fogged it the best, maybe that was the deciding factor.

As a leader in emergency services, “good enough” gets personnel injured or killed.  ”Good enough” costs the public millions of dollars in waste.  ”Good enough” is the price for an annual fire loss that leads all industrialized nations.  So long as we continue to settle for the status quo, “good enough” is good enough.

If you fail to recognize that just being good enough isn’t, take this as a call to achieve more than that.  By establishing vision, promoting core values, declaring a mission and goals, and doing something to tie all those things together, you take your team from existing to succeeding.   By seeking innovation and more effective practices, we strive for excellence.  By observing the mistakes of others and instead of ridiculing those people, learning constructively from their experience, we avoid having to make the hard (and painful) mistakes ourselves.

No one reading this probably feels like “good enough” is the answer to anything; by reading this, it shows you are probably interested in motivating yourself and your team and are looking for answers.  If anything, be reassured, “good enough” has killed and injured more of us than any one factor, by way of heart attacks, falls, drownings, vehicle accidents, and any other number of causes of firefighter deaths.  It shows itself in complacency and in acceptance that what the current situation is cannot be altered.  I challenge you to look into your soul and wonder if by standing around and doing nothing, you were leading, or simply accepting your role in the line.

Be excellent and strive for being the best.  It will keep you and your crew alive and it will better serve the public you are charged with protecting.

Values

2 comments
Hilton Head and Bluffton Firefighters practicing FLAG drills.

Hilton Head and Bluffton Firefighters practicing FLAG drills.

In the wake of the Toyota recall disaster (that’s about the best description for that event), it brings us around to thinking about the values you might have in your organization, especially when having to make tough decisions.  The author and motivational speaker Bud Bilanich has said about values:

“Values ground an organization- providing direction for people who find themselves in ambiguous situations.  They are guides for decision making.”

If your organization doesn’t have agreed-upon values, it’s a good time to get your people together and discuss some.  Even if your organization fails to enact some, the team you control should put together a value statement that provides direction to those who have to make a watershed decision at some point with little guidance otherwise.

While remaining true to your core values aren’t always easy.  It may even cost you at some point, like the instance in which Johnson & Johnson had to pull Tylenol off the shelves in the wake of a cyanide poisoning scandal.  The decision cost them hundreds of millions of dollars, but ultimately, the company prospered because of the ultimate consumer confidence that sprang from sticking to their values: “…our first responsibility is…to mothers and fathers and all others who use our products.”

As an emergency response organization, your core values may involve treating the people who call you for assistance with compassion and dignity.  I’ve been in the situation before where that has been difficult, for whatever reason (like when they are abusing you verbally at 0400 hours) but ultimately, the decisions you must make in serving that citizen (or visitor, in our case) should be based on that value and subsequently, those values will protect you in the event that things get nasty.  Like when they decide to call a councilman or make a media event out of their situation.

While there are those out there who struggle with calling the people who call for our services “customers”, that shouldn’t preclude you from believing that these people are the reason for your existence, whatever you choose to call them, and they should be treated with dignity, respect, and empathy.  Just because you don’t perceive them as having a choice in who provides their service, it doesn’t keep them from raising a royal stink over the attitude you present, regardless of “who started it”.  You’ll still look like the bad guy in the media.

It is imperative that not only does your organization recruit and retain people who embrace your values, but that the culture holds those values dear, that people are rewarded for upholding those values, and that deviation from those values are redirected.  When the going gets tough, those values will carry your organization through the tough scrutiny of a media frenzy and by standing close to those values, it will keep you all together though the storm.

Trust Is The Mortar

4 comments
My Grandfather "Smokey", my sister, and Smokey Bear.

My Grandfather "Smokey", my sister Colleen, and Smokey Bear. Unknown which cousin is in Grandpop's arm.

Trust is the mortar, the bond between power and responsibility.  Without empowerment, people are unable to act on their vision.  Give someone power and they are free to create all kinds of possibilities.  And in turn, if you give someone power and they squander those opportunities, those with power are reluctant to share it again.

There are several reasons why “leaders” fail to empower others, some of which involve the hesitancy to trust others to use the power wisely.  There may have been a precipitating event to foster this mistrust, or a cumulative effect may have occurred.  There are those who distrust others based on perception.

Take, for example, those who mistrust others because of outward appearances.  If you come into my place of business to get a job and don’t look professional, if I’m trying hard to convey a professional appearance, then you shouldn’t be surprised if it requires me a moment to trust in you.  Dressing the part goes a long way toward opening doors; in fact, it opens more doors than closes them.  But this is just the beginning: speaking my language- not just English, but using intellect and knowing the jargon- permits me to believe I can trust in you that you know what I know.  Using logic permits me to believe that you are mature and understanding of the options, and thus, maybe trustworthy.  None of this in and of itself should establish your credibility; you may dress like a slob and be a genius.  You may not have good English skills and yet have an amazing amount of information to share.  You may be one of those crazy artists who isn’t very logical, but has an excellent abstract way of looking at a problem.  But each of these things allows me a good feeling that I can take as: this person understands that what I think is important, they think is important.

Now while you can dress the part and talk the talk, that doesn’t make you trustworthy.  That’s the realm of the con man.  That gets you in the door.  The essential element is that once I allow you to open the door, you prove that the small amount of trust I hand over to you is nurtured and used appropriately.  Furthermore, if I permit you this trust, if something goes wrong, instead of stepping away from the situation, you own it and work to resolve it, I’m more willing to at least extend you a certain amount of trust again.

It’s completely give and take and it requires a certain amount of credit and repayment.  But given that transactional experience, a partnership between people is formed and the bond increases, just as mortar cures over time.

