|
VFD Resources
Special Announcements |
|
|
|
|
Grant Writing
General Consulting
|
Examining Risks The next phase in the Gathering Information step in the strategy decision making process is examining risks. Risks are generally grouped into three (3) categories: low risk, moderate risk, and high risk. The fundamental issue with this phase is the attempt to determine the probability of risk vs. reward. If you have predicted the potential outcomes for each of your alternatives, you probably have a pretty decent idea of what the risks may be already. It then is just a matter of identifying those risks as to what those risks may be, determining if you have any level of control (and what that may be) to manage those risks, and then subsequently how willing are you to take the risks to get the desired results. Any decision you make will have risks. This is as true administratively as it is at a fire scene, where many risks exists and not just as conditions, but risks with decisions as well. exist and as we all know happen very rapidly. Every decision comes with a risk of either a good outcome or a bad outcome. In identifying the risks this may cause you to go back and look at your alternatives and their potential outcomes, certainly if the risks are too high that you won't get a good outcome and/or the risk is very significant that a bad outcome may result. EXAMPLE: Let's say you're the fire chief and you're going to let your new volunteer rookie ride the apparatus in on their first call. You've looked at the alternatives (let them ride in on the apparatus, or wait on another member to arrive at the station and let the rookie to continue to ride in on the squad to continue watching and learning) and you decide to let the rookie do it, because this is the only way they're going to get some experience and at some point you're going to have to make this decision (everybody starts somewhere). You've got your two best interior attack members, you're driver/engineer is your former chief, and you've got a well experienced plug-man, who hits the hydrant so fast, he has to wait for the truck to stop, before he opens it up. Thus, the risk is better to let the rookie ride, rather than wait on another member The outcome potentials are that that either the rookie will do fine or they'll do something stupid, because they've got their adrenaline up in making their first alarm on the apparatus. And the other potential outcome is that you'll have to wait a few more minutes and hope that another member arrives soon to complete your crew. The risks are that they rookie will do fine and you'll have a good outcome and they'll start down the path of gaining real experience, because they finished fundamentals and did well there and the other risk is that they'll be so keyed up they'll forget their training and act impulsively, or otherwise do something rookie stupid. So, in looking at your alternatives, predicting the potential outcomes, and examining the risks, you decide to let the rookie ride, because you will eventually have to make this decision, it is your best alternative, the potential for a good outcome is better, and so are the risks; given who else you've got on your crew. Upon arrival at the scene, the rookie charges into the vacant structure, more charged up than the hose line (which they forgot to grab!) and they didn't put on the SCBA. As you and your interior attack team finish masking up yourselves, you all read the smoke and the scene and then you go in there to drag the rookie's gagging, choking and puking soot-covered fanny out of there. Then you get your knock-down and overhaul the fire. Thus this was a bad risk and a bad outcome, albeit what you had for an alternative potentially could have been a worse risk and a worse outcome. You also had the risk of a bad outcome, had you stayed at the station and waited longer for another member to complete the crew. Another problem has been identified. The rookie needs a little more talking to (but they've probably learned one helluva lesson, thus not much may need to be said), they need more exposure at the fire scenes, and they need some more training/drilling with the department. As this example shows, in looking at the risks, you may have had a worse risk had you waited for another member, and this may even cause you to go back and look at the problem again to identify and further define it, equally to see if there is a more fundamental problem or other related problems that require a decision to be made so that another problem may be solved. Therefore, when you look at the remainder of the crew you had, your immediate problem, the other less desirable alternatives, the other bad outcomes and the higher risk you had for those bad outcomes and less desirable alternatives, you made a good decision, or the best decision you could have made. And who knows . . . long term this may prove to be a good decision in that the rookie may become one of your best and most reliable firefighters in a year or two and potentially in 15-20 years may be the department's fire chief and one of the best they ever had. In many situations, problems and decisions, you may also have to revisit the limits of the decision making process and the level(s) of control which may exist and who has the control of those levels. This all may sound very basic, but look at your yourself, your own fire department and how many bad decisions have been made and how many problems may have been solved, if not avoided, had you or the company really looked at their decision making and problem solving process with more of a methodical approach. However, sometimes what may be a simple decision or problem such as needing new apparatus, needing funding, or needing to recruit new members may be a complex decision in that there are many factors, variables, personalities, agencies and subsequent/supplemental decisions required to solve the fundamental problem. Thus, these fundamentally defined "simple problems" are not simple problems at all and they require many decisions and many people to get the results necessary. In this Examine the Risks phase of the Information Gathering step of a Strategy Method to decision making, there are three elements of: (1) identifying the risks, (2) determining if the risks can be managed and then managing the risks, and (3) determine how willing you and your fire department are to take these risks. EXERCISES: 1) Think of a decision in your personal life and as you reflect back on the decision and its outcome(s), what risks existed. 2) Think of at least three (3) decisions made by your fire department and reflect upon their outcomes and what risks existed that may have predicted those outcomes, both good and bad. Last modified: September 21, 2008
© VFD-Funding 2005, All Rights
Reserved |
Grant Writing
Firefighting Facts |
|
Please use the convenient
Feedback
form or send mail to
webmaster@VFD-FEMS.com |
