Graduate Level Case study and Journal

MSE 5201, Advanced Fire Administration 1

Course Learning Outcomes for Unit II Upon completion of this unit, students should be able to:

1. Analyze the Multi-Agency Coordination Systems (MACS) that are employed during an emergency, including the Emergency Operations Center (EOC), and emergency information systems. 1.1 Explain the role of management in fire services and emergency medical services (EMS) during

an emergency situation. 1.2 Describe how the four key managerial tasks of planning, organizing, directing, and controlling

can be used during an emergency situation. 1.3 Discuss the value of experience and intuition in decision-making during an emergency

situation.

3. Explain the Integrated Emergency Management System (IEMS). 3.1 Describe the roles of area command and the incident commander during an emergency

situation. 3.2 Describe the importance of chain of command and unity of command during an emergency

situation.

Course/Unit Learning Outcomes

Learning Activity

1.1 Unit II Lesson Chapter 3 Reading (Fire and Emergency Services textbook) Unit II Case Study

1.2 Unit II Lesson Chapter 3 Reading (Fire and Emergency Services textbook) Unit II Case Study

1.3 Unit II Lesson Chapter 3 Reading (Fire and Emergency Services textbook) Unit II Case Study

3.1

Unit II Lesson Chapter 2 Reading (NIMS textbook) Chapter 4 Reading (Fire and Emergency Services textbook) Unit II Case Study

3.2

Unit II Lesson Chapter 2 Reading (NIMS textbook) Chapter 4 Reading (Fire and Emergency Services textbook) Unit II Case Study

Reading Assignment Fire and Emergency Services Administration: Management and Leadership Practices Chapter 3: Management Chapter 4: Leading Change National Incident Management System: Principles and Practice Chapter 2: Integration of the Incident Command System

UNIT II STUDY GUIDE

Impacts and Challenges in Leadership

MSE 5201, Advanced Fire Administration 2

UNIT x STUDY GUIDE

Title

Unit Lesson Integration of the Incident Command System (ICS) After studying this unit, you will evaluate how the National Incident Command System (NIMS) is being incorporated into a previously established component of the Incident Command System (ICS), and you will be able to define integrated incident management. In addition, you will apply the characteristics of ICS and explain the common terminology, organizational structure and management by objectives, integrated communications, and the unity of command. Management After studying this unit, you will evaluate the roles of management in fire services and emergency medical services (EMS), and outline the four key managerial tasks of planning, organizing, directing, and controlling. You will also be able to define the value of experience and intuition in decision-making, list techniques managers can use to increase staff compliance with rules and regulations, and list the techniques for motivating staff members. In addition, you will be able to list the three-step control process used to accomplish organizational goals and explain the management strategies of technology-based management and total quality management, leading by example, using broad-based empowerment, and managing by walking around. Finally, you will analyze managerial performance standards and methods of performance assessment. Leading Change After studying this unit, you will be able to describe the importance of accepting and managing change within the fire and emergency service department. Also, you will be able to identify models of change commonly used in organizations and summarize the steps of the change management process. In addition, you will be able to describe how an organization can respond to current or emerging events or trends. In the movie NYC: Tornado Terror, a very unusual event took place in which the atmosphere separated into two different air mass movements over New York City. As a result, these two air masses generated electrical charges, which caused atypical lightning to develop inside the tornadoes. These tornadoes were devastating to the city, the emergency service personnel, and city officials. The mayor consulted a climatologist for advice on how to mitigate the destruction and stop the loss of life. The climatologist suggested using rockets to disburse silver iodide into the atmosphere. However, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) disagreed with the use of silver iodide and ignored the advice from the climatologist and city officials. Emergency officials and others suggested that the alert status should be increased in order to warn the public; however, due to the mayor’s reelection, the advice was not followed. Instead, the mayor insisted on the alert status remaining low. Some of those opposed to the leadership of the mayor and the recommendation of the climatologist consulted a rogue scientist who disbursed dry ice into the atmosphere from makeshift rockets and stopped the tornados (Fastan & Takács, 2008). In this movie, key questions need to be analyzed concerning effective leadership and management.

 What was the impact and challenges of leadership on the events that took place?

 Was there an integration of the ICS?

 Who has authority in a tornado disaster or any nature-occurring disaster?

 What authority did the emergency services and management personnel have?

 Should the emergency service or emergency management leaders go against the mayor and increase the alert status?

 Were there any key elements of successful communication?

 Did any of the officials use experience or intuition in the decision-making process?

 Was there consensus building? Many times, there are impacts and challenges in leadership. As occurred in the movie, the responsibility of both the elected officials and appointed officials was to make day-to-day decisions regarding the protection of New York City. From emergency services to emergency management, we use standard operating procedures (SOPs) or standard operating guidelines (SOGs) to help guide our decision-making process. We all know that these SOPs or SOGs are based on criteria established from experiences and situations that are planned for. However, SOPs or SOGs cannot cover every situation and plan for disasters such as tornados charged with