Right now in Haiti, for the survival of their nation, true leaders must come to the forefront.  They have an opportunity to rebuild their nation and make it strong.  There was a lot of work to be done before the disaster and the squandered trust between the “leadership” and the people is certainly a problem.  But when I know for fact that a lot of work is needed to restore their infrastructure, that indicates to me many opportunities for people to shine, to show others their devotion to hard work, to innovation, and to creativity.  If the leaders really desire change for the better, they need to foster a new generation of Haitians with power to improve their economy and their standard of life.  And while the disaster is only a week or so old, and the devastation so close at hand, it makes it difficult to focus on the future, but the future is there and waiting.  Once the fog lifts, enlightened leaders should seek those who desire a strong nation and employ them to rebuild it.

In this nation as well, there are those of us who are sick and tired of the two party system, the system that seems to be all about itself and not about us, and desire leaders who don’t give in to the rhetoric of the ultra-left or ultra-right.  There are those of us who simply desire to do right by each other, to look out for one another and not see things in the extremes but in shades of gray, because we all have value, and we should all be able to engage our dreams, but not at the expense of others’ dreams.

In your particular environment, insure that those around you are given the trust they need to succeed, and if you are in the position that someone entrusts you, make the most of it.  Insure you give back what you receive, and share that power as well, and create opportunities for others, and work together to make each other stronger.  Together we are greater than the sum of our parts.  That’s what synergy is all about.  Given the right amount of trust and taking responsibility for our actions (or our failures), we can grow and we can achieve excellence.

US&R in Haiti: Wishing vs. Planning

2 comments
SC-TF1 US&R working in St. Tammany Parish, LA after Katrina.

SC-TF1 US&R working in St. Tammany Parish, LA after Katrina.

I’m sure everyone out there continues to keep an eye on Haiti.  I’m not easily shocked, yet even I have been amazed at some of the scenes from down there.  Every time I see another bit of news, I want to go hug my children and remind myself how fortunate we are.

When friends and family see the situation there, not knowing how US&R deployments really work, I get asked if SC-TF1 is going.  Each time, I have taken that opportunity to explain the workings (and separation) between the USAID/DART assets and domestic response (FEMA US&R and State US&R assets) and how “task forces just aren’t sent to international disasters through FEMA”.  Of course, by saying “never”, something I NEVER thought I’d see in all of my years working in this business is occurring: the cooperation and coordination of FEMA with EMAC for the possibility (note I said, “possibility”, not “probability”) of State US&R Task Forces being deployed along with FEMA-sanctioned assets to an international disaster.

But all that being said, in watching the events unfolding, I continue to try to get my head around the response and it frankly has been a challenge.  With any disaster, there needs to be an attack plan, but in most cases, these plans hinge on some basic tenets of organization, none of these which seem to apply in Haiti.  Having been hit by several prior disasters recently, the country was already in extremis and the current situation obviously doesn’t improve things.

I have already heard from my sources that the teams that are there are working under heavy force protection.  Any of us that thought operating in New Orleans post-Katrina was sketchy, one look at the situation in Haiti makes us understand that at least we had the force of law SOMEWHERE on our side.  Reports have indicated that aside from the overwhelming number of missions and dangerous conditions, another part of the reason that engaging missions is problematic is because there simply isn’t any way to get the equipment from the airport to the disaster: roads were bad to begin with, there’s only one active runway at the airport, and there’s no machinery to off-load equipment and supplies.  Once the materials do happen to get onto the ground, no matter what conventions you try to apply for allocating the resources, there isn’t any guarantee the locals will comply with it anyway.

So for this disaster, there are other “sub-disasters” that make it much more dire, and even the media isn’t astute enough to understand it.  This situation is going to get MUCH worse before it gets better, because there’s no way to effectively get the help to where it needs to go, and if it did get there, there’s no guarantee that it will be applied to the right area anyway (unless you count “at gunpoint” as an effective means of allocating resources).

While equipment and supplies are arriving, we could just send everything we have to the area, but without the people who know how to work it, the equipment is useless.  While one friend of mine said to this, “If you gave me a concrete cutting saw, I could probably figure it out”; I mentioned to him that if you didn’t know water was an important part in making the saw blade cut more effectively, failing to do something as simple as that might mean the difference between extricating someone with one blade or a half-dozen blades.  It occurs to me that there are nuances of working with our US&R tools that are completely lost on the uninitiated.  I said this the other day: “It’s the definition between an organized US&R resource and ‘mobs with shovels’”.

My point is, after all this rambling, is that this is very much a teachable moment for everyone, just as I hoped Katrina and other disaster have been.  Even for some of my non-emergency service readers out there, there is an extremely important lesson to be learned: Every community must understand its vulnerabilities and the potential for disaster, and plan accordingly.

The caveat to this is, that despite the presence of a written plan, you can have every contingency covered and discussed, if you don’t understand and practice the plan, it isn’t worth the paper it is written on (Anybody remember Katrina?).

It is imperative that elected officials along with those of us who serve the public safety sector of our respective communities (AND the citizens living in those communities) understand what likely scenarios can occur, know where the vulnerable populations exist, and understand what resources are needed.

For responders: If those resources aren’t readily available, it is then incumbent upon us all to know where to get those resources, how to legally obtain and use them, and even more important, when and how to call them.

For the elected officials: It requires insistence on development of these plans as well as FUNDING to support the plans.

For non-responder citizens: Maybe you should understand that you have a part in this as well, to insure you are prepared to go it alone for at least 72 hours and maybe have some ability to rely on your own preparedness and not look to government for the total solution.  Try checking out the recommendations here at the FEMA website.

