Tag Archives: Command hierarchy

Regaining Long-Lost Employees

Posted by Jason Moore on

Office Space Lost EmployeeWhile working on the book I am writing, I approached the subject of the different types of employees we find in our departments.  With a high concentration of Type A personalities, as found in most fire departments, there is one employee in particular that merits some additional attention.  I imagine that we all know someone like the person I am about to describe and each one of them, while similar, will have a broad spectrum of reasons for being that way.  This type of person is known as a disenfranchised employee (DE).  Many business leadership books list the DE as someone who used to care, perhaps was a star employee, and is now hurting the agency.  In the business world this accounts for lack in productivity, poor work environments, and a slew of problems that eat at a company’s bottom line.  In the fire service these people represent a growing number of “burned-out” employees that can put people in danger.

The old school way of thinking would dismiss these people, toss them to the side, with remarks pertaining to their inability to “make it” as a firefighter.  While this seems like the easiest and fastest fix, it fails to understand the merits of the individual and account for the cost associated with their training and experience.  In many cases, the brightest burning stars are the quickest to burnout.  The first question that needs to be asked is “what caused them to change?”  Identifying the personal or professional issues that caused the change is the first step to re-engaging the individual.  Word of caution though, we are not mental health professionals and do not need to act like it.  You do not have to dive into the personal life of your employees the analyze what went wrong.  A simple understanding of their situation will suffice.  Some common personal causes are: divorce, money problems, unhappy home-life, sick or dying family members, or lack of support at home. There is very little that we can do about these types of issues beyond acknowledging the problem and offering an employee assistance program. The more common issues that we can handle revolve around professional causes. Some of these include: lack of acknowledgment, not being validated, failure to progress, constantly being limited or micromanaged, lack of personal accountability within an organization, and having a perception of being mistreated.  While many of these problems are employee specific, there is also something to be said for noticing trends.  When multiple personnel show signs of being DE, there is often a bigger problem within the organization.

The question remains, “How do you re-engage someone who has become a DE?”  On a personal level, they need to have a reason to be connected to the organization.  No one, especially firefighters deal well with feeling like they are not needed.  Employees much like fire need specific components to grow.  I like to think of it as a spark, fuel, and air.  Finding a role that utilizes their specific talents is the fastest way to create a spark.  On its own, the spark is not enough to breathe new life into the employee.  The next component is fuel.  Just like a fire you cannot add too much or too little fuel if you expect growth.  The fuel is a two part formula that includes continuing projects to provide opportunities for success and positive reinforcement with honest feedback.  The final component is one that takes an experienced leader to understand.  Air in its simplest form means that the leader needs to give the DE room to succeed without leaving them feeling abandoned again.    Best case scenario, this career CPR will bring a DE back however, if wide-scale problems are present, individual action will not be enough.

On an organizational level, several DE’s are a sign of poor leadership/management practices.  Drops in morale, lack of advancement opportunities, failure to hold people accountable, and micromanaging supervisors are generally the root of the problem.  The effects are further compounded when the DE is a supervisor.  Our attitude as a leader is highly infectious.  Poor attitudes seem to be even more contagious than positive attitudes making it more difficult for positive attitudes to survive.  The biggest question in this scenario is how do you as a company officer fix DE problems that may stem from higher levels of management?  This is one of those “easier to explain than to do” scenarios.

You have to be persistently positive.  Find ways to give DE’s spark, fuel, and air while pushing for management changes.  Help to reestablish the organizational image.  Throughout an organization’s progression, the failure to pass on core values and pride will lead to senior personnel becoming DE and prevent newer employees from ever truly engaging.  Give credit where credit is due, stop “blanket policy” fixes, and treat people with respect.  No one wants to be a number, they need to be accepted and validated as important members of the group.   Failure to re-engage these employees will further support the perception that employees are numbers as they either leave or are let go and are replaced by newer, less experienced personnel.  This scenario is one that can be more rewarding than a traditional conflict resolution since you are not only fixing a problem but bringing back someone who use to be a strong performer.

I want to close with one of my favorite quotes….. “If you are not apart of the solution, you are apart of the problem.”

 

What kind of link are you?

