Skip to content


Customer Service: A Bad Concept?

7 comments

I was thinking about customer service in our profession and considering recent conversations by some of our colleagues recently who reject the term.  A bit of enlightenment came to me while listening to a reading to a segment of the radio program This I Believe.

The subject was Ruth Cranston, author of World Faith: The Story of the Religions of the United Nations. She spoke of achieving the insight that all of the world’s religions, despite their differences, were united in very similar tenets of how to live with our fellow man.  Even when there is constant disagreement with how we go about our daily lives, she posited this about the commonalities of religious belief:

They [the world’s religions] taught the unity of all life; the interdependence of all men; love and service to fellow man; help, not exploitation, of the weak and backward. They taught nonviolence and non-injury. They all taught purity of life and of motive, simplicity of life too, and that true riches are within. They taught the worth of individual man and the ability of every man to rise to higher states of development than we are now experiencing. They taught the immortality of the soul and the building of the Kingdom of Heaven here on earth.

Her suggestion was that despite the worship or belief in which we practice, we experience several common denominators that should bring us closer together rather than farther apart.  While a lot can be taken from that paragraph, it seems that like I say constantly in my forum here is that we as emergency service providers have more commonalities than differences.  In fact, those of us who are true believers in what we do as a profession probably understand that the phrase “customer service” is just a name we put on a concept in order to define it.

Of course, the belief of a higher calling to serve is about those who are truly in this and believe in this as a profession of service and enjoying the benefits of the occasional adrenaline rush, in contrast to those who are in this for the adrenaline rush and enjoy the occasional effort to serve, and even then, if that subject comes up at all.  I say that because it is my observation that a majority (if not all) of the problems we have in emergency service can be traced back to those who fail to see this career, whether you are paid or volunteer, as one in which we should serve rather than to be served.  It is this entitled mindset, that we are automatically due respect because we wear the badge, which causes problems.

The term customer service is probably pretty cynical, when you think about it, because it might suggest to the casual reader that the ideal we seek is all about making sure our profession enjoys the financial benefit of such service.  In fact, as emergency response personnel, the term “customer service” embraces the concept of all that is considered good in mankind, in that we realize the worth of others and we seek to serve those in need of help, despite their social status.  While we can quantitatively point out that having a customer service attitude benefits us in public support, there should be a much more altruistic reason for our embracing that belief.

There are two schools of thought in the “anti-customer service” camp.  One, of course, is that the public doesn’t have a choice, therefore they are not customers.  The second goes along with my statement that what we do is so much more than a client relationship.  I have argued that the public does have a choice, as Chief Alan Brunacini did much more so before I have here.  But the latter discussion bears some serious consideration.  Is the concept of customer service too simplistic? Customer service could be construed as providing a real effort only when we stand to gain from that interaction.  It might be perceived that the service we provide is done only because we expect a return on investment.

While remembering conversations with Chief Brunacini as he advocated the benefits of customer service mentality as a method for obtaining taxpayer support, I also recall that he never said that the concept was exclusive to that expectation.  If you remember, the overarching mission was to “Be Nice”.  While that’s good for marketing, it’s not something you can force down people’s throats and expect it to happen magically.  He advocated a cultural shift in his leadership that was summed up in two simple words, therefore easy to remember and easy to implement.  The customer service mentality, likewise, was easy to relate to.

Our job as leaders is to communicate our mission.  That communication requires not only our shouting it out there, but the return acknowledgment that understanding has been achieved.  The mindset of “customer service” is palpable.  We understand it and we know what is good customer service and what is bad.  We can easily empathize with a customer who is frustrated with a certain way in which their matter is being handled or appreciate the sincere gratitude experienced by a customer who is receiving excellent service.  For the purposes of defining an accepted approach to interaction with the community, it helps to be able to frame those interactions in a manner in which we are familiar.  So while, yes, our delivery of service is much more than the interaction of a salesperson and a client, it provides us with concrete objectives by which we can measure our outputs.  It is pretty easy to say, “Fire Went Out” and check the “Good” box.  It is much more difficult to say, “Obtained Confidence of Taxpayer”.

Our job can be seen from a purely pragmatic standpoint, one in which we have been tasked to provide a service and we must efficiently produce results.  Or we can say that our job is that of serving humankind with compassionate and ethical assistance when they are most vulnerable.  In either case, the ultimate measurement is the same; as Cranston implied, reinforcing “the interdependence of all men”; loving and serving fellow man; and helping, not exploiting, the weak and needy.  It is our charge to insure whichever path we choose, we do so with the understanding that we are there to serve.

How Hot Does A Barrel Fire Have To Get For Proper Helmet Crustiness?

12 comments

The Legend.

I have been very busy.  So in a recent Firehouse Zen post on our Facebook page, I asked what subjects you all might like to read about on FHZ. One popular request was from alert reader Pete, asking “How hot does a barrel fire have to get to make your helmet look really crusty?”

