Leadership in the fire service

[efdcapt115 1,511]

JFLYNN: Accountability means someone has to be the "bad guy" and unfortunately too many fire service "leaders" are more concerned with being liked than with taking the necessary steps to increase firefighter health and safety...this would apply to many areas such as seatbelts, physical conditioning, regular, realistic training aimed at everyone not just at the junior guys who are still gung-ho, etc., but this is all a topic for another thread I guess....

You are so right. It's really difficult to make the transition into a leadership role on the smaller jobs, and I imagine in volunteer departments as well. In the City, they transfer you out of your Battalion, your Division, your Borough in most cases right?

Take a small job with five firehouses and 70 members. Where are you going to go and make the change? Right in your same five houses, with the same 70 members.

Now you go to FLiPs, come back, in my case with two bars on the collar. That went over well at Randall's Island too. There was a guy in Flips from upstate that was a chief. Firefighter to chief. Talk about a leap. I spent half the time I was at the Rock explaining why we didn't have Lieutenants at the time. Now the job has Lts, much better transition for a firefighter to go to company officer then to tour command, than to skip the company officer part. But a lot of us do/did.

Even jobs like FDMV, NRFD; they aren't so huge that you can take a new officer and start over in a whole new environment. You want to practice the book and try to live by it.

But you get back, with all the knowledge you've absorbed from Flips, even though much of the classtime was devoted to FDNY operations, and now your brothers are calling you sir and you have a new level of performance you have to bring to the job every day.

It gets tested, guys have issues, problems arise, how do you handle them, do you help the brothers stay out of trouble, do you become hard nosed, do you want to be loved or feared?

I always took the meaning of my job to protect my guys as just that. Protect them in every possible way I could, so they could go home at the end of their tours to their families. There's a way to ensure bail-out systems get inspected and serviced regularly, and the members get to be trained and retrained. Commanders just have to be enabled with the authority and responsibility to carry it out. Too much micro-management on smaller jobs. Too many times a tour commander will get squeezed between a chief and his squad.

A really good boss will give the tour commander the authority, he'll pass it to company officers and the whole system works like it supposed to.

Good judgement by the commander is neccesary; we can't take our leadership roles to the extremes; laxidical or authoritarian.

In some cases if it isn't going well for a leader, it's because they can't listen and adapt to what is being told to them. A good commander is a good listener, in my opinion.

[wraftery 1,275]

On duty, Officers should always be addressed by their title (title nickname such as Lieu, Cap is also acceptable). In the gin mill, it might be Joey, but on duty it's Lieutenant. It reminds all hands what the pecking order is..all day, every day. By the same token, a good officer respects his subordinates. They are not stupid people. They are heros. If you are on the brimk of death, you expect those guys to risk their lives to save you. That is not to say your men should not be disciplined. A conniption on the part of an officer (only for serious matters)goes a long way. But if you throw a conniption fit more than twice a year, something is really wrong with your organization.

I have often heard officers make the statement "I am the Chief" or words to that effect. I can never recall myself doing that. If you are really a Chief they'll know, you should never have to announce it.

I have always tried to use "We" when talking about goals, safety, teamwork, critiquing fires, etc. I strived not to use "You" or "I." We are a team,and we are responsible for the members of that team.

As the two well respected posters before me said, sometimes you gotta be a pr..k. Sometimes you gotta get the whole 1st alarm assignment to a shopping center parking lot at 3am to chew them out over the fiasco that occurred an that last inncident. Don't expect breakfast in bed the next morning, but expect that fiasco won't happen ever again.

[hudson144 150]

Isn't there a course out there that you take and then the Mayor makes you the Chief?

[M' Ave 1,466]

This was a great topic to start. To try and analyze the supervisor/firefighter relationship is very difficult, especially to someone who does not reside within the ranks of our respective profession. In other professions you do not eat three meals a day with your boss. You don't reside in the same building a few nights a week. Above all, you do not enter into hazardous environments with your boss. I believe that the underlying concept of the brotherhood and the responsibility we have for one another transcends rank, to some degree.