Posted by Jason Moore on

broken-chainImagine your department as a chain, starting at the top with a well anchored fire chief and working its way down one link at a time.  This analogy isn’t too far from the truth when looking at  most departments.  The only difference is that some are longer chains while others may only be a few links long.  The old saying “you are only as strong as your weakest link” definitely applies.  The real question is…. “what kind of link are you?” Are you strong and supportive of those under you or weak and flexible?  Do you align with the links above you or try to chose your own direction?  With my limited experience using chains, I know that twisted chains tend to fail when they are put under stress.

Many of the problems within a department can be blamed on problems within the chain of command.  While weaknesses at the bottom of a chain (firefighter) can cause problems, weaknesses in the upper tiers are guaranteed to end in disaster.  When there are problems at any level it can immediately be identified on a fire ground however, the day-to-day weaknesses hide these issues until they fester and become infectious to the entire department.  The sad realization is that the issues remain hidden because we all choose to ignore them.  Even the newest member to the department can see the signs of a weak chain.  Does the senior staff fully support the decisions of the chief?  Do the company officers fully support the decisions of the senior staff?  When I was in the military there was a strict unwritten rule that complaints go up the chain never down.  How often do we see a breach of this concept?  Chief says I want A, B, & C done, Battalion chief tells the shift chief wants A, B, & C done but he doesn’t agree with A & B, followed by firehouse discussion with a company officer who says they disagree with C.  This entire process caused every link from the top down to lose strength.

Many people interject the argument that being a “yes-man” destroys integrity and creates a mindless department.  While blindly following orders can lead to “helpless” departments, the challenge process must be professional and respectful.  If I don’t agree with something the professional thing to do is send my concerns up the chain along with possible solutions.  Without the accompanied solutions the possibly valid issue gets dismissed as whining.  Failure to handle the problems correctly often leads to complaints being ignored and subsequent “trash talking” down the chain of command.  If you truly want to have the strongest chain possible, stop undercutting the stability of the links above and below you.  Whether at the top, middle, or bottom of the chain….your department needs you to be as strong as you can be.  Don’t be the weakest link and the reason your chain fails!

 

Reposting of: A Wake-Up Call by Chief Dennis L. Rubin

Posted by Jason Moore on

Last year, when I began this site, I opened with a reflection of the year and stated that I wanted to make a difference in our career field.  While I understood this process would not be instantaneous, I had hoped to reach out.  Throughout this journey I have met many fire service leaders, each with a different perspective, based on their experiences, who have helped inspire and guide me.  After a few e-mails back and forth, I received permission from Chief Rubin to republish some of his articles on Fire Officer Mentor with the understanding that we shared a common goal to reach out and help the fire service.

Before I post his article, I wanted to take a moment to share some of the concepts I took away from his words.  First off, the public eye is always watching what we do or don’t do.  Secondly, even the most routine of tasks in our line of work can be life-threatening.  Last but not least, officers must be willing to assume the blame when something goes wrong.  This entire article could be torn apart and criticized however, Chief Rubin took a negative and broadcast it to others as a learning experience.  We all make mistakes, lose focus, or get distracted.  Understanding that and empowering our people to identify hazards then act will provide an added safety net to a hazardous job.  With that being said, here is Chief Rubin’s article!

