By Judith Glick-Smith | Fellow
As technical communicators, we think of “tech comm” as communication that we create for users who need technical information. We are aware that technical communication spans all industries and disciplines, not just the world of hardware and software. However, we are quick to think that only technical communicators are capable of developing effective technical communication. In my recent quest to understand critical decisionmaking in the fire service, I discovered an amazing system of technical communication I had not previously realized existed—one which charges firefighters, officers, and investigators to be technical communicators in all aspects of what they do. This occurs as a “conceive, design, build, and implement” process with severe time constraints and the added caveat that there are no do-overs.
Communication in the fire service is multilayered, complex, and focused in its purpose: to save the lives of the public and to protect firefighters. The word fireground refers to the location of an emergency event developing over time. The word communication in the fire service includes the technology used to communicate, such as computers, cell phones, radios, and dispatch services. This article focuses on the art of verbal and non-verbal interpersonal and written communication. Technologies carrying that communication must be reliable and redundant because, when it fails, tragedy can occur.
The effectiveness of communication in the fire service lies in a fluid observe-orient-decide-act lifecycle orientation. This article breaks down fireground communication into three phases, all of which work seamlessly together: (1) pre-incident communication, (2) real-time incident communication, and (3) post-incident communication, from which a lessons-learned feedback loop is inserted into pre-incident communication. I will begin by describing the most integral, standardized communication component in the fire service: The Incident Command System.(Note that my research has been focused on U.S.–based fire service communication.)
The Incident Command System
The Incident Command System (ICS) is a scalable management approach which, according to the Federal Emergency Management Administration (FEMA) website, provides “an organizational structure for incident management” and “guides the process for planning, building and adapting that structure” (2013). The ICS provides both standardized processes for reporting and templates to facilitate communication. The fire service uses the ICS to manage developing incidents, multi-day training activities, and non-emergency events. The ICS captures the paramilitary nature of firefighting with an integral chain-of-command, span-of-control, and unity of purpose.
Pre-incident Communication
Specific, time-sensitive technical communication prepares firefighters for critical incidents. This communication is used in (1) experiential training, (2) developing standard operating procedures (SOPs), and (3) sustaining 24/7/365 preparedness.
Experiential Training
Training in the fire service is very prescriptive. There are detailed standards and requirements required for each work level. Firefighters are required to learn in both a classroom setting and in experiential training scenarios. Hands-on scenarios are designed to foster muscle memory of how to do critical tasks, such as swapping out the air cylinder of a self-contained breathing apparatus in a hostile, smoke-filled environment. When the firefighter is able to do that task quickly with confidence, his or her potential for survival is increased. There are minimal requirements and standards at both the national and state levels for this type of training. Training is often reinforced through the use of tradition and ritual, including the telling of first-person stories full of lessons-learned from prior incidents.
There are also special training programs, such as Georgia Smoke Divers, which lead firefighters beyond their original training. The Georgia Smoke Diver (GSD) program is managed using the ICS to insure safety and effective program management. Critical, time-sensitive decisions, practices that worked or didn’t work, and lessons learned documented in real time, scanned into a database, and used to improve the training. Command staff (project managers) meet regularly throughout each training day to evaluate communication among themselves for accuracy. This communication is then distributed to the team leaders managing the instructors. The relevant decisions made in these meetings are captured and communicated among the teams. Each 15-minute morning briefing, attended by all instructors, ratifies the day’s objectives. A special team, called “Plans,” is charged with tracking the decisions, documenting them, and verifying they are communicated. Due to the high tempo of activity, the entire process is in a constant state of continuous improvement.
During training sessions, instructors are also being trained to mentor at various educational levels. This helps fill future needs for an instructor cadre, solidifies the cultural aspects, and retains consistency in the quality of instruction. Instructors work with candidates one-on-one, in a prescribed way, coaching them to think critically in a high-stress environment.