I'm simply a fireman, no bars for this guy. Not yet at least and I like to think that I pay attention to the dynamic and here is are my observations. In New York City, following promotion, you are indeed removed from your immediate work environment to attend FLiPs. Once you complete that schooling, you are assigned to a division and often a Boro that is different from where you served as a fireman. Suddenly everyone calls you "Lou" and you are responsible for EVERYTHING that happens with that company during the tour. I have to imagine that this does help the transition since, in all likelihood, no one at that company knows you as anything other than a boss. However, you knew yourself as fireman, so I would imagine that it is a difficult internal transitions to make. Would I be wrong to assume that the first promotion is the most difficult to adjust too?

In my limited experience, the best bosses are rarely feared, sometimes loved and always respected. In our system, we live in the same house as officers, right up to the rank of Deputy Chief. There should be a mutual respect between the rank and file and the boss. He is the superior officer. He has gained rank and with that comes responsibility and that should not be challenged by the lesser rank. From his perspective, you cook his meals, make up the rack for him and clean his office. To some degree, as you move past the Co. Commander (Capt.) and on to chief, he spends a lot less time with the men, but the best officers know how to balance their time. They know just how much time to spend in the kitchen and the sitting rooms with the men. They know whey to just head up to the office and stay there. In the best scenario, the men know when to let the officer lead and when to settle issues in such away as not to trouble the officer. I have always been told that in a perfect world, the men run the house and the officer runs the company.

[16fire5 693]

First off excellent choice by the good captain to spin this off. When I saw Chief Flynn's paragraph about accountability I found it to be one of the best points made in a long time. Things really do change when you are promoted but you have to accept that and do the job. Your number one job is to take care of your men. Sometimes that's easy and sometimes it's not. Many officers are maybe too timid about making waves and want to be friends. I think your being their friend by making them wear all their gear and their SCBA. Maybe the relationship is more fatherly even if the boss like me is not that old.

M Ave. I'm with you 100% hands on senior guys are priceless you learn that quick when you cover. Good senior men bring the probies and junior guys up right and handle things right away. Good senior men keep things from getting to the office.

[wraftery 1,275]

This was a great topic to start. To try and analyze the supervisor/firefighter relationship is very difficult, especially to someone who does not reside within the ranks of our respective profession. In other professions you do not eat three meals a day with your boss. You don't reside in the same building a few nights a week. Above all, you do not enter into hazardous environments with your boss. I believe that the underlying concept of the brotherhood and the responsibility we have for one another transcends rank, to some degree.

I'm simply a fireman, no bars for this guy. Not yet at least and I like to think that I pay attention to the dynamic and here is are my observations. In New York City, following promotion, you are indeed removed from your immediate work environment to attend FLiPs. Once you complete that schooling, you are assigned to a division and often a Boro that is different from where you served as a fireman. Suddenly everyone calls you "Lou" and you are responsible for EVERYTHING that happens with that company during the tour. I have to imagine that this does help the transition since, in all likelihood, no one at that company knows you as anything other than a boss. However, you knew yourself as fireman, so I would imagine that it is a difficult internal transitions to make. Would I be wrong to assume that the first promotion is the most difficult to adjust too?

In my limited experience, the best bosses are rarely feared, sometimes loved and always respected. In our system, we live in the same house as officers, right up to the rank of Deputy Chief. There should be a mutual respect between the rank and file and the boss. He is the superior officer. He has gained rank and with that comes responsibility and that should not be challenged by the lesser rank. From his perspective, you cook his meals, make up the rack for him and clean his office. To some degree, as you move past the Co. Commander (Capt.) and on to chief, he spends a lot less time with the men, but the best officers know how to balance their time. They know just how much time to spend in the kitchen and the sitting rooms with the men. They know whey to just head up to the office and stay there. In the best scenario, the men know when to let the officer lead and when to settle issues in such away as not to trouble the officer. I have always been told that in a perfect world, the men run the house and the officer runs the company.