dennis-rubin-picFire Prevention Week for 2009 held more promise than just about any other one that I can recall over my career. There were the detailed plans for many demonstration events and a lot of additional work hours. There were many television appearances over the weekend, early-morning ones as well to talk about our city’s fire prevention activities. The extra effort seemed to be worth it to get very important information out to our community. There were, however, several major setbacks that would surprise and dampen the spirits of many in the department. As final preparations were being made for the annual fire prevention celebration, the department responded to a rowhouse fire late one afternoon. The first-in engine arrived just a few minutes after dispatch to report heavy smoke showing from the roof. Engine Company 5 moved in with a 1½-inch attack line to extinguish the room and contain the fire, while Truck Company 2 vented and laddered the home. Minutes after the fire was located and attacked, the companies made the discovery of an elderly woman who perished in the blaze. The fire is under investigation, with the likely cause being improperly discarded smoking materials. This situation may be the 17th fire fatality for the Nation’s Capital (currently the death is undetermined, awaiting the city medical examiner’s report). We spent most of the Saturday of that week meeting with the  deceased woman’s family and installing smoke detectors in the neighborhood that experienced this tremendous loss. A loss of human life is always a sad situation, but during Fire Prevention Week there is an added degree of difficulty. A Disturbing Near-Miss For about a month prior to Fire Prevention Week, our Community Relations Division had worked in cooperation with Gallaudet University to host a fullscale smoke detector and residential fire sprinkler demonstration. Using the Campus Fire Watch construction plans, two typical college  dormitory rooms were constructed. One of the rooms would serve the purpose of graphically showing the results of fire in a non-sprinklered building.  After the non-protected room reached flashover, the engine company standing by would extinguish the mock-up, so that the second room  could be ignited to demonstrate the effectiveness and efficiency of the residential sprinkler system. Disaster nearly struck when the engine  company crew approached the dorm room mock-up to extinguish the blaze. At this point, approximately five minutes after ignition, the room reached flashover. The rapidly spreading flame front across the ceiling set the entire contents of the mock-up on fire. This was the point for the attack crew to extinguish the blaze. As the officer and two firefighters advanced the hoseline toward the mock-up, all seemed to go well at first. The fire was being knocked down and it seemed to be so routine, until the crew neared the opening of the prop. A makeshift “draft curtain” (a device to collect heat and smoke to cause automatic fire protection systems to function) was added to the front roof line of the mockup to retain the heat and smoke to allow the protection devices to function properly. The draft curtain was a thin sheet of Plexiglas material. The Plexiglas sheet had begun to liquefy and drip burning hydrocarbon material on the attacking crew. Within seconds, the three members were on fire. I couldn’t believe what I was seeing! To add to a very difficult situation was the fact that the three members were not aware that they were burning. This is a great testimony to having the best turnout gear and wearing it correctly; however, my guys were burning and they didn’t seem to react to impending disaster. The flames were on their upper torso and helmets for about 60 seconds, but it seemed like an eternity to me watching. One of the members became aware of the other two folks burning. It was at this point that he redirected the hoseline to extinguish the fire on our members. The situation was relatively minor, but the potential for harm was at the extreme level. The demonstration for the several hundred college students was very impactful. The viewers were also given the opportunity to witness the capability of the protection provided by our turnout gear. As well, the ever-present danger of being a firefighter was clearly demonstrated that day. All three firefighters were transported for observation to the Washington Hospital Center Burn Unit. Two of our members were checked over and, thank goodness, not injured. This was a real testimony to the quality of the turnouts and wearing all of the component parts properly. Our company officer was banged up a little. He received a facial burn close to his ear. Further, the top of his hand had a minor burn. Because of the location of these two wounds, the sergeant was held overnight at the burn center for  observation. He is doing well and is expected to make a full recovery returning back to full duty soon. To my surprise, the turnout gear and airpacks were cleaned, inspected and placed back into service. Only the one Nomex hood and glove that our officer was wearing was not usable. Both were “dissected” by our Safety Office to determine whether they performed satisfactorily, in that this was the one where the second-degree burns occurred. Our safety chief, Deputy Fire Chief William Flint, is conducting an investigation to help us learn from our mistakes. Look for this report to be added to our website soon or obtain a copy by contacting him at william.flint@dc.gov.

Personal Reflections (by Chief Rubin)
This was a very difficult day for me, both personally and professionally. I need to state that I take full and complete responsibility for everything that happened during this fire prevention demonstration. Our members engaged in extinguishing activities performed properly
and within our protocols. In fact, I am deeply in the sergeant’s debt. He insisted that all members properly use their gear and because of his actions, the injuries were very minor. I express my appreciation to our Community Relations and Public Education Division for doing a  great job with the demonstration preparation and execution. So, you are asking, what failed and caused such a graphic near miss? I would submit to you that simple everyday complacency got the best of me that day. A few fire service leaders have contacted me to ask whether the subordinate members who set up the demonstration knew their jobs. The answer is of course! We have trained 300 to 400 recruits in the past three years without incident, so trust me when I say our department knows how to conduct live-fire training based on National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) Standard 1403. It is not a question of trusting the preparation work, but better described as verifying that all items were handled correctly. Several items were forgotten or missed, such as a back-up line with a crew and an incident safety officer. I should have taken the time to verify that all aspects were covered before I stepped up to the podium. I did not do that and I do regret not confirming that all aspects of the 1403 were covered. Some folks (mostly bloggers) are going to be critical of me and describe this action as micro-management, and perhaps it may be. However, my role at an emergency incident is to verify everything that I can as soon as I can. At the demonstration, I should have taken the time before starting. Another difficult lesson, but with a reasonable positive outcome. Again, my apologies for allowing this to happen. Pay attention at all times and remember your life may depend on your attention to details.

