Fire and Emergency Services Administration- CH.2_split_1.pdf

Project 51. 1999. History of the TV show Emergency. Retrieved from http://www.squad51.org United States Fire Administration. 1973. America burning—The report of the National Commission on Fire Prevention and Control. Retrieved from https://www.usfa.fema.gov/downloads/pdf/publications/fa-264.pdf CHAPTER 2 Introduction to Administration LEARNING OBJECTIVES After studying this chapter, the student will be able to: ∎ Recognize how both management and leadership are integral to effective administratio (pp 18–19). ∎ Outline professional qualifications for fire and emergency medical services (EMS administrators (pp 19–20). ∎ Comprehend how problems caused by staff–line distinctions can be overcome (pp 20–21) ∎ Describe the pros and cons to selection of administrators through the process of electio or appointment (pp 21–22). ∎ Examine how national consensus standards and standard operating procedures (SOPs affect the consistency and effectiveness of emergency services (pp 23–24). ∎ Know the value of direct supervision and standardization in firefighting and EMS (pp 24 25). ∎ Explain how administrators can work to bring about change and what common challenge they face (p 25). ∎ Describe how to gather feedback from staff members and peers as part of the decision making process (pp 25–27). ∎ Recognize how to engage influential sources of power, including tradition, political group and individuals, unions, and the public (pp 27–32). ∎ Explain how to gain influence over the political process (pp 28–30). ∎ Discuss the process and challenges of negotiation (pp 33–34). Case Study Resolving Staff Divisions In 1996, the Madison, Wisconsin, Fire Department made a decision to reduce its budget by decreasing the number of division chiefs and combining staff and line functions. Madison’s Assistant Fire Chief Phillip Vorlander recognized that the distinction between line and staff functions had created divisiveness in the department, alienating shift commanders from other administrators. The department changed its organizational structure so that each battalion chief worked two 24-hour shifts and six 8-hour shifts per 2-week period. Between the 8- and 24-hour shifts, each battalion chief spent 4 days a week serving as a staff supervisor. With this new organization, staff officers were more able to participate in the administrative decision-making. This increased the quality of the decisions and their acceptance, and the commitment to the management team. This structure also had a positive effect on the cohesiveness of the department because chief officers no longer had allegiance to a particular battalion, division, or shift (Vorlander, 1996). Discussion Questions 1. In your department (or a department in your vicinity), are staff and line functions separate? If yes, would departmental decisions be better accomplished by obtaining input from all officers? 2. In the traditional organization of a fire department, would mandatory transfers of battalion chiefs have a positive effect on administrative decision-making? 3. Although not mentioned in the Madison case, would input from all personnel be helpful? If yes, give one example. 4. Identify three techniques to improve decision-making in a multi-station department. Combining Management and Leadership Effective administration requires two skills: management and leadership. Management ensures that the organization is prepared and able to accomplish its goals by establishing that sufficient personnel and equipment are available for the organization to perform its duties. Leadership can be observed when trained personnel safely and efficiently complete their mission using the resources provided by the fire and emergency services (FES) organization. At the organization level, leadership is required to “sell” new programs, the need for additional resources, or progressive changes. After the resources become available or the new change is implemented, effective management is needed to use them to support the mission. Administrators should possess management and leadership skills, even if they feel more comfortable in one of the roles than the other, which is common. A person who excels in management skills will be very good at making the existing organization work efficiently. Many U.S. companies have trained great managers who propelled the country to the top of the industrialized world. For example, Disney—a great visionary company—had a period of time when the management was focused on increasing profits and dividends for stock owners in lieu of truly visionary media products. This caused a decrease in truly innovative new entertainment products. Although this sequence of events does not occur in every organization, it is common in many industries. For instance, management-oriented people generally represent most chief officers in FES organizations. Management skills are necessary for this role, because the chief officer often needs to be a good caretaker of public funds, staff, and resources. However, managers may not be proficient at leadership. A person with strong leadership skills has a clear vision of where the organization needs to go and the courage to attempt the journey. There is no guarantee that the leader will arrive at the visionary goal, but because good leaders are inherently risk takers, they try anyway. Conversely, good leaders may not be good managers because they typically are not detail oriented and may miss those items that must be completed to achieve the overall goal because they are big picture visionaries. A leadership-oriented administrator may focus on a visionary goal 5–10 years down the road but forget to plan for tomorrow. In contrast, a management-oriented person generally is not comfortable with risk taking and would rather not get involved in visionary goals that have no guaranteed outcome. Managers may try to implement change slowly or make it voluntary; be aware that a voluntary plan can foster inconsistencies because members and supervisors set their own goals. When the voluntary phase results in a commitment of 10% to 15% or more members, this is a good time to phase in a mandatory policy. A leadership-oriented person is more of a risk taker when it comes to new ideas and change. Many people drawn to the FES have a reduced sense of fear and are risk takers in physical actions. There is an old saying that highlights the heroic behavior of firefighters: when firefighters are entering a burning building, everyone else is leaving it. However, when it comes to changes in the organization, fear of the unknown may make many FES and EMS chief officers reluctant. Although these descriptions of leadership and management may be oversimplifications, it is important for administrators to recognize the value of management and leadership skills and work to develop them through formal education, self-study, seminars, mentoring, and experience. The National Commission on Fire Prevention and Control’s America Burning Report of 1973 further comments on the duality faced by the chief officer: Presiding over this tenuous alliance [fire department] is the fire chief, who wears two hats—one, the administrative hat required to run the organization; the other, the helmet he dons when the alarm is sounded to lead his firefighters in the suppression of a fire. Because the fire chief usually has come up through the ranks, the second hat probably fits comfortably (United States Fire Administration, 1973). The America Burning Report uses the term leadership when discussing the ability to lead firefighters at the scene of an emergency incident. In this text, the term leader is used at the organizational or administrative level, which calls for a special set of skills and knowledge. Leaders are problem solvers; therefore, this text discusses the many aspects of problem solving. More precisely, this text is about the very special challenges to problem solving and/or policy choices that FES and EMS chief officers encounter in the public sector. Professional Qualifications for Administrators Career and volunteer organizations sometimes struggle with selecting the best person for the chief officer’s position. Whether the person is elected or appointed, the result may be the same: the administrator (chief) may be ineffective and in some cases disruptive to the organization. FES is evolving as a profession, and the selection of chiefs should strive to be similar to other professions, such as doctors, engineers, and lawyers. Professional qualifications for fire and EMS administration include three areas of competency: (1) training, (2) experience, and (3) education. In all three areas, fire and EMS administrators should meet minimum levels of proficiency; these minimal qualifications should be the same throughout the country, just as they are for medical, engineering, and legal professionals. For example, a medical doctor must complete college-level education and medical school, and then an internship/residency (training and experience). Only after completing these requirements and passing a comprehensive examination is the doctor granted a license to practice. Many FES organizations can improve their departments’ reputation and ability by adopting minimum professional requirements for officers. Although this is a complex and controversial subject, the following are some examples of recommended requirements for fire administrators: Minimum of 3 years of experience at each prerequisite level— firefighter and fire company officer Certification as a Fire Officer III or IV Training and certification as a Fire Fighter II and Fire Instructor I A degree from a regionally accredited college or university that is recognized by the U.S. Department of Education (an associate degree for smaller departments—those with less than six stations—or a bachelor’s degree for larger departments) HIGHER EDUCATION TIP: REGIONAL ACCREDITATION VS. NATIONAL ACCREDITATION Generally, “regionally” accredited higher education institutions (colleges and universities) are preferred and are typically more academically rigorous. Nationally accredited schools are predominantly for-profit and offer vocational, career, or technical programs. When considering higher education institutions, it is usually better to attend a “regionally” accredited school. © Smeby Jr, Charles L/Jones & Bartlett Learning EMS administrator qualifications are not as standardized as those of fire departments and vary across companies or positions. The three areas of competency—training, experience, and education—may be less defined in the EMS world. Fire departments have a hierarchical structure based on standardized training, but this is not the case with many private ambulance companies, because EMS supervisors have no national oversight organization to define those supervisory standards. Ambulance companies may offer supervisor or management positions to paramedics with comprehensive field experience, but they may not require management experience or higher education. A paramedic who may be an excellent clinician does not necessarily have the skill set to be a competent administrator. The extent to which a new supervisor, manager, or administrator is offered training opportunities also varies greatly from company to company and may be considered the responsibility of the individual. As EMS professionalism continues to increase, qualifications for management positions are becoming better defined. Common and preferred requirements for EMS administrative positions include: High school diploma or GED equivalent (college degrees may be preferred) Advanced Cardiac Life Support and professional-level cardiopulmonary resuscitation certification, with specialized training (e.g., hazardous materials, emergency vehicle operator, National Incident Management System, International Trauma Life Support, Pediatric Advanced Life Support) preferred EMT-P license and state driver’s license Three to five years active prehospital experience, with supervisory experience preferred Staff–Line Distinctions Most FES organizations have a distinct dividing line between staff and line functions. This classification is especially apparent in larger departments where it is common to have specialized divisions, such as fire prevention, training, dispatch, logistics, or human resources. There are several reasons why this traditional organization can cause conflict, especially when those on the line are asked to move into staff positions. First, firefighters and EMS providers often enjoy working at emergency incidents, so they may resist a transfer to staff positions if doing so takes away their ability to respond to emergency calls. Second, the crew can almost become a second family, and individuals may be hesitant to leave that family to move into staff positions. In addition, the daytime work schedule often required in staff positions may not be appealing for those who have second jobs or enjoy having extended time off. In the common 24- hour shift, an employee works for 24 hours straight, and then is off for 2 or even 3 days. Firefighters and paramedics might become comfortable working this shift and look forward to having time for their second job, family, or social commitments. To address these concerns, some organizations have combined the staff–line jobs at the mid-supervisory level. For example, a fire department may have a battalion chief in charge of each shift. This same battalion chief would also be assigned to supervise certain staff functions. During the weekday, the battalion chief is the administrative head of prevention but is available to respond to major emergencies when needed. Another alternative organizational strategy is to rotate command officers every few years to supervisory positions of both staff and line divisions. Serving in different commands ensures that the next chief officer has a well- rounded knowledge of the entire organization. CHIEF OFFICER TIP Tips for an Outstanding Reputation The following is a list of suggestions for how a chief officer can build an outstanding professional reputation: ∎ Build a solid experience base, starting at the lowest level and moving up through the ranks. In small organizations the chief may have to help out and, therefore, should still be skilled in basic emergency tasks. ∎ Take advantage of every opportunity to learn the skills and knowledge of the job through hands-on experience and training. ∎ Keep in the best physical shape possible; this includes strength, aerobic fitness, and body weight within recommended limits. Even if the chief officer no longer has to perform physical skills, fitness is a great area to lead by example. ∎ Acquire a formal education, especially through programs that lead to an associate’s or bachelor’s degree in fire science, administration, management, and other job-related areas. For larger departments, a graduate degree would be beneficial. ∎ Stay up-to-date by attending seminars and conferences, and by reading FES, government, and management periodicals. ∎ Read local newspapers, web sites, and publications from influential organizations. Be familiar with all controversial issues in the community, not just those that relate to FES. ∎ Visit other FES organizations and learn from their experiences and progressive ideas. ∎ Have high personal and professional standards for ethics and morality. ∎ Be very careful not to lie, including misinformation and omissions that would affect credibility. It is very difficult to recover from this damaging issue. ∎ If appointed to a top position, choose your initial proposed changes carefully. Choose only those changes that are certain to succeed. It is very important to start out as a winner. ∎ Last, but perhaps most important, lead by example. A similar model may be found in EMS organizations. Paramedic or emergency medical technician supervisors are much like battalion chiefs in terms of job function and span of control. During a 24-hour shift, they might be responsible for administrative tasks, meetings, and field oversight and also might be expected to respond to certain types of calls or function as a provider when staffing levels are low. Some companies have a controversial rule requiring supervisors to staff an ambulance while supervising some staff functions. Some EMS providers believe that, although supervisors should be required to maintain field skills and certifications, there should be a clear distinction between staff and line roles. In addition, union affiliation may create some conflict, because in many companies field providers are union members but supervisors are not members. This is a typical division found in many union organized companies where supervisors are separated from the workers. In companies where union field employees work as part-time supervisors, they may be restricted in their ability to discipline other field employees, handle sensitive company information, or investigate complaints. Selection of Administrators Most fire and EMS administrators are selected by election or appointment. Both methods present unique challenges. By Election In many volunteer FES organizations, administrators are elected. These organizations are often independent and self-regulated private corporations that are operated without formal scrutiny by the municipality or public (customers) they serve. Without public accountability or oversight other than the members named as its commissioners or board of directors, they may be more likely to make unintentional faulty decisions. To counteract this lack of accountability to the public, it is suggested that elected officials for the area served could appoint the chief officer from a list of qualified applicants, for example. In addition to issues of accountability, these organizations may also have less stability and consistency than those of municipal FES organizations. This is because appointed officials typically have more latitude than elected officials in enforcing, interpreting, and changing the SOPs, training requirements, and equipment and apparatus needs and specifications. In practice, volunteer chiefs may initiate change each time a new chief is elected. The resulting inconsistency is not caused by bad or incompetent people; it is the result of a system in which officers are elected by a democratic process. Furthermore, because most volunteer chiefs are typically elected for a 1-year term, they must start working toward reelection as soon as they are elected, tempering their ability to be strong leaders. A similar situation exists in the U.S. House of Representatives, in which representatives are elected for 2-year terms. Almost as soon as representatives are elected and take office, they must start planning for their reelection. Thus, they spend a considerable amount of time and effort on reelection strategies, taking away from their key mission, which is to represent the people in their district and the interests of the United States. In most cases, these are honorable people who are placed in a system that has limitations encouraging policies and limits of the enforcement of rules and regulations that may be opposed by those supervised. By Appointment Just as there are limitations to volunteer organizations that elect their officers, there are problems when chief officers in municipal departments are appointed by a government’s elected officials or administrators. While most are appointed from a list of qualified applicants based on formal education, experience, and a comprehensive interview process, the FES administrator might feel conflicting allegiances to those who appointed him or her, the labor group, and the public. It is not uncommon to find FES or EMS administrators who feel alienated from their organizations. The chief officer may believe that the labor organization, the elected officials, and other appointed administrators all want to convince or force their particular ideas on the organization. Government officials and labor organizations have powerful self-interests, but the public may only have a weak influence because of its lack of knowledge about emergency services. Therefore, the chief should counteract this by being an advocate for the public interest. Rules and Regulations One of the main duties of a fire or EMS administrator is dealing with rules and regulations often created as SOPs. This includes analyzing, reviewing, creating, determining, and enforcing rules and regulations for the entire organization. In some cases, such as local, state, or federal regulations, rules may be mandated by a higher authority in government. These rules may also be initiated by a task force of officers and members empowered by the administrator to create SOPs