Well, Pete, in answer to your question, I’m not quite sure, having never done that myself before, but I’m sure there’s someone out there who could answer that question for us. But the subject begs another question like “How crusty does someone have to look to you before you feel like they know what they are talking about?” I have found, for example, in the individual with a dozen patches on his or her coat, an inverse relationship between the “advertising” and how much I trust their “experience” on the scene. When I was young, I had the patches. Fortunately, I had some real jakes pull me aside and explain just how squirrely that looked.

If you are a young firefighter (or an old one looking for some real guidance) truly looking for a mentor, instead of looking for who has the nastiest looking gear or the most patches, maybe you should just talk with some of the informal leaders of the group and find out who THEY really respect. Watch their faces when Chief So-and-So speaks: if even these guys are listening and soaking in what is said, then you can trust that they believe that person is a leader. If they look like they’re not paying any attention, chances are the individual may have a title, and may even have the education, but maybe not the street cred to back it up. That kind of observation is much better at judging who’s “been there” than looking at the amount of garbage melted on their lid.

Note the helmet in the picture.  While some of you may understand that the helmet is upside down (to better protect the ratchet system), some of you more insightful ones might wonder why I have an upside-down helmet as my featured photo/logo.  Well, it’s because the useful part of the helmet isn’t the shell, the truly useful part is the space in which you put your head. So while some of our brothers are obsessing over the proper level of carbon on the hard part up there, what would be a better thing to concentrate on is what is filling the hole, when it comes to deciding who is the best person to look up to.

While taking really good care of your protective ensemble is important, there’s nothing wrong with a little smokiness to show you have been there. But the truth of the matter is that even though someone may LOOK the part, it’s what is under all that crust that really counts. So skip the barrel burnishing and earn your look the old fashioned way; safely but aggressively, taking reasonable risk to save lives, taking a little risk to save property, and none at all for the already lost. Get in there and get it, but don’t be stupid in the process.

Evolution And You

2 comments

You can choose to keep your head in the sand or come up for air. It's really YOUR choice.

In an uncharacteristic Firehouse Zen moment, I’m going to share some not-so-heartwarming news with you: If you fail to evolve, you will die. It’s not all about cheerleading and mentoring. Some of this motivation has to come from the subject themselves. If you are not intrinsically motivated, you can only be kicked in the head so many times before it’s time for us to move on to someone who genuinely WANTS to succeed.

I am inspired by this post from the New York Times that discusses what is known as the Dunning-Kruger Effect — our incompetence masks our ability to recognize our incompetence. In essence, some people are so stupid, that they don’t even recognize that they are that stupid.

It’s like the contemporary fire officer who continues to discuss his or her lousy computer skills.  Do you know one?  While twenty years ago, it might not have been a big deal, but virtually everything we do these days as a company or chief officer requires a certain understanding of how to complete forms, create documents and memos, and to analyze data.

I don’t know of a single department in the nation who is still using a typewriter to perform these tasks, although I’m sure someone will pipe up and claim that distinction.  Unless you are some superstar fireground tactician, I don’t know anyone so gifted that they can forgo the skills required to cover the administrative requirements of the job, and those skills include basic computer use.  Claiming you can’t work a computer just doesn’t cut it in the 21st Century; if you are so confused by a word processing program that you can’t manage to put out a coherent memo, it might be time for a career change.

But this isn’t a rant about not being able to use a computer.  The point is that as times evolve, so do our jobs.  You can complain about it and moan about it all you want, but the expectations placed on us as leaders require us to understand and manage change. You may not be an early adopter, in fact, you might be the last one dragged kicking and screaming to the next level, but at some point, you must make the change or expect to become irrelevant.  As a company officer, your redeeming skill might have been that you could last the longest in a smoky room without puking your guts up, but now that we have methods to skip that desired attribute, you’d better polish some of your other abilities up soon else you will be yesterday’s news.

We must constantly evaluate our knowledge, skills, and abilities and determine what we can do to evolve.  If we fail to do that, we are dooming ourselves to obsolescence. If retirement is within your sixty-day window, that might not matter to you, but if you plan on hanging in for the next few years, I suggest you learn more.  You have to be smart enough to realize you don’t know everything and certainly not so stupid that you think you do.

In Any Change, Timing Is Essential

1 comment

According to Musashi in The Book of Five Rings, timing is the core principle in strategy.  You must adapt your strategy to coordinate timing with your skill, and you must know when to attack and when not to attack.  All things ebb and flow and so there is cyclical timing, as in waiting for the proper time to execute, when the energy of the defenses are low or distracted.  There is also the benefit of understanding when the energy of the defense is at it’s peak and to use varying methods to either stall, divert, or spread out the defense until the timing can be right.  Sun Tzu said: “The victorious army first realizes the conditions for victory, and then seeks to engage in battle.  The vanquished army fights first, and then seeks victory.”

I know company and chief officers who have no sense of timing.  They’ll go off half-cocked at everything and anything, thinking that by brute strength and a full-on frontal assault, they’ll impose their will on whatever comes along.  Imagine their surprise when not only do they get it wrong, but they look bad in the process.  It doesn’t matter how right you are (or think you are), if the time and opportunity don’t meet, you will find yourself on the losing end again.