For more information please visit http://www.chiefrubin.com/

Leading by Example

Posted by Jason Moore on

The phrase “lead by example” is over used whereas the concept behind the phrase is just the opposite.  Many officers demonstrate the skills and values needed to be an officer however once that goal is obtained, they plateau off and become complacent.  The focus on training those under us, should reinforce our own skills but often turns into a session of telling rather than doing.  One of the easiest ways to overcome this is to remove the rank title and evaluate what we truly are as officers.  We are Lead Firefighters.  This means we are just as responsible to upkeep our health and firefighting skills with the added responsibility of knowing what to do.

One thing I love to do with brand new or probationary firefighters is challenge them to a bunker drill.  The winner doesn’t have to do the daily details like sweeping, mopping, scrubbing toilets, etc.  This is not my responsibility normally so it basically gives them the chance to avoid doing something they should be doing anyway.  Many ask why I would be willing to challenge them without having the chance to gain anything by winning.  The truth is, by you winning you have obtained three things:  demonstrated you have maintained the basic skills, demonstrated the ability to do something they should do, and shown them that you weren’t afraid to do the work you ask of them.  In all of the times I have completed this challenge, I have never lost on the first round which is also another positive outcome.  Through friendly competition, I improved the performance of the firefighters under me which helps the entire team.  Beyond that simple exercise, putting on the gear anytime you ask your crew to, goes a long way towards building respect. The basic concept behind leadership by example isn’t for you to do everything with/for your crew but rather to be willing and able to do what you ask them to do.  If I am swamped with reports, I won’t be outside washing the truck or sweeping the floors however, if I am caught up with my work, I am willing to go out and help those under me.

The next portion of leadership by example comes from how you project yourself.  Do you follow the rules?  Do you wear your uniform properly?  The point is, are you the kind of employee you want your people to be?  As a figurehead, the people under you and around you are looking at how you behave, how you handle problems, and how you treat the leaders above you.  If you are setting the wrong example, those under you are faced with a difficult choice.  Do they follow you or do they put you in the category of a leader that has taught them what not to do?  That choice is up to you!

Accountability…it’s more than a word on the fireground.

Posted by Jason Moore on

Every professional magazine or book harps on the word accountability, however typically only one form of the word is identified.  Accountability on the fireground is ensuring you know where the people are so that as a fire service leader you are able to properly maintain the scene.  In regards to the words other uses, many times it is left in the dictionary and never used like it should be.

Beyond the fireground accountability is more encompassing of the work we do on a day-to-day basis.  It involves using cause and effect to truly look at what your people are doing and how efficiently they are completing their tasks.  It should be in place to protect the taxpayers trust that we responsibly use the money obtained from their hard-earned paychecks.  Ultimately, it means that every single person has someone to answer to for the things they have done, both good and bad.

Generally speaking this word comes up when it revolves around big-ticket items.  If someone does an exceptional job maintaining or damages a fire apparatus, all levels of management step up and say something.  Why doesn’t that same attitude apply to the other aspects?  When we put on the uniform, we are accepting a lot of responsibility.  Even the lowest ranking member is accepting the responsibility to maintain a positive image of the department. To prove that point, look at any media agency to find a story about a firefighter, former firefighter, volunteer firefighter, or retired firefighter.  I don’t read about John Smith, a plumber for Acme plumbing did ____ however, once affiliated with the fire service, it is a life long tag.