for safety and efficiency during emergency operations. It is important to recognize, despite what some critics proclaim, including lawyers, that SOPs do not leave an organization legally liable if they are enforced strictly. If SOPs are promulgated and enforced rigorously and consistently, there should be no concern for liability issues. Vigorous enforcement actually helps to protect the organization from lawsuits. Other than requesting additional funding from elected officials, enforcing rules and regulations is one of the most difficult duties of the chief officer. There are always some members and supervisors in fire departments and EMS organizations who do not like rules and regulations or who disagree with the rules and regulations. However, rules are absolutely essential for accountability and consistency, especially during emergency operations. Too often, support for rules and regulations comes only after a major tragedy. For example, after a devastating hurricane in Florida, the construction of new buildings required the use of specific techniques to reduce or eliminate the damage from these powerful storms FIGURE 2-1. Building and fire codes are rules and regulations that chief officers can use to accomplish their mission of fire safety, and it is often easier to find justification and public support for strict enforcement and changes after a major disaster. FIGURE 2-1 Rules and regulations regarding building construction are created to prevent future tragedies. © James Steidl/ShutterStock, Inc. Fire departments should have a set of rules and regulations that outline operational actions and safety expectations for its members and disciplinary action that may be taken for failure to follow these policies, including SOPs. Rules and regulations and subsequent orders from the chief should be in writing and distributed in such a method as to ensure all persons are made aware of them either through web sites or email distribution to members. Ongoing training sessions for new and existing SOPs should be scheduled throughout the year. There is no room for misunderstanding, especially of the safety regulations (NFPA, 2008). As a general guideline, rules and regulations can fall into two major categories: management and emergency operations. For emergency operations, basic rules and regulations are absolutely necessary to provide consistent, safe, and efficient FES, especially in the first few minutes of emergency operations. Additionally, employees who are unionized want to have a written contract that contains rules on personnel management. Such items, as when overtime is to be paid and many other conditions of employment, are typically included in a labor agreement. Most of these agreements are necessary to prevent inconsistent and unfair actions in personnel management. However, some agreements also contain items that can restrict effective administration. For example, a mid-west fire department’s union contract severely limited the requirement for union members to train during inclement weather. This was specifically defined as below 40°F or above 85°F. When a new million and a half dollar ladder truck arrived in the middle of the summer, the firefighters were not allowed to train on this new truck because the temperatures would be above the high temperature mark. The very expensive ladder truck was stored for several weeks until the fall. One question that would challenge this requirement would be the expectation that firefighters typically respond and work at emergency incidents that occur at these adverse temperatures. CASE STUDY Administrator Dilemma A supervisor receives a complaint from his superiors that a crew “abandoned” a patient. The supervisor is told that the crew was treating an abused child when the abuser returned and threatened them with bodily harm if they did not leave. The crew left, parked around the corner, and then called the police. The local news has a very negative spin on the story, and the public is outraged because the patient was an injured toddler. Therefore, upper administration is planning to suspend the crew over this incident to appease the media and the public. Should the supervisor advocate for the crew based on the threat to their safety at the scene, or does he act on the need to mitigate the political firestorm before it has a negative impact on the organization’s public reputation? Administrators have a responsibility to the organization to enforce the rules and the mission of the company, but they also need to be an advocate for the people doing the work that makes the organization viable and may adversely affect moral of the troops. National Consensus Standards National consensus standards, such as NFPA standards and Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) regulations, are relatively new to the fire service. Although the necessity of such standards is well accepted, FES organizations are still in the process of implementing changes to comply with many of these standards. For example, an April 2001 article in the magazine Fire Chief asked four safety officers if their departments had completed a safety audit as described in the appendix to NFPA 1500 Standard on Fire Department Occupational Safety and Health Program. None of the safety officers interviewed reported that they were in full compliance with this safety standard, which was first adopted by NFPA in 1987, 14 years before the interviews. Instead, these safety officers estimated anywhere from 60% to 90% compliance (Fire Chief, 2001). Although compliance probably has improved since then, seldom does a department comply with 100% of the safety requirements. Because this type of change can be expensive and potentially disruptive to the organization and its members, slow improvement is very common. Some NFPA standards are designed to reduce inconsistency in operations, staffing, training, and communications. These inconsistencies in the FES result in differences from agency to agency, town to town, and state to state. These differences add to the public’s difficulty in judging the service provided and determining if the community is truly receiving professional-quality emergency service. At this time, a sign on the side of an engine that proclaims FIRE DEPARTMENT does not guarantee the same level of service for all similarly marked fire trucks throughout the country. Although the fire service has made a lot of advances, the pursuit of quality and consistency is still a work in progress. Administrators should work to implement these NFPA standards to ensure their organizations are delivering professional FES and be able to demonstrate that to their residents. Some fire and emergency officials, along with elected and appointed municipal officials, outwardly resist complying with standards and regulations that they personally disagree with or that have fiscal impact. In some areas, local FES officials want the freedom to provide the level of public fire protection that is determined necessary by the local community. However, in many cases, the citizens of these communities have not done enough research to determine the needed local level of protection or quality of service (e.g., number of stations, training, companies, and staffing). Whatever resources and types of organizations exist at the local level are the result of a very complex and independent evolutionary process, not a systematic planning effort. That said, FES organizations are entering a new era of rules and regulations. In the EMS field, responders are now certified to national standards for emergency medical technicians and paramedics. In the fire services arena, national standards for training and safety are now available. One example of a national standard for the fire service is NFPA 1021, Standard for Fire Officer Professional Qualifications. The chief may propose a new program to certify all officers to this standard. This type of program may require training, incentive pay, and overtime pay to cover classroom attendance (especially if education is a requirement for promotion). The selling point for this proposal is that, when completed, the city will have a more professional, competent fire department—a goal on which the municipal administration, the public, and elected officials can easily agree. Standard Operating Procedures Within an FES organization, the level of service can vary by shift or battalion. Freelancing or independent goal-setting can be deadly on the scene of a major fire; the public deserves an emergency services organization that can operate with a high degree of consistency and conformity. Standard operating procedures (SOPs) further this goal by achieving a high degree of conformity and consistency throughout the organization as well as ensure emergency scene safety and encourage situational awareness, which is sometimes a problem for a younger workforce that has little life experience and feels invulnerable. In particular, emergency response driving is a high-liability issue, and fatal accidents can occur. For that reason, many public agencies and private companies have developed SOPs regarding emergency response driving, such as those requiring units to stop at intersections with red traffic lights even in areas where emergency vehicles have exemptions from this traffic law. Infractions of this safety SOP are taken seriously for the safety of the crew, the patients, and the public. Administrators must enforce the SOPs that guide the decisions made in emergency situations—when first responders have only a short period of time to consider all the alternatives—because it is critical for the safety and success of emergency operations. Although there should be some room for exceptions based on the judgment of the officer, an appropriate system to critique these emergency field decisions ensures that this latitude is not used without justification. This can be accomplished by using a standard written report submitted to a department safety committee. The committee would be directly authorized by the chief to analyze the incident along with the actions taken by the officer and/or crew. A written report would be completed and submitted to the chief for further action, including changes to the SOP or disciplinary actions. And finally, a formal report of the investigation should be circulated to all members. For example, at a fire in