MSE 5201, Advanced Fire Administration 3

UNIT x STUDY GUIDE

Title

lightning. The actors in the movie used group decision-making. As a group, they made a group decision to increase the alert status based on the amount of damage and number of deaths that were occurring and find a unique solution to stop the tornados. Conversely, they did not recognize the limitations of the mayor’s reelection campaign. Although common sense, intuition, and gut feelings dictated that the alert level should be increased, other factors played a part in the decisions along the communication continuum. From the friendly-to-unfriendly communication continuum, conflict affects group decisions during emergency incidents and in management of organizations. Even though conflict is natural and an unavoidable aspect of any relationship, many times, emergency service and emergency management may feel the need to go along just to avoid conflict. The conflict in the movie was normal as the different characters were trying to achieve shared goals of eliminating the tornados. Johnson (2006) suggested that is difficult for a relationship to be of conflict when people have different ideas and must depend on one another. However, there are times that even interdependence and differing perspectives in hierarchies play a key role. In addition, to understand conflicts of interests, those involved must understand the needs, goals, and interests of others and bending these conflicting needs is difficult at best. Even though we know conflicts are unavoidable, there are times when individuals or even organizations are unwilling to work together based on their own interests. Conflict in these incidents can be treacherous to the organization’s performance during day-to-day operations and life- threatening emergencies. By understanding the needs, goals, and interests of the mayor, would the emergency officials have approached the mayor differently? Could they have compromised by attempting to reach a settlement in which both of their concerns are satisfied? Were there legitimate needs of both of the individuals or groups in reaching constructive agreement? The mayor was mainly concerned with his own interests without considering the other group and the community involved. Smeby (2014) tells us that managers must keep their teams up to date regarding resource limitations of resources or other relevant limitations to the group members such as new state or federal mandates or regulations. Should the mayor have communicated the limitation of his reelection before discussing options to suppress the tornados? If there would have been some degree of compromise, a temporary solution could have developed. When the concerns are serious and no clear resolution is at hand, compromise may temporarily resolve the issue. A win-win approach would have made those making the recommendation feel valued instead of the hierarchical decision-making of the mayor causing chaos (Coleman & Deutsche, 2008). Here are some points to ponder. In February 1998, a F3 tornado caused a 28-mile path of destruction across several communities in the central part of Florida (“Looking Back,” 2014). The tornado was labeled as the deadliest tornado in the state’s history. During that same night, five other tornados ranging from F1 to F3 touched down in three other counties. In the central part of the state, there were a total of 42 fatalities with hundreds more injured (“Looking Back,” 2014). The F3 tornado devastated three different municipalities, destroying numerous houses, mobile homes, and businesses. After the touchdown, several different fire departments responded within their jurisdiction establishing command and making requests for assistance. Incident commanders felt blindsided by the lack of information available as to which agency made what request. Each of these incidents were in close proximity to the other and many of the incident commanders felt their incident was in need more than the others were. Some personnel began to freelance as a result. There was no central point to collect the requests, analyze them and make sure those that were ordering up resources needed them. There was no group to gather information about the needs of the different incidents in order to communicate the overall objectives for operations and support activities. Area command was not established until days later to oversee the management of the multiple incidents. In the true-life disaster above, these questions listed below arose.

 Was there a direct hierarchical decision-making process in requesting resources?

 Did the independent decisions reduce quality of response to other incident commander needs?

 Was there chaos at these large-scale incidents?

 Did the individual incident commanders have an understanding of the big picture? In each community, there was jurisdictional authority for their incident, and the incident commanders only knew what critical resources were needed to manage the injuries, death, and destruction they were faced with. Although each incident commander was aware of the other incidents, they were unsure of the priorities that existed among all the different incidents. Within their jurisdictional authority, they had a clear line of authority and direct hierarchical decision-making. However, outside their chain of command, tactical level decisions were delayed, and valuable resources were sitting left in a staging area. Establishing an area

MSE 5201, Advanced Fire Administration 4

UNIT x STUDY GUIDE

Title

command immediately would have eliminated the lack of accountability, poor communication, and freelancing of personnel. In addition, chaos was high as critical resources were either allocated or reallocated. Area command was needed to ensure agency policies, priorities, and constraints were made known to the incident commanders at each of the incidents. Conflict is normal in any communication continuum while managing complex systems and on incidents involving multi-jurisdictional divisions with multiple disciplines. This conflict will affect group decisions during the management of these incidents unless managers can establish common objectives and approaches to mitigate the incidents. Using a unified command structure or even area command on larger incidents will prevent conflict and duplication of resources.

References Coleman, P. T., & Deutsche, M. (2008, September). Cooperation, conflict resolution, and school violence: A

systems approach. Retrieved from http://www.parentsassociation.com/health/conflict_resolution.html Fastan, C. L. (Producer), & Takács, T. (Director). (2008). NYC: Tornado terror [Motion picture]. Canada: Fast

Productions. Johnson, D. W. (2006). Reaching out: Interpersonal effectiveness and self-actualization (9th ed.). Boston,

MA: Pearson. Looking back: The deadliest night or tornadoes in Florida history. (2014, February). Orlando Sentinel.

Retrieved from http://www.orlandosentinel.com/weather/os-1998-florida-tornadoes-story.html Smeby, L. C. (2014). Fire and emergency services administration: Management and leadership practices

(2nd ed.). Burlington, MA: Jones & Bartlett. Walsh, D. W., Christen, H. T., Jr., Callsen, C. E., Jr., Miller, G. T., Maniscalco, P. M., Lord, G. C., & Dolan, N.

J. (2012). National incident management system: Principles and practice (2nd ed.). Sudbury, MA: Jones & Bartlett Learning.

Suggested Reading To access the following resource, click the link below. The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) published a formal training program on the NIMS for all department and agency personnel with incident management responsibilities. The documents can be obtained here: http://www.training.fema.gov/IS/NIMS.aspx