M Ave, if you say this is based on your limited experience, I commend you. You are a fast learner. You already figured this whole leadership thing out. Some guys don't figure it out over a lifetime. I can't give you all the credit, though, because you obviously learned a lot from your senior men and officers. Study and take the test. You'll make a good Lt.

You also reminded me of another point for officers:

If you walk into the kitchen and things suddenly become quiet, they're talking about YOU. Turn around and go back to your office. Don't get mad, either. They might be saying something good.

[firefighter36 52]

This is an excellent topic. M'AVE, thanks for the perspective on NYC's promotions. A division/borough change is a big step for any new officer, but also, a fresh start and a fair chance for a new officer to be able to do their job effectively, and be a real leader, not just a manager or first line supervisor. That, of course, is FDNY, and not the majority of small to mid-size fire departments throughout the state that employ career firefighters and officers.

In smaller career or combination departments, just like the book says, guys often go 'From buddy to boss'. You literally leave one shift in a blue shirt, and show up the next shift in a white one, with a whole new job description. (Remember, career officers don't have to attend FLST before taking command, just within 1 year of promotion.) Career advancement is a wonderful thing, and so are growing fire departments. A lot of places are experiencing growing pains, so to speak. Demographic changes in our communities, progressing the mission of the FD, are both reasons our jobs are changing. With changing jobs, comes changing responsibility.

In combination departments, all too often first line supervisors are much more than a first line company officer. They are training officers, shift commanders, senior firefighters, safety officers, etc. All while being the closest thing to a company officer the firefighters have. Typically, they have come directly from the same station, and the same back room, and were the same firefighters the guys have worked with all along. The pressure put on them by virtue of their position is often the biggest change and challenge of their careers. This is a tough dynamic to break, on both sides of the issue.

Finally, the pressure from the higher-ups. Officers in smaller places are much closer in proximity to the politicos that make the fire service possible, typically a city or village council, or board of fire commissioners. These people manage the fire department on a business level, and are not leaders. Essentially, they are not out of reach. They can be micro-managed, and held accountable, regardless of whether or not its right. As I learned my first day on the job, S#*T flows downhill.....

In my limited experience, and time on a smaller job, I guess the best way to empower officers to lead, and firefighters to do their jobs, is to let them be a fire department. Give them the proper structure to be a fire department, give the officers a chance to be leaders, and the firefighters a chance to be just that. Everything else, all things normal, should fall into place.

Edited April 5, 2010 by mbendel36

[efdcapt115 1,511]

Got a question for Antique, because he's in Maine and a very proactive fire service leader in his own right. Was wondering what and how they handle the promotions up there, and maybe his personal experiences.

M'Ave, you hit the nail right on about the senior men and the respect factor. I was using the line "loved or feared" from The Bronx Tale, but you are right, it's more about respect. I followed a philosophy of TRYING to give the respect. The job had some dysfunctional issues going way back. These things are hard to purge. One guy loved to say "firemen are like elephants, they never forget."

I was far from the "perfect fireman." I shot my mouth when I was younger, disrespected authority, but one thing I got mostly right was respecting senior men. I eventually got the respecting officers thing right, but I had to get cut down to size a couple of times. The military would have helped me I'm sure. I would have ended up doing push-ups in the mud many a night.

My point is, I was the perfect kind of guy to get a new borough. Best to try and lock up the skeletons for a while. But that wasn't the case, so I had to make up for my history. So many guys in Westchester know exactly what I'm talking about. You do elevate your game if you get the priviledge to lead. Many of the smaller jobs, it is just more difficult because of the familiarity you and the brothers have.

Then come the early mistakes of being an officer. Just because we get the rank, the training and then the real world experience, we make mistakes. We just hope and pray and train, and want to motivate our guys, so it isn't on the fireground. Or somebody doesn't have an accident with a rig.

