When Good Management Is a Matter of Life and Death

Interesting article about being "productively paranoid", insuring that information is shared and not missing things because of information overload.

Allan

From: http://blogs.hbr.org/cs/2012/08/the_leadership_mistakes_that_l.html?awid=4678865509342592577-3271


by Morten T. Hansen
9:23 AM August 14, 2012

Recall the terrorist attack in Oslo, Norway, a year ago, when a lone terrorist first bombed a government building (killing eight people), then drove to an island where he murdered 69 mostly young people on a summer camp. The newly released report analyzing that day slams the police and the government for ineptitude, much like the infamous 9/11 report in the U.S.

How do you lead in a world full of crises, shocks, terror and disruptions? This question is relevant for CEOs and government leaders alike.

Jim Collins and I studied this question in our book Great by Choice in which we analyzed CEOs and companies that led successfully in such a world. From this and other research we know a few things that ought to be in place for leaders to successfully anticipate and respond to crises, turbulence, and disruptive change.

1. Leaders need to be productively paranoid. The successful CEOs in our study displayed an odd behavior that we labeled "productive paranoia." Herb Kelleher of Southwest Airlines predicted eleven out of the last three recessions. As Bill Gates said, "Fear should guide you." The successful CEOs in our study were hyper-vigilant about threats around them (the paranoia part) and also took action to mitigate those threats, whether in the form of building buffers or hedging (the productive part).

Prior to the Oslo terrorist attack, we saw the exact opposite of productive paranoia — a leisurely attitude. The government was supposed to build a security perimeter around the building, but just didn't get around to it. It did have a fast-response helicopter stationed in case of a terrorist attack, but this could not be used, because the staff was on vacation in July, like most Norwegians. (Did they believe that terrorists too take vacation in July?) The key here is for leaders to be hyper-vigilant, and especially when things are calm — because it could be the calm before the storm.

2. The system must connect the dots horizontally. After the bomb went off in Oslo, at 3:26pm, the terrorist jumped into a van. At 3:35pm, someone called the police with a tip that a man in a (fake) police uniform had acted weirdly when he got into the car. The tipster even reported the license plate number, a possible break in the case! But alas, the junior person on the police phone line wrote down the tip on a note and took it to a senior officer, and then the note somehow got lost sitting on a desk. This mishandling of vital information is eerily similar to the findings in the 9/11 commission report.

As I write in my book Collaboration, several barriers get in the way of effective information sharing. In this case, hierarchy got in the way — a critical piece of information got lost in the handoff from a junior to a senior person. A system cannot respond effectively when information has to flow up and down hierarchical lines: it is slow, and superiors often suppress the information because they do not see its importance or relevance or don't have time to respond.

We have seen this happen before. At Pearl Harbor, at 7:02 am on December 7, 1941, two U.S. soldiers operating a radar station saw something that looked like an incoming airplane; they telephoned an officer, who told them to forget it (the attack occurred 53 minutes later). In the Columbia shuttle disaster, junior engineers knew that there was critical foam damage on the shuttle, but they did not dare to speak up to more senior managers in a meeting on January 24, 2003.

Two management tactics could resolve this: First, junior people ought to be able to pass on information horizontally across units (and not just to their immediate superiors). Second, they also need to be authorized to follow through to see that the information is really acted upon (vs. just passed on), and if not, to act themselves. This requires that hierarchy is flattened, that people build rich networks across units, and that information technology systems cascade data across units.

3. The system must be able to handle information overload. The senior officer in Oslo who received the note with the license plate number was busy in the chaos that followed the bombing, which explains how the note got lost on the desk. Similarly, at Pearl Harbor, recall Roberta Wohlstetter's famous line: "We failed to anticipate Pearl Harbor not for want of the relevant materials, but because of the plethora of irrelevant ones." 9/11, too, was not anticipated in part because critical information was lost in a sea of data.

When a crisis strikes, in business or in government, the flow and speed of information go way up, and now more than ever. The ratio of noise to helpful information goes way up too, making it difficult to interpret and manage. As Nobel Laureate Herbert Simon said, "a wealth of information creates a poverty of attention." This means leaders have to increase the attention capacity in an organization. Do we have enough managers who can interpret the information rapidly and collaborate to establish a common understanding? Do our CEO and senior leaders get the information quickly enough and it is sufficiently unfiltered so that they can really see what is going on? Sadly, in hard times, leaders cut they very resources — people and systems — that increase the attention capacity.

The implication for every leader in business and government: you are judged by how well you prepare in advance for a crisis, not just by what you do when it hits.

