We can absolutely take altruism to be an effective form of leading, because if practiced to a certain extent, there are benefits in doing so.  There is a documentary I have referenced in Firehouse Zen several times: I Am. The movie, by Tom Shadyac, makes the point that we are all interconnected, and by that very reason, stand to benefit by practicing more understanding behavior toward others.  What benefits all of us, benefits every one of us.  But this might be a little too zen for you all, and since the thoughts I share here are nothing new, just my own take on interpreting them, let's try illustrating the efficiency of altruistic behavior though more concrete means.

Every now and then, it is my responsibility to take Caroline, my middle daughter, to school.  For many reasons I could get into, but won't because I have my own reasons as well, there are a large number of children who are driven to school by parents in the morning.  And while we could discuss any number of other methods to make things more effective, it is the behavior of the adults in this particular scenario that I want to use for illustration (so while I know there are many other solutions, I'm just trying to show you something).

Picture this: The driveway in front of the school causes you to pull up past the front doors, then the "drop off zone" angles away at 90 degrees from that spot for about 300 feet. At the end it doubles back and you drive out the way you came in.  Therefore, the drop off zone, which is on the side going away from the front of the building, can accomodate at least 10 cars, if not more.  The idea is that the first car pulls to the end of the zone and nine other cars pull in behind it and discharge their passengers.  Then the first car pulls away and everyone follws, permitting the next ten cars in line to pull up.  Pretty easy directions to follow if you do it every day.

While this seems to be pretty easy, it must not be.  Without fail, every morning I happen to be in the line, I observe that virtually every parent will stop at the first point (at the front doors) and discharge their child.  Subsequently, none of the other nine spaces are being used.  Car after car discharges their children in this method one or two or three at a time at the front door. Frequently, as the morning progresses, parents get fed up with waiting in the line and discharge their children even earlier than at the front doors.  In this area there is no sidewalk, so to complicate things, now there are young children weaving in and out of cars, and further disrupting the process. It so happens that to drop your kids off this way means a shorter walk for young Spaulding: from Point A (the stop at the front door) to Point B (the front door).  The result, however, is a very long line of impatient, self-important, thoughtless parents.

One afternoon I gave up on the line and parked a block away and walked to get my daughter, passing all the angry, fed-up parents. As I got to where all the children were awaiting pickup, one of the teachers recognized me. While waving another car toward the special spot (that was being ignored) she said, "You know, you are probably one of the only parents who actually drives to the end of the drop off zone.  Caroline doesn't need to walk that far."  I am probably THE ONLY parent who goes to the end of the drop off zone, but therein lies my point.   Lets' look at this situation from the perspective that if we sacrifice a little, a lot can be gained.

Look at this from a simple equation: If "x" equals the number of available spots to discharge passengers, and "y" equals the average number of passengers discharged at each spot, doesn't it make sense that increasing the number of spots also increases the number of discharged passengers?  So if we can say:

xy = number of passengers discharged per minute

any increase in x will increase the total number of people being discharged per minute.  Therefore, if we used ALL TEN SPOTS, we would have a TEN-FOLD INCREASE in the number of people being discharged per minute.  Most of us would look at that and say, "Wow, that's a pretty substantial increase!" In fact, this would then result in everyone getting out of this drop off zone a lot quicker.  However, there's where the selfishness kicks in: young Spaulding shouldn't have to walk an extra 250 feet, the parent rationalizes.  "Why if I let him out right here in front, it doesn't inconvenience me, as he is out of my hair that much quicker, and who cares about those other schmucks behind me?" So we get one car at a time, putting their kids out directly in front of the doors.

See what I mean?  And we can complain about how long it takes (parents do), we could post signs (the school has), we could have someone out there to tell people to move up (they do), and none of it would make a difference, because it doesn't already.  This isn't brain surgery we are talking about here.  This is simple logic.

Unfortunately, people don't respond to logic.  And while I hate to be wasting your valuable day laying out this scenario, it will come into play throughout this series.  So take notes, comprehend the situation, and we'll see where altruism takes us.

Share on Facebook

I would hope that we practice altruism for the sake of simply helping our fellow man, but there are entire studies of thought that suggest even our existence defies altruism. Others suffer because we survive.  If we were truly and purely altruistic, we would just lie down and die. After all, every action and interaction we incur causes suffering for some other being.  One could argue that pure altruism would require us to stop breathing, lest we kill the bacteria and other microorganisms carried in the air we breathe.

Let’s not be so fixed on those issues, however, and for our discussion, let’s take altruism for face value.  Let’s just say that altruism will be defined for the purposes of our discussion as doing the right thing for another for no obvious reason other than it is the right thing to do.  Being mindful of our actions in an effort to alleviate the suffering of others, or just to be considerate of their own situation, requires us to be more thoughtful.  And given my observations of human behavior on a regular basis, ANY effort at being more thoughtful would be better than what we are getting right now.

