Skip to content


Get Everyone On Board

4 comments
Hilton Head's Engine 1 company using Truck 6 in training.

Hilton Head's Engine 1 company using Truck 6 in training.

There comes a point in every organization where evaluation must be made of the over-arching vision and determination made if that is the direction that is desired, or if not, does it need to be recalibrated.  While that recalibration is really incumbent on the legally controlling entity (city or county council, commissions, or boards), it is the issue of recalibrating the organizational culture that I wanted to discuss today.  Because regardless of your organization, you are going to have personnel who are resistant to change, and while the troops may or may not decide to go willingly, it is a requirement that your officers or supervisors are.  If your small unit leaders aren’t on board, don’t count on the personnel they supervise joining in to resist them.  It will be much easier on those troops if they can get along with their misdirected officer than if they embrace the change, so you can count on the message not getting through when it is most needed.

If you have officers who are unwilling to evolve, they must make a decision (as do you) as to whether their personal contribution (or lack thereof) to the mission is causing a bigger problem. People are going to disagree on issues for a number of different reasons.  They may disagree on how the overall vision is met.  But if both the supervisor and the subordinate can work to capitalize on their personal views and collaborate (or develop by consensus) on solutions that take us to that goal, then that is positive and constructive.  If you simply don’t agree as to the mission, or you can’t work with others to develop solutions, then maybe that’s your signal to start looking elsewhere.

There will also be those who just won’t let the past go.  That total distrust in authority can be chalked up to a lack of maturity.  It’s easy to hold on to fear, it’s hard to make that leap again and trust.  But for some, it’s a game.  It’s cool to be the rebel.  It’s easy to make fun of what you yourself are incapable of creating.  If you are rebelling for a just cause, that commendable.  If you are rebelling to make fun and to be “cool”, you’re a tool.

Vision must be shared to make it effective.  If you ask your team what their vision of team success is, if you get an answer other than what you desire, you have conflicting vision.  Teams all the time make assumptions that their individual visions are one.  That’s all fine on issues where concessions can be made, but if these decisions affect the core values of individuals, you will find irreconcilable differences.  If these issues become counter to your values, this is where the team will break apart or survive.  These are your true watershed moments.

It is important that vision is shared.  Otherwise, the desired result will not be what comes out.  You can have the most charismatic leader in the world out in front, but when you reach that waypoint where visions are divergent, there will be a strong oppositional pull.  Several things can happen: They will go one way or another, or they will split the team, or there will be such a struggle for control that we go nowhere, or the team will go off on a path no one wants, or people will pull together and reach for a common goal.  When those power struggles occur, these are the points where a leadership vacuum occurs.  Like it or not, when it does, something will fill that, sometimes to the detriment of the team’s overall goal.

If you are the legitimate leader and it really is your position to say, “THIS vision is your reality”, then you need to do so.  If others don’t (or won’t) share that vision, they need to get on board or get off.  You can’t deal with incompatible vision.  Conflict management and resolution is imperative.  You must either accept their way, convince them of your way, or accept a compromise- which may make everyone upset.

Each of these waypoints are periods to stop and evaluate our direction and reconfirm that we are doing what is important to us, as well as that this is the direction in which we want to go.  This provides people a place to jump off if they aren’t comfortable with the direction.

While not all of us can be inspiring, we can at least strive to be transformational.  We can know what qualities that entails, we can identify and point people toward those resources, we can listen and empower our people.  We can be open to others’ ideas, permit change when change is needed, and especially when others are strong in talent, encourage their strengths and passions to benefit the whole team.  When you can do this, it permits others to trust you.  When people have been burned so many times, you have to earn that trust and it won’t happen overnight.  You have to keep doing it and keep reinforcing it, even when it is frustrating.

Focus on Success

1 comment
SC-TF1 BoO in Chalmette, 2005

SC-TF1 BoO in Chalmette, 2005

If you want success, look hard at what it is you want to be good at and learn how to add value to it.  A positive attitude will help you be successful; While God gives you talent, your mentor can teach you how to use it, but it is up to you to have the positive attitude to propel it forward.  Focus on commitment and excellence by looking at what matters NOW.  As I heard the legendary Coach Lou Holtz say once, “Analyze the past, focus on the future, but do your best now.  Don’t look back.”

I hear from people often enough about how this obstacle is in their path or that obstacle is blocking their success, but when I look at people with real, live, seemingly insurmountable hurdles, I find it personally difficult to imagine that there is anything that can keep me from achieving success if I really desire it.  I can come up with story after story about real people who have been successful despite the walls obstructing their path.  When faced with these odds, think about people who you find inspiring and let the thought of their own success help lighten your load.

When all seems to be unwinnable, however, remember that many challenges you are faced with are simply one battle in a total war.  You may be losing today, but if you can use that loss to rebound and develop an overall winning strategy, you can make it.  If the Spartan forces simply threw up their hands and gave up after losing at Thermopylae, the Greeks might well have been speaking Persian from that point forward (of course, the Spartans delivered a serious ass-kicking in the process, but I digress).  Instead they used that heroic stand as a motivating agent to carry the fight to the Persians and to defeat Xerxes.

How can we appeal to our colleagues that we need to develop a culture of success; a culture of innovation; of professionalism; of overwhelming customer care- not just to the taxpayers but to each other.  If we in emergency services focus on what extra value we can provide to our colleagues, they will also see that this is the way to be.  I’d suggest that as much as possible, to be helpful; we have the choice to challenge ourselves within reason to do whatever it takes to work together, to solve problems, to serve, and to make others feel important.  Do a little extra.

As a leader, it is easy to become frustrated or weary when things don’t go according to plan.  While there are some events that might prove to be especially daunting, remember that no real success ever came easily.  If winning were easy, everyone would be doing it.  Instead, when things aren’t the best, take the time to walk away from things for a little while, take some time to relax, and see if you can gain a different perspective on things.  You might find that by doing so you find a different or more ingenious solution to your needs and come out ahead in the long run.  Persevere, don’t perish.

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.

Get Your Facts Straight

No comments

DSC00043As usual, Dave Statter is hard at work getting us News from the Beltway, where there always seems like something is going on (it’s a happening place).  In this case, crews were on scene preparing to extricate a patient declared deceased when it was determined that the victim was in fact, alive.  While I was not there, nor are all the facts out there for examination yet, it makes for a very graphic illustration of today’s discussion: What facts may seem to be in evidence right now may not always be accurate, thus the need for continual re-evaluation of your situation.

I’m not advocating continual monitoring of the “pre-hospital dead”, although I would hope that this is a good case for the medically affiliated that we need to insure pulslessness and apnea, and confirm asystole in three leads (and print it).  That is called triangulating your facts and documenting them in the hopes things don’t change later (like the person is actually alive).

No, what I want to discuss is that in all kinds of places where we need to make a decision, even though something appears to be true right now, it might not be in a few minutes, a few hours, or a few days.  Conditions change and regardless of the origin of the facts you hold dear, they might not always be accurate facts.  The response to this ever-changing environment isn’t to throw up your hands in frustration (like my children and firefighters seem to do sometimes), but to re-evaluate your situation and to flex with the new conditions.  There’s a quote attributed to Whitey Ford I heard years ago (and of course, I can’t find my source now) and I have to paraphrase it because I don’t remember it exactly: “Don’t make up your mind about something until the moment you absolutely have to; it may be that by the time for coming to a conclusion occurs, the conditions may have changed.”