Standard Operating Procedures
Firefighters are expected to apply standard operating procedures (SOPs) for the environments they encounter. These SOPs have been developed over time and are based on past best practices in both the industry and within a specific department. Professional literature and training encourages chiefs to implement a process that empowers firefighters to suggest changes or develop different SOPs (Cook 2012).This practice encourages the buy-in and engagement of individual firefighters.
Preparedness
Technical communication can be as simple as a check list or job aid if it communicates instructions in a way that insures understanding. For example, in fire stations around the country you will find the written “riding” roster, which is used for accountability. At shift change, the officer completes two copies. One copy is put on the dashboard of the apparatus (e.g., the fire engine), and the other copy stays with the officer. If there is an incident, the officer can collect all the rosters and know immediately who is on the scene, what unit they are assigned to, and who their supervisor is (Reilly 2012).
Every duty day, the team leader is assigned to preparing the duty task list. Each firefighter is accountable for his or her assigned task by confirming when that task is complete. Accountability fosters reliable performance and intra-team trust.
Real-time Communication
Reliable performance is enhanced when real-time communication occurs: (1) at the command level; (2) at the team level; and (3) at the individual level. In the United States, all communication begins with and is facilitated through state-of-the-art 911 dispatch centers. In volunteer departments, mobile data terminals and smartphones are being used. There is even a mobile application, called Resgrid, written by a volunteer firefighters, which allows dispatchers to send information to smartphones about what trucks are responding, arriving, etc. This helps volunteers know if they should go to the scene or to the station to get another truck.
Verbal and Non-Verbal Communication
Best practice in the fire service is to have redundant SOPs for communicating on the fireground, in case the technology fails. Having standards helps facilitate reliable communication between the IC, who “sees the big picture” and can effectively direct those who are in the hazard zone (Brunacini & Brunacini 2004).
The IC creates an incident organization chart reflecting the real-time environment from which he or she can manage communication during the incident. This is critical in terms of safety and mission success. The IC must maintain situational awareness and understand what is happening. Each IC plans his or her response strategy and maintains a written check list/job aid during the incident. One of the participants in my study said that if the paper on his clipboard wasn’t a complete mess at the conclusion of an incident, he didn’t do his job (Glick-Smith 2011).
In high-tempo, time-sensitive incidents, the best method is to keep communication simple. Individual firefighters are held accountable for his or her own communication. There are specific protocols and SOPs involving verbal communication over agreed-upon selected channels on their radios. For example, when a firefighter is trapped in a burning house, if able, he uses his radio to broadcast “May Day, May Day” on the command channel. The firefighter activates his Personal Alert Safety System (PASS) device, which emits a shrill beeping sound so that other firefighters can locate him, then he attempts to self-extricate. Technology-based systems record the radio traffic for later analysis.
Firefighters are trained to maintain a calm demeanor even in the midst of chaos to insure clarity of communication. For example, a specific incident that involved a line-of-duty death set me on the path looking at the fire service as a model for adaptive decisionmaking. I reviewed the communication in that specific incident, including the recording made by the communication equipment that day. The communication that was recorded in that incident, while urgent, was not frantic or emotional. Even Kyle Wilson, the firefighter who lost his life, was relatively calm until the end. He simply and without excitement said, “I’m burning. I need water.”
Size-Up
Every firefighter who arrives on the scene of an incident is expected to do a size-up and provide an accurate report. Firefighters use a form of standardized shorthand in their communications to facilitate understanding of fireground conditions. For example, they refer to the front of the building as the A-side. Moving clockwise around the structure, each subsequent side of the house is the B-side, the C-side, and D-side. This coding helps each firefighter on scene to be aware of spatial relationships and locations. For example, if the IC gives the order to enter the basement from the C-side of a traditional-style, four-walled house, firefighters would know to go into the basement from the back of the house.
The reason each firefighter is responsible for size-up, and not just the IC, is that everyone sees what is going on from his or her perspective. Only when all the perspectives are assembled through communication, does the IC have situational awareness.