Everything that you do is now magnified. Everything that you say is magnified. It's quite an expereince, and that's why I say priviledge of serving, because the thoughts you have, the responsibilty you carry, is something that makes you grow in a good way. It should be a very humbling experience, and if an officer doesn't feel that, maybe he should be doing some more thinking.

[M' Ave 1,466]

In smaller career or combination departments, just like the book says, guys often go 'From buddy to boss'. You literally leave one shift in a blue shirt, and show up the next shift in a white one, with a whole new job description. (Remember, career officers don't have to attend FLST before taking command, just within 1 year of promotion.) Career advancement is a wonderful thing, and so are growing fire departments. A lot of places are experiencing growing pains, so to speak. Demographic changes in our communities, progressing the mission of the FD, are both reasons our jobs are changing. With changing jobs, comes changing responsibility.

In combination departments, all too often first line supervisors are much more than a first line company officer. They are training officers, shift commanders, senior firefighters, safety officers, etc. All while being the closest thing to a company officer the firefighters have. Typically, they have come directly from the same station, and the same back room, and were the same firefighters the guys have worked with all along. The pressure put on them by virtue of their position is often the biggest change and challenge of their careers. This is a tough dynamic to break, on both sides of the issue.

This is very true and I agree that there is a different dynamic and set of challenges to officers in smaller dept's where the separation of officers, firefighters and politicians is much smaller. Thank you for the alternate viewpoint. This situation does and continues to impact members in larger jobs as well. You could be a boss in a company with someone who was in your proby class and still a fireman, ect. ect.

I think a constant here is that being promoted is rewarding yet very challenging. One of those challenges is the need to sacrifice your standing as on of the men, not always, but sometimes. The best bosses (and I'm fortunate to work for terrific bosses) have the ability to be all business and lay-down the law when it is necessary and still be on deck cheering you on at the plate for softball. Some of the burden here is shared by the firemen as well. It is up to us to know how and where to draw the line. Your best friend could be your boss that day. You owe it to him to keep that separate and address him by his title at work, at least in front of the others. It's give and take. The successful officers I've seen know how to take charge and respectful firemen who are broken in the right way will give you the respect of the rank. If an officer were to seek disciplinary action against a subordinate, I would think it less likely that he is some hard-nosed guy and more likely that a subordinate backed them into a corner and left them no choice. Thankfully, I've never seen this happen.

Any officer here care to share a bit about the transition? What was the first tour like? What did you do internally to make the change and what external factors helped/hindered the transition?

Edited April 5, 2010 by M' Ave

[Guest alsfirefighter]

Much can be learned about the transition in rank/supervisory duties at any level of size by taking a look at the military. As most already pointed out it can be very challenging when you transition in smaller departments when most of the persons you are going to now be supervising are your friends and even saw you do some of the smaller things that might not have fit so snug within the rules, regs or appropriate means of the fire service.

As with the military the rank structure does carry some weight and also changes the way in which persons speak to you by title. The only major difference is enlisted personal (at least in the Marine Corps) are also prohibited from calling each other by first name, last name only was appropriate. Once you reached NCO status, everyone called you by your title and last name, even if you were the same rank. Hence, Corporal Smith. Not just "Smith" by another corporal. This instills that the title is something of significance and demands the respect of such. I also feel that this holds true within the fire service where a Lt. should reference another Lt. as Lieutenant. Not Lieu..not "L.T.". Same things holds true with Captain. Obviously anyone of higher rank should always be called by title and last name. ALWAYS. To take it another step, I rarely if ever refer to a fire instructor who I am working with by their first name with students, I do not allow students to call instructors by their first name and I reference them either by Instructor XX or by the title they earned if they are on the job, Captain XX. I find it sets the example for students, particularly probies in the academy and demands respect of the service, the title and the discipline the fire service should have. Bottom line is this also, while you may be friends with some of them, those that are truly your friends and respect our job will give you the respect you deserve and if not they will quickly not be a friend and you will do your job as needed.

