Pearl Harbor

Lessons For The Fire Service

Recently, I was reading some articles that talked about the attack On Pearl Harbor. As is often the case, some of the lessons learned in those articles seemed like they might also be applicable to the fire service.

So, I did a little research and found additional articles and papers written on the subject of the failures leading up to the attack.

The balance of this article draws parallels between the lessons learned from those and other historical events and the fire service.

In a paper titled "US Failures In The Pearl Harbor Attack: Lessons for Intelligence", Masahiko Kobayashi states that 'the lessons from Pearl Harbor mostly stem from the nature of human beings: people want to be comfortable.'

We see this routinely in the fire service. People are generally unable to objectively look at information presented that is contrary to long held beliefs. Translation, "we've always done it that way," or "Look I've done this for years and never had an issue."

While at times, those could be accurate statements, it is unlikely that they will forever hold true.

Back in my EMS days, I was advocating for a bolstered disaster response plan that would allow for more resources to be called should a large scale incident occur. The Fire Chief, at the time, would say, "Brian, a plane is just not going drop out of the sky."

We know now that, well, you know...

We could extrapolate that thinking out to active shooters, acts of terrorism, domestic or otherwise, etc.

We might also see this issue crop up when seeking to change the way a department conducts business in one way or another. Very often with a new SOP. Or, upon the introduction of a theory on how to carry out a specific strategy or tactic that is new to the department's thinking.

The paper states that people are naturally inclined to stick with their first or long held assumptions.

According to Kabayashi, these long held tenants are hard to overcome because of the personal and often financial investments made by personnel or leadership.

He goes on to say that people are reluctant to give up ideas they are invested in. They are reluctant to work or cooperate with outsiders, and are unwilling to share their successes with people who they are unfamiliar with.

So his conclusion is that many organizational challenges are a result of these human caused issues and that the organization's positions are hard to change because you need to have more people on board than just a few like minded individuals.

He was able to identify several lessons learned by the study of what happened at Pearl Harbor on December 7th, 1941, and in the months and years before the event.

The lessons are as follows;
1. Diversify Intelligence Sources
2.Avoid Mirror Image
3. Make Objective Estimates on Capabilities 4. Be Open Minded
5. Overcome Sectionalism
6.Make an Open Atmosphere within Groups

Let's take a look at these individually with the operations of a fire department in mind. Consider these points from the Chief down to the newest firefighter, and how everyone plays a roll in their success.

Diversify Intelligence Sources. Intelligence in the fire service could be considered anything from knowledge of your first due, current or new products and tools, theory on specific strategy and tactics, to specific firefighter capabilities and how certain building products act when exposed to fire. In short it's any of the information that we need to do our jobs.

An example used in the paper was the use of human intel coupled with photographs of buildings to gather intelligence on enemy actions.

In the fire service, we need to take what we can see from sources like photographs or articles, and add information provided by our personnel
in the streets. Using a building as an example,
we may know it looks ugly from a fire standpoint from driving by, but it's only an assumption based on our previously held ideas. If we listen to what another shift has to say about what they saw on an EMS run to the same place, we can add additional information to what we already know. This may support and strengthen our previous information, or it may challenge it.

Information could be gathered from other sources as well, such as the police department or EMS. They may know about issues at a particular location that we may have never considered. We need to make sure that the lines of communication are open with other agencies so we are all able to see the big picture.

On other subjects, such as SOP development or specific tactics like hose loads, we should be able to look at other agencies and evaluate

their operations, have discussions with them, and consider the viability of their tactics
for use within our own departments. Again,
it may strengthen in-place policy, or it may challenge it. If it challenges it, we know that we must investigate further so that we can draw conclusions that will lead to effective tactics moving forward.

There is plenty of information out there. Our challenge is to break down our long held ideas enough to be able to look at them critically and to consider outside ideas for our own application.

Avoid Mirror Image. This idea has to do with only seeing something from your own perspective.

So, when evaluating ideas on such things as strategies, tactics and operating procedures, we need to be able to look at them from other perspectives and recognize that there may be several different ways to accomplish the same thing.

Kobayashi gave several ideas on how to avoid the challenges created by mirror imaging.

First was role playing. So, take a policy on accountability or command structure for example. There are many ways to run accountability on a fire-ground, and there are several command structure systems that are commonly utilized.

If we take the easy way out here, it's simple to say, "That will never work for us." The reality is, how do you know? Is it just because you are comfortable with what you have always done? Or is it because it challenges what you've always believed?

As research is completed and released, we learn more about the human mind and how it works, especially under pressure and during crisis response. We learn that there is a lot of information that is dumped during the crisis event.