a large vacant house, the first due engine stretched its hose line to the front door and began to enter. The department’s SOPs required the first due engine to attack the fire from a position on Side 1 (the front), where the front door is found in most buildings. On entering, the firefighters noticed that the floor had burned through, leaving a large hole into the basement, which was initially blocked from view by heavy smoke and fire. The firefighters quickly retreated and radioed this information to the Incident Commander (IC). Based on the IC’s judgment, a revised plan of attack was implemented, resulting in successful fire suppression. Direct Supervision and Standardization Many modern entrepreneurial businesses are organized around the principle of employee empowerment. Business administrators may argue that empowering employees is the best way for individuals to learn new skills and deal with changing environments. Employee empowerment can improve a business’s service and competitiveness in the world where revenue generation is the goal. However, although the empowerment theory may work very well in a corporate or industrial organization, it does not lend itself to the FES organization at the company level. FES organizations could not operate effectively if each company officer was empowered to determine what actions the company would take at an emergency incident. Although the overall incident strategy is the responsibility of the IC, the company officer is empowered at times to determine what tactics shall be used to complete a task assigned to them by the IC. For example, if the IC orders a company to ventilate the roof, it is usually incumbent upon the company officer to determine the most effective, efficient, and safest way to complete that task in a timely manner. Employees or companies acting independently (freelancing) at the scene of an emergency cannot be tolerated. Standardization and SOPs are needed to coordinate efforts, and direct supervision is required to ensure that each member works as part of the overall team FIGURE 2-2. FIGURE 2-2 Safety committee meeting. © Jones & Bartlett Learning. Photographed by Glen E. Ellman. Direct supervision and standardization are especially critical for the FES organization during the first few minutes after arriving on the emergency scene. This is the time before the incident commander has arrived and has been able to evaluate and formulate a comprehensive strategy for the emergency. Consistent and reliable emergency operations at all times are very important, if not critical, to the successful and safe handling of emergency incidents, which in most cases requires strict adherence to the SOPs. However, because a few incidents will not fit neatly into SOPs, officers are empowered with latitude for independent judgment. Bringing About Change Do not underestimate the chief administrator’s power to make change. In most cases, the administrator’s power goes beyond simply giving orders that may or may not be followed. When chief administrators speak and initiate a new project or change, the attention of the organization and its members is immediately focused on the proposed change. The chief officer also has the power to set the agenda for change in the organization. Generally, changes come about when the chief officer initiates the process, with the exception being changes that are forced from the outside by a court order, a new state or federal regulation, union pressure, or elected officials. In most cases, initiating change takes real courage and detailed preparation. The chief officer’s ability to get the administrative job done, identify problems, and, when necessary, make changes in the organization makes up a dynamic process. To comprehend these dynamics it is critical to understand the chief’s power, the interdependence on professional capabilities and agency reputation, and the chief’s ability to influence others. The following questions help determine if a chief officer is ready to manage and lead the march to initiate change: Is the officer knowledgeable about all aspects of emergency operations? Does the officer have the appropriate formal education? Does the officer lead by example? Can the officer gather all the facts needed to make an informed decision? Does the officer really know what is going on in their department and community? Can the officer schedule and set an agenda for change that is reasonable and evenly paced? Will the officer’s proposed change improve the service to the public (customer)? Will the officer take risks for the sake of making real progress in improving service to the public? The dynamic process of bringing about change involves several complex elements, including getting feedback, understanding the various sources of power at play, and the process of negotiation as discussed in Chapter 4, Leadership. Getting Feedback The chief officer must attempt to maintain a professional, independent position, which at times can make the job a very lonely one. Although this loneliness may make it difficult for an administrator to get unbiased advice and feedback on controversial administrative decisions, it is important to continue to solicit this feedback from staff members and peers. In fact, effective fire chiefs will find they do more listening and reading than talking. Before seeking feedback, administrators should gather information about new policies or equipment by reading and studying the issue. Take care that your informational sources are nonbiased and based on expert opinion and facts. Reference sources such as NFPA standards are a good place to start. Doing so may be a challenge in the FES, where most periodicals are not peer- reviewed for accuracy, veracity, and legitimacy. Feedback from Staff Members To be a part of the decision-making process, it is important that staff members demonstrate loyalty to the agency. Knowing that staff is loyal allows administrators to communicate honestly, trusting that any sensitive or potentially controversial information remains private. Administrators should solicit opinions in an open format. Preliminary discussions with staff may be held in meetings behind closed doors to facilitate an open, honest dialogue. Never equate a privately expressed negative or opposing view as a sign of a person’s lack of loyalty. In fact, this person may be giving the chief officer the advice needed to stay away from a bad decision. However, after the administrator has chosen a particular proposed policy, staff should be expected to support the change. The chief officer should realize that there are situations in which the decision-maker does not know all the facts or circumstances. This lack of knowledge is sometimes referred to as imperfect information. Imperfect information may occur, for example, when the top staff members are reluctant to make an argument that opposes what the chief officer would like to do and thus do not inform him or her of an important obstacle, or when the officer is facing pressure from elected or appointed high-level officials to act before knowing all the facts. Behind a desk, it is easy for administrators to forget the field perspective FIGURE 2-3. Making decisions without an accurate understanding of the current situation is not effective leadership. Decisions need to be balanced among administrative goals, public needs, fiscal constraints, political realities, and the needs and concerns of staff. FIGURE 2-3 Even in personnel counseling, jumping to conclusion can be very unfair to the employee. Do your homework. © Jones & Bartlett Learning. Photographed by Glen E. Ellman. When the subject is one of major importance to the organization, it is best to empower a task force to study the issue and make recommendations. The task force should include members that represent diverse opinions and all levels of the organization, including experienced firefighters, field providers, and officers. A diversified task force opens communication and prevents information obstructions that can occur between different levels of management. Chief officers should encourage open and honest dialogue and explain that it helps them to make fair policy decisions. Staff members should feel safe bringing their concerns to the chief officer; angry reactions from the administrator can discourage staff from raising negative information in the future. A management style called management by walking around is also useful in fire and EMS administration and is discussed in Chapter 3, Management. In some cases, although the chief officer has the authority to order a change, members may make this change only in name, without actually changing their actions. Departments may report to their peers and community that they are progressive, but chief officers can use management by walking around—literally visiting with members of the staff (along with appropriate accountability techniques)—to find out what is really going on in their organizations. Administrators should visit stations often and float ideas for informal discussion. It is important to remember that there may be some members who are unable to differentiate a brainstorming session from a formal announcement of a new policy, so administrators need to develop a keen listening ability and effective communication style. During actual implementation of a decision, an administrator should be their own intelligence officer, confirming that all the details to fully implement the decisions are complete. Feedback from Peers Often, other chief officers or professional acquaintances may be able to help in evaluating and discussing changes, especially if these discussions are better kept confidential in the preliminary discussions, research, and evaluations. While attending conferences and professional development courses, administrators can meet with professional peers who may be able to provide advice and insight into difficult decisions, issues, and contemporary problems. Although some administrators may feel uncomfortable asking for help, it is important to work to overcome this reluctance. Administrators must be able to gather and analyze information to present a full picture to their peers. It is also important to be able to ask more than one person for advice to gain different perspectives on the situation. To illustrate this process, it is helpful to look at how a patient