I fell asleep at my computer last night.

I am working on a project that has pretty much occupied all of my time over the course of the last three shifts. I think, in retrospect, that the reason that I am having to embark on this dreaded project is simply that a great number of people failed to understand that their actions or inaction created a mess that someday would have to be unraveled.

The mess doesn't even go back a short while.  When I say a great number, I am talking about numbers probably nearing a hundred.  Anyone close to this project that knows that I am talking in circles and understands the scope of this project might disagree with me, but I see the failure in my own interface with the situation, and I see the failures in many others who permitted the condition to occur, knowingly or not.

In a microscope, closely examining one piece of the puzzle, you might not even notice the problem exists.  But when you step back and look at the larger picture, you can see it is definitely crooked.  There are warning signs printed all over this and frankly, they were ignored. But they are insignificant when you step back even farther and realize that any problems we face today could have been avoided had individuals assumed some responsibility and did the right thing early on.

One of the principals in this project called out everyone else on the team and with good reason.  I say that because he is absolutely right; the system failed us.  Or to be clear, we failed the system, because it wasn't all to be blamed on the way we manage these situations.  Instead, key stakeholders ignored critical information.  They felt like status quo was acceptable. Or perhaps they felt inadequate to address the most pressing challenges.  I told this individual that while the historical aspect of how we got to this place is important, just to put the picture in perspective, who to blame is irrelevant. The situation is what it is and you can't unring a bell.  We must look forward.

Those of you reading this might assume you know what I am referring to, but I am suggesting to you that you re-read it and ask yourself, "What am I doing that is creating this same situation today?"  Because if you are honest with yourself, there are any number of issues I have to deal with that follow this chain of events and I am sure I am not alone.

I have quoted my father on any number of occasions in this regard, probably the quote that will stick with me for the rest of my life: "Do it right the first time."  Had we addressed the issues when they were small, had we fixed the leak, had we prevented the spark, had we communicated the concerns, if we had done any of these things, would they have corrected the problem before we got to this disaster we now embrace?

Let go of your concerns for a moment and realize that a drop of water contributes to the flood that sweeps away your home.  Everything affects everything else and that ripple becomes a wave, given the right conditions to grow.  Don't be part of the problem; solve the issues before they become a nightmare to untangle. 

Okay, let's talk about sacrifice. My wife, who is already suffering a post-Nepal-trip flu, fell asleep on our couch last night. At zero-dark-thirty this morning, our youngest daughter, Honora, woke up with similar symptoms. She went downstairs, curled up next to Kathleen on the couch and kept her awake for the remaining portion of the morning.  Kathleen did not wake me up, though she had an eight o'clock appointment with a client. By the time I woke up, she had Honora under control, got ready for work, then came downstairs and helped Emma, our oldest, create a faux buckskin tablecloth for her school project on indigenous cultures.  Between all of this, of course, she was also engaging our middle child, Caroline, who didn't want to be left out of the excitement.

The point of sharing this information is not to celebrate my wife's profound dedication to our daughters, although it is amazing and deserving of such praise.  The point is that true leadership requires sacrifice.  Real leaders don't just mail it in when they are tired, or sick, or having a bad day.  They put others first and they continue soldiering on.

Sacrifice is often associated with the Supreme Sacrifice, that of laying your life down for others.  I suggest that to lay down your life for others is different than laying your life down BECAUSE of others, as the former implies you are trading your life for theirs and the latter that you are simply dying with them.  I'm not going to go into the issues I alluded to yesterday, about not wanting to leave your fallen brother.  What I am getting at is that the act of laying your life down FOR another implies a trade, or the meaning of sacrifice in that you do something so that someone else can gain something.

My wife could have sent Honora to wake me up and continue sleeping, which she should have, but she did not.  My wife could have told Emma to suck it up, to figure out her project herself, but she did not.  She could have told Caroline to leave her alone, because she didn't have the time, but she did not.  She took one for the team, she did what she did, and she showed our daughters what it is that mothers do.  They sacrifice.

As an officer, you are called to sacrifice as well.  If you don't, you are just one of the gang.  You have to put on your game face and do what needs to be done, not only because it is your job, but as a leader, you have to lead.  You have to be in front, showing people the way.  You have to provide positive examples for your team.  You have to engage, coach, correct, reinforce, teach, and mentor.  This all requires time.  It requires patience.  It requires understanding your people and what motivates them.

Transformational leadership doesn't come about by simply telling someone what to do and expecting compliance.  It is the difference between catching the fish and teaching someone how to catch fish, as the saying goes.  It is one thing to catch the fish, it is entirely another to take the time to teach someone to do it for themselves.  But this sacrifice of time, if correctly applied, is an investment in the future.

