“Good decisions come from experience, and experience comes from bad decisions.”
-Author Unknown
Consider a command officer facing a tactical decision on the emergency scene. He carefully makes observations and gathers safety information and preplan data. As he examines the data within the context of policy and training, a suitable course of action should emerge.
But what if the officer receives contradictory information? What if the reporting sources were biased toward a particular course of action? And what if our officer-our decision maker-opts to rely on common assumptions or disregard pertinent information offered by a subordinate?
Or consider an EMS officer who decides to rely on anecdotal information provided by a patient’s neighbor and, therefore, shortcuts a patient exam.
In both situations, team members and observers would correctly question the officer’s competency. With this in mind, let’s take a closer look at the issue of competence and how it relates to decision making.
Generally, to competently perform our duties, we must possess sufficient knowledge, judgment, skill and physical strength. More specifically, competence in decision making involves four factors: setting aside ego; developing trusted fact sources; observing and listening; and thinking critically.
Ego Trap
Some officers act as though their officer badge confers knowledge and wisdom. Such an assumption is especially egregious when held by a superior officer. If we consciously or unconsciously buy into this thinking, our ego will get in the way, preventing us from asking for help. Further, with ego at the controls, short-sighted, ineffective decisions often prolong the work at hand. The bottom line: Promotion does not result in technical and tactical expertise. Expertise emerges from ongoing training, education and experience. The same holds true for building the skills necessary to make quality decisions.
An officer-especially one new to the position-must not expect to make every decision without counsel. They must feel absolutely comfortable saying, “I don’t know, but I will find out,” and be disciplined enough to follow through on that statement. In response, others must recognize and promote the courageous honesty of this approach. Only then will leadership grow, experience deepen and skills improve.
Trusted Sources
We operate in a world brimming with information. But how credible is it? When gathering input prior to a fireground tactical decision, do you give equal weight to the assessment provided by a rookie firefighter and that provided by a 12-year veteran? Probably not.
When offered potentially valuable information, you should weigh the information provided or factor it into the situation based on the experience, skills and biases of your source. In my department, I expect personnel to be problem-solvers and let me (or other appropriate people) know when they think a problematic situation or issue might arise. Basically, I want honest, accurate information. And to get good information, you must expect it, respect it when it arrives and base your actions on it.
Tune In
The information exchange process is just as critical as the quality of the information. Carefully observe your source and listen closely during the exchange. Inattention creates a high probability of either missing or misinterpreting the information.
On the emergency scene, a number of factors can hinder communication. Noise, poor radio performance, competing issues and numerous people vying for your attention are not unusual-but they can be problematic. Even in the quiet of an office space, telephones, computers, pagers and other people can interfere with your communication process.
In addition, assumptions and biases multiply the risk of making poor decisions. These scenarios often begin with thinking, “I already know what he’ll say,” or “I know what she wants.”
High-quality decisions come from good communication, which is grounded in active listening. As you gather information, be objective, and step outside of your assumptions and biases. With your ego in check and trustworthy information fully settled in your mind, you are ready to ask some questions-the right questions.
Critical Thinking
As I query officers throughout the fire service, I regularly hear them place a high value on supervisors and peers who are “critical thinkers.” What they’re referring to is another person’s ability to use a set of principles and questions to skillfully determine what information has worth and what does not.
Unfortunately, our educational system focuses heavily on rote-learning and memorizing facts. But the value of building a mental inventory of facts has rapidly diminished. Current technology places all of the facts you may need in a palm-size (or smaller) device that is readily updated. What we now need (and value) is the ability to apply sophisticated thinking to relevant information; this results in effective decisions.
In his book “Five Minds for the Future,” Harvard professor Howard Gardner asserts that success in this century and beyond lies in our ability to exercise critical-thinking skills. Gardner, a psychologist and prolific author, concludes that without disciplined thinking skills, people are “at the mercy of forces they can’t understand-overwhelmed by information, unable to succeed in the workplace and incapable of making judicious decisions about personal and professional matters.” Although his conclusion seems to turn our education practices upside-down, it’s especially logical in today’s information environment.
In a practical guide to critical thinking, authors Neil Browne and Stuart Keely offer 11 questions in their book “Asking the Right Questions.” The authors frame the process in the context of two approaches to thinking. The first approach is characterized as the “sponge,” which focuses on absorbing information and facts. This passive approach tends to foster decisions based on what information you acquired most recently.
The second approach, called “panning-for-gold,” is both challenging and sometimes methodical. The results foster credible and durable decisions. Some of their “mental check” questions include: Did I ask why someone wants me to believe something? Did I evaluate what was being said? Did I form my own conclusions about the topic? Although it may not be essential in every decision, the more frequently you use panning-for-gold approach, the better your critical-thinking skills become.
Thinking for Success
I advocate two decision-making goals: wisdom and competence. Wisdom results from the combination of good information and ethical action. Common sense comes from experience-both your experiences and witnessing those of others. That said, the ability to make good decisions comes not with a badge or title, but with conscious effort to build these skills. If you make decisions to curry favor with your personnel or superiors or simply amass information and rely on the most current thinking or shy away from difficult decisions, you’re short-changing your team, your department and, most importantly, yourself. Don’t measure success by popular approval of your decisions. Instead, make informed decisions that involve setting your ego aside, listening to trusted sources and panning for gold!