People who worked with me closely before I made Chief probably recall my frustration with schedule changes, personnel changes, equipment and apparatus changes that occurred over the course of a shift, often with no warning.  Now as a Chief Officer, I have a different perspective on the situation because I now have to step back and look at “the whole forest”.  I now understand how and why some of those “course changes” have come about and I also see why frustration with those changes is counterproductive.

As firefighters, we deal with changing conditions on scene without too much drama.  We know Murphy is a constant companion and if anything, we are surprised if everything goes RIGHT on a scene.  No incident is “textbook”.  But because we are good at our jobs, we flex with the new situation, understand it, and make whatever we have work.  Why we can’t do that in our daily operations, I guess, is my question.

If there’s anything I know about myself, it’s that I know I am not a patient man.  In fact, I’m probably one of the least patient people I know.  I also know I don’t have a lot of tolerance for less-than-excellent performance.  But part of maturing and growing involves experience, and experience shows us that there are many changing elements that occur over the course of a day, and a life, and reacting to them rather than soaking them in and understanding them (and then solving the problem) isn’t productive.  In fact, it is stressful and irritating to those who we have to live with.

I have a lot of personal growth and understanding to continue working toward and I wish some of this stuff would have been shared with me when I was a firefighter and a young officer, but it wasn’t.  I now have that benefit of experience, though, and it is my responsibility to share it with you all.  Take the time to understand the situation and instead of criticizing, find benefit in the lessons we learn and resolve not to let mistakes happen again, or at least in the environment we personally control.

Get facts before making critical decisions and don’t dwell on them too long, because in many cases, the facts will change before you even get a chance to decide on them.  Take decisive action when necessary, and when not, take considered action, and always, always, continue to re-evaluate the situation. By understanding your surroundings, you will be safer and your life richer for it.

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.

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.

The Fixers

5 comments
webIMG_1675

How can we help you today?

Are you a fire department or are you an EMS service?  Do you do both?  The knee-jerk reaction I sometimes get was one coined by a previous chief, “We are an EMS agency providing fire service”.  In fact, it sounds so clever that there are a vocal few who like to throw that out there time and time again, like they were the ones who originally came up with the concept (they’re paramedics, so they’re a little biased, I’m sure).

Something I said in a much earlier blog bears repeating:  customer relations are essential for any department operating in this day and age.  There are those who continue to disagree with the use of the word “customer” when referring to those who use our service.  Respectfully, I also continue to insist that just because they don’t walk into your shop and buy something doesn’t mean they don’t have a choice in using your service.  Taxpayers may not be able to change providers, but with enough votes, they can radically change your organization.

The world can change overnight.  If you think the current model of how we provide service is going to last another 200 years, think again.  As our customers become more educated and expect more innovation from government, look for them to insist on ways we can do things better.  We need to continuously and constantly evaluate our direction and possibly even reinvent  our concepts in order to stay out front.  Good customer service revolves around recognizing the needs of our customers and using our skills, abilities and past experience to improve service quality and to provide excellent service.

As has happened over really the last thirty years, our industry has evolved into one that defies definition, one that more and more reflects all-hazard response.  I’m going to go on record to say that I’m even confused as to what to call us anymore.  There’s a famous paragraph in Report From Engine 82 (Dennis Smith) that I’ll paraphrase, because I can’t remember it exactly.

In this city, when you turn on a wall switch, you may or may not get a light.  When you turn a faucet, you may or may not get water.  If you pick up a phone, you may or may not get a dial tone.  But everybody knows that if you pull the handle on that red box, you WILL get a fire truck.

The purpose of my poorly remembered paraphrasing of that statement was to illustrate that times have not changed from when the book was published in 1972; just substitute “call 9-1-1″ for “pull the handle on that red box”.  But what we have become has, as we become EMTs and HAZMAT Technicians and Water Rescue Technicians and etc., etc.  I read “Report” cover to cover when it first came out (I was eight- I’m a good reader) and the context of that paragraph has stuck with me forever.  Dennis Smith points out in his story how the fire department was used to handle plumbing issues, to handle overdoses, and to handle pretty much anything up to and including, things that happen to be burning.

So back to customer service; what is our mission?  Why do we exist?  If your answer is, “To protect people from fire” or “To help the sick and injured”, I’d suggest that maybe you should reconsider all of those calls that don’t meet that definition as distracting you from that mission.  If you’re anything like me and the organization I work for, I’d say that not handling those calls is probably counter to the needs of your community.  And what your mission should really be, is defined by those needs.

When someone dials 9-1-1 (or whatever they dial in your community), they do so because they have a problem they can’t handle themselves (or should I say they don’t know how to handle), they don’t have the resources to handle the problem, and they don’t have anywhere to turn for an answer.  Obviously, you are saying, “Well, if my pipes are leaking, why wouldn’t I call the plumber?”  Again, think about the ENTIRE situation.  Maybe they can’t afford a plumber.  Maybe they can’t find a plumber to come out.  Maybe they are totally freaked out by the situation and not thinking clearly.  There are many answers to the question, but the long and short of it is, they trust YOU to help them solve the problem and YOU are the people they call.

So what I’m telling you is that our job REALLY is to respond to a request for help, gather facts about the problem, analyze the options, apply a solution, and ultimately, stabilize the situation.  We may not FIX the problem, but when we leave, things should at least be stable.  We really don’t need doctor-wannabes or adrenaline junkies for our job, what we need are people who can look at any situation and understand the situation, then apply creativity using the resources at hand (either on site or on that BRT you brought) to stabilize their situation.  And further along that line, we’re not asking these individuals to rebuild the house, we’re asking them to stop the forward progress of the damaging element (or disease process or whatever it is) and return some means of order to chaos.  We’re not building a piano here, we’re improvising and hopefully we’ll come out with something that can at least pass for a musical instrument of some sort.

What should our business be called?  What is it that we do?  How can we possibly have meaning in our life if we don’t have a label or title for our life’s ambition?  When I hear of the trash guy being called a “Sanitation Technician”  or a dog-walker a “Pet Care Specialist”, I wonder what title really defines what it is we do.  What it really comes down to is that everyone recognizes the title for your job more than you could ever know.  When someone asks me what I do for a living, I answer, “I’m a Firefighter”.  The knowing look on their faces and the subsequent questions about my job, my worst call, my most stupid call, etc. confirm for me that most everyone understands what our job is really all about.  Now the bigger goal is to get those of us who do it to understand that as well.

Use of Faith-Based NGOs As Disaster Response Partners

2 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.

Distance Separates Us

5 comments

ladder talk webDistance separates us.  Of course it does, you are probably thinking.  That’s not that much of a revelation.  But distance separates us all the more so because by being distant, or more so, by not being alike, it also indicates a schism between you and I.  The fire and emergency services are united in our history, but at some point we evolved into many different representations of the same idea: service to others.  As to whether that space can be broached or not is the big question.  While we can all claim brotherhood and a desire to do this job, whether we are career or not; whether we are urban or not; whether we provide EMS or not; and a whole host of other differences keep us from effectively saying “We Are One”.