So look at accountability. When a structure collapses on the fire ground, will we remember that Jim and Pete swapped shifts this tour? Will we remember that the first two arriving engines arrived out of order because one was out getting fuel?

It's difficult to say, but research shows that much of that information won't be immediately recalled when responding to the crisis event.

So with that in mind, when we look at trying new approaches to our procedures, it's best to try them in a non-crisis situation. Role playing or table topping are a great way for us to do this.

Recently, I attended a conference where we did just that. Table topping responses with fire officers from all over the country. What I learned was that some of the ideas that I held as true in my mind were not, and might not work the way I thought they would. Ideas I would have utilized on incidents had I not put them into action in a realistic table top exercise and realized their ineffectiveness.

Kobayashi's second idea was consulting with outside experts. On occasion we need to realize that there are others who might have significantly more expertise and information on a topic than we do. While their environment and or operations may be a bit different, their information and ideas may be solid.

We need to first be able to place our egos aside for the benefit of everyone, and hear them out. Then we should be able to take that information and apply it to our situations in a meaningful way. It may not always be a good fit but we can not dismiss them simply because they are not us.

Thirdly, he mentioned taking clues from historical precedents. One of the big challenges we face in the fire service is learning from our past mistakes. These mistakes over the years have often been paid for through property loss, injury and death. Many of them are made over and over.

We must be able to take a critical look at our operations, comparing them to the lessons learned by others so that we can prevent future losses within our own agencies.

We do this by reading articles or talking with others about their incidents, by reading the reports put out about line of duty injuries and deaths, and by attending seminars on the topics.

We need to then look critically at what we do and develop ideas and strategies on how we might avoid these same issues in our operations.

Make Objective Estimates On Capabilities.

Historically, many leaders have overestimated their abilities, resulting in catastrophic losses when faced with an enemy or event that quickly escalates and overtakes their capabilities.

The Battle of the Little Bighorn is a great example of how leaders overestimated their capability while underestimating the capabilities of the American Indian tribes camped along the Little Big Horn River.

The inability to see the forest from the trees resulted in strategic and tactical errors which set the stage for catastrophic losses.

We've all done this on a smaller scale when we're in a burning building and command has requested us to evacuate. Inevitably, we argue our desire to stay. However, once we submit and exit the building, we see there was no way we'd have done what we thought we could do.

As well, at a command or administrative level, Chiefs' often believe that their departments are far more squared away and capable than they actually are. This too can result in the loss of property and injury or death.

In his article, Kobayashi writes about how what are often invisible factors really decide the outcome of events. Factors such as moral
and motivation, quality of leadership, actual tactical ability of commanders, flexibility of command structure, training and discipline of the troops, and the quality of their intelligence and organizational doctrine.

I think just by reading those topic areas, one can begin to see how they might apply to the fire service. They are mostly intangibles, but anyone who has spent any amount of time in a fire department, career or volunteer, knows their importance to success.

Morale and motivation are very high on the list, if not at the top. If your personnel don't want to be there and are not motivated to do the job, you'll have limited success with your initiatives.

Quality of leadership and tactical ability of commanders. Let's look at this as company officers and above. If these officers do not have solid skill sets, it's hard for them to make the correct decisions on what strategy and tactics to employ, and it's equally hard for their subordinates to follow their lead and believe in their decisions.

Quality of leadership is one of the biggest challenges facing the fire service at the moment. It's one that we have to look at and address by developing innovative ways to grow our leaders from the moment they join the service.

Flexibility of command structure. Developing systems that will work effectively on incidents is not something that can simply be done on paper. It must have buy in from leadership and the rank and file. It also needs to have familiarity, which requires frequent implementation and practice.

By having a system in place that is constantly utilized, personnel will develop a level of comfort that allows it to become second nature. So when an incident requires the system to grow or become flexible, their resources can concentrate on that part of the operation and not the implementation of the system itself.

Training and discipline of the troops. Training and tactical discipline of our personnel is of the utmost importance. Having members who know their jobs inside and out, allows us to concentrate on the situation at hand, instead of the components making up individual tasks being employed to mitigate the event.

The understanding of fire-ground tactics needed to carry out those strategies, as well as, the individual skills needed to carry out the various tactics, are key components to developing tactical discipline. That discipline is what can make or break an operation.

Doctrine. Whether it be at the departmental, shift or company level, doctrine has a significant effect on operations. Doctrine should be developed by the department leaders. If it's not, it will certainly be developed by its members.

The principles and core values of an organization are far too valuable to be left to chance. We have all seen areas where department leaders have left members to their own devices on these issues. We've seen where leadership has failed, and contrary opinions and value systems have taken a hold. It's quite difficult to regain ground when it's lost to a divergent set of values or theories.