As frustrating as it can be sometimes, the officer must determine which way the wind is blowing and then introduce the change (or proposal for change) when the opportunity presents itself.  And I’ll tell people again and again, as I’m telling you now, watch officers who don’t understand this and I’ll bet they’re not perceived as very successful at their jobs.

Just as water flows to conform with boundaries and seeks the most efficient path, so should the officer possess the ability to change with one’s own situation to shift between options when presented with new information.  Be aware of where loyalties lie, with the old and with the new, seek the chance to win over those on either side, and be the master of change.

Back To Work

No comments

The Road Warriors at Bryce Canyon (or as they consider themselves, "The Wonderpets"As some of you may have realized, I was on a vacation. While the first days involved attending to the business of the NFPA Technical Correlating Committee, of which I am a member as a result of my chairmanship of NFPA 1006, the remainder involved a jaunt by RV through some of America’s National Parks and Monuments with my wife, her sister, and my three young children.  My wife and “Aunt Patrice” were pretty self-sufficient, as many adults tend to be.  The three young ones, however, do require supervision (hopefully you all recognize this as being said tongue-in-cheek, since they are three little girls, ranging from 4 to 9, and each of them is already convinced they know WAY more than Dad).

While the supervision of children isn’t that much of a stretch from my real job (supervising firefighters), it does bear discussion here, since it doesn’t seem that all fire officers have the same understanding.  Supervising my children involves primarily looking out for their welfare.  It involves insuring they don’t plunge headlong off of one of the many steep overlooks of the Grand Canyon, and that they don’t shove an entire roll of toilet paper into the RV toilet, both of which could result in a disaster requiring lots of paperwork.  This actually sounds much like my work at the fire department as well.

Watching children involves logistical functions such as scheduling and insuring they have the right materials for the job, which in my case involves a lot of distraction and could involve duct tape and beer, were it not for the intervention of my wife and Aunt Patrice.  Likewise, I could probably fix most of my problems at the fire department with a lot of duct tape and beer, but I know laws prohibit the former and policies prohibit the latter, so I have to actually use the skills of negotiation, coaching, mentoring, and apparently, parenting.

So you see, my job as a father (and sherpa) doesn’t differ really much at all from my job as a Battalion Chief.  When you put it in that perspective, seriously, you realize that the people you work with and for require your insight and creative application of problem solving to make the day go safely and effectively.  Sun Tzu once said, “Treat your subordinates as you would your beloved children, and they will willingly die for you when you give the order.” While I don’t desire that from either my subordinates or my children, you get the point that if you apply the skills of GOOD parenting to both your children and your charges, they will hopefully respect and obey your orders, and do what is necessary to achieve success.

While my leave was really only marginally scarred by a Philadelphia loss to Chicago (where, coincidentally, Aunt Patrice is from) and the constant updates on the games from she and her friends, I had a great time and actually look forward to singing “Here Come The Hawks” for Fire Daily on the World Wide Web.  I got to somewhat enjoy the final game from the comfort of the Maswick Lodge in the beautiful Grand Canyon and when it was all said and done, I said to my children (who Patrice convinced should all be loud, raucous Hawks fans for my benefit) that you know, it’s just a game. When I walked out onto each of those vistas of Zion, Bryce and of course, the Grand Canyon, I realize that ultimately, none of it really matters unless you build something out of all of these experiences, and share them with others.  That’s really where leadership falls into the grand scheme of things, and if we can’t enjoy the sunsets and laughing at ourselves from time to time, what good is it all?

I’m glad to be back at work.  Enjoy your day with your people as well, and remember, it’s all in how you choose to look at it as to how things will go for you and your team.  Maintain a positive perspective and even the big things can be made right again.  Be safe.

The Weekly Weasel – Installment 2

No comments

ladder talk webI’m so happy that the Weekly Weasel seems to have intrigued some people, so let’s have another go at it. Our subject for today is the officer who sets a less-than-stellar example for his personnel (don’t worry, I have some “her” stories too, coming up).  This weasel is going to go by the name “Lt. Bubba”.

In Lt. Bubba’s head, he is an excellent example of leadership.  He has managed to cram his fat butt into his too small uniform pants for a while now (reminding me of trying to stick 11 pounds of crap into a 10 pound bag) and his cheap cologne and immaculate hair might cause one to think he is concerned with his image and how he is perceived by his subordinates. If this were truly the case, Lt. Bubba should probably re-evaluate his daily actions rather than his appearance, as this brings me to a short discussion on leading by example.

While it would seem intuitive that subordinates will perform to the level that they perceive their officer to be performing at, it is also true that newer members to a team will perform to the level that the senior members of a team are performing at.  Likewise, an entire organization’s attitude will ebb and flow along with the attitude of the chiefs.  There are, of course, always exceptions to this rule, because people are individuals, but just the act of watching someone who is engaged, inspiring, transformational, and positive will translate to the subordinates because they can see that this is the expected norm.

Lt. Bubba’s actions, however, are of an officer who is aloof, uncompromising, and negative, unless, of course, it is about some of his “heroic” actions taken during one of the many (many, many) war stories he likes to tell.  But once done eating his bear claw and reminiscing about the good ol’ days, it’s back to his office, where the door goes shut and one can only assume the amazing transformation of the organization that is going on in there (which is probably more primping, reading the latest girlie magazine, and of course, a little Solitaire on the computer, rather than anything productive).