Over the past decade, the efforts Dave Iannone and Chris Hebert have put together brought a lot of us old crusties to the digital age.  These innovative experiences took firefighters (and non-firefighters) from around the world and brought us closer together.   But while this has been a good thing because I now know and can better understand the perspectives of a volunteer firefighter in Moosejaw, AK as well as a firie in New South Wales, Australia, it is saddening because I see some of what I had hoped not to see.

Although I was first promoted to officer rank in 1985, I’m afraid I wasn’t a very good officer.  Sure I could run tactics and make sure people were doing their jobs, but I lacked maturity and looking back on it, depth.   In 1988, my eyes were opened.  During a weekend seminar on Fire Service Leadership, Chief Harry Diezel (Ret, Virginia Beach Fire Department) opened my eyes and put me on the path that I have since continued along.  Twenty years ago, this guy said that networking was one of the single most important elements of leading. Yes, twenty years ago.

I quickly found out what firefighting was and was not about.  In that one class, I realized that there was firefighting, there was being a fire officer, and there was fire service leadership.  While I never had the opportunity to work with Chief Diezel, his words have never left me.  Although some of his ideas still are met with resistance from some of our colleagues and did that weekend from people in the class, the ideas have only been confirmed over the years to me as his concept of emergency service delivery made Virginia Beach one of the model departments of the Eighties.  Over the years, people like Howard Cross, a legendary instructor at the National Fire Academy, have also reinforced those concepts to me.

Like these individuals did for me, I have always wanted to do for others.  Firehouse Zen is part of that legacy.  I want others to look at this job with renewed perspective, to comprehend, rather than simply demonstrate knowledge.  To understand, rather than to just repeat memorized information.  To seek alternatives, to improve, and to be about positive change rather than to be about the status quo.

FireEMSBlogs.com is just a natural evolution of sharing this body of knowledge.  Dave and Chris have done a tremendous job to bring us together and to allow us to share experiences, to bond, and to better appreciate the situation each of us must face daily.  We have, however, light years ahead of us and so long as we refuse to acknowledge that our differences are actually a good thing, we will never be united.

To effect change, we must seek to understand.  To understand, we have to be presented with knowledge and that knowledge comes from others.  As the internet bridges the miles and brings our world closer together, we are finding that we share a lot more than we thought we had in common, and yet we also find ourselves unwilling to accept the views of others and even assault those who happen to share a contrarian view.  In order to grow, it is imperative that we open our minds and take the tools we are given, and use them to the best advantage.  Do us all a favor this year; point a colleague toward some of the networking opportunities out there, especially the one afforded by FireEMSBlogs.com, and tell them that there’s no time like the present to start working toward tomorrow.

Science Is Your Friend

1 comment

While taking Honora to school a few days ago, Bob Edwards was speaking on NPR Radio with Chris Mooney and Sheril Kirshenbaum, the authors of the book, “Unscientific America”.  While the book apparently discusses “scientific illiteracy”, some of the commentary seemed applicable to what we currently endure in the fire service; clinging to tradition for tradition’s sake and the global ignorance of scientific findings that can improve our efficiency and safety.

The authors, in discussing their premise, suggested that the general populace isn’t stupid when it comes to science, they’re just disengaged.  The idea that they put forth is essentially that science needs to discover a way to get people to re-engage on the issues, which is not as easy as it might seem.  While the scientific community as a whole might not necessarily agree upon the ways to communicate their issues, for scientists and supporters of science to simply dismiss the “emotional side” (my quote) of others when it comes to scientific issues is turning their back on the problem.

In the early to middle parts of the last century, scientists were looked at as heroes.  Science brought us protection against disease; it brought us innovative fabrics and materials.  Science ushered in a nuclear age and took us to the Moon.  Science, however became pedestrian or became background noise.  Although Mooney and Kirshenbaum didn’t suggest it, I suggest that maybe we all began to take these accomplishments for granted.  Consider that every other time I upgrade my computer it becomes a third smaller and four times faster (and I seem to have to upgrade these bad boys about every two or three years).  While the laptop I am typing this on has 500 GB of storage, my first work computer back in 1988 had MAYBE a 120 megabyte hard drive.  Since I wasn’t so computer literate back then, I couldn’t even begin to tell you how much RAM it had.

While these technological miracles happen almost daily, maybe they’ve become a little too commonplace.  And of course, the unintentional wall established between science and the rest of us (maybe I’m a bad example) doesn’t afford any converts.  In fact, the authors discussed that Carl Sagan suffered considerable stigma from the scientific community because of his efforts to put science in a context others could understand.  The result was that he was considered to have “populist” (their quote) views and was somehow, not worthy of inclusion into the supporters of science.

What has happened is that science just isn’t as popular a subject.  Mooney stated that if you read the newspaper, “Science doesn’t beat the horoscope or the sports pages” among most people.  Along with the theory that your political view influences your perspective on science (I’d agree with that), especially in this day of deeply divided emotions about our nation and the people who run it, I’d bet that the thought of discussing some of these scientific endeavors (stem cell research, evolution, etc.) with some of your friends or family probably makes you uncomfortable, regardless of where you stand.  So it’s no question that science in many circles, isn’t exactly a hot topic of conversation.  In fact, unless you are surrounded by a bunch of like-thinkers, you might well avoid scientific discussion altogether.

So just as goes science as a discussion for us all, so goes the fire service for those of us within it.  Go to any firehouse and you’ll see some strong feelings on certain fire service topics.  For any of us to discuss deeply held beliefs about our fire service brings up some pretty raw emotion.  Depending where you sit on many of these issues, sometimes it is better to sit it out and watch the fighting than it is to engage.  Why is that?  Well, I know personally, while I don’t shy away from conflict, I am not interested in engaging in an all-out battle with anyone who just can’t see any side of the issues except the one they are on.  If I choose to remain open-minded and civil, so must you.  That doesn’t seem to prevent people from acting like assholes though (yeah, I said it).

Blogging and posting is a little unique.  The anonymity of being online seems to permit some of the less enlightened individuals to pipe up when they should probably just stick a sock in it and slink back to their corner.  Especially when I’m being lectured by some moron who has two or three years under his (or her) belt and all of a sudden, they are the subject matter expert du jour.  Since the privacy of the internet protects cowards and psychos from getting popped in the mouth if they cross the line, I’d just as soon focus on positive discussion, but it doesn’t seem to stop some of them.

The emergency service industry, as does the scientific community, must remain objective while considering the deeply held beliefs and traditions of those who came before us.  While it seems that logic should overturn any voodoo, the scientific community can’t be dismissive of the emotion attached to these beliefs, because they can be equally as powerful, and no scientist has really been able to explain that.

I’ve said before that I love the traditions of the fire service.  I come from four generations of firefighters and I am proud of that heritage.  But just as my grandfather and my father were renegades and agitating for change and improvement, so do I.  I’m happy to keep a roto-ray on the front of my engine, but I’m not so keen on rushing so quickly to a fire alarm that I flip a rig.  I guess that’s a tradition that seemed to occur a lot in the past that I’d just as soon leave behind.  And yes, there are some who still think that this is acceptable behavior, as do those who think risk/benefit analysis is for sissies.