would deal with a life-threatening medical problem. The decision to undergo major medical surgery should not rest on the opinion of one surgeon. Just as in the field of medicine, consulting with two or more experts provides a second opinion and ensures that individual biases are weighed against one another. Furthermore, speaking to administrators in other parts of the state or country can provide a wider perspective and help prevent the conversation from being repeated locally. Although feedback from peers is important, talking freely on a day-to-day basis about potentially controversial changes is discouraged. The casual nonstop conversation around the dining table in the firehouse kitchen is a great socializing time for firefighters and company officers, but the minute the officer puts on the fire bugles, everything they say takes on new meaning. As a firefighter, talk about controversial change may end with a good- natured argument; but, as the fire chief, this kind of talk may scare members to the point of damaging morale, resulting in strong opposition. Real change always has opponents. It is not a good idea to give opponents a heads-up on the change, because this gives them more time to fight the change. One example of an effective way to combat this is the NFPA-sponsored annual meeting of Metro Fire Chiefs. It sends invitations to fire chiefs in some of the largest fire departments in the United States and several international departments. Only fire chiefs—not deputy assistants or other chief officers—can attend. This exclusion is intentional, designed to allow fire chiefs to feel safe that all conversations and discussions at the conference are confidential. The NFPA realizes that the fire chief position is special and that those underneath and those above the chief’s position can become adversaries when the chief attempts to initiate change. For those chiefs who cannot attend or who do not command a metropolitan department, networking with fire chiefs in other departments can be very helpful for honest discussion of controversial subjects. A good place to meet other chiefs is at the National Fire Academy or national conferences such as Fire Department Instructors Conference, International Association of Fire Chiefs, and the National Fire Protection Association. An exclusive environment of peers gives the fire chief a safe venue to discuss potential or controversial changes. EMS administrators also have avenues to gather feedback from their peers. For example, the National EMS Advisory Council (NEMSAC) is the nationally recognized council of EMS representatives and consumers that provides advice and recommendations to NHTSA in the Department of Transportation and to the members of the Federal Interagency Committee on EMS. They meet three times each year and discuss contemporary issues and also provide a venue for EMS administrators to share ideas and experiences. In addition, various EMS conferences and seminars are presented throughout the United States with dates and times at https://www.ems.gov/meetings.html. However, administrators from private EMS companies must recognize that competition for 911 contracts makes peer discussion of decision-making more challenging. EMS administrators may know each other well but share little proprietary information. EMS administrators may learn from others by examining errors other companies have made; doing research; being honest in determining if a choice is cost effective; and making a decision based on the best interests of the company, the community, and the work force they serve. Sources of Power One of the challenges that FES chief officers encounter in bringing about change in the public sector is related to other sources of power that affect decision-making. This includes the power of tradition, political entities, employee unions, and the community, although administration comes with its own power. Supervisors Power The chief administrator’s direct supervisor may be a city/county mayor, deputy mayor, public safety director, elected, appointed, political, or merit and in some cases a board of directors. The names and how they achieve their position are many. What is important is that the FES administrator reach out to the individual(s) to achieve a friendly and professional relationship. This is easier said than accomplished. Most new chief administrators have been working in a highly specialized technical group of likeminded acquaintances. In addition, it is common to be working with other members who are almost like family. And, there are those administrators who are hired in from outside and this process becomes even more complicated and difficult but vital. Personal face-to-face meetings work best and should be varied in their structure. A once a week lunch with the boss can be very effective. One of the goals should be to see each other as a human being, not the enemy. The conversations ought not be all business but include sports teams, family, vacations, and any other personal topic, but not to too personal. Eventually, you may become close friends. This can help in two respects: it makes it easier to approach your supervisor to implement controversial changes, including when they have to be funded and, for your long-term tenure, it is more difficult to fire a friend. Between face-to-face meetings, electronic correspondence can be very effective. Updates of important actions or accomplishments should be sent to the boss and, if critical, followed-up with a phone call immediately. This is especially critical for any controversial issue that may end up with media attention. Make sure your staff is aware of your need to communicate even bad news timely. Blogs and news web sites are also a good place for the FES administrator to keep up with the latest trends and news about FES, including other city/county and departments even if they do not directly affect FES. In addition, obviously, the Internet is a good place for research. Be cautious of the source of information because it is not uncommon for web sites to have a biased viewpoint. For example, at the U.S. Cattlemen’s Association web site, information on health benefits of red meat may be biased and should be questioned. All in all, this news and research information is always good material for conversations with the boss. It is imperative that these relationships be achieved in a respectful manner. Keep in mind that your boss has many pressures on their ability to distribute taxpayer resources. The political, merit, or appointed supervisor also has a boss and may not be able to decide in your favor. Do not get belligerent when the decision does not go your way. Assume that there was a logical reason and save your push for another day, month, or year. Also, your boss does not owe you a detailed explanation of the reasons behind the decision, so do not press the issue. Be respectful of their judgment. Your reaction should communicate that you will try again in the future. Perseverance can be the key to long-term improvements in the FES department. Power of Tradition The power of existing traditions within fire and EMS services can provide a barrier to implementing change, often with tragic consequences. For example, a career fire department in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania customarily staffed its engine companies with two or three members. At a fire, the officer was often physically operating the nozzle. This custom was caused by the lack of adequate staffing and the privilege of the position. After increasing the minimum staffing on each engine to four, on February 14, 1995, an engine company from this fire department responded to a house fire and found heavy smoke emanating from doors and windows. With a lieutenant on the nozzle and the two firefighters behind on the hose line, the officer was unable to supervise the operation and assess the situation on the floor where they were operating. When the hose line burned through, there was no longer any water to control the extensive fire on the floor below, and, tragically, the fire had also burned through their only known avenue of escape—the stairs leading up to the ground-level floor from the basement area where they were operating, and the three members on this hose line became the victims of the fire. This tragedy may have been prevented had the officer been supervising the operation, not physically operating the nozzle. Too often, organizations are driven not by their missions, but by their rules, traditions, or budgets. Although rules are important, too many administrative rules and traditions can restrict an organization from being mission- or customer-focused. Therefore, administrators must understand the power of tradition in order to overcome it. Political Power To some, the term politics may bring up negative stereotypes of uncaring elected officials only taking care of special interest groups. In some communities it may seem that the big money contributors have more influence than ordinary citizens. Although some individual elected officials might abuse the power entrusted to them, this does not mean that the entire political system is not legitimate. Remember that politics is the foundation of the United States’ representative form of government. Although elected officials have many goals, one goal that is fairly common is to get reelected. In most cases, this means taking care of the voters’ or the campaign contributors’ needs. For this reason, many elected officials are heavily influenced by the local voters. Because many voters are concerned about the amount of taxes they pay, elected officials almost always question any request for additional funding for the department. These politicians are acting as the voice of the individual taxpayer who may believe that taxes are already too high. This is especially common in jurisdictions with large numbers of taxpayers who are on fixed incomes, such as Social Security. CHIEF OFFICER TIP Do’s and Don’ts for Working with Political Power In your relations with elected officials, DON’T: ∎ show animosity toward their opinions or decisions ∎ support their election efforts (the other person may win and you will assuredly have an opponent) DO: ∎ invite them to departmental events ∎ conduct basic orientation presentations in the fire house ∎ demonstrate fairness, honesty, responsiveness, openness, and