I didn't know the man, personally, or professionally, really.  I own a few Apple products and I like them, I even love them. But while I recognize Steve Jobs as being an amazing individual, I hadn't really followed his career, or read any articles about him, or anything like that.  But I recognize greatness when I see it and his impact on our world as we know it has been substantial. 

When I listened to some of the testimonials about Steve Jobs this morning, I realize what a loss our generation has experienced, but not probably from the aspect you might think. This individual was truly visionary.  He created from what was a dream, an empire.  He was an inventor, a creator, a manager, a huckster, and summing it all up, a true leader.  He applied his vision to create a reality.  He used his vast array of abilities to translate vision into action.

What impact do you have on the world around you?  You don't have to invent the next best thing to aspire to greatness.  In fact, some of the simplest things you can do will break you out as an inspirational and amazing leader.  By using your skills of motivating others, setting positive examples, working hard, demonstrating integrity, and caring for others, you can be a leader that others flock to.

Charisma goes a long way, but being true to yourself and leading from the heart will carry you the full distance.  It takes real belief in self to achieve greatness.  Do good things for others and be a person of vision and action.  There is a big difference between "support" and "activism".  If you believe in something, make it happen.

God bless you, Steve Jobs.  You made a significant impact on our world throughout your life. We can only hope to achieve a fraction of that kind of effort, but in doing so, we can achieve excellence.  

"Despite the lives at stake, the recommendation to improve radio interoperability for first responders has stalled because of a political fight over whether to allocate 10 MHz of radio spectrum … directly to public safety for a nationwide network, or auction it off to a commercial wireless bidder who would then be required to provide priority access on its network dedicated to public safety during emergencies," says the report, whose authors include 9/11 Commission chairmen Lee Hamilton and Thomas Kean.

I distinctly recall the shouts of support from the American public for firefighters everywhere after the Towers fell, and how shocked people were when we let them know that one of our biggest problems is communications interoperability.  Then, in 2005, when Katrina blew through, the politicians were adamant that we needed the tools to combat this problem of communications interoperability.  And here we are, in 2011 and the politicians still will tell us one thing and do another.

Congress seems to find the time and support to help out their fat cat buddies when times are tough. Banks and corporations get bailed out and corporate big-wigs continue to get record bonuses.  In the meanwhile, public servants I work with get lacerated over getting a miniscule pay raises over the last three years, like these firefighters, cops, EMTs, teachers, and city administrators are sitting at home, counting the dough in their offshore accounts and laughing maniacally.  Really? And many other people, not just our brothers, are losing benefits, taking furloughs, or worse, losing their jobs altogether.  

It makes me sick when I see our politicians sucking up to the ones who shout the loudest on the right or the left while forgetting there are many more of us out here in the middle who are just trying to get by.  These are the same individuals with the nerve to take government pensions, government health care, and government paychecks, the whole while saying "government is bloated".

This proposal was meant to make our job safer, to improve our ability to save lives, and to combat disaster in our communities, but instead, our politicians want to continue to discuss the possibility of awarding the block to a commercial wireless company who, of course, stands to make billions off our first responders and probably still give us communications that suck.

If you really want to get mad about something, find a battle worth fighting over.  I'm throwing you the ball now, you are supposed to swing at it.  Here's one: Call your representatives today and tell them what you think of their continued stalling and their greedy tactics.  We need support.  This would be the support the politiicans continually promise us when the news cameras are on them and they're hawking their platform on the graves of firefighters, cops and EMTs.  It's the same support, of course, that is quickly forgotten when the lobbyists show up and when the big money is up for grabs.  

If you don't know who represents you, try this link: ContactingtheCongress.org.  It makes it easy for you; there are phone numbers and comment links.  Put your money where your mouth is.  Or better yet, get some balls and tell your representatives what you think.  Your representatives are supposed to be representing you.  Instead of taking a few minutes away from your valuable Facebook time posting an anonymous rant against a brother who had a lapse in judgement caught on video, try venting against the real enemies: the political hacks who tell you they support you but can't work together to fund necessary things like fire departments, fire education, and firefighters.  Here's a message you can send them: If they want that photo op with dirt on their face, shovel in hand, and helmet on their head, tell 'em they have to earn it first.  Support the brotherhood.  FTM.

In between class sessions here in Colorado, Chief Ron and his wife, Linda, and I took a scenic tour of Rocky Mountain National Park by way of the Western Portal, going up to the Gore Range before turning around and going back into town.  While the park is incredible and the vistas breathtaking, it occured to us that settlers going west centuries ago must have been awestruck coming off the plains and facing this massive roadblock.

We were also listening to a talk radio show at the same time and the moderator was indicating that we are never just given the keys to leadership, we have to earn them through trial and survival.  Only after being faced with hardship and making it through do you realize that these challenges fortify you for any battles ahead.

Sitting in an air conditioned car on the paved road and using GPS to find our path, it became apparent to me that the next time I am faced with adversity, I need to consider these individuals.  How daunting it must have been, going to a land unknown to them, packing up everything they had and moving it across the Rockies to forge a better life for themselves.  Yet they not only overcame those challenges, they led the making of a new nation.  What right do I have to worry about my petty issues? 

If you believe in what you are doing, nothing can stop you. Consider the triumphs of others when given impossible odds and realize that you can do anything you dream.

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.