If we really want change, we have to understand that it scares some people.  Being dismissive of their fears or their preconceived beliefs doesn’t bring them to us in harmony, it creates division.  Understanding how and why things do the things they do is just as important as understanding who we are and where we came from and how we got here.  Since most of you reading this already get “IT”, I’m probably preaching to the choir, but perhaps we can do a better job of reaching out to the dinosaurs and conveying our respect for the way things were done, as well as educating them on safe and effective practices.

Understand that although scientific exploration may bear out an idea and that idea is as right as rain, that same idea will remain locked up in your head somewhere if you’re unable or unwilling to frame the idea into something everyone can understand and eventually, embrace.  If I had the universal answer to all of our problems, I wouldn’t be sitting here asking you open-ended questions.  But it seems that the questions keep getting asked and we aren’t hitting on the answers.

As a brotherhood, we need to band together and discover what others have found before us.  That together we can work toward improving public safety while striving for our own safety as well.  That tradition is important, but it doesn’t supplant common sense.  And that science, in reaching out to find answers to our questions, has achieved a method of achieving logical approaches to many problems, but we have to sometimes choke back emotion and realize that improvement sometimes means walking away from the treasured, but flawed, reasoning of our past.

Turtles, Circumstances, and Change

No comments

Hilton Head Engine 7Just this week, not only on our relatively quiet haven of Hilton Head Island, but right here in the community in which I live (Palmetto Dunes), comes a story which has become national news.  Before I knew it would be on CNN and everywhere else, I read in our Island Packet this article on a romantic proposal gone wrong, and the subsequent death of sea turtles.  Now while I never really thought I might read in the same article anywhere, the words “sea turtle”, “romance”, and “death”, you really might be wondering, “What does this have to do with the fire service?”  I can reassure you that it does. 

 

How it does is that it clearly illustrates the law of unintended circumstances.  I’d be willing to bet you that no one involved in this story desired to kill off 60 turtles and had no idea that their simple luminary tribute to the sanctity of marriage would touch off what ended up on the AP news feed.  But as a result of something they did, or might also be the case in our situation in fire and emergency services, didn’t do, there was heartache, conflict, and even injury and death.

 

Actions are taken in our fire stations and on emergency scenes on a daily basis that sometimes go badly, and I would venture to guess that 99.9% of actions that resulted in poor outcomes were purely unintentional.  However unintentional these actions (or inactions) are, though, our actions may have wide-ranging impact on our entire organization.  Our actions or inactions may not even be noticed today, or could end up as front page news.  We must constantly be vigilant of the actions we take and how they affect our current situation, and even more importantly, our team, our agency, and our customers.  What may seem insignificant to us may end up costing someone their life later.

 

Working together as a team, we have to have the courage and the ability to say, “Hey, that doesn’t look right” to our colleagues, and they should also be able to say it to us.  It’s a basic tenet of crew resource management.  Fostering this attitude in your team requires cultural and social change, especially in our traditional paramilitary hierarchy.  Our most important role in this concept is awareness of the things we do and importantly enough, to do things right, as well as to be open to the suggestion from others that we should be doing something differently.

 

Being in the position of a transformational leader requires more than being right, it requires us to be open to the idea that we might not be.  As part of a team, when we make a mistake, we must strive to understand what occurred and what the results were, so that we and others don’t repeat that mistake.  When we mistakenly lay off blame we don’t really learn from the mistake. 

 

I had a driver once who had a minor accident with the apparatus we were assigned to.  It was obviously a result of a failure for someone else to do their job.  But he owned that situation and every time he pulled out of the station from then on out, I noticed him looking to insure it never happened again.  It is imperative for us to understand our shortcomings (hey, I have many), own them, and resolve to do better next time. 

 

I’d say that if that couple ever does decide to re-visit our Island again, they’ll never forget to blow out the candles when leaving the beach.  It’s called a watershed moment,  In our lives, it is one thing, but when we have one of these events occur while operating as part of a team we are tasked with leading, it is a requirement that we critique it, learn from it, and resolve to not let it happen again.

Ambition

1 comment

At Mass today there was a reading from the Letter of St. James that got me thinking: “Where jealousy and selfish ambition exist, there is disorder and every foul practice.”  It goes on to say, “Where do the conflicts among you come from?  Is it not from passions that make war within your members?”

It reminded me of several passages from the Tao Te Ching, one of which says: “Those on tiptoe don’t stand up, those who take long strides do not walk; those who see themselves are not perceptive, those who assert themselves are not illustrious.”

These are some teachings that have lasted centuries and what, exactly have we taken from them?  When I was younger, I wanted it all.  When I grew up and could have it all, it was hard at first for me to understand, but I realized that it wasn’t altogether worth it.  Power comes from within and can’t be seized.  If you let it come to you, it will.

Conflict comes from people wanting something.  The amusing part of that is those who have power will say all day long, “If you really want it, you have to let it come to you.”  I’ve found that to not exactly be true.  That concept relies on enlightened leaders seeking people who are also enlightened, and not on surrounding oneself with “yes-men” and deceivers.  Had I waited my whole life for people to come to me and ask for my help, I’d probably still be waiting.

Thus the neverending struggle between seizing opportunities and creating them;  I have put a significant amount of research into what it would take for me to get from Point “A” to Point “B” and in some cases, made it happen.  I’m happy to say, however, that a lot of what I have accomplished has actually come about because I didn’t walk up the backs of others to get where I am at.

Ambition is not necessarily a bad thing; being deceptive, manipulative, and doing things contrary to the good of the team and the public we serve is.  What we individually have as a vision of our organization is proper if it involves service to the people we are charged to protect and assist, and not if it involves the “benefits” of public service.  By those, I mean the “perks” of having a badge, importance in the community, and the ability to lord over others and speak down to people.

There is such a thing as being an advocate for those who have no power, for standing up and doing the right thing, even when the right thing requires going out of our way to do so.  The other day I was driving down the road in my chief’s wagon and saw a family broken down on the side of the road.  I also saw several other official vehicles (not ours, thank God) pass these people by.  Had I been going somewhere in a hurry, would I have stopped?  Maybe those other official vehicles had places to go and people to see.  I stopped and helped them out.  They were grateful but I didn’t do it for their gratitude, I did it because it was the right thing to do.

As leaders, are we interested in the chase for power?  Or what we can do with the power once we have it?  I was talking about money with my oldest daughter today and explained to her, what good is money if you already have what you need and you are more interested in accumulating “stuff”?  Wouldn’t it be a better idea to help others who are in need, or at least taking the time to do something nice for others?  Once we hit the mark we desired, as a company officer, or a chief officer, what will we do with that newly found power?  Will we share it with others and empower them?  Or will we use it to beat others down and tell them what to do and where to go?

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.

