The Fire Service Organization An Exercise in Rationalism
FEATURES
MANAGEMENT
Sometimes, we can be intimidated by our lack of knowledge in areas that have, somehow, grown up around us and about which we are expected to know more and more. A chief’s job in the fire service, paid or volunteer, is like that. All of a sudden a computer has found its way into your office. You should have paid attention to it before, but you didn’t, and now it’s there. Female firefighters have become a part of your department. Perhaps a better job could have been done in anticipating their needs, but their presence in your traditional male world did not truly seem a reality. Toxicity has become a daily newspaper expression. A few years ago it was reserved for the scientific community; now you are expected to interact on a meaningful level in the development of tactics and procedures that could seriously influence the health and welfare of your firefighters and the community.
It’s easy to go on listing the demands of a fast-moving world, but the point has been made. And while having to meet the demands of rapidly changing environments can be intimidating, there is one area that remains rather constant, an area that continues to function and deliver what it has been designed to provide, and with which a fire chief should be thoroughly familiar. It’s the fire service. Not the fire stations and the equipment, but the organization.
Based on a truly unique and successful organizational philosophy, the fire service’s principles and concepts are something that we should never allow ourselves to be intimidated about—or allow ourselves to take for granted.
THE FOUNDATION
The direction of the fire service was shaped by significant historical events. For example, the great London fire of 1666 in which approximately 80% of the city burned to the ground, gave birth to organized firefighting and the fire insurance industry. Boston authorities, in 1676, ordered a fire engine from England that had been developed due to the 1666 blaze. In 1679, they hired men to care for the new pumping engine, requiring some form of rudimentary organization.
But long before this, the need for organization was experienced. Peter Stuyvesant of New Amsterdam appointed three fire wardens to perform fire prevention inspections in 1648. They had the power to issue violations for such things as a faulty chimney or failure to keep a thatched roof in a safe condition. They performed fire patrol duty and, when a fire occurred, they took charge of its suppression. Fines collected for violations were used to pay their salaries and to also provide what was needed to fight fires.
The influence of Peter Stuyvesant’s military bearing was felt in the recommended bucket brigade procedure. Under the command of a fire warden, ladies formed one line and men another line. Ladies passed empty buckets from the fire to a canal to be refilled. The men passed the filled buckets to the fire. The warden, to assure complete attention to duty, had required that the lines be formed back to back. As the old records are reviewed, this need for firm organizational control at fires can be sensed time and time again.
Although Benjamin Franklin successfully started a fire insurance company in the New World in 1752, it wasn’t until 1835 when the Factory Mutual System was founded that fire insurance really came into being, at least as far as industrial coverage. It was through the efforts of Factory Mutual that the automatic sprinkler came into existence, and much of what we now know as fire protection and fire loss prevention was also spearheaded by Factory Mutual.
MEN AND THEIR MACHINES
Right from the early bucket brigades and long brake handled pumping engines, the spirit of the fire service began forming. The hand-drawn machines, some weighing nearly 3,000 pounds, were literally pulled through the streets by up to 50 volunteers, sometimes at breakneck speeds and with reckless abandonment.
The hand engines produced water pressure in direct proportion to the speed at which the pumping brake handles were operated. Men were required to move the handles up and down at approximately 60 strokes per minute. At times, the strokes were more than doubled to increase pressure. This process could go on for hours or even days.
Getting first water on a fire became the object of many responding fire companies; and usually this could only be done by getting to the fire scene first and finding water.
The strength and bravery of these volunteers were not only needed, but greatly respected. However, a change in the methods of responding to and fighting fires was necessary because of the difficulty involved in controlling the men who were quick to not only draw the heavy machines through the streets and put them to work, but to use their fists in the fierce competition that sometimes resulted in the quest for first water.
PARAMILITARY ORGANIZATION
The era of steam, 1850 to the early 1900s, saw many changes. Although James Watt had invented the steam engine in 1736 and steam engines were being used in industry by the 1840s, it took quite a few more years before the men who loved their hand-drawn and hand-powered fire machines would give way to the advent of steam. By the 1860s, however, most of the nation’s major fire departments were equipped with horse-drawn steam fire engines that could weigh as much as 22,000 pounds.
Also during this period, New York City, a city with one of the largest volunteer fire departments in the world, saw the transition from a volunteer to a paid fire department.
On July 28, 1865, the first paid fire company went into service. This new department immediately set into effect a strict military code of regulations that forbade racing other companies to fires, crossing hose lines, using profane language, and drinking alcohol in a fire station. Distinct levels of authority were established and a military code of behavior, proper for each rank, was structured into the organization. In short, a paramilitary organization was intentionally created to assure a desirable behavioral posture and maximum control at fire scenes. During the latter years of the 1800s, similar transitions were made in fire departments throughout our nation.
PENDLETON BILL
In 1882, the Pendleton Bill was passed by Congress, whereby employees were hired and promoted based upon merit and their jobs were secure from political interference. The federal civil service commission was formed to implement and administer the functioning of the bill’s provisions.