One of the most telling things she pointed out to me as I listened in awe, was that she could realize that we have "leaders" who are more interested in their ability to get re-elected than they are about running our government.  I asked Emma where she was getting all this and she indicated that she has been watching the news and overhearing conversations, and it was pretty plain to her that while our representatives are supposed to be working to keep our country great, they instead are spending their days and hours accusing each other of who screwed this mess up.

Here's news for you: you all screwed it up. WE screwed it up.  We allowed special interests, the media, and most of all, zealots on both sides of the aisle, to hijack our government.  I was listening to something the other day that stated that the Federal Election Commission, which is made up of six individuals appointed by the President and with the "advice and consent of the U.S. Senate", has been pretty much limited to people from either the Republican Party or the Democratic Party for a long time.  I tried to look this up to see if I could find if that were true, but did not see it anywhere.  However, it isn't surprising to me that it, like so much of our government these days, is about whether you are a Republican or a Democrat.

Likewise, if you want to run for anything more than a local council seat these days, you need to be either a Republican or a Democrat, or plan on coming up with the money yourself.  While that might sound like an okay idea, these days, the support for a run at political office requires funding that is grossly out of control.  Media gets their cut, through advertising. There are consultants and poll interpreters, and people are needed to print signs and to make phone calls and to chat voters up on the Internet.  Since that money has to come from somewhere, there is a certain amount of leverage that donors can exert in order to help a candidate get elected, and anyone who suggests that to be anything else but true is simply delusional.

And if that isn't enough, We, the People, aren't represented by people like us anymore.  We are represented by career politicians, ones who have no idea what the cost of a gallon of milk is, or have never had to sweat out their bills themselves.  They have people to do these things for them.  The amazing healthcare and retirement benefits these federally elected officials get are way out of our league, which is ironic, because these are the same people who have been voting down insurance reform and banking reform.  And who is getting stuck in the long run? Us.

Emma pointed out to me a big problem: "Dad," she asked, "So why won't they do the right thing and try to work together?"  And I indicated that if they did, they'd likely alienate the people who voted them in there in the first place, and when they went up for re-election they would likely lose.  She thought about that a while and said, "I thought you told me that leaders are supposed to make hard decisions sometimes, even if people don't like them afterwards.  I thought you told me that leaders have to be brave and try to do what is right for everyone, even if it means that they have to sacrifice?"

I smiled a little, but since I'm not trying to raise a cynic, I explained to her that sometimes people get sidetracked, and even though they may have the best intents, sometimes the decisions are very, very hard.  And I told her we need to pray that our leaders make decisions not based on what they gain out of the decision, but based on what is good for the Nation.  But I also reminded her that we don't always know what is best, so we have to hope we remain open-minded and willing to work cooperatively, rather than to fight with everyone.

She seemed to like that answer and she was quiet for a while. But while I was putting on a brave face, inside I was wondering, what has become of our government?  Why would supposedly mature individuals choose to take our nation to the brink of insolvency, then once done, stand around and point fingers at one another instead of working harder to try to fix this mess?  I heard conservative political heads talking this morning about how this situation is President Obama's fault, and I remember (I guess that is a long time ago and hard to remember) that the recession started when President Bush was in office.  Back when we had all the problems with the banks and insurance companies, I heard lots of blame going around, but my memory is that the fat cats have been getting fatter for not one, not two, not three, but at least four presidents ago when so much of the financial industry was deregulated.  And likewise, there is plenty of pork going around and plenty of waste, but the things that get threatened for cuts are programs like Medicare and Social Security, but I don't hear suggestions like "stop funding for other countries, especially ones who hate us", or "cut funding to try to win the hearts and minds of those who would rather see us dead".  Or maybe, "stop providing corporate welfare and get the big businesses to pay their taxes just like small businesses have to".  

Our priorities have gone out the window.  We, the People, are more interested in who wins "American Idol" than who our elected officials are going to be.  The public is so under-informed about what our elected officials actually stand for and they could care less.  It's too much trouble to click on individuals than to vote a straight party line because really, what difference is my one vote?  If any of you can't see where we are going, we can go ahead and put it into perspective for you.  Take the time to write your elected officials and make a suggestion for something you think is important, or in support of legislation that you think will improve our country.  The test is actually that I'd be willing to bet that a significant percentage don't even know who their elected officials are.

If you REALLY are a patriot and REALLY care about this country, skip flying the flag on your car and do something really meaningful.  Get to know your elected officials and make sure they are actually representing YOU, whatever political party or preference you happen to be.  And by know them, I mean, be a total pain in their ass until they realize that they don't represent Acme Chemicals or whomever is hosting that huge fundraiser this weekend, but you, your spouse, and your kids.  And call them and e-mail them frequently.  If enough people do this, perhaps, just maybe, our officials will finally understand what their jobs are: to act like adults and work together to keep our Nation the greatest in 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.

The teacher then told the student he could not instruct him. "If you are hunting rabbits", the master told him, "and chase two, you can be sure to catch none."

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"?

We have to carefully balance risk versus the likelihood of occurrence.  Of course, if it snows and I calculated that we didn't need snow removal gear, some will be quick to point out that I have no idea of what I'm doing.  If I buy snow removal gear, those same individuals will be quick to point out again that I have no idea what I am doing.  There are those who understand and there are those who do not.  If you are going to be the Chief, it helps to have thick skin.  But in the long run, do what is best for your customers; making decisions based on observation and experience is the key.