Reserving Our Scorn for the Deserving

7 comments
Hot Day on the Training Ground

Hot Day on the Training Ground

I know that I am one of the chief purveyors of snarkiness as a means of combating the less-than-professional element in our midst.  I guess that just because I have a personal vision of what I’d like to see the fire service evolve into, there are those out there who also have a vision of well-lit POVs and thumping bass stereo in their engines as what is considered to be worthy of discussion.  However, just as many other red-blooded males of the species, I’m okay with crushing my enemies, seeing them driven before me, and hearing the lamentations of their women.  To each his own, I suppose.

So the dilemma, I guess, is which battles need to be fought and to what degree.  This then relates to what level of sarcasm should be employed when you are trying to point out that someone is discussing what we consider to be bizarre or to the extreme and we are trying to point out that yes, they are an idiot.  As I have found out over the years(and especially recently), the degree of snarkiness should probably be limited when dealing with the less fortunate, the disadvantaged, and the criminally insane.

As to why we blog or write, there are different reasons, of course.  I am not interested in blogging for the interest of stirring up hate and discontent, except as it goes to encourage spirited but civil debate over subjects that require deeper thought.  So for me, my reason for writing and expecting feedback is to ask questions to challenge the minds of others, in an effort to learn more and to grow. 

Some people blog and posts to hear themselves speak.  Just as when we must tolerate the gas from a nearby infant, what comes out of the mouths of some of these people may stink, but just as we wouldn’t flame a child for passing an offensive cloud in our direction, we must consider the source of some of these scratchings (”writings” would be pretty charitable for some) and be relatively tolerant. 

Likewise, no amount of clever rhetoric is going to get you back the thousands you’ll have to spend defending a frivolous lawsuit.  What it really all comes down to is that we must decide for ourselves what is harmless and what is dangerous, and go after the dangerous and ill-advised.  All other discussion is probably wasted because with some of these individuals, no amount of logic will sway them from their misdirected viewpoint.

I guess my measurement on deciding which individuals should be dealt with would be that there are those whose views are derived either because of laziness (and reluctance to change because it would require them to do something other than to take up space), those who are as a result of ego or greed guarding their domain (and reluctant to change because it would cost them their position in our “society”), those who are defrauding others (for whatever reason, again as a result of ego or greed, aware that change would cause people to analyze their claims), and the malicious.

Believe it or not, I don’t find too many people in our business that fit into the category of deserving of a flame attack.  In most of the cases I have found where I am dealing with someone who gets my temper to flare up, after a few moments of deep breathing I have found that they fit into the category of the misinformed.  The question then is, are they receptive to education, or is it me who needs to be educated?  After all, maybe I’m the one who was misinformed or misunderstood the issue.  The key, I have found, is that both parties need to be open to civil discourse and willing to appreciate the viewpoint of their counterpart.  It is in this area where I find many of us, including myself, to need improvement.

By checking our emotions at the door and getting to the point of the discussion, figuring out the difference between factual information and rhetoric, we achieve enlightenment.  Let me paraphrase something from the Tao Te Ching; the useful part of a jar isn’t the jar, it is the empty space within the jar.  Unless we are willing and able to understand someone else’s position on a subject, no matter how right or wrong, we will not be able to teach someone the truth, or appreciate the truth ourselves.  In understanding how someone comes to a conclusion, we can then effectively show the way, if that is what is necessary, or we can be shown the way.

I may have lost some of you with that, but it is in this that you can probably see the point better.  When was the last time you were completely convinced that something was the truth, only to find out after time that you were wrong?  So in that interim, did you find yourself defending that “truth” to the point of being uncivil to another?  How did you feel then about what you said or did that may have been to defend your position, only to find out now that you were wrong?  Did you regret your actions?

There is an eastern tradition that the victorious should be be magnanimous in victory and as much as possible, allow the defeated to save face.  In doing so, you secure allies and you earn respect.  If you trot around like T.O. after a touchdown after winning your point, be reassured that if you are ever wrong, it will be rubbed in your face (like I wish someone would do to T.O.).  When you are convincing someone of your point, you’ll find it to be a good move to win them over rather than to point out their folly and subsequently, you’ll find that you gain trust and respect as well.

It may feel good to be snarky and rub someone’s face in their ignorance (I enjoy it), but after a while, you’ll find it to be a hollow victory.   I’m sure we can all agree we should never attack the unarmed, and in a battle of wits, that is the root cause of much of the problem. So instead of being smug about our victory, maybe we should celebrate together that we have another convert to our cause.  That seems to be a more appropriate celebration anyway.

I Had A Vision

No comments

IMG_0631I woke up this morning with an idea for emergency services that is already a reality.  It’s funny about technology in our business; innovation driven by the private sector and the military is implemented and has probably run through four or five revisions, then we look at it and say, “Wow, this is amazing technology!” while the others have likely moved on.

I was thinking about the use of RFID, or “radio frequency identification” for you non-geeks out there.  Now while we have discussed the use of RFID for personnel accountability (which you could embed in your credential we have been beating on about over the last month and I have decided to let rest for a bit), where as you pass through a checkpoint at an incident, the RFID chip would log you in, plus pertinent data, and make it much easier to manage the locations of your valuable assets (that would be your people).

But another application that private industry and the military have used RFID for is for logistics management.  For a while I have gone on in our department about the use of bar coding to produce a reliable determination of asset location (if you can’t scan the code, the item is obviously not there).  But in the case of RFID, what I was thinking is that you could have a portal- like at the bay doors- that would scan your vehicle, with all of the RFID-chipped tools and assorted equipment, and tell you what was there and what wasn’t.  While you were at it, you could actually tell WHICH item it was; for example, the generator on your engine is Acme Fire Department Generator #3.  Well, Generator #3 is due for maintenance.  Or Generator #3 was swapped out at your last preventative maintenance cycle and you actually have Generator #21.  And your Maintenance/Logistics folks just happen to be looking for Generator #21 because it has to have a whatsit retrofitted.  You see where I’m going with this?  You could actually know if Engine 1 went out the door with everything on it or not.

If your department is anything like my department, and your firefighters anything like my firefighters, you are asking, “isn’t this going to be expensive to replace when we break the chip?”  You all know that if you put a firefighter in an empty locked room with two ball bearings he will break one and lose the other.  Well, if this stuff is ruggedized enough for the military, it’s likely that it will last at least a week in a fire station.

The sad part is, like I said, this is stuff that has been out there for a while.  But do YOU know about it?  Can you advocate for change and improvement if you don’t know what kind of change and improvement we are capable of?  What other ideas do you see being used in everyday life that have an application to our jobs?

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 – Organizations That Need to Go Away

9 comments
HHIFRD Truck 6 working a grinder.

HHIFRD Truck 6 working a grinder.

Here’s one for you; a subject near and dear to my heart and the reason why we have standards.  As a matter of clearing up any legal challenges, I have to make an official statement here as a result of some of the positions I hold:

My opinions and views as expressed here and throughout the Firehouse Zen blog site, are not, nor shall ever be, an official statement representing the Town of Hilton Head Island, Hilton Head Island Fire and Rescue, the State Urban Search and Rescue Alliance or its board, the State of South Carolina and the South Carolina Emergency Response Task Force, the National Fire Protection Association, and the committees on which I serve.  If I have missed someone, I’m sure I’ll hear about it. And if I do have something official to say from any of them, it’s not likely going to come out on here, but you’ll be the first to know if I do.