accountability ∎ provide accurate and timely information on a regular basis ∎ follow-up as soon as possible on any communications or requests ∎ meet with them privately on major issues ∎ get to know them better personally © Smeby Jr, Charles L/Jones & Bartlett Learning Furthermore, the view that fire and EMS services are monopolies has given elected officials justification to impose regulations, just as they do with local law enforcement agencies and public utility companies. A monopoly occurs when only one provider or company has complete control of the market and can charge prices that are above the market value—that is, what they would be worth in a competitive market. If a house catches fire, for example, the occupants do not go to the yellow pages to choose a fire department to call. FES are provided to anybody who calls, but only one primary provider is responsible for the service provided. In the United States, monopolies are illegal unless they are a government-regulated industry or service. In this way, the government can meet the public’s expectations that it will maintain high-quality emergency services. Public FES can be viewed as monopolies either provided by a government or allowed to operate without control by the local government (e.g., independent volunteer departments). Although municipal departments may have no trouble understanding the issue of government oversight, independent volunteer companies might strongly resist any oversight by elected representatives. This may be a mistake because administrators should respect and work with elected officials who represent residents in the community. In addition to formal political authorities, such as elected or appointed officials, fire and EMS service administrators must be aware of informal sources of political power. This includes external groups of politically influential citizens such as: Employee or member associations (e.g., unions and volunteer fire companies) Media Special interest groups Professional organizations Businesses and industries Homeowners’ groups Social clubs Religious organizations Fire and EMS administrators should be in touch with other agency administrators or staff in these organizations and work to maintain positive relationships, because these groups can influence political decisions that affect the service’s budget. In addition, the general public may affect approval of any proposed changes—yet another reason why public opinion is so important. Some administrators may find it challenging to achieve the changes they desire in the face of the many opposing goals of these political groups. Before attempting a policy change, the fire and EMS administrator should consider the following: What political party is now in control? Are the elected officials short-term thinkers, long-term thinkers, or both? Are there any elected officials who are expected to lose or not run for reelection in the upcoming elections? Has a single-issue candidate recently been elected? Are elected officials elected at-large or from districts? Are there any signs of taxpayer disapproval? Is there any expectation of what is politically correct? Are there any elected officials who would have a reason to not support the FES organization? Are there any officials who would like to be a champion or strong supporter of the fire or EMS service? Do any of these elected representatives owe a special interest group that may oppose your changes? An administrator must be willing to show courage, sacrifice, and determination to achieve their goals. The difference between caution and courage can be the difference between the status quo and successful progressive change. However, be cautious not to jump into a decision on change without fully analyzing all the potential opposition. It could defeat you or even in some cases cost you your job. Always taking the safe path and insisting on having all the answers before making a decision prevents the chief officer from leading change in any organization. Seeking new frontiers for your vision and thriving on the unpredictability of the future helps achieve real change. Courage, planning functions, and vision reduce the unexpected changes that tend to push many organizations into crisis management mode. It is relatively easy to be a hero at the emergency incident; it takes a lot more determination to be a courageous leader who ventures out to make significant positive change in the organization. Remember, there are always some people who are against change simply because it is change. As an administrator, one needs to be prepared to accept some inevitable criticism. Keep in mind that it may be unsubstantiated, self-interested, or fabricated. There are those that believe that the ends justify the means (i.e., lying, etc.). Be prepared for this type of opposition. The following abilities are helpful for administrators to overcome political opposition: Accepting the legitimacy of politics and elected officials Understanding the structure and process of politics and government Building political alliances, including personal friendships Obtaining the support of special interest groups Acquiring public support through effective marketing Practicing open and honest communications with employees, citizens, media, and appointed and elected officials Using conflict resolution, negotiation, and bargaining techniques Identifying the various stakeholders and any benefits they may receive or lose as a result of a change Developing trust between members in the organization, the public, the media, and government representatives The Power of Unions In FES organizations, unions work to protect the interests of their members and can have substantial influence over administration decisions. For example, the International Association of Firefighters (IAFF) is a labor union representing nearly 313,000 firefighters and paramedics who protect 85% of the nation’s population. Since 1918, the IAFF has worked to unite firefighters and achieve better wages, improved safety, and greater service for the public FIGURE 2-4. Heading this organization is the general president, who is elected to a 4-year term by the membership. It is typical for the general president to serve for many years because there is no term limit. The lack of a term limit is advantageous because it emphasizes long- term goals over short-term success. The IAFF actively lobbies in Washington through its political action committee FIREPAC, which has influenced OSHA regulations, NFPA Standards, and federal legislation. The IAFF contributes to congressional election campaigns for individuals who support its agenda and goals. In addition, the IAFF provides research and advisors to assist government officials in legislative decision-making. At the local municipal level, the IAFF’s influence varies greatly throughout the United States, having less influence in the 27 “Right to Work” states TABLE 2-1. In a “Right to Work” state, an employee cannot be required to join a union or pay union dues. This reduces the number of members and their influence on wages and benefits. FIGURE 2-4 IAFF logo. Courtesy of IAFF. Description For many FES workers, the union becomes a social fraternal organization along with a platform for employee benefits and safety. However, in “Right to Work” states, the influence of the union varies depending on whether the administration formally bargains with the union. In any case, the real influence is primarily derived from the union president’s ability to impact public policy. This is strongly affected by the same items that affect the chief administrator’s power. There are also national, state, and local efforts that aim to reduce the influence of public-sector unions. For example, in March 2011, Wisconsin’s state government passed legislation restricting union bargaining rights for public workers (except for police and firefighters). These efforts are often driven by economic considerations and the desire to reduce expenses in the forms of worker wages and benefits, especially pensions, which the unions aim to protect. The union’s job is to represent the workers in gaining better wages and benefits and safer working environments. Although in difficult economic times unions have agreed to take a reduction in wages or benefits to save the jobs of union members, it is not the union’s duty to save money for the community or government by declining wage or benefit offers. It is also important to understand that in other industries, employees who do not believe their wages, benefits, or working conditions are fair or safe may change jobs relatively easily. In FES, this is rare, because the system is designed to offer rewards and benefits based on seniority, discouraging employees from seeking other opportunities. Many disagreements between the government and unions stem from each group not understanding the duties of the other. The job of chief officer, appointed official, and elected representative is to provide the best services to the public, given a specific tax revenue base. This is a very complex task. Offers of future retirement and health insurance benefits that once seemed realistic may now be problematic. For example, economic issues at the national level, such as Social Security and Medicare, more than likely will require changes to address their solvency. Although there are many issues on which the government and unions may agree, there are also disagreements. These should be settled by principled negotiations, in which all parties should act in good faith toward their stated purpose. FES administrators should avoid being in a position where they feel forced to accede to union demands. Unions like to use a process of binding arbitration to settle disagreements. In the process of binding arbitration, both parties choose an impartial arbitrator or third party to represent their position and reach a compromise, which is binding on both parties. Binding arbitration should be considered for all disagreements, especially safety issues; however, elected and appointed officials often do not want wages and benefits to be considered for binding arbitration. This practice is receiving more scrutiny and resistance from voters, senior municipal officials, and political leaders, especially when financial demands are sought by unions or have been gained in prior agreements that are