So without too much further delay, maybe this is a moment for all of you (elected officials, responders, and citizens) to dig out your volumes of plans and look through them and begin to understand not only what is in them, but at least what your part in that plan will be if, God forbid, you have to utilize them.   While we here in the United States are subject to the same disasters as other nations, at least here, there is the force of law to keep this type of situation from getting out of hand (note the sarcasm).  My suggestion: have a plan, support it, practice it, and if things go badly, USE IT.

Stay safe and let’s keep the responders as well as the citizens of Haiti in our prayers.

Urban Search and Rescue – Rockbreaking 101

No comments
SC-TF1, GA, and MD-TF2 working with St. Bernard, LA at Katrina

SC-TF1, GA, and MD-TF2 working with St. Bernard, LA at Katrina

Since there seems to be a huge lean forward from people who want to know more about US&R, and since US&R is (and has been) one of my main projects for over twenty years, I figure I’ll take the opportunity to point you all in some directions for information, as well as provide some useful links other than the standard FEMA sites.  I’ll start off with one or two and add some more as time permits.

Also, if I have missed a good link (or source), please add it, because any errors or omissions are likely just my failure to remember someone while sitting here for a moment, rather than deliberate exclusion.

I’ll start of course with my baby: the South Carolina US&R Task Force, which is a state-sponsored NIMS Type 1 equivalent US&R Task Force.  Our deployment to St. Tammany and St. Bernard Parishes during Hurricane Katrina established us on the map as a viable response asset.  While I am no longer the Director of this organization but serve as Deputy Director in an advisory role, it is still my pride and joy.

There is another US&R project of which I am very fond: the State Urban Search and Rescue Alliance, better known by its acronym, “SUSAR”.  This began as a consortium of 19 states, including Puerto Rico, meeting for the first time in July 2005 at the South Carolina Fire Academy in Columbia, SC.  Now it has representatives from over 41 states and we have earned the consideration by many other affiliated organizations as we help to advocate for these state teams which previously had no voice.

One Firefighter Nation there are several US&R “social” groups: Urban Search and Rescue, of course; USAR/FEMA; and USAR.  You can join into the discussions there and say your piece, or at least get to meet other like-minded individuals.  There is also the Cancel The Engine site on there, which has a lot of rockbreakers hanging out looking for something to tear up.

I’ll take the time to add some more later, but if you have a link near and dear to you, feel free to add it on a comment, and if it is appropriate, I’ll add it in.

Vigilance and Haiti

2 comments
South Carolina US&R Task Force at Vigilant Guard

South Carolina US&R Task Force at Vigilant Guard

As is always the case in times like these, fire and emergency service providers stand ready to send whatever relief is necessary to aid the survivors of disasters.   While we continue to keep the residents and visitors to Haiti in our thoughts and prayers, an open letter to the fire and emergency service community from FEMA Deputy Administrator Richard Serino reminds the response community that self-deployment to the disaster areas is not advisable.  For a number of reasons, there needs to be a coordinated response so that well-meaning people and resources don’t ultimately overwhelm what is already bedlam.

While it may seem counterintuitive to some not to send EVERYTHING to the region, I’m reminded of the scenario that presents itself in football when the defensive end is told repeatedly, “Seal the ends and don’t let anyone out” and after being told that twenty times (and having no backs running around the end), he decides to “get involved” and leaves his assigned area, only to be left in the dust by a screen or a reverse.  His job was to protect the flanks from just such a move, and failing that, this weakness was not only recognized by the offense, but exploited.

It is imperative that we take this opportunity to recognize that these disasters also affect our own communities, and this is the time when increased education of your customers is important: what to do if something like this happens here, who will respond, what your capabilities are and how you plan to address your needs in a disaster, and so on.  This is the time when you contact your representatives and reinforce to them that we have emergency operation plans in place and resources, and educate local responders what to do and how to obtain these resources.

Most importantly, someone needs to be watching the outside, anticipating that at any time, events can also happen at home.  In that event, teams selected to move into the Caribbean to aid Haiti may need reinforcement back in their home jurisdictions and we should be ready to help in those situations as well.

Everyone has a part on the team.  Take this unfortunate situation and at least turn it into a “teachable moment”.  If you fail to do this while it is fresh in the minds of the public, I can reassure you, look at past disasters and see how fast those moments faded from view.  We can prevent death and injury often by educating people as to what we do and how to get us when they need us.  But in order to do all of this, we need support, not just during the disasters, but in the times in between.

Keep our fellow US&R teams in your prayers as well as the citizens and other responders in this most distressing of situations and make sure we are ready if anything else goes down on our watch.

The Thanks of a Nation

No comments

webDSC01875Author’s Note: I updated this post from the original due to what looked like, in hindsight, to be mostly whining.  My apologies to those of you subjected to the original garbage.

Maybe it’s the observation that many of the politicians who are quick to take credit for the nation’s preparedness are slow to ever visit a fire station, or maybe it’s my expectation that instead of having to beg for the table scraps that our law enforcement brethren leave for us, we might also get a seat at the main table, but I just don’t see the fire service gaining the amount of respect that we deserve for the sacrifices we make.  And if you’ve been following this blog for any period of time, you’ll know that I am fully cognizant of the reason why.

We have friends in high places that can help us.  Despite your individual politics, Vice-President Joe Biden has long proven his support of the fire service, and there are others out there who are as well.  If you don’t want the fire service to continually get what’s left over; if you are tired of watching FIRE and SAFER grants get thinner and thinner; if you expect that the fire service should be considered for a bigger piece of the decision-making that goes on in our homeland defense, I’d suggest you get involved.  Learn what legislation is pending that affects the fire service, what is beneficial and what is detrimental, and call your Representatives and Senators.  Join the Congressional Fire Services Institute and support our efforts to get help from the government in furthering our mission.  Participate at the National Fire Academy and make sure your elected officials know how valuable it is to us.