In addition to the responsibility to maintain a positive image, many firefighters are responsible for large sums of taxpayer money in the form of tools and equipment.  As the company officer are you using the tools to properly ensure the accountability of that equipment?  Are you using itemized checklists, maintenance schedules, inventory lists (more accurate than an engineers memory), calendars to track sick days and call-outs, or other tangible means to track how accountable your people are?  Moving beyond the leadership side towards a managerial side, the use of documentation is a control program to hold people accountable.  Don’t rely on memory or other fallible methods to track performance.  That leads to inconclusive or inadequate evaluations which by-the-way is another accountability tool.  One of the best pieces of advice I ever received was to keep a personal journal of events that occur.  Just like a station log book, if you have an evaluation to do or a question about when something was put into effect, turning back the pages can answer many of our questions.

Basically, as you progress through the ranks, you will need to utilize the tools of the trade to ensure you are holding your people accountable and like many passionate books/articles mention, don’t forget to apply that word to the fireground as well.

Friend or Boss…. How to Draw the Line

Posted by Jason Moore on

drawing a lineWhen progressing through the ranks there comes a point where many excel and surpass their peers and even those that were once deemed their superiors.  Being a close-knit, family modeled career field can often blur the lines that are supposed to be in place as that progression is made up the chain.  A question was posed:  how do you draw that line of being someone’s friend versus boss and when should that transition occur?

Ideally this transitional phase should begin as you begin to move up and train to become an officer.  I am not saying you cannot or should not “hang-out” with subordinates outside of work or maintain a working friendship however; all of the parties involved must understand that the change is going to occur.  Depending on the current group dynamics and how you treated the leaders above you, as you rose through the ranks, this sudden perception of you having power over them can easily disrupt a personal relationship.  Personally I make it known to my friends that work is work and when I wear the badge it must come first.  True friends will not put you in a position that will require you to choose work over the friendship, and if presented with that choice the decision can be difficult.  Looking at the issue from an ethical perspective it can be extremely stressful.  An example would be your friend calling out “sick” when you know they wanted to go see a concert and couldn’t get annual leave that day.  Do you speak up or sweep that knowledge under the carpet?  How you answer that question will define you as either being an officer with integrity or one that bends the rules for a friend.

The issue of showing favoritism to a friend is often a huge consideration to new officers and results in many being tougher on their friends than the other subordinates.  Both situations, showing favoritism and being overly critical are fallacies that must be avoided.  As with everything we do, a balance must be maintained.  The easiest way to avoid this issue is to consistently enforce the rules, policies and practices between your subordinates.  Going out of your way to “make an example” of someone to prove you are not showing favoritism is doing a great injustice to that person and undermines your ability to lead.

As a final thought on this subject, maintaining clear boundaries as you transition into a leadership role will define how people treat you.  If you establish the boundaries with your friends prior to their being an issue, the likely hood of being caught in the middle is greatly reduced.  Failure to clearly identify that line can and will destroy the rank structure and required respect levels needed to maintain discipline within a department.

Between the Badge and a Hard Place

Posted by Jason Moore on

One of the hardest parts of being a good company officer is maintaining the line between being one of the crew and a middle manager.  As a part of the crew, many feel compelled to share their gripes and complaints with policies, procedures or decisions made, by their superiors, with the rest of the crew.  As a supervisor you should portray an image of being in line with the decisions being made above your pay grade and enforce the same policies, procedures and decisions the crew (including yourself) find unpopular.

The general rule is that griping, complaints and negativity can be expressed up the chain but should never be dumped on those below you.  Being the middle person in this process is that proverbial being between a rock and a hard place.  The biggest thing to remember is that without a singular vision and supported chain of command, any organization is doomed to fail.  If you disagree with the way things are done, you should bring your concerns up with your peers and supervisors however, these issues should never be dumped on your crew.  You may feel the same way but your job is to maintain the chain and enforce, support and enhance the way your superiors want things done.

Beyond undermining the authority /credibility of your superiors, this behavior becomes a learned coping mechanism and one day you may find yourself making the unpopular decisions only to be under-cut by those who witnessed you do it to your bosses.  From my experience, the best thing you can do for someone that throws out a bad idea is to follow it to the best of your ability.  This is the only way to prove that the failure of the idea is due to it being a bad idea and not because it was not properly supported.  You never know… what you see as a bad idea may turn out to be just the thing that is needed.  Giving change a fair chance and providing your effort will prove your commitment to making things better and more importantly will maintain a clear line of authority that needs to exist in a successful organization.