The Pendleton Bill helped to establish the basis of what we now know as a career path in a paid fire department, and it was a natural concept to include in the newly emerging paramilitary fire service. Discipline, order, and developing professionalism fostered through job security and the recognition of merit for promotion rather than political favoritism became the guideposts of the new fire service, and formed the basis of our modern fire service.
We have inherited a philosophy and an organization that was hewed out from the countless experiences of those who have gone before. It is not an accident that the fire service is regarded by civilians as one of the most efficient forms of governmental agencies. It can’t be anything else. It represents, since the beginning of our nation, the result of grass roots commitment. The trick is for us to be wise enough and proud enough to keep it that way.
Rationalism
It is difficult to pick any other word but rationalism to describe the driving force behind the American fire service’s organizational methodology.
Although the organizational conceptualization prior to the 1900s could be described as colleagueship, as our cities grew and material wealth amassed in warehouses, good fellowship had to give way to a more evenly functioning form of administration. Hence the organizational concepts of the military were adopted. Attempting to separate leaders from firefighters was not an attempt to establish an autocratic subculture in a country of democratic ideals. Rather, it was a necessity for carrying out rapid and efficient firefighting operations.
Although there are many new concepts in organization and management techniques, most do not fit well with the unique nature of the fire service. There is no escaping the need for absolute discipline, obedience, and machinelike efficiency when Kaving to mitigate emergency situations.
Rationalism connotes an intellectual approach to a problem or a situation. And once a decision is reached, even though possibly unpopular, it will, in the fire service, be obeyed. A chief officer who negates this organizational philosophy which provides that kind of dutiful response may be doing the fire service a great deal of harm. Of course, variations in decision making that will take advantage of group dynamics or some similar psychological phenomenon can be introduced, but in the final analysis, there must be one authority figure with the power of a final and absolute decision and also with the right of instantly dissolving the group. There can be review boards and grievance procedures, but these come into play after the moment of decision. A group cannot take final responsibility. Meaningful accountability requires fixing responsibility squarely on the head of one individual, the chief. That is a lesson that has come down from the past and one that has proven effective. It should not be replaced by or pushed aside for theories that are in many ways still full of holes.
Many of the concepts and principles set forth by the German sociologist Max Weber (1864-1920) on the creation of an efficient organization were adopted by the American fire service.
Weber thought of an organization as an ongoing entity, separate and distinct from that of its administrators, who, ideally, would make decisions based on considered reflection rather than on whim. Managers who acted capriciously were a threat to the life of and had little place in the organization. To help ensure efficiency, job knowledge was an implied prerequisite for an officeholder.
Rules were of great significance in Weber’s view of organization. and formed the law by which all behavior and organizational activity was governed. The rules were to be open and available to all who had need of them, and would serve as a barrier against cavalier behavior on the part of administrators.
Decisions, which were the right of those people in an organizational position of authority, were to be made on the basis of the rules and through the use of rational procedure.
Authority is the power to carry on the business that you are required to perform, and formal authority always flows downward, never upward. Only the amount of authority that is needed is given, and when it is no longer needed, it may be taken back (as in a reorganization or a demotion where less authority is needed).
The concept of authority remaining in the organizational office instead of in the officeholder was a particularly important idea. This ensured that the authority was there for the next occupant and that it would be surrendered by the former officeholder.
In our modern fire service organization, authority has been watered down to reflect a softer view, and the needs of modern man to disagree with authority have been recognized. Indeed, they must be recognized otherwise labor problems could quickly arise. However, the need for absolute authority is a valid requirement. It can’t be given away. The concepts of men like Weber can’t be dismissed on the basis of belonging to a bygone era> The fire service organization is not a democracy. It’s an efficient machine operated under rational autocratic guidance.
The vision of an ongoing entity governed by written rules and existing independently of those who temporarily occupy its offices was and is a unique concept. Such an organization is not dependent on personalities nor on the frailties of human nature. Weber envisioned the organization’s longevity and efficiency being tied into its ability to create a system of interacting offices that focus their individual efforts into one gigantic powerful surge. Perfection is assured through correct interaction and the appointment of competent officeholders. The Pendleton Bill helped provide this.
Even though modern American fire departments have long ago forgotten Weber, they nevertheless have reached the concept of efficiency that he dreamed of and the level of operation that he predicted. They do deliver fast efficient service and they do strive to increase their level of efficiency through the development of written procedures; and the organization exists as an ongoing entity, much bigger than any one person who is in it. Levels of authority are clearly set forth, and when the organization is charted, it represents a hierarchial arrangement, rationally conceived.
MANAGEMENT/OPERATIONS
Henri Fayol (1845-1925), a French engineer, spent a great deal of time on the study of exactly what a manager does when he engages in managing. He developed the notion that managing activities are really the same no matter what the organization, and encompass:
- Planning
- Organizing
- Commanding
- Coordinating
- Controlling.*
Fayol’s concepts and principles of management have long ago been adopted by the fire service as its official method of management. Some of the most basic principles and concepts include unity of command, unity of direction, the use of authority, discipline, and what Fayol described as esprit de corps.
Modern day managerial writers such as Harold Koontz and Cyril O’Donnell have continued developing the classical concepts, listing a manager’s functions as:
- Planning
- Organizing
- Staffing
- Directing
- Controlling.