While we speak here on Firehouse Zen about change and progress, tradition is good when it comes down to the meaningful things, like our history and our preservation of the courage and sacrifice of our brothers who have gone before us.  One of the beautiful traditions of our service is the recognition of a job well done and award of something meaningful to most of us.  I knew this method of conveying our certificate upon us was going to happen, so it wasn’t a surprise.  And regardless, the best thing I honestly took away from this experience was the friendship and the sharing with some of the finest people I will ever know, which in and of itself is one of the best traditions of our job.  But over the last ten years, the current method of awarding you your certificate says to me that our government thinks so much of our efforts that they wad up a certificate in a cardboard tube and ship it off.

What do we need to do to end this and other shots at the fire service?  Get involved and show them we are here.  We need to work together and stop shooting ourselves in our collective feet in order to agree on some basic principles and move forward.  We need to agree on at least some things, and put them out there, and not pull everything off the table when our pet project doesn’t get funded.  We need to work together as a team, and get our government to understand that we will not be going away anytime soon.

An Atmosphere of Trust

2 comments
webMen of Iron BW 2

You want that hole WHERE?

Having worked my normal 24 hour shift, I got up at 0530 and went to the station’s kitchen to make a pot of coffee.  As I stood there, filling the pot with water, I realized that the crew’s dinner kitty was still sitting there on the counter.  Although it wasn’t much, it made me think about the trust that you find (or don’t find) in some firehouses.  It contrasted with a discussion I overheard about one shift raiding the other shift’s fridge just the day before.  Now while most of our stations are “hardened” facilities and require an ID card for entry, I remember when we could leave the place wide open and never have to worry about anything being touched.  In this day and age, not only do we need to worry about some mutt walking in while we were on a call and stealing a laptop (it happened to one of our guys), we have to worry about the criminal elements who want our ID, uniforms, or even a vehicle, so they can pose as a firefighter.

Trust, however, is a pretty interesting concept of its own.  As a leader, you have to earn the trust of the troops.  And as I pointed out, twenty years of being their buddy can go right out the window if you hose them on one thing.  I’ve found that it’s better to be circumspect than to lie to another firefighter.  If you just can’t talk about it, you might as well lead off by saying that, because if you try to act like you are bringing them in on “the scoop” but you can’t tell them the full details, your credibility is shot.

I look at the way my crews trust me in differing degrees.  Do they trust me to command them going into a burning building or to guide them at a building collapse or a confined space incident?  I’d guess most of them do since I’ve never had them second-guess me on a scene.  Do they trust me on most things?  I’d guess they do.  Do they trust that I’ll get the roster right in the morning.  I’d bet much less so (I’m notorious for having to re-send everyone the “amended” roster).  But whatever you do, you had best build credibility in the areas you want them to find you credible in, because if you don’t, your word is crap.

I know company officers (and chief officers) who simply aren’t trusted.  The guys may like them, they may have a beer with them, but get them aside and they’ll tell you, “This officer isn’t trustworthy”.  They may feel like the officer has got their back on daily things but just can’t trust them to make the right decision on the fireground.  And on the fireground, when people have the possibility of being injured or killed, you’d better bet that if you are leading a crew, a section, or the entire incident, you’d better have some credibility.  Because do you know what happens when you don’t have credibility?  No one will listen to you.

When elements of mistrust exist on a regular basis between the troops and the brass, those factors simply add to frustration levels that always exist anyway between these two dynamics.  If you are an officer trying to increase team morale and trying to slow down the rampant rumor mill, you’ll find that deep at the seat of these sentiments lies that mistrust.  Be it that the previous leaders were untrustworthy, or that others have continued to fuel the conspiracy theories for their own amusement, in any case, so long as your people fail to trust you, no amount of money, new trucks, etc. will stop the train.  It requires making that leap to show them that you can be trusted.  In exhibiting your faith in them, hopefully they can begin to have some faith in you.

Maintaining this kind of relationship requires a lot of work.  From first-hand knowledge, it can often be frustrating.  I am a “firefighter’s firefighter” (or at least I hope that’s how my people see me) and I still walk the walk as much as talk the talk.  Yet when I pinned on those chief’s bugles, it didn’t matter that some of these individuals have known me and what I am about for decades: I’m a chief now.  The whole element of trust seemed to have to begin from scratch and work its way back to the same level it was at when I was a Captain, I guess.

The problem is that for as much as you try to show these people that you are only interested in doing the right thing, because of years of mistrusting anyone in a white helmet, they don’t feel comfortable putting their trust in you.  Firefighters pride themselves in being a cynical bunch; show me one firefighter worth his or her salt and I’ll show you that they have a skeptical eye about pretty much any subject that presents itself.  It’s a survival mechanism.  While others pride themselves in seeing a half-full glass, we fully expect that the glass is half-full alright: with an unknown toxic.  Firefighters require everyone and every incident to prove it is safe to trust first, and only then will they dip their toes into the pool.  So an understanding of that culture requires actually living it because the lack of “street cred” automatically targets you as being an outsider and unable to be trusted.

We as leaders must work hard to develop a space of trust.  Of all of the qualities of a leader, trust is most important.  Frankly, no one is going to follow you if they don’t trust that you’re going to take them someplace they want to go.  While you may have all kinds of degrees and certificates, there’s nothing other than setting an example for your troops that is going to teach them that they can follow you and that they can trust that they’ll survive the experience.  If you are trying to change your organizational culture and continually meeting resistance, chances are that your either personnel aren’t mature enough to appreciate that individuals are different and new  leadership isn’t automatically to be distrusted (until you’ve done something to break that trust already), or because no one has ever given them a reason in the past to let go of their fears and follow you.  In both cases, it’s going to require you to stand in front and establish that relationship or understand that you need to develop a thick skin, because the sniping will never end.  Standing up and setting an example seems to be the most productive means of accomplishing the mission.