not supported by tax revenues. One common example is underfunded pension plans, which is of great concern for local unions and taxpayers. Municipal negotiators may have made promises that were not founded in factual assumptions of future tax revenues. Many times, these negotiated decisions are driven by politicians who know that they will not be around when the actual bill comes due. Local politicians encourage these agreements to gain votes and donations to their campaigns. TABLE 2-1 Right to Work States Alabama Nevada Arizona North Carolina Arkansas North Dakota Florida Oklahoma Georgia South Carolina Idaho South Dakota Indiana Tennessee Iowa Texas Kansas Utah Kentucky Virginia Louisiana West Virginia Mississippi Wisconsin Missouri Wyoming Nebraska Courtesy of L. Charles Smeby, Jr. Union negotiators should demand professional actuarial analysis to guarantee sufficient funding for any monetarily based benefits. Check any financial assumptions very carefully, such as growth of investments to support trust funds that provide for future payments. For administrators and union officials involved in negotiations, the book Getting to Yes, Negotiating Agreement Without Giving In (Fisher et al., 2011) provides additional guidance and recommendations. The Power of the Community Administrators should identify and become acquainted with the community’s power elite at the earliest opportunity. The power elite are a small number of highly influential citizens rarely seen at public meetings. These are local people who have easy access to elected officials as a result of longstanding friendships, wealth, or influence at the local, state, or federal level of government. The powerful elite can either help with the adoption of a new policy or, with active opposition, doom the policy to failure. In most cases, it is unusual for the power elite to get directly involved in FES policy decisions. However, for major policy proposals, such as the construction of a new fire station or a request for funding that requires an increase in taxes, the chief officer should consider approaching these individuals privately and explaining the request personally. Although the help of the powerful elite may not be needed in all cases, they may have the potential to influence policy changes. The following are examples of potential conflicts with the power elite: A new fire station on a vacant piece of property is proposed. The information about the neighboring properties contains the name of one of the power elite. However, the chief fails to make a personal contact with this person before announcing publicly that a site has been selected. A new physical fitness program is proposed that contains reasonable goals along with an implementation plan for those existing members who cannot comply immediately. However, the firefighter’s union was not consulted. The president of the union is a long-time resident of the jurisdiction and knows many of the power elite by first name. The chief has just finished a high-rise fire seminar at a national conference. On returning to the city, a reporter asks for any revelations on fire safety discussed at the conference. The chief announces to the reporter that he is now convinced that all existing high-rise buildings should be equipped with automatic sprinklers, and that a proposed local ordinance will soon be submitted to require it. What the chief is not aware of at that time is that the power elite own many of the existing high-rise buildings. Private ambulance companies are not in the same situation as fire departments in terms of community power elite having direct impact on internal policy decisions. However, EMS management is wise to seek out and court the power elite who may have influence with those who have political clout. When contracts are up for bid, community stakeholders can have a big influence. Incumbent companies may lose contracts even if they have a great response time record or few patient care complaints. The winner is usually the company that comes in with the lowest bid. Recently, companies with a history of 40 or 50 years of good service have been ousted by others that offer a lower bottom line or are politically connected. This includes the pressure by firefighter unions to take over ambulance transport, encouraged by the International FireFighters Union. When faced with a conflict with the powerful elite, the chief officer might not always be fighting a losing battle. Approach the potential change by slowly building a consensus among those people who will have an influence over the final approval. In general, arguments that are backed up by professional judgment and solid research have the best chance of approval. If national consensus standards support the request, it will be easier to gain the support of the power elite and others who shy away from public debates. Remember, the power elite and special interest groups (e.g., firefighters’ unions and volunteer fire associations) can have a big influence over elected officials. Approach these groups and their officers at the earliest opportunity to gain their support. Although it may not always be necessary to gain their support to be victorious, in many cases their support can make the process smoother, resulting in a better chance of success. Administrative Power Administrators should know that power is never guaranteed. Being promoted to chief officer does not ensure that all members of a company(s) will follow all of the chief’s orders. A FES administrator, when managing and leading change, would do well to study how the most powerful administrators in the world use position and power to make changes. The FES or EMS administrator is familiar with the power of the direct order or command. The following criteria are necessary for a command to be followed without question: The reason for involvement is instantly recognizable. The orders are widely publicized. The words are clearly understood, coherent, and unambiguous. The supervisors and members who receive the order have control of everything needed to comply. There is no doubt about the authority to issue the command. It is rare that orders on the emergency scene are not carried out verbatim, although this does occur. Because the FES are quasi- military organizations, it is well understood by all members that they must obey the orders of a higher-ranking officer. Officers are trained and educated to follow orders even if the justification is not provided or understood. Individual officers and their company assignment fit into an overall plan that may not be clear to a specific unit, but fits into an overall strategy to mitigate the emergency. Therefore, orders must be obeyed without question, unless it is clearly an unsafe directive. Private ambulance companies are less likely to have the same level of quasi-military supervision, but field crews know there is a chain of command they must follow (e.g., medical and trauma care is approved by online or offline medical control). Offline medical control is accomplished by protocols, policies, and standing orders approved by the local medical director. Online medical control occurs when a provider calls a base station and talks to a Mobile Intensive Care nurse or emergency department physician to ask a question, get an opinion, or seek approval for a situation that might not be covered under written protocols. Seeking approval from a higher- level provider provides legal protection for the paramedic. However, in nonemergency situations, the ability to effectively administer the FES organization ultimately depends on whether the chief officer can persuade or convince others of what ought to be done for their own good or for the betterment of their service to the public—essentially, their level of administrative power. In addition, follow-up deadlines and delegation all play a very important role in everyday managing and changing projects. The ability to recognize a problem and take action to make sure it does not happen again is a great attribute for an administrator. The chief officer should establish an informal information-gathering system made up of friends and confidantes throughout the organization. In addition, it is critical for fire and EMS administrators to maintain their professional reputation. If the chief has the reputation of not following up on assignments, poor communication skills, or low empathy, then when a request for members to comply with one of the department’s orders is issued—either verbally or in writing—many will not comply. Noncompliance is much more likely if members do not agree or are anxious about the consequences of the change or request. CASE STUDY Employee Noncompliance A good example of how employees may have their own agendas that keep them from complying with an order occurred during President John F. Kennedy’s administration. In 1962, the President became aware that the Soviet Union was constructing nuclear missile facilities in Cuba. Because Cuba was so close to the mainland of the United States, these missiles could be launched and hit targets in the United States in an alarmingly short time. As it became clear that his negotiations with the Soviets were not making any progress, President Kennedy ordered a blockade around Cuba. A blockade can be construed as an act of war, and the crisis brought this country to the brink of nuclear war with the Soviet Union. During the negotiations that followed, an offer was received from the Soviet Union—if the United States would remove nuclear missiles from Turkey, the Soviet Union would remove its missiles from Cuba. At the time, Kennedy remembered that he had previously given a presidential order for the U.S. military to remove its missiles from Turkey. Kennedy had received expert advice that the missiles were not necessary for the defense of the United States and could safely be removed. The military officials—who were trained to obey all orders from superiors—had deliberately failed to carry out an order by the most powerful person in the United States, the commander-in-chief. The military officers believed that these missiles were critical to the defense of the country. Fortunately, the military’s disobedience provided Kennedy with a bargaining token to make a deal with the Soviet Union. The United States still had the nuclear missiles in Turkey that Kennedy then used in