These functions serve as the essence of rational thought in the management process, and can perhaps give us an appreciation of what the true nature of fire service organization is and strives to be.
*In the 1930s and 1940s, Fayol’s concepts were expanded by Luther Gurlick and Lyndall Urwick. Urwick developed 29 principles of organization designed to produce efficient operations, and Gurlick’s description of the management process in terms of the acronym POSOCORB is still used by students studying for promotion. POSOCORB represents planning, organizing, staffing, directing, controlling, reporting, and budgeting.
Planning
Planning, although considered the primary function of a manager, seems to be one of the most undesirable for firefighters, perhaps because they are action oriented people. Planning is mainly a sit-down, intellectual process whereby data is collected, evaluated, considered, and reconsidered before committing manpower, money, and resources. The final product is not putting a fire out, it is a written report spelling out what has to be done and how it has to be done.
When approached in the correct frame of mind, planning can provide a great deal of internal satisfaction. Planning requires looking ahead and determining both long-range and short-range needs of a department. It takes some of the unknown out of the future.
Anticipating problems and roadblocks and providing for those with longand short-term contingency plans is also a manager’s responsibility. Contingency plans help prevent being caught off guard. It’s having the flexibility of switching to mode B when mode A doesn’t work or when mode B is simply the best way to go.
Organizing
The organization process involves a manager in methods of arrangement for people, activities, and communications. The aim is to have everything operate so that group effort is focused on achieving the objectives that were established during the planning function. The principles employed in the process of organization are:
- Chain of command;
- Delegation of authority (remember that ultimate responsibility rests with the officer in charge and he must have sufficient authority in place to meet that responsibility);
- Unity of command;
- Logical assignments;
- Span of management.
While many of these areas are covered in management books and articles (see the following FIRE ENGINEERING articles: “Delegation of Responsibility,” August 1984; “Delegation for Growth and Survival,” September 1984; “Dividing the Fireground,” August 1985), let’s just highlight a few points about unity of command.
The purpose of unity of command is to prevent any possibility of a subordinate playing one superior against another, or in having a subordinate confused by conflicting orders from a superior officer to whom he reports. For example, a member of a truck company assigned to vent the roof should not be ordered away from doing his job by a superior officer who happens to be looking for a firefighter to do something else. If the firefighter cannot avoid this officer, then he will usually disobey the officer and get to the roof. The principle to be stressed is that the firefighter reports to one specific officer and is directly responsible for carrying out that officer’s orders.
As with everything in life, there has to be exceptions to every rule, and there are three recognized exceptions to the concept of unity of command:
- When safety is involved;
- During emergency situations;
- When expediency is required. In these cases, the chief officer must be fast to intercede on the part of the firefighter when the firefighter is confronted by his immediate superior and asked why he did not do the job that he was directly ordered to do. These are principles that have been found to be necessary and are very much a part of the fire service. The fireground is no place for a committee meeting or for a group discussion.
Staffing
Staffing involves at least seven activities:
- Determining personnel qualifications;
- Recruitment;
- Selection;
- Placement;
- Orientation;
- Promotion or demotion;
- Termination (retirement or separation).
Four aspects of staffing that are a natural outgrowth of a rational, intellectual approach to management and that serve to promote the efficiency of an organization are: job analysis, job description, job specification, and manning tables (a listing of jobs and the required qualifications).
An officer should be aware of these aspects and their abuse or lack of use when critics are attacking the inadequacies of the fire service. For example, it is not fair to silently stand by if entrance qualifications have been removed or watered down to a point where anyone who can breathe can enter the department and if leaders are no longer selected on the basis of merit. It doesn’t matter what sex or color firefighters are, but their capabilities and ability to do the job are extremely important—for everyone involved.
Directing
It is in the function of directing that the operational school of management approaches the human element in the organization. However, it does so in an impersonal and scientific way. Today, the human side of an organization is very important and a chief officer must realize that, when dealing with a human being, scientific rationalism, the basis of thought by those who founded and developed our fire service organization, is not the complete answer.
Still, for the fire service, just as for Weber’s organization, excellence is achieved through expertise and commitment. And, in the final analysis, the human must be secondary to the organization’s goals. Although this is a difficult concept in modern day America, this is exactly what is expected of a firefighter—which is part of what makes him different from others.
Controlling
Control in the fire service is a traditional approach to achieving safety and proficiency in areas where most organizations do not have to function. Remember that fighting a fire is like fighting a battle, but the enemy will never surrender. The enemy has to be conquered, and conquered completely every time there is an attack. Therefore, control must be tight, and this is achieved, partly, by using a narrow span of management.
CONCLUSION
We started our discussion by saying that sometimes we can find ourselves in situations that have grown up around us and that we really need to know more about. This article restated some of the basic principles and concepts that serve as the foundation of the traditional American fire service organization, an excellent organization based upon sound organizational theory.
As a part of the fire service, you have been trained and geared to respond to emergencies with cool precise professionalism. This is something that we can be proud of.
The foundation of our fire service organization, formed by rational principles and concepts is also something we can be proud of— and something that we need never be intimidated by.