On a personal level when promoted in the service and assigned a team, squad or whatever the assignment, I generally had a meeting of just my personnel under my supervision. This often included guys who I was friends with and was going to stay friends with as I had bonds with outside of the tight comaraderie that occurs in operational military units. In the meeting, I would make it semi formal as I would take a position of authority either by having them sit, and me standing or having them directly in front of me as I would sit alone in front of them. I would lay out what my expectations are and in smaller unit levels would remind them that I am also not just there to supervise them, to get a job done, but also there for them when they have problems or concerns and that I would carry them to the appropriate level to get assistance or an answer and that I will be honest with them, but I demand honesty with them. Then once that was done, for the first couple of weeks, if any hiccups would occur I would do personal verbal counseling sessions to attempt to correct any issues that I had or were violations of rules and regs. From that moment on any additional would get the appropriate disciplinarian action. If there is one thing that I have learned that gains huge respect from your men is this:

1. They're not stupid. They knew who and what you were in the ranks. Come on too strong or holier then thou, they will become defiant. Also under this..there is a difference between leadership and management. Balance the 2 well they will go to war with you (in some cases for me that was literally).

2. Stand up for them and they will respond very well. Often another person of equal rank but of a different group or of a higher rank will want to take something on or go after a member of or your group directly. I would always, pull that person to the side and discuss it, even with higher rank, stay respectful of their title, but if they get it, they will realize that it costs you face and sometimes they need to be reminded that chain of command goes both ways and with same rank you are responsible for your people. I would then go back to them, reinforce that if they did something wrong, they were wrong, but that I spoke to the individual and that if that were to occur again that they were to report it to me, and not take it up with the other person. This builds face for you, shows you are involved in your group cohesiveness and shows other rank that you will not be walked on. The problem is you have to make sure you're people are up to snuff and doing their jobs or this is all for not. The only thing I ever found acceptable was to correct safety issues immediately but then those persons should come to me not only out of respect but to ensure I can supervise correctly and make sure it doesn't occur again. I also forgot that if your member was disrespectful..to ensure you deal with that immediately and sternly.

3. Let them do their jobs..and let them invest in what you need to get done. If your not afraid of how you will look by delegating they will like it and helps them build into getting promoted and the skills necessary to do so the right way. Maximize your people with their potential and pair those up with them who are not so they learn a new skill/process. It will come around full fold if that 1 person who is good at something isn't there when you need them.

4. Know how to identify when its time to be your rank/last name and when its time to be joe blow. I always looked at it this way. In uniform or official FD function in plain clothes...title. Non FD function, first name. Again friends who have respect will get this also.

Just a few and I could go on...but some probably stopped reading already.

[Guest alsfirefighter]

Its nice to see that there are over 600 views of this topic...but I can't believe there are only 9 posts. This is a time to hear so many experiences of both good and bad about leadership...what you have done good and bad...what you have seen good and bad. 9 posts

[JimmyPFD 11]

Its nice to see that there are over 600 views of this topic...but I can't believe there are only 9 posts. This is a time to hear so many experiences of both good and bad about leadership...what you have done good and bad...what you have seen good and bad. 9 posts

Excellent topic and those view numbers are building up as we come back and read excellent posts like your last. The responses are few but have quality. My prior lack of posts in spite of coming back to this topic a few times has been to keep the thread free if gibberish.

Out of respect for your wanting to hear something; I'll give it a shot...I will focus simply on: "Leadership under fire" It does not come with title or appointment. It comes from having your colleagues respect you on very different level. A level based not on how good of an administrator, coordinator, organizer...whatever this person may be.

It's based three things: 1-competence to keep your a** safe when the situation is going South quickly. 2- "right Mindedness" Meaning a genuine concern. Taking the responsibility of completing the objective; while taking true ownership in the personal responsibility of each of your men's safety. 3- The few who excel at both.

To me, this is the good leader and what I aspire to be; regardless of, and in spite of rank if need be.