His personnel, in the meanwhile, are milling about aimlessly.  They might get some training, and they might not. They will probably clean up around the station (because Lt. Bubba insists on a clean station, so long as it isn’t him doing the cleaning) and wash the trucks, but to me, most of this is just a replacement for checkers, because it certainly isn’t meaningful effort.

If coached and mentored correctly, personnel often manage to reach a high bar because they are interested in doing well unless there is a factor which causes them to do otherwise.  In Lt. Bubba’s case, it is his laziness, and although the clean station and the grooming seem to indicate a well-organized team, it is just a facade, because his personnel aren’t prepared to go out and do anything other than what he tells them to do, and certainly not prepared to think through a problem and solve it.

When personnel are unable to hit the bar, it is key to determine that cause and root it out.  This can be done through counseling, encouraging, remediation, or the less preferred method, discipline.  If individuals can understand when deficiencies occur and self-adjust, it is certainly a more pleasant method of doing so, but in the event that they can not, that is where the supervisors must step in.  Lt. Bubba is so busy doing as little meaningful as possible, that his personnel are adrift and might or might not get the direction they need.

In organizations with high standards and expectations, the community can sense this commitment and get their heads around that, supporting the organization with good response in the “letters to the editor”, and comments at the weekend BBQs around town.  This is what happens when you have good people, good training, good equipment and apparatus, good rules and guidelines, good staff support, and most importantly, good leadership not just from officers, but from the core leaders- the troops.

Lt. Bubba is all about the window dressing.  I know chiefs who say, “Well, there’s nothing I can pin on him.  His station is clean, his people are always in uniform, and they come in at 0800 and go home at 0800.  Exactly what is your problem with him?”

Well, when I put Lt. Bubba’s people on the fireground, they are constantly looking at others for direction.  Every order must be spelled out in exacting detail, because they don’t understand the difference between strategic, tactical, and task level decision-making.  They too are aloof and ask no questions, and don’t understand the inner workings of an incident, and when faced with a problem they have never faced before, are like deer in the headlights, because they have no critical thinking skills.  On medical calls, it is the same way; they don’t do anything unless told to.  I suspect that it is less a motivational issue so much as it is a failure to comprehend what the next step is in a certain event and to perform proactively.

As a leader, it isn’t just about making everything look good today, it is preparing your troops for tomorrow.  I mentioned this at length in my post the other day.  Lt. Bubba is big on window dressing and little on substance.  This appeals to some chiefs because they think, “Well, he stays out of trouble and he looks good.  I’m okay with that.”  Unfortunately, his personnel are working in a transactional leadership state and need to develop their own thinking skills, because when he is gone, they will not only fail to understand what they need to do, but they might just drift away in the process.

What kinds of techniques might be used to push Lt. Bubba toward coming out of the office and doing what is really needed?  What efforts must be made by his supervisors to develop a more effective team?

Be the catalyst for real change.  If you have a Lt. Bubba in your organization, the people under his command are starving for education.  They may not know it right away, but if shown the path to real teamwork, they might be the spark that moved that machine forward.  Progression and innovation come from original thought, not the parroting of rules.  Personnel need to be able to understand, so they can think for themselves when the time is present.

Protect Your Loved Ones

1 comment
Give your subordinates a chance to succeed while you watch them closely.

Give your subordinates a chance to succeed while you watch them closely.

There’s been a lot of talk about death in my family lately.  I have been coveting a tortilladora for a while, a relatively heavy device for making homemade tortillas.  The other day, I bought one (they’re cheap, but I had to make a side trip to the supermercado to buy it).  Of course, when I did, my daughter Emma, who is my kitchen sidekick and sous chef, got attached to it.  At dinner, we were joking around and I announced that when I died, I would make sure I specifically left her the tortilladora in my will.

Of course, my three-year old, Honora, took this to mean that my death was imminent, and for the last week everyone in our family has been getting quizzed as to when we are going to die.  Explaining to Honora that I had no immediate plans to die wasn’t cutting it, and explaining to her that everyone will eventually die, but not necessarily over the weekend wasn’t doing it either.  All we can do, I guess, is to be reassuring and hope the discussion evolves to something else soon.

Heartbreaking as it is, however, it brings to mind that our life on this mortal coil isn’t forever and just as I tried to reassure Honora that it wouldn’t be within this pay period, we really have no guarantees that it won’t.  Interestingly enough, our buddy the Fire Critic was just reflecting on this very same subject the other day, while blogging about firefighter wills being offered to personnel.

As good as this sounds, and our department approaches this from a different angle, by providing a one-time benefit to all employees for $300 toward a will or financial counseling, I was hit with something a few years ago that made me spend that much and more as a result of our daughter Caroline having special needs.  Having a “regular” will drawn up would only exacerbate the problems for Caroline; we actually needed to have a specially trained attorney draw up our wills to include the creation of a special needs trust in order to keep the government from taking away any benefits that Caroline would have coming to her as a result of her having Down syndrome.  So the objective discussion is that not only do we need to plan, but we need to know what we are planning for.

