BY ALAN BRUNACINI
A timely management topic we started to discuss last month is how organizational boundaries are established, maintained, and revised-they pretty much establish the lane we all personally and occupationally “drive in” and describe what is acceptable behavior/performance as we go along in our lane. A great deal of our personal success depends on how we learn (and keep learning) the boundary dynamics that apply to the major parts of our lives because those separate parts all involve a different set of acceptable limits. This learning process is a continual challenge because boundaries keep changing, particularly for long-time veterans who struggle every day trying to figure out the latest assault on the old school teachings on which we were raised. I guess this is what is described and regarded as “progress.” (Speaking of staying in your lane, I read in the newspaper that we will soon have driverless cars. What’s next?)
A major place where boundary dynamics occur is in the organization where we work doing the functions of our profession. Those organizational limits should be directed toward and focused on the mission of that system. A major role of a boss is to teach, encourage, support, and sometimes enforce that workers operate within acceptable limits. Sometimes the boss must “nudge” the workers back into the boundary when they get out of balance in relation to acceptable behavior. A major way a boss defines his level of capability is by how he manages his workers’ boundary behavior.
Today, we often hear a company officer described as the “designated adult.” This humorous (but accurate) reference applies to how that person patrols the perimeter of organizational boundaries that apply to the team. For a team leader boss, being able to develop the “nudging skill” on every level is a critical (quiet) boundary management ability as he ascends the capability hierarchy. It involves the development of trust between the workers and the boss; constant, sensible mutual engagement; and an ongoing focus on customer-centered service (both inside and outside). All of these capabilities are directly connected to the personal and positional capability of the boss.
Effective bosses also must positively reinforce successful observance of boundaries in their workers wherever it occurs with the basic performance model standard operating procedures (SOPs)/Training/Application/Critique/Revision). The model creates a performance sandwich that involves a combination of preparation that is done ahead of the operational action and a review that must occur after the action. The back half of the model strengthens the definition of effective behavior and reinforces that behavior with positive recognition. When there is a problem, a standard performance/behavior review is used to develop a plan to do whatever is required to get back within the boundary. Bosses must understand and build the skills (and perspective) necessary to do boundary prehab on the front end and boundary rehab on the back end and to effectively manage the service-delivery action part in the middle. A boss sends a highly relevant message that he is very serious about investing in positive performance, pays attention to boundary dynamics, is anxious and capable to fix problems, and is skillful and sincere about commending effective performance.
Many internal institutional organizational boundaries are influenced and defined by formal/written/structured official directives like SOPs, system guidelines, standing orders, and rules and regulations. Those directives create an explicit definition of how the system will control and use its resources to do business. The development of that formal material over time describes the history of that system and creates a cultural foundation for not only how the organization operates but also how well (or badly) the system controls itself.
A major activity with many very rigid boundaries involves delivering tactical operations in a hazard zone. How these limits are approached and managed is critical because they set the stage for doing manual labor in a dangerous place (immediately dangerous to life or health) and the boundary game plan (overall strategy and initial action plan) for operationally conducting ourselves when we are in that serious injury/death zone-simply, the details and substance of these unforgiving boundaries are serious because we are about to listen to some sad bagpipe music when we violate those directives.
Changing Operational Boundaries
Speaking of changing very serious survival boundaries, we are now struggling with the actual (I mean ACTUAL) application of the results and tactical directives that are executed in the street according to the latest fire testing. This very well-developed intelligence is creating a new, different, and better (= effective/safe) approach to firefighting techniques. I have historically lived through a lot of operational phases before the current fire testing chapter. Much of what we have been doing through the years leading up to the present was the habitual result of our getting into the back of the cultural line within our department and then imitating the guy ahead of us. Although that highly reinforced follow-the-leader approach has gotten us where we are today, we now have professional, very experienced, and very street-smart scientists developing observations and recommendations based on highly tested evidence.