When you think about leadership and stewardship, they are basically the same thing.  They involve "taking care" of something, usually people.  Leading can come about because you simply happen to be the person at the front of the line. But real leadership comes from knowing where to take that line and how to avoid pitfalls along the way.  That requires caring about everyone else and shepherding them to the final destination.  And because it requires you to do MORE than just following, it is in itself, sacrifice.

We can exist or we can take action.  We can take up space on this planet or we can work to make it a better place.  If you are reading this, except for those of you I shame into reading my articles because you are close friends or relatives, you are likely interested in learning more about leadership.  So I don't believe that existence is sufficient for what you have in mind.  Take hold of the standard, put it up high where others can see it, and advance. If you are doing it right, others will follow.  When they see you are willing to sacrifice, they may even offer to carry that flag for you.  And when they can create the same momentum, that, THAT is leadership.

I'm returning to my hometown November 4 through 6, 2011, for a few cheesesteaks (I'm a Pat's Steaks guy), to see some childhood friends, and mostly, to share some of my insights at the inaugural Liberty Regional Training Event presented by GoForward.

While Philly is a big place, the event is being held literally in my old backyard, within an easy walk from my old house.  And I should know, I used to have to do that all the time.  I actually used to sneak into the movie theatre that is in the hotel complex downstairs from the convention center during the summer and swim (unauthorized) in the hotel pool.  Back then it was a harmless day spent being a delinquent, nowadays, someone would have you hauled off to jail.

But all that being said, I'm excited to be involved in this event and from what we are seeing so far, the excitement isn't limited to me.  And further, if this and the others planned go off well, they could end up being regular stops packed with some of the most exciting names in today's (and tomorrow's) fire service. 

So while you have a chance, sign up, join me for a few cocktails on Friday night, and especially join me during my two scheduled presentations: Zen and the Chief Officer and You Can't Make This Stuff Up.  Hopefully I will be able to meet some of you who have only been able to interact with me here.  I'm looking forward to that weekend.

The lack of real leadership surfaces in a number of the world’s problems. I don’t necessarily feel like people can’t handle the job, I just think that in a lot of cases, people are designated as leaders who have no business in that position. To me, they are like gases with asphyxiant properties.

Some of these gases or mixtures aren’t necessarily harmful in and of themselves, but to us, their harm is that just by occupying space with their presence, they ruin what could be a perfectly suitable atmosphere. So to make the atmosphere tenable again, one effective tactic would be to replace these noxious materials with the materials we find suitable. 

Similarly, poor leaders displace good leaders.  By just being present and nothing else, they contaminate the atmosphere. As a result, good leaders are simply forced elsewhere.  Hopefully those good leaders can find places to create a better condition, but the loss of those individuals is intolerable to those left behind and the organization suffers.

In reading and watching the news in recent days I am reminded just how damaging these “asphyxiants” can be to organizations and really, to society. I see my job as being one to facilitate good leadership. I try to encourage you to be better people, to use good judgment, to learn and understand, and to be “missionaries”, carrying the message of good leadership to others. I don’t consider myself to be a good leader – I see myself as a continual work in process and have plenty of faults – but I recognize good leadership and I have observed what it takes to promote good leadership in others.

As much as I’d like to suggest to poor leaders that they should move out of the way to permit good leaders to fill that space, I think it is more realistic to say that perhaps we should convince those individuals to be more open-minded to learning, to engaging their people, and to promoting good practices. So you can see, instead of removing the problem, there is another tactic we can use in mitigating an asphyxiant atmosphere: by mixing the material in with a good atmosphere and making it much smaller in proportion to the whole, we can “safe” the atmosphere. While we may not always have the answers, if we can permit ourselves to be exposed to good practices and to see how things should work, we can make things better, incrementally, but just the same, much improved.

Be an agent of positive change. Promote best practices. And let’s all go home in the morning.

In this case the researchers are using the Green June Beetle, but given the size of the cockroaches (or Palmetto Bugs, as we like to call them in South Carolina) I have seen, we could probably equip them with a hammer drill and let them tunnel the victims back out of the rubble once they find one.

Cyborg insects are low maintenance, can get into very restricted and virtually inaccessible areas, and with these new developments, can be adapted for a number of different tasks.  Some of these cyborg applications could also be used for monitoring hazmats or terrorist attacks, doing pre-entry search and recon for SWAT teams, or spy work.  As far as our use of these creatures, the sky (or the basement) is the limit.

Never lose sight of this constant: Change is inevitable.  It''s how we deal with it that makes the difference. What we know today as the way we do business may be radically different tomorrow.