Use of Faith-Based NGOs As Disaster Response Partners

4 comments

tfcc_pano1For some of the new readers here, not only is Firehouse Zen about enlightened leadership, it is about management issues and creative solutions to ongoing problems in the emergency service industry.  If you are a long-time reader, you may recall our discussions in the past regarding disaster response and credentialing, and in an effort to dip back into some of the issues of disaster management, I’d like to point you all toward the excellent website of the Natural Hazards Research Center at the University of Colorado – Boulder.

In their latest issue of Disaster Research, there is an article regarding government response and recovery and the increase in governmental partnerships with faith- and community-based organizations to assist in cleaning up catastrophes.  In the recent past, we have seen ineffective response from certain portions of government that have assumed responsibility for this service at the local, state and federal levels.  I don’t think anyone who works in our field and  is taken seriously about their views on the subject feels like “government” alone can deliver an entire package of assistance to a disaster-stricken community.  However, there is plenty of debate about how to most effectively coordinate assistance in the wake of a calamity.

Of all things in our industry, our frustration with failure of some politicians to continue to apply heat (and funding) to the problem BEFORE disaster strikes is only compounded by the political “outrage” when disaster occurs and we are accused with not properly preparing in advance (still with limited or no budget or legislative action on our behalf).

In an answer to some of these challenges, some state and local governments are forming coalitions that guide organizations providing emergency response. Missouri, Florida, Texas, and a few others have, according to a recent article in the St. Louis Post-Dispatch, begun to develop alliances between emergency managers and NGOs.

There are many discussions regarding the potential for blurred church and state separation which can’t even begin to be adequately addressed in a short blog post.  However, those issues aside, NGOs over the past decade have been efficiently providing disaster recovery assistance and have been successful in finding resources that governmental bodies can’t seem to scare up.

This discussion doesn’t also begin to factor in the entire over-reliance on “outside” help in the event of disaster.  This was a point made by Alan Kirschenbaum in earlier works referring to the growth of the disaster response community that seem to be related to the decline in perception of individual responsibility for preparedness.

While this all has some serious discussion ahead of it, I have less of a problem with this type of assistance than I do with pseudo-qualified responders self deploying to events with little or no capability or self-sufficiency.  I think there are plenty of avenues for a person with altruistic motives to get involved with an organized response; it’s the poseurs and con-men I’m interested in keeping away.

I’m open to some observations on the subject.  I think if managed correctly, these NGOs have access to resources currently limited to those of us charged with response, and we should take advantage of creative partnerships, as the organizations I am affliliated have already done.  Look around your community and identify capability that lies outside of the conventional response.  You’ll be surprised by the resources that lie out there and I think you’ll find that instead of spending essential funds on assets that already exist, you can find better uses for that money in areas that are currently underserved.

Innovation Distinguishes Between Leaders and Followers

No comments
Safely chocking those wheels.

Safely chocking those wheels.

If you didn’t know, that’s a quote from Steve Jobs (I didn’t).  I was sitting in the office of our Deputy Chief/Ops, reading a magazine while he finished up a meeting, and I saw that quote.  I liked it a lot and wanted to share it with you.

The quote was being used by David White, the editor of Industrial Fire World, in this month’s editorial, where he is discussing “evolution vs. intelligent design”.  His point was that while it is fantastic we have these newfangled radios and all, they’re really not worth anything if we can’t talk to anyone on them because they’re too complicated to use. What’s more, while we have been wrestling with interoperable communications for eons (I mean, look at the Tower of Babel and all), we have another situation that merits a technological solution: tracking firefighter location inside a burning structure.

While some of this stuff is a little out of my immediate reach, there are tools used daily around us that don’t get used to their full efficiency.  Take for example, that little bundle of software you probably have on your computer right there in front of you.  If you’re like me, you have some sort of office pack with a word processing application, a spreadsheet application, and a database application.  In most total office packages, I would surmise that they are interoperable between each other.  I’d be willing to bet you that most fire stations these days have computer workstations and in each of those you also have some sort of interoperable office pack.

How many of you are proficient at using these programs, not just as stand-alone applications, but in concert with one another?  Can you create a table in Excel and transfer it to Word?  Can you create an Access database and then query it to get information, then export it to Excel to create graphs and tables for presentations?

I was at a “presentation” the other day, and the person was trying to influence a governmental body into giving their project funding.  While the speaker was disorganized, what was more appalling is that in this day and age, there weren’t any supporting slides or visuals to reinforce their points.  There’s that whole theory of how much you retain by hearing and seeing something in comparison to just hearing it or just seeing it that you learned in Instructor I (one more reason for requiring this kind of a course as a pre-requisite for Fire Officer I: it teaches you how to communicate to an audience).  You’d think that by now someone might have retained that information themselves.  If you care enough about your project that you’re willing to get up in front of a whole bunch of people to discuss it, why wouldn’t you try to SELL it?

If you want to be a leader, it’s not just about surviving, it’s about EXPERIENCING.  You have to stretch and pull, not push.  You don’t see the lead climber at the back of the pack, do you?  They’re the one forging the way, finding the path, and establishing the precedence.  You have to get out ahead of people to lead them and the way to do that in places other than on the battlefield is to be innovative and thinking about new ways to do things, and learning and finding out the better way up, not by taking the same path everyone else takes.

To be a real leader requires creativity and more than anything, the ability to manage in a dynamic environment.  If you are willing to be flexible and change with the conditions that present themselves, people will look to you for the answers when they don’t have them.  This isn’t just from your subordinates, either, this will very likely come from your superiors as well.