But even "thoughfulness" doesn't wrap itself around what we need to practice.  Really, when I see a homeless person, I am certainly moved by their plight, I feel empathy, and I try to be compassionate.  But the realities of each situation don't always permit me to practice what I preach, I guess.  If I did, I would likely be homeless myself, as I would share everything I have to eliminate the suffering of another.  I found this quote to be interesting, although the website does not give the author’s name:

Altruism and compassion are not synonyms. Compassion is an emotion, sharing the suffering of another. Altruism involves acting to help another. Not all compassion leads to altruism, and not all altruistic acts are performed because of compassion.

There is no reason why we can not at least attempt to be more considerate of others, especially since it doesn't cost anything. We can refrain from being mean; We can make eye contact and acknowledge their existence; We can offer a prayer; and none of these things cost us any more than the personal feeling of embarrassment and uncomfortability.  I use those descriptions of our emotions because we are faced with the reality of someone else's suffering and we don't have the facts as to why they are in that situation.  It is the awkwardness of knowing we are being asked for help and for whatever reason, we choose not to answer.

We may rationalize that the individual squandered their opportunities, or we may realize that there are those with mental illness that provide profound challenges that resources don't readily exist for, or we may simply think they are a drunk or a drug addict. In any case, we don't know unless we ask, and even then, we may not get the truth anyway. But to use this as an analogy, how often have you been confronted with a situation where a fellow worker needed assistance and you failed to give it?  

I would bet nearly all of you reading would say they would never do that.  However, I suggest to you that as leaders, we often fail our followers for the most mundane of reasons. We are tired, or we have problems at home.  Or we have a report due.  Or we just don't feel up to training today.  Likewise, when we have experience to share, do we seek those out who could use it, or do we wait for those people to come to us?  I would suggest that there are probably plenty of people you work with who could use that kind of mentoring.

Leadership implies that we have something that others don't have.  We may have funds, tools, supplies, knowledge, or other things that others need.  Or we may have a position that creates power.  In all of this, the person who is leading has some advantage, in that they can bring together others to create a change in our existence, however that leverage came about, and use it for good.  Or they can use it to their own advantage.  And in that, it requires a choice.

Creating a culture of transformational change requires interaction and trust.  It certainly requires sacrifice, but even more so, it requires you as the leader to sacrifice, to demonstrate that example of altruistic leadership.  Nobody ever said transformational leadership was easy.  It might be the reason why there are so few truly transformational leaders.

Share on Facebook

Altruism is the belief in or practice of disinterested and selfless concern for the well-being of others.  Another definition of altruism is the behavior of an animal that benefits another at its own expense. 

We in emergency service like to believe that our work is done for the betterment of mankind.  We talk about the “supreme sacrifice” and wear shirts that say, “We fight what you fear.” We tell people that our bond is based on “brotherhood’. These are all words that suggest a higher calling, something more about us and our comrades that perhaps places us above others in a moral hierarchy, short of sainthood but above the common man.

There are those among us that throw these statements out there pretty casually, considering actions we hear about routinely. Firefighters using their positions to steal from a fire company treasury.  EMTs who are charged and convicted of preying on the vulnerable. Officers who permit subordinates to misuse their community trust.  Too many heartbreaking stories in a group of people who pride themselves on being honorable, valorous, and having a great deal of integrity.

In our business, in emergency service, we have many who state emphatically that they are on this job for purely altruistic reasons.  While volunteerism, perhaps, places a subject closer to that definition, I suggest that there are still benefits of volunteerism that we don’t think of, that don’t keep us in that category.  Conversely, there are those who suggest that as a career emergency responder that we do not embrace altruistic behavior, that our efforts are mercenary.  And while the reward is a paycheck, I suggest that this also does not limit us from the category either.

The definitions of altruism escape conventional thinking.  We don’t know what is in the hearts of others.  We don’t know what drives and motivates those who serve along with us.  We know what we are told, and we may have reason to believe those reasons.  I do, know people, however, who would wordlessly “step in front of a bullet” for a stranger; and I know people who talk a good talk, but are the first to run when any mention of even menial sacrifice surfaces.  There are big differences, then, in what we say and what we do in regard to altruism.

What drives you?  What about our job inspires you to continue, day to day, to perform dangerous, distasteful, uncomfortable tasks that challenge your own limits?

I wanted to begin a discussion on leadership that matters, focusing on the merits and drawbacks of transformational leadership as it relates to our job and to society as a whole.  I can't put a number on the conversations that will come from this, but I can say that we could focus on the subject for years and only scratch the surface.  The idea, however, is that there are too many out there who are like zombies, walking along from point to point, disengaged from others, and singly focused on their own comfort, their own needs, and on making their lives more comfortable on the backs of others.  For these reasons, maybe if I can reach a few, I can create an avalanche.  One can only hope.  Feel free to comment at any time and share what you see.

Share on Facebook

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. 

Share on Facebook

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.

Share on Facebook

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.

Share on Facebook

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.

Share on Facebook

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.

Share on Facebook

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.

Share on Facebook

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. 

Share on Facebook