The reason for all the disclaimers?  Because I happen to work with a few bodies who get taken to task when we start talking about making people do things they should be doing anyway.  When we do these things, you know, make standards, the inner libertarian in some people comes out with a vengeance. I mean, really, who do I think I am, telling people that you should have a means to measure what you are and how you do it? 

Well, you can begin by blaming organizations and people who currently hold jurisdictional responsibilities and fail, for whatever reason, to adhere to consensus standards.  Why is the failure to uphold a consensus standard such a big deal?  Well, first off, when we break down what standards really do, they are really more of a definition than anything else.  Yes, a standard can be a way to tell you how to get to that defined place, or standards may be in place to define how something should be developed or occur, but the case of professional qualifications and those operations and training standards, the standards say, “you must achieve THESE things to be THIS”.  It is a label.

It doesn’t hurt that there are people or groups or things that want to wear that label, for whatever reason.  In most communities, people or groups or things require a label.  The label is there to make asking for that thing easier, but it also tells you what it is you are getting, especially if the standard has any acceptance at all.  If you went to the store and bought a box of Cheerios, and you opened it up at home and it was a box of rocks, I’ll bet you wouldn’t be happy.  But at least at the store, when you picked up that box of what should be Cheerios, and it was full of rocks, the weight would probably give it away that you had a problem.  The difference is, when I’m at a command post in the middle of Disasterville, if you tell me you are a box of Cheerios and the box of rocks shows up, how am I supposed to know that until you get there and I can see it for myself?

Then of course there’s that little thing called negligence that can be found at the intersection of: 1) duty; 2) breach; 3) causation; and 4) damages.  Why do we care? Standards are created to define what a competent person would do.  It defines their capability and provides not only the user and the teacher and everyone else an objective benchmark to measure against, but provides the lawyers a ruler to hold up against a case and say, “was what happened here considered to be an industry standard?”

But before we kill all the lawyers (I have friends who are lawyers and they’re actually nice guys, or at least these guys are), let’s pause for a little putting ourselves in someone else’s shoes.  I think I said it before in another blog, but it merits repeating.  A well respected South Carolina jurist once said this to a group I was with about 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)

Standards, too, are just that; if people (and subsequently, organizations) did their job the way it SHOULD be done, we wouldn’t need them (standards, that is).  But there are plenty of people and organizations who don’t.  And like I said, looking at standards as some sort of evil developed to help the legal community is actually a pretty cynical way of thinking.  The best (but certainly not the ONLY reason) for standards are that they give us a benchmark to measure against, they provide guidance for where to shoot for, they allow us to call an apple an apple and an orange an orange.  And this is where the discussion comes in regarding credentialing, and those agencies that should go away.

In all of this, the credentialing reinforces the idea that you put on the label, and you are what you say you are.  I don’t mean to suggest for a minute that a firefighter from Ajax Fire Department in Podunk, Saskatchewan has the same experience as a firefighter working a busy truck in North Philadelphia, but if they both carry credentials saying they met a minimum standard, at least you can trust that if they are both certified and credentialed through the same standard, that they both will be able to tell you which end of the ladder goes to the roof.  Does one have more firepower than the other?  You bet.  But we all at least know they started out on the same footing.

Of course, we have the organizations who are made up of people who are not comfortable with credentialing.  The agencies who insist that their organization is the rightful responder to a given incident, by way of statute or whatever legal standing that empowers them.  They then, for the means of deception, because that’s really what it is – you are deceiving others or deceiving yourself – you make the claim that your group/jurisdiction/etc. is equipped, trained and has a plan. At least that’s what you do when you declare, “I am Task Force so-and-so”, or put a patch on your jacket, or a sticker on your car, or wear the t-shirt, and then open your doors for business.  And you aren’t. 

Case in point:

Years ago, I was given the responsibility to do some research about the claims of an agency who purported to be an “urban search and rescue task force”.  In fact, there were two really interesting statements made to me (and even put in writing):  ”FEMA said that when the next teams are brought into the system, we will be the next one”, and “We finished in the top two teams that will be brought into the FEMA US&R system”.  So it was my responsibility, as given to me by an emergency management agency, to find out just what it was and wasn’t that this organization could really do.  To be short and sweet, it only took me a half-day.  Despite the presence of a patch, I was unable to find a plan, funding, or a cohesive legally authorizing document to even declare they were what they were. 

When I was serving in Horry County, SC during Hurricane Floyd, and before my current status as a pointer-of-fingers, I was impressed even then at the variations in type and kind that came waltzing into the staging areas.  Why is that a problem?  Just for example, let’s say that you have declared you and your pound hound a “US&R Canine Task Force”.  You then put it on the side of your car along with red lights and a siren, and you quickly get to be the guest of honor at several 11:00 news shows, saying that this is your label.  Well, if I’ve got ten stories compacted into about three, and I declare an incident, and I’m on the RECIEVING end, I’m gonna be pretty pissed when I call for a “US&R Canine Task Force” (whatever that is, anyway), and a guy, Fido, and a well-lit vehicle show up.  Because right off the bat, and I’m no genius, but a task force is at LEAST a multiple of SOMETHING and if this label is attached to an asset, then I am at least expecting a pick-up truck and maybe another dog (maybe).

So that label, then, well what does it get you?  Well, a label is only as good as the standard that defines it.  I’m not going to beat the old drum on here (it’s been roundly beaten), it would seem to me that if you (a credentialing authority) had some agency that got your highest mark and that agency was indisputably so far off the track of using modern incident management, currently accepted strategies and tactics, personnel accountability, etc., well, you’d probably change things pretty quickly to give your credential some real meaning.  I mean, if you don’t, it pretty much points the measurement out to be unreliable, doesn’t it?  But that measuring stick continues to exist in the same form, and yes, people are trying to change it, but the progress is slow.  You tell me- what kind of damage does that do to the argument in support of credentialing when currently existing measurement and validation processes we commonly use are such a joke?

There are plenty of organizations out there who claim to be doing the job that they were tasked to do, and they are simply squandering the taxpayers’ funds.  There are organizations out there who don’t get a dime of tax money that are taking up space and interfering with trained and equipped response assets.  There are people out there who wear a sleeve of patches saying they are this and that and they’re the last person I’d pick in a kickball game, much less to extricate my family out of a wreck.  So why do I want these groups to just go away?  Because there are those of us who genuinely want to provide the best service to my community (and yours, if I am deployed there) and when these clowns show up, they’re wasting my time and yours.  When I call for a “Type II Collapse Rescue Team” as defined by NIMS, then I’m expecting two six-man squads with a team leader and a logistics officer to show up, with equipment, trained and self-sufficient to a point.  If you show up with three bubbas in a pick-up with a tool box, just save me the energy of telling you to leave.  If we had credentialing, it would be easy to say, “THIS is what I am”, but right now, we have to take your word for it.

Who is against credentialing so far?  Well, the “Good Samaritan” has been, or at least many have made that satement clear to me.  I’m of the opinion they shouldn’t be worried about it because we really SHOULD incorporate them in somehow, but they’ve got to understand that if we can’t be sure of who they are or what they can do, we can only trust them to do things like direct traffic or man a chow line, and not run a track-hoe. 