Do you want to recharge your batteries?  Teach.  Take what you have learned and share it with others.  You don't have to be a certified instructor to teach.  Even the lowest man on the totem pole can learn something and share it with others. Sharing knowledge changes the world.

By the way, as a quick aside, this photo is of a "Gino's Giant".  That has no bearing on the article except that Gino's isn't either of the two Fast Food Joints discussed here.  And, of course, as a matter of disclosure, I worked for the Gino's corporation back in high school.  But I digress… 

There's this giant megacorporation I'll call Fast Food Joint "M". There's another Fast Food Joint we'll refer to as "C".  Last week I went into "M"; Between eight people on duty, not a single one, not even the cashier, even acknowledged my existence.  They made eye contact, but there was no effort to recognize that a customer was waiting alone at the counter.  Ultimately, the cashier shuffled over to the register and looked up; not a "Thanks for coming, what's your order?" or even a grunt.  Made my order, which required repeating twice.  Then upon getting the order, of course, it was wrong.  Returning to the counter, there was one person ahead of me.  They were also getting the same treatment, but it was taking even longer.  I stood there with my bag, hoping that just one of all of these people would realize, "Hey, we must have made a mistake, let me see what is going on", nope, nothing.

At "C",  the place was packed; yet there are five employees.  Everyone is hustling, taking orders and turning orders around.  The manager is even involved and as customers come up to ask for refills, she is also covering those as well.  I am spoken to by several of the employees, asked about my order, and thanked when the order is processed.  But it takes a little longer than expected, as it appears they are training one of the people in back.  The bag comes and it is correct, but I get an apology anyway.

Fast food management doesn't seem to encounter anything like this level of service at any "M" I have ever been to.  At almost every "C" I have visited, however, I sense that they have a higher purpose and they pride themselves on what is turned out.  At "M", there is plenty of hype from the corporate HQ and there are expensive promos and new restaurant styles.  At "C", the store is nice enough, but the focus is on polite manners, courteous service, and good food.  Personally, the experience at "C" is much more enjoyable.

I have gone to visit fire stations and when I walked in, other firefighters have stared at me like I was from Mars, but none ever took the time to ask me what they could help me with, or why I was there, or even to just say "Hi".  I have been in some memorable houses where I have been given gold plated tours of the facilities, coffee, offered dinner, and all before I even identified myself as a firefighter.  I realize that this last situation is pretty unreasonable, but I don't even expect that; I just ask that you address my being there, ask if there is anything you can help me with, and engage me if I happen to show an interest or have a question.

The "M" experience is not one I would ever tolerate in any of my stations.  The "C" experience is more like it.  The last time I checked the news, we, that is, the collective fire service, have a problem with getting the things we need to do our jobs.  Our staffs are being cut, stations and companies are being closed, and funding chopped.  Actually, the only thing that seems to be increasing for municipal fire departments is taxpayer frustration at what is considered an overfunded concept, coupled with what is perceived as having no tangible benefit.

Based on my consumer comparison between "M" and "C", if these were fire departments, which of these do you think I might choose to fund?  The surly, uncooperative, and overstaffed "M"? Or the pleasant, courteous, and efficient "C"?  You can polish your image all day long with fancy marketing and spiffy stores, but ultimately, if your own people don't get the concept, you are wasting your time and effort.  As leaders, we need to focus on improving the attitude of our people.  The culture of your organization, if you want to survive these lean times, should be focused on improving attitudes and making "service with a smile" the norm, not the exception. 

I never thought I'd find myself quoting Gov. Perry, but it reflects the idea of The Middle Way, especially in this time of conflict and anger.  There are many ideas that we can all agree upon and that we all hold sacred; ideas that should bond us, unite us, and cause us to realize that while we are individuals, we are also one people, and we should be working together to promote peace and prosperity, not for ourselves alone, but for all. 

Finding consensus does not call upon us to abandon our values and our beliefs, but to see the issues as affecting more than just our own little world and working together to coexist.  I observe with little humor the anger with zealots and terrorists in this world, finding it contradictory that our own leaders can't see that zealotry in their own positions.  The unwillingness by many to consider alternative views on the world's problems are simply hypocritical.  I have written many times before about the need for understanding, and even appreciation, of the culture of the adversary. This isn't a call for leaders to embrace the ideas of the opposition.  It is a call for leaders to be willing to understand that their approach to solving the problems of today may not be the only approach, nor might that approach be what is best for society as a whole.