Vancouver's Fire Station 6, which was closed for most of 2011 for budget reasons, is facing another possible closure.

This is the negative side of the SAFER grants. Jurisdictions use the grants to hire firefighters then lay them off at the end of the grant. Jurisdictions should be ready to absorb the new hires at the end of the grant funding period.

Allan

From: http://www.columbian.com/news/2012/aug/13/fire-station-6-may-face-another-closure/

Vancouver's Fire Station 6, which was closed for most of 2011 for budget reasons, is facing another possible closure.

By Andrea Damewood

Columbian Staff Reporter

Monday, August 13, 2012


Vancouver leaders have decided against applying for a federal grant this year that, if awarded, would have ensured Fire Station 6 will stay open after its current grant runs out at the end of 2013.

The move means the station, on Northeast 112th Avenue, could close from the end of 2013 to as late as August 2014 — and that's if Vancouver is successful in getting a Staffing for Adequate Fire and Emergency Response, or SAFER, grant next year.

Fire Station 6 was shuttered for most of 2011 due to budget cuts, but reopened after the city got a $2.3 million SAFER grant to hire 13 new firefighters.

City Manager Eric Holmes told the city council in an email Friday — the deadline to apply — that Vancouver wasn't technically qualified for the grant, and that because it has a grant now, the department wasn't as competitive.

But supporters of the station said they felt blind-sided by the last minute change — the city council had approved going after the money in May.

"I'm highly disappointed," said Mary Elkin, who lives in the Image neighborhood and founded Friends of Fire Station 6. "I'm a little upset that no one even told the city council this was going to happen. It didn't give them time to ask questions."

Holmes said that after his office consulted with the Federal Emergency Management Agency, which hands out SAFER grants, he found that Vancouver doesn't technically qualify. The city council would have to authorize a letter of intent to lay off those 13 firefighters — something Holmes said should happen as part of the larger talks about the city's budget, which will occur later this year.

"It is an issue of debate that deserves to be considered in context of the overall biennial budget," Holmes said Monday. Holmes' budget is subject to council approval, but it does not contain money for Fire Station 6 as it stands now.

"In addition, the fact that the city has almost a year left on the current SAFER grant makes us less competitive compared to other departments that are actively laying off staff from their 2010 SAFER awards," Holmes wrote the city council.

In an email, Fire Chief Joe Molina said he also felt that the city wouldn't be a good fit this time around.

"My recommendation was that we provide layoff notices prior to July 2013 with a layoff effective date by the grant deadline (most likely November 2013)," Molina wrote. "SAFER award timing is unpredictable but could come early enough to minimize the layoff period to a few months, or worst case, as late as August 2014."

Molina and Holmes also both expressed hope that a redesign of the department's fire and EMS service delivery model may help keep the same level of coverage in central Vancouver, even if Fire Station 6 closes again.

Elkin said she wasn't sold.

"I think it's wrong," she said. "I think our city needs to fully fund our police and fire departments."

Andrea Damewood: 360-735-4542; http://twitter.com/col_cityhall; andrea.damewood@columbian.com.

Unions approve fire pact (in Stockton)

Stockton fire union agrees to a one-year contract with increased pension contribution (9+%).

Allan

From: http://www.recordnet.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20120814/A_NEWS/208140323/-1/rss02


Deal leaves police as lone holdout


By Scott Smith

Record Staff Writer

August 14, 2012 12:00 AMSTOCKTON - The city's two firefighter unions approved new contracts Monday, which has them contributing more to their pensions, saving Stockton money amid its financial restructuring.

Firefighter Bryan Carr, executive secretary of the Stockton Professional Firefighters IAFF Local 456, declined to reveal more of the contracts' fine print before the City Council votes on them later this month.

The Stockton Police Officers' Association now becomes the lone holdout among the city's nine labor groups asked to agree to new deals as Stockton wends it way through its Chapter 9 bankruptcy.

"I'm happy that fire has a contract," said Sgt. Kathryn Nance, the police union's president. "We're just at the point where we're working out a contract, something to carry us through bankruptcy."

A sticking point for police is retaining additional pay for senior officers. Without that, those with experience on Stockton's streets will continue leaving, she said.

"We're down so many officers that it's just not safe," Nance said. "The crime rate's out of control."

The city staffers and the police union don't meet weekly, but they are in regular communication. Nance said she hoped that with the other labor groups securing new deals the city can focus on working with police.

For fire, the major change to the current agreement, adopted less than one year ago, raises the percentage each firefighter will contribute to his or her pension. They also raised it last year to the current 9 percent contribution, Carr said.