Secondly, we have the people and agencies who are against credentialing because it’s going to point out to everyone that they aren’t exactly what they purport themselves to be, or are measuring themselves with an inappropriate, or ancient, or idiotic standard.  Like I said with them, they need to get with the program, do the right thing, and either step up to the 21st Century, or get out.  If you are advertising yourself to be a box of Cheerios, be the tastiest and crispest Cheerios anyone ever poured into a bowl, and not a box of rocks.

In the next installment, let’s talk about the thrill seekers and glory hounds.  If you thought I was hard on this last group, guess again.

The Past Will Continue To Haunt Us

2 comments

I’m supposed to be working on my final Executive Fire Officer paper but in doing some literature review, I came across a voice from the past.  I happened upon a copy of “The Fire Chief’s Handbook” from 1978.  Now to someone like me, 1978 doesn’t sound like too long ago.  But putting it into perspective, there were no CD or DVD players then.  As a matter of fact, the Walkman hadn’t even been out yet. 

1978 was 31 years ago. That’s a long time for a lot of things, my friends, much less for a book. But here I am, three decades later, reading this paragraph:

It is not difficult to convince a community that attention should be given to certain technical aspects of fire extinguishment.  It is much more difficult, however, to convince a municipality that increased knowledge and skill in management have now become necessary to insure the most efficient use of resources invested in protecting life and property against fire.

The discussion goes on to say that “until recently, fire protection in most of our communities had been a relatively simple and catch-as-catch can affair”.  Wow- so thirty years ago, you’re saying there was actually some discussion about increasing requirements and demands?  Sounds like a familiar argument.

So I guess when I hear someone balking at the needs for higher education and a new approach because our industry is evolving into a more complex environment, I guess we’re still talking about things we were talking about, well, when disco was popular.

I think I’ll make this short and sweet because I’ve got a lot to do, but isn’t it odd that what was considered the seminal book on fire service management was pointing out then what we still haven’t accepted now?  I’ve said several times before, that the fire service will go into the 21st Century, like it or not, kicking and screaming even, but as our world evolves around us and things change, if we continue to resist change, we ourselves will become an anachronism. As long as organizations and leaders think that the fire service will go on without turmoil by just sticking your head in the sand and hoping it will all go away, it won’t.  When you come up, the world will be telling you that if you don’t evolve, you may not survive.

Growth

No comments

red-forklift1If you aren’t making mistakes, you aren’t reaching far enough. Of course, when we are talking about something like making a decision on dinner, it’s one thing, but when it is something where your career is on the line, it’s a whole other ballgame.

The problem is though, that sometimes we have to reach out of that comfort zone and stretch, or else we aren’t going to have any new experiences, and new experiences are what it takes to truly learn.  From each new experience, other opportunities open up and provide us again another chance to learn.  It’s a never ending cycle if done right.

If you bring a potted plant home and leave it in the pot, it’ll grow for a while, but ultimately, it will only grow as big as the root system can manage, and in the confines of a small pot, that’s not likely to be far.  But put that plant in the ground, give it the right amount of care, and it will do well and thrive.  Likewise, though, transplant it into the ground and abandon it, and likely it won’t.

Personal growth is necessary for success.  It goes without saying that no one is simply born a success, unless your parents happen to grace the tabloid pages regularly, and it should go without saying, that’s not success.  Success and fame aren’t necessarily the same; success requires achievement, and achievement requires effort. 

But even the most effort in the wrong place or at the wrong time can be wasted.  If you took that same plant, and transplanted it into the ground in say, Antarctica, all the hard work, fertilizer, and love isn’t going to keep that plant alive.  You have to seek opportunities to put your efforts into, do them with passion, and if the time is right and the conditions right, success will bloom.

When you give everything your best and things don’t go right, consider that sometimes the timing isn’t right or perhaps you needed another factor to work that you hadn’t considered.  But even the most talented gardener will tell you, you can’t just give up because one of your projects went bad.  You have to look hard at what went wrong, learn from it, and make the changes to improve for the next time.

Just Wanna Have Fun

2 comments
Did this get your attention?

Did this get your attention?

I started to title this, “Girls Just Wanna Have Fun”, but no matter what I did, that title wasn’t fitting really well.  Soooo, as you may be able to tell from the title, I just wanna talk a little bit about being serious and not being serious.  On any number of occasions, I (and a number of you) have ranted uncommented upon about firefighter safety, incident command, leadership, and any number of issues that are real, tangible concerns for the future of emergency services.  Hey, wake up; I said THE FUTURE.

In the meanwhile, in the opposite corner, and serving its purpose (and I don’t want to take anything away from these posts, because they’re apparently what “the people” want), are forums on “The Word Association Game“, with 2320 comments at last check,  and “Practical Jokes“, with 161 comments.  These are two forums on Firefighter Nation, if you didn’t know.

Now first off, I want to commend these authors, because they have generated traffic like you wouldn’t believe, and they did it without running a picture of a scantily clad woman on the first page (which is also a guarantee for thousands of hits) and I think maybe this is a lesson we all need to look at and appreciate for what it tells us.

When I am going on about a subject near and dear to my heart – let’s take funding issues for an example – I find it relatively interesting, but admittedly it lacks the firepower of say, Firegeezer’s article on helmet types.  Don’t be swayed by the 13 comments (which I would kill for, by the way), this baby is taking hits like nobody’s business.  But people are PASSIONATE about their helmets (as I am, as you might already know) and they are interested in hearing more about what others think about the subject.

This all brings me back to the issue of marketing.  I don’t know what I can do to make firefighter safety and emergency service innovations and leadership “sexy”, but I can probably make it more funny, and hope it gets your attention.  I even hope it gets you to pass it along to others.  I MIGHT even hope it gets you to say, “Hey, that made me think”.  But the goal of most writers is to evoke some reaction (or even better, ACTION) in their audience and it serves the purpose of educating or enlightening others and the author gets feedback, which is important in determining whether they should keep writing, or find something else to do like Sodoku.

How would you feel if you were instructing a class, and you said something you really found important, and the whole class just sat silently and stared back at you (”is this thing on?”)? You’d probably be saying to yourself, “Did they miss that?” or “What part of that didn’t they understand?”  I understand that it’s different here on the blogosphere, but it’s really not that different.  Ask any blogger and they’ll tell you, what they really crave, more than the millions we make writing these things, is feedback.

If we all found ourselves in a situation where we had a message to pass along, but no one was interested in hearing it, we’d find ourselves in the same situation many of us are in as we try to advocate for improvement and for a safer workplace.  Honestly, I already know a lot about what I should be doing to keep myself and my crews safe, but I think it’s incumbent upon me as an emergency service leader to pass this stuff along to anyone who wants to listen.  The catch is, we (and I’m speaking for many of the authors of that deeper, less entertaining stuff) want to know if anyone is listening and there’s only one way we can know this, and that’s through feedback. And in providing this, not only do we know if we are getting it across to you, we ourselves also are learning in the process how to be better communicators and we are learning from you all through your experiences.  Let’s hear what you have to say and let’s try to have fun in the process.