Understanding that our personal values are not exclusive to the needs of the many is an important step toward making grown-up decisions and not simply drawing a line in the sand and saying "I've got mine".  Even when dealing with something that some people hold as unapproachable, like religious beliefs, must be qualified by realizing that at some point in our existence, perhaps before our own lives, but certainly in the history of Mankind, our own beliefs were likely considered heresy or blasphemy.  We must realize that at some point, our beliefs were cause for persecution somewhere on this globe.  And somehow, somewhere, we or our ancestors had to make hard decisions about standing for what was right and what was wrong, and learning how to live with others to continue forward.  Learning how to live with others requires the decision to accept what we can and cannot change, and create equalibrium so we can tolerate that existence, or begin to find a way to create separation so that our existence is tolerable. 

Unless you have all the power to force change in the hearts and minds of others (and you don't), you will have to understand that consensus and acceptance is necessary for peace.  That understanding is required for both sides of every issue, unless the issue is incompatible with existence, such as at the point of a gun.  In that case, you may see outward expressions of acceptance, but don't be surprised when the pot boils over later.

Understanding consensus is an important part of leading.  If you can't help others to understand that and to bring them together on serious issues, and you continue to refuse any efforts toward working together, you can reassure your position to be under attack the moment you let your guard down.  As any good tactician will point out for you, while you may not immediately have the resources to combat your opposition, when the center of gravity changes and the opportunity presents itself, to not attack is folly. So to be a leader who thinks that he was able to shove change down someone's throat and to not expect retaliation is to be entirely delusional.

If you really want peace and understanding, work toward those efforts and help to educate those who oppose you, while understanding their beliefs and appreciating those values as well.  We may not always agree, but we can be respectful and we can work toward living together and sharing the things we do hold important together.

Lo and behold, a quote from the author, Linda Holmes, describing the actions of the management team for Two and A Half Men.  From the article: "They [the management team] voluntarily ripped a key piece of machinery out of one of the most successful money factories on television.  Things actually got that bad."

That's not "#winning" folks.  That's stopping the hemorrhage. At what point in your wildly successful organization does the presence of a key individual become so dysfunctional that you just have to say, "Enough"?  Conversely, I know people who say they would work for any psychopath Chief if the money were right.  But there comes a time when a line must be drawn, as has allegedly occurred in Weirton, WV, according to a post by FireGeezer.com.  

It's tragic that there are people who are "in charge" who exhibit this kind of behavior.  While this individual may have some other issues we don't know about yet, I know of ex-chiefs of departments who have fought employees, threatened them, or just acted like total sociopaths. I know business "leaders" who act similarly to their employees.  Years ago, I had the opportunity to work for one of those psychopaths I refer to and frankly, I took the inconsistent, hypercritical, hypocritical direction for a period of time, then ultimately, parted ways.  I have always been considered a pretty decent employee, if I say so myself, but this guy made no sense to me whatsoever and I knew I could do a better job for someone who was a little more balanced.  So I left.  Ultimately, so did he, but that's a story for another time.

I tell you all the time about leadership and mentoring.  I am positive that even as a buck recruit you can influence and impress others where you can in fact, be considered a leader through positive contributions.  But there are just some people who happen to rise to power and are either corrupted on the way, or didn't have a good sense of values to begin with, who should simply not be in a leadership position.

And forgive me for saying so, but there are people who may have all the right intentions, but simply don't have the chops: they may lack command presence, or conversely, may be too overbearing.  But I can work with someone if they are pointed in the right direction and are willing to allow me to help them go in that direction.  But if we are diametrically opposed in our vision and our values, someone is going to have to change or go.  Unfortunately, in some cases, it might be the forces on the side of "good" having to leave because they can not positively influence the direction the organization is going in.  And no amount of money, fame, or awards will change that.

When you have just started out somewhere, it may be immediately apparent that this isn't the place for you and cutting your losses can be a little easier.  But aside from the investment you have made in an organization, when you have been in the business long enough that you have built up some chips and got your resume positioned correctly, it makes the decision tougher because you really do believe you can turn things around, if you happen to get the chance.  

Successful warriors are so because they choose their battles wisely.  They seek advantage in terrain, timing, and resources.  They attack when they see weakness and they withdraw when they sense resistance.  Just as a skilled butcher doesn't chop through the bones lest he damage his knife, he finds the joints and cuts through those at the weakest points, making the job easier and extending the life of his blade.  So should we seek our opportunities to advance and withdraw, to put forth ideas to improve the service we provide, or back off until the timing is right, or we have the right analysis of our idea, or we have the resources to fund the concept.  But when those elements aren't ever made available, a decision has to be made.  

As I asked earlier, at what point in your wildly successful organization do things become so dysfunctional that you just have to say, "Enough"?