Leaders are most effective when they have made expectations clear, and follow the doctrine they espouse.

Be Open Minded. Lack of imagination has been sited as a key component to failure in such events as Pearl Harbor, The Attacks on 9/11 and the responses to events such as Hurricane Katrina. We should be willing to realize that there are things that we don't know we don't know.

On this topic, Kobayashi cites utilization of the devil's advocate, role-playing and deferred judgment as ways to ensure that we are really putting all options on the table.

Hear out the devil's advocate and listen to their opposing view point. Their perspective and experience may be telling them something you've yet to consider.

Table topping out of the ordinary responses allows us to get creative in thinking about unusual possibilities and how we might respond to such incidents.

Deferred judgment simply means not rushing to judgment when an idea is presented. Allow for the idea to be presented, look at it objectively, and then determine its usefulness. The main point here is to create an environment where your personnel feel they can up channel information and ideas without being intimidated or having the fear of reprisal.

Kobayashi's conclusion is that a combination of group and individual thinking allows for the most effective results.

Overcome Sectionalism. "It's not about me, it's about we and we are here for them." Getting your entire department on the same page is of paramount importance to your overall success.

When shifts or companies are allowed to go in their own direction, we allow the department to become sectionalized. That often creates an 'us vs. them' mentality, which is detrimental to the mission.

Some ways to prevent sectionalism within your department include regular updates on projects, regular informational meetings, and briefings with shift commanders and departmental officers. On the external side we can look at such things as routine interactions with our response partners and unified command operations.

Make An Open Atmosphere Within Groups. Very often, leaders fail their subordinates because they aren't truly invested in them. There may be systems set up where people can bring forth ideas, however they haven't really created a system that allows for effective use of the ideas, or that encourages their members to do so.

Many leaders will say that they have such a system in place, but often don't realize that they are actually the ones who are inhibiting their members from bringing forth new ideas due to their reactions or lack of response to them.

No one wants to be made a fool of, or made to feel that their ideas are of less value than those of others. Nor do they want their ideas to continually fall on deaf ears.

Occasionally, leaders have to take a step back and realize that their actions are the ones truly limiting their organization's ability to continue moving forward.

Nurturing an open culture within a department is very often challenging and almost always rests upon Chief officers' abilities to place ego aside for the forward evolution of their department.

In an article titled 'Analysis of Failure: Pearl Harbor, 9/11, Hurricanes Katrina and Rita', Carl J. Jensen III lists several common conclusions found to be major contributing factors to the outcomes of each of these incidents.

Like Kobayashi's article they have direct parallels to the fire service.

Jensen's conclusions are as follows; 1. Lack of imagination/creativity

2.Failure to gain a comprehensive strategic understanding of the threat

3. Inability or unwillingness to share information/cooperate

4. Failure to plan/train
5. Failure to act decisively

Again, just by looking at this list, you can see where these easily apply to the fire service. It's imperative that from the recruit to the Chief we learn not only from the tragic events that other departments have endured, but also from historic events in our national and world history.

We repeatedly see how not heeding the lessons
of history, as well as poor awareness of what is happening around us, leads us on a journey through precursor events often culminating in tragedy.

Learning from history is not just about reading books, articles or reports. It's about having a mindset that allows you to learn from them. It's about taking the information presented, interpreting it, and applying it to your situation in a way that will work for your organization so that the events might never occur again.

Of course, it is impossible to prevent all situations from ever recurring, but in those instances we must have taken the steps to be educated, prepared and flexible enough to respond in a meaningful way and gain the upper hand as quickly and efficiently as possible.

There are many ways to do this, but a few good ones can be gleaned from an article called 'Management Lessons From Pearl Harbor, How To Ready Assistants For Unexpected Challenges', written by Nate Nickel. They are as follows:

1. Create Leadership Academies

2.Support Professional Development

3. Take Time to Mentor

I'll add a few more that I think are just as important:

1. Leave egos at the door.

2.Nurture an open culture which allows for input and creative thinking.

3. Be responsive and interactive with subordinates.

4. Don't micromanage, and allow your personnel to live up to their potential.

5. Acknowledge and publicly praise your personnel for jobs well done.

6.Do not waiver from your core values.

There are many ways to prepare your department and personnel for success when responding to critical situations. However, development of personnel, development of a team, and development of a culture that is professional, flexible, and adaptive are key components.

Taking the time to study and learn from those who've gone before us and not allowing our egos to prevent us from taking appropriate action are probably the most important of all.

Honor those who have gone before us, not only those in the fire service but also those throughout our nation's history. Do this by learning about their events, reviewing their lessons learned and then applying those lessons, so that we might eliminate as much loss as possible in the future of our own organizations.