Realistically: In the absence of #3; If I need to chose between partnering with type 1 or type 2.... I'll be with competent Jack a**.

[ex-commish 490]

Its nice to see that there are over 600 views of this topic...but I can't believe there are only 9 posts. This is a time to hear so many experiences of both good and bad about leadership...what you have done good and bad...what you have seen good and bad. 9 posts

Tom once again you raise a good point. I have commented numerous times in other forums with regards to selection and training of officers. I believe the present system needs much improvement. I would like to see a forum on how to improve it. I believe a start would be to do away with elections. It is truly a popularity contest in fact an embarasment. We could do better.

[antiquefirelt 994]

From the standpoint of an officer in a small department I can tell you that it is often difficult to change the past. In a small FD, everyone knows you, your past successes and more importantly-failures or weaknesses. While most people cannot actually change who they are, some can excel when they get a new start. Sometimes this is at promotion time. I've seen guys who spent to much time as firefighters become bored and subsequently less motivated, who when promoted excelled at the new challenge. Others have been passed over for the same reason. It would be nice to be able to lift a guy upon promotion and place him in a new environment.

At the time of my first promotions testing process, I had already passed on one due to being just barely eligible on time. I had seen many officers and knew what I liked and didn't like in an officer and was determined to use that to mold myself as an officer. Of course seeing and doing are worlds apart. I had to learn many lessons the hard way-by screwing them up! The stuff we study for on testing day is by far the easiest part of the job. I'd go to incidents all day every day, even complete the paperwork, but dealing with people and personalties is by far the most difficult part. Dealing with divorcing firefighters, one who are cheated on, those in bankruptcy, or those who are bored with their job or life are the real challenges in firehouse life.

Treat people how you'd want to be treated. Most of our guys are adults (legally 100%) and should be treated as such. There are more than 5 ways to do almost anything, yet some officers feel the need to micromanage every task to have it done their way. I'd much rather set an expectation level and have the crew accomplish their tasks safely and efficiently. How they get to the end result means far less as long as it was safe and within a reasonable time frame. It's like making sausage, you love the end result but really don't want to see how its made!

As a boss of bosses it's a little different. You're responsible for the leadership of a much greater number of people and tasks and you must rely on subordinates to run these tasks. I tell all Lt's under me that I expect them to be advocates for their people. They must enforce our rules, but should always be looking out for their personnel first. I expect some push back from these guys on some things, it shows they're advocating. I also expect they know when to say when and how to move on and bring the crew along too.

With regard to leadership, I've always liked the model that goes like this:

Tell them the task, clearly explain your expectations, give them the tools and latitude to get the task done, and then get out of the way. If they fail, look at where you failed. Did I set the expectations clearly enough? Did they have adequate tools for the job? Was this within the scope of their abilities? Only if you can answer yes to all three of these should beyond yourself for answers. And in the end, hold yourself more accountable then your people. Similarly a success is their success, not yours. Don't worry your leaders will see you passing the praise as easy as they see you stealing the glory, selflessness benefits everyone, selfishness rarely serves anyone well.

Edited April 8, 2010 by antiquefirelt

[Guest alsfirefighter]

Tom once again you raise a good point. I have commented numerous times in other forums with regards to selection and training of officers. I believe the present system needs much improvement. I would like to see a forum on how to improve it. I believe a start would be to do away with elections. It is truly a popularity contest in fact an embarasment. We could do better.

Andy I couldn't agree with you more. While not exactly perfect as you still get some little quirks of favoritism or nepotism, I think a testing system within the volunteer ranks would be beneficial like the career ranks use. With today's technology you could use an internet based training system to get a test at the appropriate level for the title. Then set a date, give those who qualify by policy time to study the material that the test references for its questions..then rank the members by test score, do oral interviews, etc and have either the commissioners, city manager, village manager or mayors/supervisors do the right thing and invest in the safety of their firefighters and citizens.