negotiations to trade for the removal of the Soviet missiles from Cuba. However, after this experience, Kennedy set up a system to follow-up and collect information about what was really going on in the many levels of the government. The President obviously could not manage such a large organization by walking around, but he established direct contacts with friends and trusted confidantes throughout the government. Accurate feedback can be hampered either by subordinates following their own agendas or by high-ranking government officials not wanting to give the boss any bad news. This type of behavior by subordinates can be prevalent in departments where the administrator has a lot of influence over who is promoted. Many subordinates see their chances of being promoted as being based on their ability to do a great job and keep the boss happy. Colloquially, this is called surrounding yourself with “yes” people or “groupthink” of the close staff. Kennedy did not want to be blindsided again and therefore made extensive changes to provide impartial avenues by which information could reach him. (Neustadt, 1990) The Process of Negotiation In most cases, when a new vision or policy is proposed, the chief officer must negotiate or convince others that the change is good. Most administrators would think that they have the advantage in bargaining because they are the recognized leader. However, bargaining power only starts with the formal position; it also includes professional reputation and knowledge and skill in debating. There may be opponents to the new vision because some members may lose privileges or simply because they resist any change. Member opposition does not mean that it is impossible to make policy changes, but the chief officer must be prepared, informed, and patient. Officers must have a plan to compensate those who stand to lose (if possible) and be able to prove that the change is based on solid research, logic, and professional judgment. Chief officers who have a trustworthy and justifiable proposal may be able to negotiate an agreement with the members to implement the policy. For example, faced with irrefutable justification for the betterment of the public and the individual, many labor organizations cooperate with a negotiated agreement. If administrators have the facts and can prove them, they have the bargaining and influence power. Administrators in government agencies should stay in contact with a number of individuals outside of their formal organization to help support major changes in policies, such as staff members of legislative committees, researchers from nearby think tanks, and representatives of lobbying firms and public interest advocacy groups. In addition, other government agency administrators and their staff need to be contacted on a regular basis to facilitate information flow and, when needed, solicit support for policy changes. Informal organizations can be used to help facilitate the negotiations and data gathering that must go along with the decision-making and consensus building revolving around a proposed public policy objective. Informal organizations can help overcome barriers to change and facilitate communication between different groups; however, if not approached correctly, they can also sometimes initiate and facilitate resistance to change. An effective administrator must take full advantage of the informal organization to gather facts and acquire support for any policy changes. Wrap-Up CHAPTER SUMMARY Understanding that administration is made of two components, management and leadership, will help the reader understand how to be an effective and efficient administrator. Recognizing that professional standards are the key to successful administration and service to the public. Understanding that SOPs are key administrative tools to guide the members in consistent, professional, and safe service to the public. Comprehending the many aspects that improve the administrator’s ability to recommend and successfully adopt progressive change despite the many challenges. Awareness in how to gain influence over the political process using feedback and support from members, including other agencies and outside influential people and organizations. KEY TERMS Administration The practice of supervising and leading an organization to achieve its goals. Battalion chief A chief officer who supervises a number of fire companies or a subdivision of the fire department. Chief officer The principal administrator of a fire department. Emergency medical technician supervisorsA supervisor who has the responsibly of several EMS units or a section of the organization. International Association of Firefighters (IAFF) A labor union representing nearly 313,000 firefighters and paramedics. Imperfect information The lack of knowledge required to make an informed decision. Leadership Inspiring trained personnel to safely and professionally complete their mission using the resources provided by the FES organization. Management Ensures that the organization is prepared and able to accomplish its goals by establishing that sufficient personnel and equipment are available for the organization to perform its duties. Management by walking around Refers to administrators spending some part of each day listening to problems and ideas of their staff, while physically wandering around an organization. Standard operating procedures (SOPs) Rules and regulations for safety and efficiency during emergency operations. Task force A group of employees assembled to discuss an important decision before implementation and to make recommendations. REVIEW QUESTIONS 1. Compare and contrast management and leadership. Do you feel your personal strengths lend themselves toward one or the other? Explain. 2. Do you think it’s more effective when administrators are selected by appointment or elected into their positions? Defend your answer. 3. Describe how rules and regulations (SOPs) help reduce freelancing on the emergency scene. Research a specific example from a national consensus standard that is applicable to your experience. 4. Review the checklist on page 25 to help determine if a chief officer is ready to manage and lead change. Which of these questions do you feel is the most difficult for new administrators to check off? Why? 5. Provide an example of a past incident in which you solicited feedback in order to solve a problem. Whom did you ask for the advice? What strategies did you use to obtain effective feedback? CHAPTER ACTIVITY #1: AN EXAMPLE OF POLICY ANALYSIS A voluntary physical fitness program increases the average physical fitness of firefighters. It is well recognized that firefighting requires a high level of strength and endurance. Therefore, the assumption is that the public would be better served by firefighters who can perform at more advanced physical levels. Firefighting is a team activity, so the weakest link limits the entire company or team. When a two-person team enters a structural fire and one individual is in good physical fitness and the other is not, the total team effort is limited by the less fit person. For example, a person in good aerobic condition can have a useful work time with a self-contained breathing apparatus of around 20–30 minutes, whereas the unfit person may not be able to stay more than 10 minutes before the low air alarm sounds. Therefore, the team of firefighters is limited to 10 minutes because when one firefighter leaves, the other must also leave for safety reasons. Conclusion: A mandatory physical fitness program is needed. Discussion Questions 1. Make a list of management and leadership goals that have to be accomplished to implement the conclusion from the above case study. 2. Do you have a management or leadership preference? How would this preference affect your actions necessary to complete the change process? Give several examples. 3. If you are stronger in either management or leadership, describe how you would select and incorporate people with the other preference into your implementation process. CHAPTER ACTIVITY #2: CHAIN OF COMMAND There is a shooting incident in your district and two victims need emergency medical treatment. After police secure the scene, your Basic Life Support (BLS) first responder engine arrives and Incident Command System (ICS) is initiated. As your company begins assessment, an EMT/paramedic unit from the private transport company arrives. With the help of firefighters, the paramedic assesses the patient with a bullet wound to the abdomen. In addition, EMTs assess the patient with an apparent extremity injury. The officer of the BLS engine determines that the first patient with the gunshot wound to the abdomen meets trauma center criteria. The company officer calls for a medical helicopter per county policy because ground transport to the trauma center would exceed 30 minutes. He is given a 15 minute ETA. In 10 minutes, he calls the fire dispatch center to confirm the ETA of the helicopter and is advised that the request was canceled by the ambulance provider through their dispatch center. Discussion Questions 1. As the FES administrator, how would you handle the paramedic canceling the helicopter without consulting IC, thereby failing to use the chain of command? 2. Who was ultimately responsible for the delay in patient care? 3. What can be done to assure this type of problem doesn’t occur in the future? REFERENCES Fire Chief staff. 2001. What’s new on the safety scene? Fire Chief. New York: Penton Publications, Volume 45, April 2001. Retrieved from http://firechief.com/mag/firefighting_whats_new_safety. Fisher, R., B. Patton, and W. Ury. 2011. Getting to Yes. New York: Penguin Books. National Fire Protection Association. 2008. Fire Protection Handbook, 20th ed. Quincy, MA: National Fire Protection Association. Neustadt, R. E. 1990. Presidential Power: The Politics of Leadership. New York: John Wiley & Sons. United States Fire Administration. 1973. America burning: The report of the National Commission of Fire Prevention and Control. Retrieved from http://www.usfa.fema.gov/downloads/pdf/publications/fa-264 Vorlander, P. 1996. An innovative approach to fire department command staffing. Fire Engineering, 149(8):131.

Fire and Emergency Services Administration- CH.2_split_1.pdf

Document Details

Tags

Related

Full Transcript

Upgrade to continue