The point of my post today is one of leadership, believe it or not, and it goes to the heart of your legacy.  While you may be doing the right thing by your people on a daily basis, there’s also the consideration that we need to prepare them for the event when we are no longer with them, for when we retire, or move to another position, or for any other reason (we’ll leave the realm of death out of it, but that’s another contingency, of course).

If you are a transformational leader, rather than simply a transactional leader, your personnel will already be understanding the need to engage themselves intuitively, to participate and stretch their comfort zones (with you nearby as a safety net), and to identify the areas they need to improve.  You should also be taking this time to coach these people- encouraging them, redirecting them, and allowing them to take small leaps, like leaving them in command of some incidents (like I said, though, with you at their side).

At the company officer level, this sometimes gets a little challenging, since you can’t necessarily turn over command of your company at the next worker to the new guy (there’s usually not enough of those to go around), but there are plenty of other learning moments.  Put them in charge of the company at training, or better yet, have them teach a few classes to the company.  Get them used to being in front.  Let them handle some alarm activations or medical calls or even some service calls as the CO.  Surprisingly enough, we probably had all kinds of training on how to handle fire, medical, and rescue incidents, but how about the critical thinking involved in solving a ruptured water heater call, or a public assistance request?  There are needs for the CO to not only solve for X, but also to be able to provide effective interaction and communication with the complainant to help them through the situation.

While you may have subordinates who can achieve this learning on their own, it is important for you to not only facilitate it, but to monitor it to insure that what these individuals are doing is what meets your criteria.  Coaching and mentoring involves your oversight; you just can’t leave it to chance that they will have absorbed what you have been demonstrating over the years.  While you may have looked upon your own mentor for years and figured out what he or she was doing and understood how they approached situations, not everyone has the same understanding level and while your subordinates may seem to have figured it out, there’s a good chance they are just parroting your moves as well.  Thus the need to have these folks achieve understanding and a deep appreciation for the nuances of each decision and how they came about.  It’s one thing to have someone do what you tell them to do, it’s a different thing to have them think through the situation on their own.

What do you want your legacy of leadership to be?  Do you really want to leave it to chance that your students absorbed the lessons?  Insure that you prepare your personnel for the future by realizing the entire situation and make preparations now to support them in the days to come.

Daily Values vs. Emergency Ops Values

2 comments

webDSC_0162A while back, Chris Naum at TheCompanyOfficer.com discussed briefly the New Rules of Engagement for Structural Firefighting.  This is, of course, a work in progress, but I urge you to read it and understand what these rules mean to us as practitioners.  We are called to save lives and fight fires, but to do so safely and responsibly, understanding that our resources are finite (you just can’t keep throwing firefighters into fires until one comes out safely with the victim).

If you search this blog for discussion about leading with values (I even linked the search to make it easy for you),  you’ll see that values were specifically mentioned in at least eight articles, not to mention all of the other times values were a peripheral part of the discussion.   Like it or not, organizational values define organizational culture.  These values help guide you in times when hard decisions must be made under ambiguous situations.  When organizations lack defined values, or personnel don’t understand them as the gospel truth, they don’t always reflect those values when challenged. If you have never implicitly discussed your organizational values, your personnel will revert to whatever values conform with those of the group (think “B” Shift) or scarier, their own beliefs (which you have no ability to predict).

While the article by Chris suggests that the Rules should be concise and bulletized in format, it is in that suggestion related to firefighting that I see these “rules” as reflecting our values in considering the risky nature of engaging with a particularly dangerous enemy.  I challenge each of you to read more about this and ask yourself, as well as your leaders, questions that help refine what to do in those emergency situations, especially as they involve our own organizations.

While we value the service we provide to our customers as being our highest calling, there comes a defining moment where we must place the welfare of our troops at a higher level, especially when it comes down to fighting a “lost cause”.  I am willing to personally take a calculated risk to save lives, but I am NOT willing to take a risk personally, or to expose each of you to a risk for the sake of a body recovery or to fight a structure that will be written off anyway.  I am as aggressive as they come when it comes to firefighting, but I value my personnel higher than any property, and I think we all need to think that way about how we choose to engage at these incidents.

But it is in this that the problem is apparent; we have made a decision to discuss our values in regard to emergency operations, but have we defined our organizational values when they come to day-to-day operations?  In many departments, the over-arching statement seems to be, “Use common sense and logic when it comes to making decisions”.

While I agree one-hundred percent with that statement (and that approach may very well save your life some day on an emergency scene), when we have recruits (and in that, I’m lumping Juniors, new volunteer members, etc.) making value-based decisions on day-to-day things (like when they are unsupervised or in situations where they are asked to show initiative), have we really done a good job of reinforcing our belief system to them and demonstrating a positive example by living those values ourselves?

Take setting fires, for example.  While we (and society) continually insist that firefighters setting fires is wrong, is the culture around your organization such that going to fires and “fighting the red devil” is more important than community service?  Is it more apt to say that personnel walk around moping about the loss of call volume?  Are members who seek to demonstrate their commitment to the community challenged by the lack of calls to demonstrate that commitment?  Why is it that we are in this business, anyway?  If the answer is to run around in a uniform and drive fast down the road with lights and sirens on, well, we all know that only represents a finite amount of our jobs (and it’s not like I want someone who thinks that’s a good reason to be an emergency service provider anyway).