Monday's vote passed by 70 percent of members agreeing, but it only required more than 50 percent. The contract has a one-year lifespan, opening again when the city is either out of bankruptcy or further along in its Chapter 9 proceedings, he said.

"We're obviously going to come back to the table and figure it out then," Carr said.

Councilwoman Susan Eggman praised firefighters for their leadership by approving the tough contract, which asks them to take a hit to their paychecks so Stockton can maintain its service levels. She viewed the vote count as a good thing.

"It could have gone the other way just as easily," Eggman said. "To their credit, they want to do their part to help. I think its admirable."

Contact reporter Scott Smith at (209) 546-8296 or ssmith@recordnet.com. Visit his blog at recordnet.com/smithblog.

Ambulance fee to stay in Montgomery County

If the volunteer association's opposition was that the fee would stop people from calling 911, they should explain how that position has changed. It appears that they were convinced by receiving 15% of the collected fee.

Allan

From: http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/md-politics/ambulance-fee-to-stay-in-montgomery-county/2012/08/13/ba8516d0-e583-11e1-936a-b801f1abab19_story.html

The Montgomery County Volunteer Fire-Rescue Association announced Monday that it is dropping its opposition to a controversial ambulance fee, meaning that patients could be charged for a ride to the hospital as early as January.

The fee, which would range between $300 to $800, was initially opposed by the volunteer firefighters because of fears that it would deter some residents from calling 911.

As they did two years ago, when they helped kill a similar proposal, the volunteer firefighters mounted a campaign recently to collect signatures to put the measure to a vote in November. But at a news conference on Monday, the fire-rescue association said it had struck a deal with the county, that would give the volunteers 15 percent of the revenue generated by the fee, which is estimated at $18 million a year and would likely grow over time.

Eric N. Bernard, the association’s executive director, said he will monitor ambulance calls to make sure they don’t drop because of the fee.
Bernard said the association had collected more than 11,000 signatures but stopped gathering them about two weeks ago. He said the volunteers were “getting fatigued.”
“Our concentration is on fire and rescue, not on collecting signatures,” he said.
The fee, which was expected to be one of three controversial issues in the November ballot, will help pay for fire and rescue equipment and personnel costs. County officials said that in nearly all cases, private insurance companies, Medicare and Medicaid would cover the cost of ambulance service, which would vary depending on the distance and urgency of the trip. County officials have said they would ensure that residents don’t pay out-of-pocket costs, but there were still some out-of-county patients who would pay.
At the news conference, County Executive Isiah Leggett (D) said he would try to prevent even those patients from having to pay. But there are legal obstacles, and it remains unclear whether they will be able to do so, county officials said.
Bernard said that if the county doesn’t overcome the legal hurdles, his group may work with hospitals and nonprofit organizations to create a fund to reimburse those patients.

The fee has had a rocky path. It was initially approved by the county council in 2010 as a way to generate additional revenue. The firefighters were able to put it to a vote, and residents knocked down the measure that same year. Undeterred, the council passed an amended version of fee again in May.
Meanwhile, longtime Republican activist Robin Ficker submitted 14,500 signatures for a referendum on the controversial county energy tax. An unpopular increase to the levy was set to expire this year, but in May the county council voted to extend the vast majority of the hike.
On Monday, Ficker visited Leggett’s office with two boxes containing 3,000 pages of petition documents. If approved by the County Board of Elections, the petition would allow voters to make the energy tax harder to increase.
Ficker’s measure would require a unanimous vote by the county council to increase the tax above the rate of inflation.
“They broke their promise to voters,” said Ficker, who in 2008 got a similar measure approved involving the county property tax.
Also, the county police union is trying to repeal a law that curtails its collective bargaining rights. Enacted this summer, the law prevents the union from negotiating on day-to-day duties, such as checking e-mail.
The union, the Fraternal Order of Police Lodge 35, has hired outside consultants to collect signatures to challenge the law. County elections officials certified the petition in November, but the county quickly sued to block it. In June, a county judge struck down the petition, saying it contained inaccurate information.
On Thursday, union lawyers will argue before the Maryland Court of Appeals to reinstate the petition.
The legal action has been costly. County spokeswoman Donna Bigler said in an e-mail that Montgomery has spent $201,000 in legal fees.

City files motion to dismiss unions’ lawsuit

August 10, 2012 6:19 am

The city of Racine has filed a motion asking that a lawsuit three unions filed against the municipality last month be dismissed.