Much of what they have learned (over and over) from those very scientifically conducted fire tests is changing the boundaries of how we operate. We can either pay attention and respond to their recommendations or keep falling through defensive roofs or operating in a lethal flow path having thermal insult assault us and then suffering with incredible pain in the local burn unit for an extended stay. I mean no disrespect to the historical development of our operational practices. We can integrate the latest test findings into what we have always done without suffering a massive personality change-simply, in the current boundary context of safe and effective firefighting practices, you can have your own opinion, but you can’t have your own data.
How the people in the system pay attention to and then follow those directives will also become an important part of the culture simply because those boundaries define and describe how that organization operates. It’s pretty easy to write down in a procedure the ideal way we should operate, but how the humans in the system teach, model, maintain, follow, and enforce those directives will determine if the action described in the SOP consistently shows up when we operate. Sadly, in many systems, there can be a huge difference between writing it down and doing it. Our Moms start teaching us at an early age acceptable behavior boundaries, and those “rules” follow us through our lives into where we work; most organizations have produced descriptions for their system to show what is acceptable and unacceptable behavior.
A Leadership “Breakthrough”
I have pondered how to describe and somehow make sense of how boundary management occurs in the real world. As usual, I have developed a simple way to describe, discuss, and better understand the dynamics of functional boss behaviors in managing those boundaries. The usual test I use to describe what I am trying to understand and then explain is to fit the idea on a 3 × 5 card. If I can’t get it in my shirt pocket, I can’t get into my brain. What I came up with sets the record for my lifelong simplification effort: I printed on one side of the card the single word YES; on the other side is printed another single word NO.
I have recently shared this revolutionary yes/no leadership “breakthrough” with a number of my colleagues and participants in our management class discussions. Having a conversation about how a boss deals with personal and positional permission (flipping the card around) has generally produced a spirited two-hour discussion that describes how the people within an organization create an effective YES/NO response to what (+/-) actually happens in a fire department. Having the boss pick the correct side of the card can produce happiness and safety; allowing the wrong side of the card can result in heartbreaking pain. In the discussion, the card provides a really simple physical thing in your hand you can manipulate in a tactile way. Which side you display shows a decision you have made that describes how and where you have established a real, practical, understandable boundary.
The card is designed to be a teaching-discussion tool (used as a metaphor). I don’t think a boss would carry the card around with him and “flash” the appropriate side to send a message/order. I suspect the troops would have some fun describing the “card man.” But, in every discussion where we talk about the card, just about every boss (including me) says they wished they had used the NO card when they could have stopped an action/act that produced a really sad/negative/irresolvable outcome.
Being serious about being a boss involves that person signing up as a student in a school where you never graduate. About the time you think you’re a senior who has seen all the YES and NO answers, something will happen that produces a lesson that shows how much you have to learn. Then, if you don’t act like a boss student and do what is required to learn the lesson, you are a dangerous person because you are responsible for the welfare of real workers and customers. The positive (happy) part of the card is that it is simple; the negative (sad) part of the card is that it is simple. Life is made up mostly of learning and following simple lessons.
I recently saw what I considered an excellent, simple, and powerful example of boundary management. I was scheduled to teach a customer service class in Pittsburgh. We were going to be in the auditorium of a suburban high school on a Saturday (no kids). The school was very nice and well cared for. We entered through the front door that was directly across from an interior brick wall. On the wall was an impressive, very stylish, tasteful framed poster. In large block letters, there were three words: “Punctual-Prepared-Polite.” Someone in that school (I hope both teachers and students) summarized the critical behavior boundaries that were expected of everyone who walked through the door-not just the students, but everyone. It is really neat when we can state critical things with as few words as possible, and whoever thought up those three words absolutely nailed it. Those three very positive boundary behaviors showed up in virtually every thank-you letter I received from Mrs. Smith. It would be smart to put a small sign across from every riding position on every rig stating “Prompt-Prepared-Polite.” It would be the first and last thing the troops would see when they get on and off the fire truck.
Retired Chief ALAN BRUNACINI is a fire service author and speaker. He and his sons own the fire service Web site bshifter.com.
Boundary Management
Fireground Management: Positive Power
Fireground Management: More Power Goofs