[FirNaTine 370]

It's bad enough an Officer may have to be a prick and a hard nose towards guys that know the Job. Now throw into the mix incompetent individuals that have been hired due to the Standards being lowered and you have a whole different issue on your hands. It's called "Constant Supervision" or "Babysitting" for the most part. The caliber of people hired today is just not the same as it was 50-60 yrs. ago. The days of the Fire Service being a semi-military organization are long gone at least in these neck of the woods.

[Guest Firediver]

'FirNaTine' -The caliber of people hired today is just not the same as it was 50-60 yrs. ago. The days of the Fire Service being a semi-military organization are long gone at least in these neck of the woods.

This I have seen with my own eyes (in my 10 yrs), and don't even think about making the academy harder! those that REALLY want this job will work harder to get it. As for the promotion process, just write a top score aand you are in. A written top score shouldn't AUTOMATICALLY get you made but you should be on the radar. And maybe extend the time you can take the test say to 7yrs (esp in a slower dept) You can actually have a junior guy who gets made in 6 yrs. So he writes a good test, real world fire exp? not much in a slow dept but now he has LEAD the senior guys who have seen their fair share. I'm not hating on the process, it just doesn't make sense in my head. These are my opinions and mine only.

Oh yeah, now that he got made he is able to take the next promotional test. ??????????????????

Edited April 8, 2010 by Firediver

[antiquefirelt 994]

Testing for promotions would go a long way toward breaking down the career/volunteer barrier. Appointments and popular votes are a black eye in the volunteer fire service. Not all the officers promoted this way are bad, by any stretch, but it does leave a question as to the competency of the person. In our FD, when I started we had 8 call officers who had been promoted through appointments, no testing, yet they held rank over firefighters and lieutenants who had tested for their jobs. The first call division (POC) positions tested for, still only tested FF II skills and knowledge. The tests for career lieutenants require a significant amount of study in leadership concepts, tactics, building construction and of course proving your previous FF knowledge has not been lost.

[SRS131EMTFF 471]

Fire Service Leadership articles from fireengineering.com

Captain's Corner: Three Questions:

http://www.fireengineering.com/index/articles/display/9523189105/articles/fire-engineering/leadership/officer-development/2009/10/captain_s-corner_.html

Captain's Corner: Characteristics of a Bad Officer:

http://www.fireengineering.com/index/articles/display/6412887627/articles/fire-engineering/leadership/officer-development/2010/04/hennigan-bad-officer.html

[Guest Firediver]

Two good articles worth reading/re-reading. Not to get off topic but I want to hit on a statement he made. Sure there are a lot of guys/girls who would raise theie hands when asked if they love the job. Now the real question would be, " Do you love BEING a firefighter?" or " Do you love TELLING people you are a firefighter?" There is a difference between the 2 and you will be able to spot it if around those people enough.

Edited April 8, 2010 by Firediver

[FirNaTine 370]

'FirNaTine' -The caliber of people hired today is just not the same as it was 50-60 yrs. ago. The days of the Fire Service being a semi-military organization are long gone at least in these neck of the woods.

This I have seen with my own eyes (in my 10 yrs), and don't even think about making the academy harder! those that REALLY want this job will work harder to get it. As for the promotion process, just write a top score aand you are in. A written top score shouldn't AUTOMATICALLY get you made but you should be on the radar. And maybe extend the time you can take the test say to 7yrs (esp in a slower dept) You can actually have a junior guy who gets made in 6 yrs. So he writes a good test, real world fire exp? not much in a slow dept but now he has LEAD the senior guys who have seen their fair share. I'm not hating on the process, it just doesn't make sense in my head. These are my opinions and mine only.

Oh yeah, now that he got made he is able to take the next promotional test. ??????????????????

I hear ya Bro! Ya gotta look at the individual though and take it case by case. The guy with the highest score isn't always going to get the position even if it's well deserved. He may be skipped over to get to another senior candidate who's got more juice then he does and that's the only reason they got promoted and not on merit. It may be rare but I've seen guys with only 5 yrs on the Job in a busy Dept. who have a better grasp of the Job then someone with 20 yrs. It all depends on the individual.