While it seems pretty intuitive that setting fires is a bad thing, when you are dealing with people who already have a less-than-mature attitude and a challenge to their belief system, you set yourself up for disaster.  If you really want to avoid this type of incident occurring in your organization, one of the basic things that should be done is to engage personnel in activities OTHER than fighting fires/running calls.  If you want to find out how committed these personnel are to the community, give them day-to-day assignments that include non-emergency prevention or participation duties- just have them man an engine and go show the flag at the local high school football game, or go spray water for the kids on a hot day.  Anything to have them prove their worth OTHER than running hot and exerting their “auth-or-it-tie” (it always loses something unless you hear Cartman saying it).

Organizations who find themselves struggling to recruit or to get people to do their jobs must evaluate if there is a gap between what the leadership defines as valued behavior and what the membership (or potential membership) defines as a valued behavior.  If there is a gap, someone had better define the expectations, or the expectation will be that everyone is entitled to define the organizational mission according to his or her own needs.  If that is the case, I’d expect to be reading about you on STAT911 or Firegeezer some morning soon, and not in a good way.

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.

Capitalize on Your Strengths

2 comments
DC Ed is not happy.  I didn't break it and don't ask me to fix it either.

DC Ed is not happy. I didn't break it and don't ask me to fix it either.

I was watching a gentleman installing some cabinets in our laundry room the other day. A few months ago, one of the cabinets fell off the wall; luckily, we saw it was going before it did and got the items out before it literally came down. The man was looking over the remnants of the previous installation (I wasn’t the installer) and made some comments about how to properly put cabinets up. I sheepishly informed him that I had no clue. While I’m pretty confident in the belief that if your community is in a total disaster, I’m probably one of the first people you should call.  If you need a cabinet put up, I’d go elsewhere.  Quickly.

I can put up a raker shore, but it isn’t going to win any awards for precision cuts and edges. If you need to dig someone out of a building, or lead a company into a fire, or command a major incident, I’m your guy.  If you want it done right, you can forget anything involving auto repair, carpentry, or the finer points of heating and air conditioner installation.  Asking me to wire something is probably not wise (or safe) either.

We all have our strengths; each of us are good at some things and may be horrible at others. Instead, there are managers who try to fit the proverbial square peg into a round hole. Most of the people I work with can patch something together (see The Fixers), but the attempt is very much something not up to any standard.   When they are showing off their “handiwork” to me, I usually end up saying, “Well, it will hold until someone can get here to fix it better”.   Usually I end that with a little smile to acknowledge their efforts, knowing that I’m certainly not criticizing: if I had done it, it would probably look worse.

When we put together teams, to develop effective teams requires thought as to what is needed by the organization, but failing to consider the small team dynamics and assume everything is going to go swimmingly, is simply nonsense.  We used to have a chief whose idea of improving small team (i.e.; company) effectiveness was to put one good guy into a team of poor performers. That way we could “spread the wealth”. Ultimately, this would result in my look in return (me rolling my eyes heavenward, knowing what was going to happen) and a muttered, “We’ll see.”

No surprise then, when months later the recently transferred good performers were  looking for jobs elsewhere while the poor performers were laughing about how they “ran off another one”. If you really DO want to get rid of your best people, keep feeding them to the sharks. It’s usually not a matter of IF they bail, but WHEN.

Building a good team requires strong leadership. For those of you who are aspiring officers, this is your opportunity to shine. If your officer has some areas where they would like to improve, this is your chance to offer assistance in what he or she lacks (subtly, I’d suggest). Are they poor at documentation? Offer to help with reports. Are they better at medical than fire training? Offer to help with the former or the latter, whichever would help them. I had officers who wouldn’t know a decent knot if it hit them on top of the head; I was ultimately the go-to person anytime someone needed a good ropes and knots class.  The experience you will get in leading will pay dividends later.

If you are an officer, it is wise to be self-aware of your abilities.  Build on your strengths and surround yourself with those who can help you with your weaknesses. I would suggest informing your crew of how they can help you and ask for suggestions to improve. If done correctly, they will appreciate your candor, they will get a chance to show their particular expertise (and impress you), and put together with each other member of the team, fill an important role.

If you are building a home, you wouldn’t  have the framers do the electric and the roofers do the plumbing, would you? If it doesn’t make sense to do that with something as trivial as putting together a building (said tongue-in-cheek, I hope you realize), why would to take that same chance when building an effective fire and emergency response team?  Be smart and seek the people out to best fill the important roles on your team. You all will be that much happier with the end result.

Taking FHZ to Wayne County, PA

1 comment

taskforceone logoAs a quick aside, if any of you are interested, I’ll be in Wayne County, PA on January 30-31, teaching at the Browndale Fire Department.  I don’t know if there are any open spots left, but contact info is on the flier.