To The Easily Offended

2 comments

sctf1-tx-060aIn another post, I mentioned a great homily by Father Chris where he spoke about getting the message out (you know, THE Message).  I specifically discussed one of his points about how, when someone in today’s society doesn’t agree with you, the expectation is that they have a “right” to be offended.  How if you have decided you don’t want Christianity in your life, you have a right to be offended by the manger scene on the corner, or if someone says that they believe that ___ is a sin, people have a right to be offended that you are talking about religion.

I guess where I am going with this blog is that there are a lot of people who should pretty much lighten up about some things, but it seems to me there’s a few people who should also lighten up and get with the program about things like firefighter safety, or more accurately, accountability, use of IMS, and not sending people in to fight fires in “lost causes”.

It seems that whenever one of these subjects comes up, there are always one or two out there who say, “Hey, we’ve been doing it this way for years, and I’ve been fighting fires since you were in diapers, blah, blah, blah, blah.” (I wrote that because that’s about where I stopped listening).  I remember one particularly spirited discussion on NIMS and what a crock of crap it was and that members of the XYZ (read: big city) Fire Department, by God, have been doing it this way without that NIMS stuff and maybe you all shouldn’t be a bunch of sissies (that’s not the word he used), blah, blah, blah.

So I guess what you’re saying then, is that despite any meaningful adaptations there are from the way we did stuff to the way the rest of us are doing stuff (in the 21st century) all of it is pretty much useless and we should go back to fighting fires with buckets and grappling hooks.  That would be fine, except that building construction has changed significantly and you aren’t going to pull much thatch off the roofs in my neighborhood.  Or maybe using single 2 1/2-inch supply lines and booster lines is really okay, except that in my city, we have large properties with huge fire loads that give off mega-amounts of BTUs that you won’t overcome with that red garden hose.  And being grossly out of shape is okay, except that now we carry more equipment than we did before, including the fact that we are going to have to go up and down stairs wearing SCBA and the heat being produced by today’s burning couch and other contents far exceeds the heat output of fires in the 50’s and 60’s.

Maybe, just maybe, it’s time some of you dug some of the wax out of your ears and listened to the voices of today’s fire service, and if you can’t fathom why change can be good, consider maybe it’s you that needs to change (a change in profession, that is).  Learn more about where we are going by studying the traditions of our past, but realize that tradition is nice when it comes to parades and retirements, but it has absolutely no place in the field of modern combat we call the fireground.

Someone Else's Shoes

1 comment

mvc-804040-037-aAs a companion to the post from the other day on Constant Battle, there’s something I also found to be very useful, that is, that understanding your “adversary” is almost as important as the facts of the issue itself.  I’m sure you have heard the adage about “walking a mile in someone else’s shoes”, but I can reassure you, that if you can appreciate the opposing viewpoint to your discussion and you can see the issue from the other person’s perspective, it can really help you to engage that person and possibly even defuse any ticking bombs lying under the surface.

In researching a paper I was writing over five years ago, I found a great article by Montgomery McFate in Joint Forces Quarterly, titled “The Military Utility of Understanding Adversary Culture“.  Looking at some of the “battles” I have fought over my years, I found that after reading this article and putting some of the lessons learned by the military into practice, I have been more successful in winning people over.

A couple of weeks ago, our parish priest, Father Chris, gave a homily on a similar theme.  In talking about missionaries over the last centuries, he pointed out that often success came as a result of appreciation for the differences in culture and embracing those differences, while educating on the issue at hand.  Something else he said, however, stuck with me; he observed that oftentimes, in today’s society, people feel victimized if someone feels differently than they do.

Instead of standing your ground resolutely on every issue and insisting that because others feel differently than you do, that they are absolutely wrong, maybe its time to reflect on what others think in regard to our issues to understand why it is they think the way they do. If we can see the problem from where someone else is standing, it might give us a better approach to solving our problems.

Someone Else's Shoes

1 comment

mvc-804040-037-aAs a companion to the post from the other day on Constant Battle, there’s something I also found to be very useful, that is, that understanding your “adversary” is almost as important as the facts of the issue itself.  I’m sure you have heard the adage about “walking a mile in someone else’s shoes”, but I can reassure you, that if you can appreciate the opposing viewpoint to your discussion and you can see the issue from the other person’s perspective, it can really help you to engage that person and possibly even defuse any ticking bombs lying under the surface.

In researching a paper I was writing over five years ago, I found a great article by Montgomery McFate in Joint Forces Quarterly, titled “The Military Utility of Understanding Adversary Culture“.  Looking at some of the “battles” I have fought over my years, I found that after reading this article and putting some of the lessons learned by the military into practice, I have been more successful in winning people over.

A couple of weeks ago, our parish priest, Father Chris, gave a homily on a similar theme.  In talking about missionaries over the last centuries, he pointed out that often success came as a result of appreciation for the differences in culture and embracing those differences, while educating on the issue at hand.  Something else he said, however, stuck with me; he observed that oftentimes, in today’s society, people feel victimized if someone feels differently than they do.

Instead of standing your ground resolutely on every issue and insisting that because others feel differently than you do, that they are absolutely wrong, maybe its time to reflect on what others think in regard to our issues to understand why it is they think the way they do. If we can see the problem from where someone else is standing, it might give us a better approach to solving our problems.

Missed Opportunities

1 comment

p1010075As a follow-up to my post from the other day about “striking while the iron is hot” in regard to educating others, I wanted to discuss a little bit about opportunity.

Ancticipating  that at some point, an opportunity will occur to implement your vision or educate others, good leaders plan for that moment, and await the timing to be right.  If you present a great idea before the time is ripe, the message can get lost and your efforts will be in vain.  It goes right back to my analogy of the home fire where taking that “educational moment” where the idea is fresh in everyones’ minds to discuss smoke detectors is beneficial; on any other day, the public just tunes it out and adds the message in with the other things going on that day.

I read a pretty good deal on military strategy as a way of gaining insight into leadership.  One of my favorite books is “Mastering the Art of War” by Thomas Cleary.  A great passage in this text is in “The Way of the General”, regarding the formation of opportunity.  In it, Cleary translates from Zhuge Liang:

There are three avenues of opportunity: events, trends, and conditions.  When opportunities occur through events but you are unable to respond, you are not smart.  When opportunities become active through a trend and yet you can not make plans, you are not wise.  When opportunities emerge through conditions but you cannot act on them, you are not bold.  Those skilled in generalship always achieve their victories by taking advantage of opportunities.

As a leader, there are ideas that you may have that may be courageous or bold, but others consider a little “out there”.  That comes with the territory of having vision, believe me.  But there is a great deal to be learned in this passage in regard to knowing what message you want to deliver, having it prepared, and shooting it out there when the timing is right.  It’s called effective communication.

Know that as a leader, you will be challenged with making changes that may not be popular or easy.  But in light of that, if you have the chance to insure the timing is right, a skilled leader will make their presentation while people are emotionally engaged with the issue. 

Don’t forsake your opportunity to make beneficial change to your organization or you community by missing out when the stars are aligned.  Be prepared in advance, know your subject, and sock it to them when the door opens. It might be your shining moment, and you certainly don’t want to be left in the dust when the moment occurs.