[ex-commish 490]

Traditionaly when a person desires to become an officer he/she goes in front of a committee of ex-chiefs which is sort of like an interview. My issue with this is there could be some of the ex-chief's who were not compotent officers themselves but made it through the ranks because of a backwards system. It is also where the peronality phase begins because if the majority of them dimply do not like you for whatever reason you are done. You can be a clueless nitwit ( and I have seen a few in my day) yet if you are popular you will get the nomination and probably get voted in and will be responsible for making life and death decisions.

[Guest alsfirefighter]

It's bad enough an Officer may have to be a prick and a hard nose towards guys that know the Job. Now throw into the mix incompetent individuals that have been hired due to the Standards being lowered and you have a whole different issue on your hands. It's called "Constant Supervision" or "Babysitting" for the most part. The caliber of people hired today is just not the same as it was 50-60 yrs. ago. The days of the Fire Service being a semi-military organization are long gone at least in these neck of the woods.

I'd have to say that I understand what you are completely saying and I often said the same thing but now have a different view of it. I don't feel that those being hired today are of a different caliber. They are of a different generation which has different norms and behaviors then the generation(s) we are part of. The baby boomers looked at generation X like many of us were crazy (I beleive I'm part of the tail end of the X er's) much the same the current generation "generation Y" is looked at by those of the prior. Many of those coming into the fire service today are some of the best educated people we've seen. Many are college educated and while some complain that they can't use their hands so forth and so on...those are acquired skills and are taught and can be taught.

I don't believe that the semi paramilitary environment isn't gone, I believe it has changed, which even the military adapts to the changes in which soceity goes through with their teaching philosophies and dealing with them. Some are more advanced then others, the only difference is the military has distinct advantages to get their system pounded into anyone coming in with boot camp. Even the Marine Corps training has undergone changes, which when I went through I had older generations of Marines saying we're softer and even here my generation saying the new is softer. How much softer could we get? lol. Guess what...everytime conflict arose, we rose above the expectations of commanders and lived up to the history of the Marine Corps. If paramilitary is dying, its because somewhere there was a disconnect in the system that loosened some things up.

Bottom line is this..the fire service generally as a service has and is very slow and extremely resistant to changes across many areas and soceital change is one of them. Like it or not it occurs and those who are doing the best are those who can embrace it and use it to maximize their personnel to their max. Good leaders will do this no matter what rank. I'm not saying we have nor should dump all traditions of how we operate, but I also understand that some things aren't going to work today the way they did "50 to 60 years ago." Which those in the fire service in the 50's say we're soft and crazy for some of the things that we view ourselves as being the "norm" are doing today. Its all circular.

[791075 34]

It's bad enough an Officer may have to be a prick and a hard nose towards guys that know the Job. Now throw into the mix incompetent individuals that have been hired due to the Standards being lowered and you have a whole different issue on your hands. It's called "Constant Supervision" or "Babysitting" for the most part. The caliber of people hired today is just not the same as it was 50-60 yrs. ago. The days of the Fire Service being a semi-military organization are long gone at least in these neck of the woods.

Brother you just hit a bullseye with that one. Add to this some officers and senior men who dont want to be the "bad guy " or "prick" and do the unpopular (but right) thing; then any type of leadership is impossible.

[firemoose827 324]

This has been one of the best topics I have read in a long time. I just had a few questions for all of the seasoned officers in these forums if I could please;

I just got elected as Captain in my volunteer dept and I want to be a good officer. Reading these posts has given a wealth of information, and knowing the reputations of some of the members posting here, I would love to ask all of you for any advice you may have that has not been posted here already. I have 1 year experience as Lieutenant also but for another department.

Thanks in advance and I look forward to being every bit of officer that most of you are now, and have a lot of respect for you all.

Moose