Whether you are a seasoned officer, one newly promoted or just are aspiring to become an officer, this program will provided
you with the tools you need to meet that challenge. A company officer’s job is difficult, especially if you have not
been prepared for the transition from firefighter to company officer. This program, through a series of interactive exercises,
role playing and problem solving activities will provide you the tools needed to succeed in the station and on the fire
ground. Through computer simulation exercises and other interactive activities, students will have to opportunity to participate
in several emergencies under the watchful eyes of our instructors. Our faculty will share their “best practices”
showing the way it is really done in today’s challenging and ever changing fire service.

The course will be “Command for Company Officers” and as Ron Richards, of Task Force 1, Inc. describes it:  ”A company officer’s job is difficult, especially if you have not been prepared for the transition from firefighter to company officer. This program will provide you the tools needed to succeed in the station and on the fire ground.”  So if you’ve got the time and you are in the neighborhood, come on by.

Command Presents

4 comments
Hilton Head Island Fire Station 7

Hilton Head Island Fire Station 7

It’s that time of the year that we hear the word “presents” often enough to make your ears bleed, so I was wondering if my misuse of the word “presents” got your attention. Apparently it did, or you wouldn’t be reading this now.  Or maybe you didn’t notice.   If you didn’t notice, go and look again: when we speak of “command presence”, we speak of the characteristics of the person in charge to lead from a strong, visible, and decisive point of view, not “presents” like a gift.  Having strong leader-like characteristics  as part of your daily personality could be a “present”, if your job is to be a leader.  It also could be very annoying to the people around you.

According to my family and friends, acquaintances, and the Myers-Briggs (and every other psych profile I’ve ever gone through), I exhibit decisive, directive behavior as part of my normal personality.  More often than I care to, my “command presence” comes out when I’m talking with my wife (she doesn’t like it), my kids (they’re not crazy about it either), or my colleagues (they probably think I’m insufferable anyway).  This just goes to show you there is a time and place for everything.  Explaining to your daughter the intricacies of math, for one, is probably not a good time to be strong, visible and decisive.

Likewise, when you are leading firefighters into emergency situations, it is not a time to be easy-going, reserved, and willing to compromise.  There are those out there who are; they are also the ones with crews free-lancing, poor accountability, mixed commands, and poor coordination.  These are also the ones who get people hurt and killed.

While you don’t have to be the second coming of Field Marshal Rommel, you should understand that the fireground or rescue scene is the place where only one person can be in charge.  Coupled with the observation that leadership abhors a vacuum, you can probably understand that if you fail to establish a clear picture of who is in charge, someone else will.  It’s not the act of having a fist fight to decide who that is; the only person who can be in charge is the legally responsible incident commander.  How that decision is made is pertinent to the laws of your jurisdiction, but if you have someone who can’t command, they probably shouldn’t be in that position.

All too often, I see failure in company officers who are “best buds” with their troops on a daily basis, and then can’t understand why there’s so much chaos on their incident scene.  It is simply because those people don’t necessarily see you as the “alpha dog”.  To them, you are just another “member of the pack”.  Other members of the pack don’t call the shots, the alpha dog does.  And like I said, if you aren’t filling that role, someone else is.  That person will also be the one that when things go south, everyone turns toward for the answers.

In this time of giving, give your subordinates a lesson in leadership.  Your leadership should set a positive example, a role model, if you will, for your aspiring officers.  Command and control is important on the emergency scene and failing to work with that does not instill confidence in the abilities of the IC.  It is essential that not only do your charges see you as a leader on the scene, but in the station as well, for if they do not, on the scene is a bad place for them to convince them of that.  Make it a “present” to the people you are responsible for teaching and watching over.  Give them the tools to lead others, and they will hopefully show you that they trust your leadership, and when the time comes, they will walk on that path as well.

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.

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.

Why Yell?

3 comments

IMG_1146I’m Mick, and I yell.  I think this is the part where you all are supposed to say, “Hi Mick.”  Why do we yell?  I started to say, “I’m a yeller”, but that doesn’t sound right.  And I don’t scream.  Screaming to me indicates panic or total loss of personal control.  But anyone who knows me knows I have a little bit of a fuse and when you light it, I’m liable to say some things I wouldn’t intentionally repeat around the God-fearin’ folk.

This blog is as much about therapy as it is for education and sometimes the questions I ask are actually me asking myself the question (did that make sense?).  Why yell?  Well, I guess the simplest way to say it is that I yell when I am frustrated.  I guess in a bit of self-analysis, I should ask, who gives me the right to yell except me?  Who made me the arbiter of all things?  Does the yelling solve anything? In short, I probably don’t really have a right to yell and the yelling only solves things when the recipient gets the message.

So it sounds like it’s more of a communication problem.  I don’t really yell when I don’t get my own way.  I yell when it is apparent to me that someone isn’t paying attention or I yell back when someone is yelling at me.  When someone isn’t paying attention in most cases, I get angry because I feel like the other person is being selfish and acting in a manner that doesn’t show consideration for others.  It’s funny, because I don’t nearly get as angry about someone wronging me as when I see someone wrong someone else.  And when someone is yelling at me, I guess I’m inclined to yell back because when I screw something up, I take it to heart and simmer over it for a while.  So you don’t have to yell at me, I get it.  And if you don’t get that I get it, I begin to yell too.