There’s a question I once heard on The West Wing, “Would you rather be ‘The Man’, or ‘The Man that The Man Goes To’?”  If you are a subordinate who desires to be considered a leader (or wishes to have real influence), consider that premise.  I hear from people all the time who complain that they wish their boss was a better leader and I always say, “Why don’t you fill that spot?”  Leadership abhors a vacuum.  If the appointed or legitimate leader fails to lead, someone will.  If that place is filled by you, insure that you cement your value to the boss and the rest of the crew by being a positive, motivated, seeker of truth and knowledge.

If you care enough about your job that you want to lead, you should consider that leading requires more effort than following. A lot of that effort is learning how to be ahead of everyone else in the pack, especially when it comes to improving your condition and by employing creativity to do a safer and more effective job.  Be proactive and be the best at what you do.  if you do that, I can reassure you, with a good attitude, people will come knocking on your door for the answers.

Star of Life Law Blog

1 comment

I am encouraged by some of the blogs that are going on out there right now and I try to throw a link to the good ones over on the side over there (you know, over THERE, on your right).  A great one that popped up in the past few days has some serious merit; the Star of Life Law blog by my friend and colleague Pete Reid, who is not only a practicing lawyer but a practicing paramedic.  I am a man who has braved some serious fires and disasters, dove into alligator and shark infested waters (not at the same time), and fathered three girls, but if there is a subject that strikes fear in the hearts of all of us, and that’s the legal side of the business.  It’s likely because we don’t fully understand it, but given the few posts Pete already has on there, he has the opportunity to help us at least stay out of trouble.

As I posted before, a quote from a lawyer on lawyers:

“Lawyers are like vultures – most people look upon the vulture as a vile creature, eating carcasses and garbage, reprehensible to watch.  However, if there were no vultures, think about all of the roadkill that would rot on the highways, in the forests, and elsewhere.  Vultures take care of the messes we find distasteful.  If people would just get along and deal with each other in a civil manner, we wouldn’t need lawyers.” (Judge Thomas Kemmerlin, in a Leadership Hilton Head session)

While Pete is certainly not a vile creature (he’s actaully a really nice guy), he does offer a perspective on the legal side of emergency services that I hope to include in our discussions on here, because after all, he’s the lawyer.  If people didn’t sue people, we wouldn’t need lawyers, but if we do our job, we shouldn’t have to worry about being sued either.  Unfortunately, that’s not always the case and frivolous lawsuits cost a lot of money to defend, money that I’m sure most of us have allocated for more important things, like food and a mortgage.  So learn, educate others, and protect yourself.  Go check it out.

I Wanna Be A Libertarian

5 comments

mod abf slidell (7)For the most part, I consider myself a Libertarian in that I’d just as soon the government not tell me what to do.  In some aspects, I guess, I’m pretty conservative in my values, so I’m a little Republican, and I like the idea of people on welfare getting off of it someday, especially since I had to eat a lot of PBJs and continue to drive a car with 100k+ miles on it to afford the house we live in (but that’s called choosing your priorities).  And although I’m all for funding the arts, I’m pretty sure I don’t want to fund anything called “Piss Christ”. 

Socially, I guess, I’m pretty Democratic.  While I want people off of welfare eventually, I’m also realistic in that there are people who really need help.  I also believe that just because I believe in certain things, others do not.  Just as soon as I would never force anything down your throat, though, I’d just as soon you didn’t force me to either.  So I’m all in favor of saying “One country, under God” and courthouse lawn manger scenes, in season, of course.

Our government should help when it can and stay out of our business when it can not. But when public safety is involved, time and time again the public has shown it can’t be trusted to do what is right for their neighbors, so there are times when the government should really step in and set things straight.

What am I talking about?  Well, in Breckenridge, Colorado, an ordinance was passed to create a defensible space between properties.  While some people see this as a sane thing to do, others think that it infringes upon their rights.  As I see it, it is the right to have highly combustible timber and brush leading right to your home (or your neighbors), and then, I guess, your right to bitch about it when it catches on fire and the fire department is overwhelmed trying to help all the other Libertarians in your neighborhood.

Now, I don’t for a minute think all these people are Libertarians (nor do I care, and the same for any other political affiliation, just bear with me), but there really does come a time when the common good trumps that of your personal rights.  Call it a slippery slope, but you know, as much as I embrace your religious rights, I don’t see a problem with being able to see your face when you enter a public building.  And I as much as I believe in my First Amendment rights, I think race-baiting and hate speech should be banned, because it is apparent some people lack a certain amount of civility.

When we in emergency services make proposals for public safety, we should always consider the effect we have on individual rights.  The decisions we make really do affect those rights, but so long as we are using good logic in doing so, the public has to understand that we need a LITTLE HELP sometimes.  If you choose to exercise your right to build right up to the interface, you are going to have to give us a little break when we ask you to cut back the forest from your house a little.  When we tell you that you need to leave your home because the fire is heading in your direction, trust me, if I could leave you in place, I would, because frankly, you’re just going to get out there and tie up the highway and gawk and get in my way instead of evacuating anyway, so I’d just as soon leave you there.  I do, however, realize that leaving you to burn up in your property, regardless of your individual rights, is going to land me in court because I left you to do what you wanted anyway.

How do we take into consideration individual rights versus the right to protect people from themselves?  By educating people, and sometimes that requires bold and candid speech.  It is this exact kind of speech that politicians hate, because it shakes up the status quo.  So long as the populace is happy, the politicians are happy and it’s a lot less work.  When we make decisions to cut back trees or not to respond to calls for help at a certain windspeed during a hurricane, or to evacuate people from harms way, it certainly upsets people and they take that moment to complain.