On July 19 the City Council voted to rescind prospective 2013-2014 contracts affecting 524 of the city’s 670 employees. City staff told aldermen that wage and benefits provisions in those contracts, which were passed by the council in December 2010 and January and February of 2011, will create a $2 million deficit in the 2013 budget and the city can’t raise taxes to pay for the provisions because of property taxing restrictions imposed by the Legislature.

Two days later three of the unions affected by the vote — AFSCME Local 67, the Racine Police Association and Racine Firefighters Local 321 of the International Association of Firefighters — filed a lawsuit in Racine County Circuit Court asking that the contracts be upheld.

In the summons and complaint the unions argue that council’s actions constituted a “breach of contract.”

In its motion to dismiss, which was filed Wednesday, the city states that the unions failed to follow state statue when they filed a lawsuit without first waiting for the city to respond to the unions’ “notice of claim.”

“Any time there is a lawsuit or claim against a municipality or governmental agency there is a statutory requirement that whoever is filing the claim file a notice of circumstances,” Deputy City Attorney Scott Letteney said. “That has to be filed within a 120 days of the event giving rise to the claim.

“Within a 120 days of the notice of claim being filed, the municipality has to file a response to the claim, and the (city) council has to do that,” Letteney continued. “It is only after the municipality has responded to the claim, that the complainant is permitted to file a lawsuit.”

The unions did file a “notice of claim” with the Racine City Clerk, Letteney confirms, but they did not wait the required 120 days and find out the city council’s response before filing their lawsuit.

In their summons and complaint filed on July 19, the unions address the “notice of claim” issue, writing: “Although plaintiffs do not believe they are required to file a notice of claim...under the circumstances of this case, particularly given the urgent need for swift judicial action in response to the city’s actions, they have presented such a notice...”

“We believe that we have followed the proper procedure,” David Dorn, a staff representative for AFSCME Local 67, said Thursday of the city’s motion to dismiss. “I would say that unfortunately the city’s decision to wait six months before these contracts were to become effective doesn’t afford us the opportunity to wait 120 days.

“City employees need to know their future and they need to know it soon.”

The city’s motion to dismiss is slated to be heard at 8:30 a.m. on Sept. 7 in Judge Gerald Ptacek’s courtroom.

Unpopular shift changes could take 'a huge toll' on firefighters

Interesting schedule called "Day Crewing Plus" in which members work for day shifts attached to 4 nights on-call then get 4 days off. This schedule requires members to be away from home for 4 days straight.

Allan

From: http://www.windsorobserver.co.uk/news/roundup/articles/2012/08/13/61757-unpopular-shift-changes-could-take-a-huge-toll-on-firefighters/


Hannah Shroot • Published 13 Aug 2012 06:30 0 Comments

AN UNPOPULAR system that changes the way fire stations operate could prove to be 'a huge toll' on firefighters if it is implemented.
An action plan released by Royal Berkshire Fire Authority - the body responsible for deciding how Royal Berkshire Fire and Rescue Service (RBFRS) is run - has indicated a 'Day Crewing Plus' system is being considered for the region, which incorporates Slough, Langley, Windsor and Maidenhead stations.
Under the system, which could be introduced in 2013, separate rest areas are provided for crew so they can work four duty shift days and four nights on call at a time followed by four days off, instead of the current 42 hours a week.
The system halves the number of firefighters on a single fire-engine station, reducing the number of watches to two instead of four.
Michael Rowley, secretary of the Fire Brigades Union at Windsor fire station, said: "The system would be a huge toll on employees and their families if they have to be away from home four days at a time."
Switching to this system, which is already used in some places across the country including Lancashire and Merseyside, would allow savings of about £330,000 for each fire station where it is introduced. Crews would receive an enhanced salary for the additional hours on call but Mr Rowley said there was a distinct possibility redundancies would have to be made if stations opted for the new system.
Andy Mancey, RBFRS's area manager for response, said the proposals are for a selected number of fire stations only. He added: "A project team has recently been appointed to look at Day Crewing Plus in more detail and this work is still in its very early stages. The outcome of this work will be reported to the Fire Authority when it is completed."
Members of the public are invited to take part in the consultation programme, which runs until October 22, 2012.
The Action Plan can be downloaded from www.rbfrs.co.uk/irmp_options.asp. Email comments to irmp@rbfrs.co.uk, call 0118 938 4331, fax 0118 959 0510 or write to IRMP Consultation, Royal Berkshire Fire and Rescue Service, FREEPOST (RG2 669), 103 Dee Road, Tilehurst, Reading, RG30 1BR.