Generally, I am an empathetic man, and when I finish yelling, I wonder why I did it in the first place, and more often than not, I feel badly about it.  I don’t CHOOSE to yell.  I guess that’s the powerlessness coming out.  Just as a three-year-old will lash out when no one understands what they want, I guess yelling is a form of emotional immaturity that we need to choke back.  But how else then can we communicate what it is we need when the subject doesn’t seem to be listening?

The problem at the heart of this truly is communication.  If all the laws of effective communications came together like they are supposed to, we wouldn’t have to yell.  We tend to yell when there is a lot of noise, and by noise, I’m not just talking audible noise, but distractions – problems at home, busy schedule, not feeling well, etc. I suppose the key is to either find a way to effectively drill through the problem or to postpone the communication until a more appropriate time.

I’d just as soon never yell again, but unfortunately, I’m in a business where sometimes things go seriously wrong and people die when orders aren’t understood.  If you aren’t paying attention on the fireground, I’d rather yell at you then see you fall through the roof, so please bear with me.  And I have three young children at home, none of whom seem to be inclined to pick anything up when they are done with it, so as much effort as I have put into not yelling at home, it’s inevitable that it will happen again.  I suppose it all really comes down to a matter of perspective.  If I don’t yell at home, the result might be a dirty house.  If I don’t yell at work, someone might die.

But just like commercials and other annoying things, too much completely ruins the effectiveness of it.  If I yelled all the time (other than everyone staying away from me), the intended recipients just see it as another crazy rant.  I know people who like to yell at me (a lot) and while at first it bothered me, now it is just so much background noise.  So if yelling a lot isn’t working, I guess the key observation would be that you should save your yelling for when it is absolutely necessary, else it will have no impact whatsoever on your chosen yellee.

I guess this brings us full circle then.  Is yelling effective?  Why yell?  It almost seems counterintuitive to suggest that yelling will cause people to NOT listen to you, but if you do too much of it, chances are that you are headed right down that path.  So some advice- take a deep breath, put the problem into perspective, and decide if yelling is even worth it.  On occasion, it might be.  But the likely scenario is that by the time you consider all that, the problem individual has moved on already and you may have even cooled off.  So think hard before you use a shotgun to kill a housefly.  Save the yelling for the completely necessary events only.  My audiologist thanks you.

Constant Battle

4 comments

2005-427I am never surprised by the willingness of firefighters to fight for what is right.  I have officers that work with me as well as friends throughout emergency services who seem like they are perpetually locked in battle with someone over something, and having been one of those people myself for a number of years, I know how exhausting and frustrating that mode of operation can be.

I was reminded of this recently in two cases; one in which an officer was trying to right a wrong for someone who wasn’t even assigned to him, and to another who was constantly frustrated by others who wouldn’t jump in and take up a perfectly valid cause.  In both cases, these people had every right to be upset- their points were perfectly logical and they were angry because of the injustice that was being perpetuated.  However, my advice to them was to do something that seems like it is counter-intuitive to most of you out there (given the number of angry responses I see to some e-mails, blogs, posts, etc.)  Again, Master Sun, in The Art of War, from Terrain:

Sizing up opponents to determine victory, assessing dangers and distances, is the proper course of action for military leaders.

My advice: First, you never want to engage in a siege mentality with someone who has already made up their mind what they believe.  I don’t care how right you are and how wrong they are, when someone is locked in on an idea, attacking them head-on is just another version of the irresistible force vs. the immovable object.  You are destined for a long, protracted battle with no clear end in sight and in the case of trying to sway opinion, nothing is going to come from this but hurt feelings and a lot of anger.

A quick solution: Find out where they stand and which way the wind is blowing BEFORE engaging them in a heated discussion.  Develop your points and reinforce them with irrefutable logic.  Enlist allies and discuss your strategies for making this change.  And then, when the timing is right, introduce your well-thought-out argument without being emotional or threatening.  Allow the other party to come to their own conclusions and they will often come willingly.

Two quick observations though; when you are developing your case, you may find that maybe YOU were wrong and THEY were right.  Or you may find that you both are wrong or you both are right (it happens more often than you would believe).  In which case, presenting to these other people your findings (and if you are wrong, admitting it), is bound to give the other party the opportunity to save face and will buy you some chips you can cash later. 

Then the other issue- some people, no matter what, can not be swayed by logic.  They are so emotionally tied to a belief that no matter what you present, they are entirely convinced you are wrong and they are right.  You see this often in political and religious discussions in which one or both parties are absolutely unwilling to see another’s point of view.  If you find this to be the case, even Sun Tzu advises, “besieging a walled city is to be the tactic of last resort”.

In the earlier discussion we had on opportunity, we covered some issues of timing. No matter how right your belief, if the timing isn’t right, you won’t be able to convince anyone of its merit.  What it really comes down to is that if you want to be successful, you need to enlist some help, make sure you have ALL of the facts, and make sure you now when to move forward.  No leader in their right mind would attack an opponent without the right number of resources, the right reconnaissance, and the right timing, and neither should you.