By Alan Brunacini
We have recently been discussing how the basic capability of a boss connects to the effect of what that boss does and, just as critical, how he does it, particularly the way he treats others as they do their job. A lot of that treatment (plus or minus) is directly connected to how that boss deals with personal and positional power. I have related before how frequently I hear as I interact with fire service folks how they are attempting to survive working for a dysfunctional boss. Much of that unhappy conversation involves the conflict workers have in loving the work (firefighting) and hating how they are treated (maladapted boss). This imbalance eventually affects the mental health and physical well-being of the humans in that system.
That connection (between basic personal capability and actual leadership accomplishment) occurs along an up-and-down (vertical) scale we have named a “hierarchy.” All of the stages and places along the scale are connected and are necessary for effective operational outcomes.
A very basic problem occurs if a boss stops along the scale because the higher levels of accomplishment exceed his basic capabilities (i.e., the Peter Principle). It is extremely frustrating to operate in such a system that is stalled (or stuck) at that lower point because the next step up the hierarchy exceeds the boss’s capability. Many times, such “organizational paralysis” causes that overwhelmed boss to do the wrong thing harder, which results in a less than effective/safe performance level. Most organizational members want to be part of (and be proud of) a system that can take on and accomplish a positive, significant, progressive set of goals while being led by a functional boss. Not achieving this level of accomplishment creates a great deal of frustration and internal conflict.
In past columns, our hierarchy discussion involved the very necessary basic organizational activities/functions such as attendance, appearance, and maintenance routines. Managing these programs requires the effective (mostly) supervisory efforts of a boss who has the skill and experience and directs them toward helping workers do these basic daily activities over and over (forever) to create and always maintain the readiness capability to deliver service.
Mrs. Smith is interested in and needs us to quickly show up at “showtime” and solve the problem that is messing up her day. She is not generally preoccupied (as an example) with the level of transmission fluid in Engine 1 (E-1). We hope she has the feeling that her fire department is well managed and that the boss of E-1 is preoccupied not only with routine but also with critical things like fluid levels and all the other required readiness functions. The only way we can consistently and effectively operate is to have bosses who always manage the “ready-get set” part at the bottom of the hierarchy so we can execute the “go” at the top.
Looking at the areas of management activities and the outcomes those efforts produce going up the hierarchy, each requires an increasing level of skill, ability, understanding, and related experience. The boss requirements and routines on the bottom are more “mechanical,” routine, and recurring; yet, they are absolutely necessary and set us up to effectively and safely operate. They are not as human centered (motivational) as the areas higher on the scale that necessitate that the boss use his personal and positional resources to interact with others to achieve a full range of the activities that need positive participation to reach the objectives of the activity that delivers service to Mrs. Smith.
Within the organization, good order is the result of positive, functional discipline that directly and indirectly leads to high-quality accomplishment. This discipline is the result of everyone’s having the capability to control their behaviors and to consistently perform the function of their position. This behavior control objective is simple when it works and can be very complicated when it doesn’t work. That easy/difficult reality is the result of how humans come from the factory.
It would be pretty simple (and dull) if a boss managed only machines and robots. In our business, when A Shift is ready to go home, B Shift shows up, and shift change is always an adventure. Based on the “personality” of the workers who show up at morning roll call, the shift boss (company commander) may have to be a psychologist, referee, grade school principal, and social director. A major part of performing all of these roles involves the art and science of managing boundaries. In fact, if you just stand back and watch, the dynamics of the interaction (read: “operetta”) that occur at shift change sometimes require the boss to engage in all those roles simultaneously-doing this produces the ecstasy and the agony of being a company officer.
Boundaries
A major part of the environment within an organization is determined by how boundaries are formed and maintained. A boundary is a border or a limit. Within an organization, boundaries establish how the members perform, operate, and behave. How those boundaries are managed defines in a real way the kind of a place it is for members. The major custodians of the organizational limits are the formal and informal leaders on every level.
When a person is promoted to a new position, he gets increased power. Sadly, organizations typically do not do a very good job of preparing employees who are promoted or transferred for managing the boundaries of their new levels of authority and influence (power). I can remember my rugged, very traditional boss (rigid autocrat) sliding my new badge down the table (no human contact) when he promoted me to battalion chief (BC); he then summarily excused me (I was not his favorite). I got in my chief’s buggy (as opposed to the pumper I rode on that morning) and wondered, now that I had my own wheels, where in the world I, as a brand new BC, should drive 10 minutes after being promoted. This was my (absolutely no training) welcome to being a tactical level boss. Luckily, the old, wise captain at my new battalion quarters home had raised many baby BCs for the past 20 years, so I just followed his instructions. Thank you, Captain Jones. He was a master of explaining how I should operate within the boundaries of my new job. We did not call them boundaries then; but looking back, that was what he was really describing. He was way ahead of his time.
Organizational leaders define themselves in the most powerful way by how they conduct themselves in defining, teaching, following (themselves), and then enforcing those boundaries. Being able to do this boundary management involves effectively dealing with human workers in a creative and sometimes imaginative way. Doing this moves that boss up the hierarchy by creating an acceptable behavior boundary foundation that can lead to organizational excellence, which is up on the structure of the hierarchy. The personal and positional approach of the boss creates a powerful internal message about that boss. Those on the receiving end of the power process will immediately identify (and react to) any phony, mean-spirited, or self-serving behavior of a boss based on how that person deals with organizational boundaries. It does not take long in the real world for Worker Smith to figure out if Boss Smith (who has power over him) will help him, neglect him, or sometimes hurt him. We have the most accurate and personally primitive understanding of people with power over us. People with such power sometimes do mean-spirited, destructive, fear-producing things because “they can.” Such a boss can cause an enormous amount of organizational wreckage.
Although it is instructive for us (students) to look at a full range of the power dynamics (plus/minus) exerted by bosses, how bosses actually use their influence and authority becomes a direct function of personal boundary management where a boss self-regulates his management and leadership action by behaving in a consistent manner that brings out the best in the humans under his care. Today, more than ever before, boundary mistakes are reported on nanosecond social media. Almost every time we turn on the computer, we get to review the latest, many times unbelievable, fire service situation where some member did something that pulverized some organizational limit and created a great story. These are high-profile mess-ups that land in the grateful lap of the media, who it seems will have work forever. Based on that reality, we will continue our boundary management discussion in the next column.
Retired Chief ALAN BRUNACINI is a fire service author and speaker. He and his sons own the fire service Web site bshifter.com.
