The Ultimate Guide to Excellent Crisis Leadership

Chapter One Understanding Crisis Leadership "There can't be a crisis next week. My schedule is already full." Henry Kissinger "These are the times that try men's souls." Thomas Paine You probably already saw the symbolism of the book cover with the stormy sea and strong lighthouse casting out its light. Great crisis leaders are like lighthouses. Lighthouses represent direction, hope, and safety. They serve as beacons of light in times of darkness, guiding ships to shore and offering a sense of security. Throughout history, they have been associated with resilience, overcoming difficulties, and circumnavigating through life’s challenges. Lighthouses stand strong. They do not retreat. They stand alone in times of great tumult. Are you a lighthouse for others. I hope so. Control the situation. Do not let the situation control you. You may or may not be familiar with the National Response Framework (NRF), the National Incident Management System (NIMS), and the Incident Command System (ICS). These are all great guidelines and tools for handling pretty much any incident or event. However, none of these great tools offer a particular leadership style to use during an event. This is all left to chance. That is why I wrote this book. I am a fan of three leadership styles in general—servant leadership, transformational leadership, and situational leadership. I would argue that these are all applicable during a crisis, but in different ways and to varying degrees. I would put a heavy dose of situational leadership into the mix of a crisis, with a dose of servant leadership and then a little transformational leadership. I would add one more style that runs along with transformational, and that is transactional. During a crisis, we do not often have time to take a poll or do a lot of voting. We should collaborate in a unified command when determining priorities and goals. The one style I never want to put into my leadership stew is laissez-faire leadership. Understanding Emergency and Incident Management Kemp (2004) stated that there are four phases of emergency management, which are mitigation, preparedness, response, and recovery. I argue for a fifth phase which should come first and that is prevention. The NIMS is applicable across all four/five stages. The ICS is mainly found to function within the response and recovery stages. Kemp went on to state that ICS should not be confused with mutual aid agreements. The ICS provides a structure or framework within which to work. Mutual aid agreements cannot take the place of ICS or NIMS in general. All emergencies are local in nature. Kemp went on to state that local agencies who use the ICS have a functional chain of command, reduce the possibility of duplication of services, and are overall more effective in the response and recovery phases. Lastly, an all-hazards approach must be adopted by all agencies, both public and private (Alexander, 2002, 2002a; Bullock et al. 2006; Canton, 2007; Klann, 2003; Lindell et al. 2007; Maccoby, 2000; Walsh et al. 2005; Wise and Nader 2002). Command, control, coordination, cooperation, collaboration, and communications are considered key elements to effective incident management (Alexander, 2002, 2002a; Brunacini 2002; Molino 2006; Rosenthal 2003; Wise and Nader 2002). Molino (2006) described the emergency response priorities, which are life safety, incident stabilization, and property conservation/preservation (Brown 2005; Brunacini 2002; Reardon 2005). According to Molino (2006), and Flin (1996), in a small incident, there may be one officer, one fire chief and several firefighters, one transportation supervisor and workers, and one wrecker driver, etc. Incident command could change several times throughout the incident. Yet there can be disagreements about who does what and when. Individual personalities may play a role, along with missions, organizational cultures, past experiences with one another or one another’s discipline, levels of experience, and leadership styles, among many other factors (Allred, 2004; Canton, 2007; Klann, 2003; Mitroff, 2004). Most incidents are small and remain local in nature but then we have events such as a Washington, DC, sniper-style attack, or Pentagon attack, Twin Towers, Flight 93 by terrorists or even a larger-scale crisis event such as Hurricane Katrina or COVID, and issues increase exponentially. Unified command may be within a single discipline, such as a county police force, a state police force, or a federal law enforcement agency or across other disciplines or agencies (Alexander, 2002, 2002a; Allred 2004; Boin et al. 2005; Brunacini 2002; Lencioni, 2002; Lester and Krejci 2007; Smits and Ally 2003). Governmental agency personnel respond to incidents, emergencies, and disasters daily (Boin et al. 2005; Bourne 2005). While the dynamics of each incident may differ, there is one common thread: it will take decisive and appropriate leadership to resolve the situation (Bitto 2007; Bourne 2005; Howitt 2004; Mitroff 2004). Lester (2007) stated that it will take transformational leadership, coupled with NIMS, to achieve success during all phases of a disaster. Guidelines have been provided regarding how to prepare for and respond to incidents in a uniform manner throughout the country (Bourne 2005; Hanneman 2007; Perry 2003). What appear to be lacking are guidelines on how to lead during such incidents. Team or group leadership has been the subject of much research (Avolio et al. 2003). What remains to be examined in detail is individual, group, and/or team leadership during an actual incident. Even in the limited number of studies completed regarding team or group leadership, the focus has been on groups who have been established and function in a less-than-hazardous environment (Avolio et al. 2003; Fox, 2009; Jung and Sosik 2002; Kearney and Gebert 2009; King 2002). Phillips (1999) stated that the incident commander is responsible for establishing command, ensuring responder safety, and assessing incident priorities. Furthermore, the incident commander is responsible for developing and implementing the incident action plan, developing an organizational structure as necessary, and maintaining a manageable span of control. Finally, the incident commander must manage incident resources and coordinate overall emergency activities.