We have to make the grown-up decisions, though; it’s why we exist.  Sometimes it’s best to leave things be, but sometimes you need to point out to people that their decisions could very well result in injuries and fatalities.  If people can’t see their way through those choices, then maybe we should just restrict our response to help them when all Hell breaks loose.  After all, we wouldn’t want the government to interfere with your life, would we?

Hypocrisy

1 comment

When a man will condemn others but will not subject himself to the same ethical standards, that, my friends, is a hypocrite.   We talk about people living in glass houses and the logic for their not throwing stones, but we often fail to hold people to their statements that they made to get them to where they are today.

When a man will say that a project is a waste of time, yet take credit for it when the project is being hailed by the media, that, my friends, is a hypocrite.  Likewise, there are “leaders” in this world who like to trumpet their budget cuts and their saving of taxpayer funds, despite being warned that their efforts could prove dangerous, but when things do go badly, they slip free of any blame, and those people are also hypocrites.

When a man will make claims that he has accomplished something spectacular, but won’t permit scrutiny of his claims, is that man a hypocrite?  Shouldn’t we, if we have indeed done an amazing deed, be willing to permit people to look into our claims, to see just what it is that we have done and how we can replicate that “success”?  Hypocrisy is claiming you are all about something, when really you are not; so if you make claims of expertise, shouldn’t you expect critical review of your work?  If it is truly what it is, it will stand up to the examination.

When people go around pretending to be leaders by making claims of their honesty, they should in fact be honest.  If they are about being a good steward of taxpayer funds, they too, should be actually doing just that.  If they think that their cost-cutting efforts are actually beneficial to the community and they prove to be wrong, they should be willing to take that heat.  And when we say we are professionals in what we do, we should permit others to review our works and determine if they hold up to a critical examination of the content.

Change freightens the entrenched and the hypocritical; the entrenched because of their anticipation of loss and the hypocrites, because they will be exposed for what they are when the light of truth shines in.  If you are one who embraces change, it’s probably because you know you don’t have anything to lose.  If you are what you are and you do what you do, and you practiced your art and you learned from the masters, you have nothing to lose and everything to gain from change.

The Case for Credentialing – An Opposing View

2 comments

I’m distressed that a comment got sent to my spam filter regarding an earlier post and for that I apologize.  The poster made the comment that he didn’t think I’d print it.  As it is, I would hope by now that readers understand that I welcome opposing views, because it is only by listening to what others have to say that we can grow.  Thus, I’m interested in discussing the issues intelligently and understanding the emerging challenges in the emergency service industry.  So since the comment got sent to the spam folder, I don’t feel that it was shared with you all, and I wanted to insure we had equal opportunity to present our views.  If you have a point to make and it can sway my view, then I encourage it. 

First, an excerpt from a letter Mr. Doug Copp sent to my employer:

In his zeal to please some nefarious people at FEMA I believe he has decided than he will promote himself, at my expense..and your town’s expense. I have had a running battle with FEMA for 20 years because they have used major disasters as an opportunity for military and espionage activities while the ‘victim’ country has been in chaos, from the disaster.

As a person who only cares about saving lives..they hate my guts.
Before 911, I was the most experienced rescuer, in the world; since, 911 I have been sick every minute of every day and after 8 years am still being treated by 7 MD Specialists, for my 911 injuries.

 

This is twisted, perverted and a disgrace that this little man should find it necessary to cause me harm. 
How much do I have to suffer? How much abuse do I need to put up with? If he is so twisted…then he should spend his time mutilating small animals and leave me alone.
 

 

 

Then, his comment, which I retrieved from the spam folder:

This is what I submitted to him as a comment, on his blog site. I do not expect that he will have the courage to post it:

http://www.firehousezen.com/2009/05/29/the-case-for-credentialing/

 “It is disgusting that my name which was so destroyed by a psychotic, twisted pervert,,,aka Thomopson Lang..owner of the Albuquerque Journal ..because I refused to give him an emergency pass,,not because he was wearing women’s clothes..not because of his disgusting behavior but mainly because he was an evil, evil man..and even more so because some wannabee phony pretend rescuers see me as an easy target..get a life..go credential your phony ass.

My 20 years of selfless volunteering saved the lives of more than 200,000 lives..go see the proof at www.amerrescue.org

As far as Mr. Copp’s claims that I have offended him in some way, I hope he continues to read this blog and understand that I’m not about divisiveness but about seeking the truth, and as far as I am concerned (and this is my blog) there is a discussion that should be made about the merits and demerits of credentialing.  We presented some opposing ideas and we will discuss others as well.  But as far as dismissing the idea of credentialing because Mr. Copp feels it goes against him and some of the others out there, well, I’m sorry that he feels this animosity toward me. 
Instead of threatening me with a lawsuit, perhaps he can let us all know just what it is he has in the way of scientific evidence defending his points.  I’m only interested in discussing the facts.  I happen to be opposed to self-deploying groups posing as rescue teams and not showing evidence of having met any recognized consensus standards.

I have nothing to gain from only presenting one point of view here on FHZ.  As I said before and I’ll say a thousand times, I don’t blog on duty and I don’t speak for any of the organizations I work for on this blog, so they have nothing to do with anything on here except to serve as good examples of organizations using best practices.

 

Enjoy and have a nice day.

The Case for Credentialing – Answering Your Comments

No comments

I hate to break free in the middle of this series like this, but there were some comments made that I wanted to discuss.  Since one is on one post and the other is on another post, I felt the need to tie them together and talk really quickly to the issue.

On June 15, Steve said:

Yes, credentials would help but WHO is the final authority on issuing them? WHO sets the standards? How are you going to avoid the age old paid vs volunteer bias in any credentialing agency?

My quick answer: I am against the bias in the career vs. volunteer.  If you can meet the standard, you can meet the standard.  I think there is plenty of room for volunteers, especially in disaster response.  So some career guy is going to tell me my docs can’t be part of the team because they aren’t career guys somewhere?  And I have said in regard to SC-TF1, where I do have some pull, if one person in a one-station volunteer department down the road wants to be part of our team, we need to let him if he meets our criteria (background check, physical agility, etc.)  As Ray Wilkinson, our past Director once said, “I can teach someone to break rocks, what I can’t teach is desire.”  If someone wants to do the job, and goes through the requirements to meet a position, why should I care if he’s a member of FDNY or of Acme Fire Department?  So Steve, I’m with ya, brother.

On June 16, Kevin said:

I live in a state where there is no agency tasked with certifying or credentialing Search and Rescue dogs. I have seen (many times) where someone will buy lights for their POV and load their pet dog into the truck and call themselves a SAR team! If I didn’t know better, I might think all volunteer SAR teams were like this. However, there are a number of excellent non-governmental SAR teams in my state as well. I myself and a member of a volunteer K9 team.

Kevin goes on to say that they have a volunteer K9 SAR team because there isn’t an existing asset and law enforcement has asked for it.  Well, Kevin, as they say in Australia, “good on ya”.  You have identified a need and you have tried to meet that need.  No one else has that asset and it sounds like you have tried to do a good job of using accepted industry standards to meet the need.  THAT is good stuff.

However, I just went to discuss the concept of “those of us who want to do this right, but there are people with authority screwing things up so we can’t get in”, and realized that the post I wrote for that last week never posted as scheduled!  So that is now on the post schedule and I hope it does discuss some of the feelings I personally have in that regard. 

On June 16th, SAR Volunteer also commented:

I totally agree with your points. Please understand this are a handful of small volunteer K9 SAR teams in the state of SC who do NOT self deploy, do NOT work for anyone but the proper state or municipal authorities, train hard, carry their own liability and workmenscomp insurance, align their standards with NIMS Resource Typing, and are working to ensure they meet the proposed credentialing requirements.

And to you too, SAR Vollie, I applaud your efforts.  I think there is a place for the small volunteer K9 teams at the table as well, if they meet a standard.  Let’s take SC-TF1 again for example.  I have said over and over again, if we have people out there who want to do this stuff, let’s get them involved.  But not being a canine guy, I have some difficulty understanding some of the things the canine types are telling me.  So when I get national experts telling me one thing, and some guy with Rover in a pickup truck (or Expedition, as it were) saying his dog can detect live scent, cadavers, lost pets, and get a beer and catch a frisbee, understand that I am skeptical.  And the self-deploying thing is just purely bad in my book, but that’s a whole other issue as well that doesn’t stop with canine SAR teams, and DOES include career guys, departments, and organized teams, etc.  Frankly, if you (SAR Vollie) or anyone else in SC have dogs trained to find LIVE HUMANS in collapsed or damaged buildings, and feel like you can meet a standard, send me an e-mail.  I’d love to hear from you.  But anyone who calls themselves “Urban Search and Rescue” and they are running around doing wilderness searches, well, go back to my box of rocks comment.  Be what you say you are.

Anyway, I hope this illustrates some of the issues considered so far and we’ll get back on track with the next post (which should have published before the last one- go figure).  Please continue with your comments.  I certainly appreciate your perspectives.  Stay safe.

The Argument for Credentialing – Moving On

2 comments

crimson-060aNow that we have discussed the four major players in the argument against credentialing, lets talk about the argument for it.

A credential is only as good as the standard by which it is issued.  The point of having a credential should be to identify an individual or other resource as a certain type and kind.  If there is no standard, you might as well tell the carrier of a credential, “just stand over there until I can find something you can’t screw up.”

A worthwhile credential should also have some security associated with it.  After all, if anyone could get one, what good would it be?  So there are issues of validation involved as well.

In disaster after disaster, free-deploying individuals and “organizations” (and I use that term very loosely) go to “help” and in many cases, put a drain on an already over-taxed system and cause the diversion of legitimate resources from going to areas in need.  And while there is obviously some merit in the use of bystanders for certain aspects of disaster response, that has to be weighed seriously against the risk of their involvement, including the risk to themselves and the affected community, as well as the risk to rescuers, who ultimately must rescue the well-meaning if things don’t go according to plan.

There is no way to eliminate the truly altruistic in their quest to render aid.  Nor should there be.  But likewise, the civilians must understand implicitly that there comes a point when they must be diverted from the scene so the professionals can take over, especially when it comes to the extremely hazardous parts.

The standards in themselves seem to be quite the sticking point with some.  Standards utilized for the purpose of credentialing should be consensus standards and all keyholders included in the development of those standards, versus the exclusivity of some of the currently suggested drafts.  But once these are done, ratified, and chosen to be the driving force in identification of the qualified, there needs to be the embracing of the concept.  If organizations can’t agree on and use a standard that has meaning, then the credential is useless.

Like anything else, the change in this concept might be painful for some.  There are departments out there who are struggling with the unfunded mandates.  I can also sympathize with the organizations who want to become part of a greater plan like a National Mutual Aid Box Alarm System but don’t seem to know where to start or how to get involved.  I guess my first order of business, then, is to tell you how to get involved.  If there’s anything I can do, it’s point you in a direction toward activism.

Change will only come about if we work together to make it happen.  If you won’t stand for change, you don’t stand a chance to change.  Our industry is going through some important times but as you might notice (as I do all too well, sometimes), these initiatives take off for a while then they lose momentum.  Of course, that’s just until the next disaster.

Let’s work together to make something move.  In the next post, I’ll talk about opportunities to get involved.