Team Flow
Because decisions must be made quickly, firefighters must communicate in a way that facilitates team flow/integrity. Team unity and experience are built over time in training and in prior incidents. If left to work and train together over time, the team develops an understanding of each other. Each individual is able to predict the others’ moves without saying a word. When firefighters enter a burning building, they lose their abilities to see (because of the smoke), feel (because of their gloves), and taste and smell (because of their masks and breathing apparatus). Often the noise is deafening, confusing, and disorienting. Firefighters are taught never to go in alone, to always have a trusted buddy with them. Their constant communication is critical, especially in search and rescue operations.
Post-incident Communication
After the incident, firefighters often discuss what happened while still on the scene. They realize that waiting to talk about it allows mistakes to be justified and the conditions get modified in one’s mind to explain one’s actions (Weick & Sutcliffe 2007). Because each person (in any incident or situation) has his or her own perspective, this process helps build a 3-D narrative, which can be used later to build “mental slides.” These slides are the equivalent of mental simulations, or story models, created for each personal iteration of experience. Studies conducted by Gary Klein (1999) have shown that those who use mental simulations are better able to respond more quickly in the midst of critical events. In my own study, firefighters confirmed that “slides become your repertoire for decision making” (Glick-Smith 2011). Slides are used for knowledge transfer. Firefighters share slides to prepare others who have not experienced that situation. They actively teach each other how to recognize what slides they have, which ones they need to develop, and which ones they can get from each other.
All incidents have to be reported formally in writing. Further, when a line-of-duty death has occurred, a team of experts (subject matter experts) from departments other than the one involved in the incident will be convened to investigate the incident. These reports are published by various investigative entities, such as the National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH).
In addition, any firefighter may write his or her experience and submit it to the National Firefighter Near-Miss Reporting System website, where portions are redacted of personal information and often edited to be in passive voice.This is done to minimize “Monday morning quarterbacking.” However, I have found most firefighters refrain from judgment about incidents in which they were not involved.
Conclusion
Fireground communication represents the finest in technical communication. Every aspect of what firefighters do relies on effective techcom. Readiness, training, and real-time communication on the fireground lead to post-incident communication in the form of reports and documented mental models. These then shape further readiness and preparation. Best practices in the fire service encourage all firefighters to be accountable for their team communication. Officers are held accountable for effective communications during an incident to maximize safety and mission success. Documented SOPs and the very rigorous ICS facilitate all aspects of communication. The best practices in the fire service offer an integral model of communication which could be simply adapted and emulated by other organizations.
I would like to send special thanks to all my firefighter friends who reviewed this article prior to publication.
Judith Glick-Smith, PhD, is an STC Fellow and past president. She is president of MentorFactor, Inc., which specializes in consulting in the areas of technical communication, designing systems to facilitate situation awareness, and teaching the art of flow-based decision making. She also teaches in the department of communication at Kennesaw State University. Her interest in the fire service came about while working on her PhD in transformative studies at the California Institute of Integral Studies. Her research focused on flow-based critical decision-making.
References
National Firefighter Near-Miss Reporting System (n.d.). Retrieved 6 April 2013, www.firefighternearmiss.com.
Brunacini, A. V., & N. Brunacini (2004). Command Safety. Peoria, AZ: Across the Street Productions.
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (n.d.). Fire Fighter Fatality Investigation and Prevention Program. Retrieved 6 April 2013 from National Institute of Safety and Health (NIOSH), www.cdc.gov/niosh/fire.
Cook, S. (9 March 2012). Firefighters need to take ownership of department SOPs/SOGs. Firefighter Nation Magazine. Retrieved 6 April 2013,
www.firefighternation.com/article/management-and-leadership/firefighters-need-take-ownership-department-sopssogs.
Federal Emergency Management Administration (FEMA) (2013). Incident Command System (ICS) Overview. Washington, DC, www.fema.gov/incident-command-system.
Glick-Smith, J. L. (2012). The Path of the Razor’s Edge: An Examination of the Flow Experiences of Firefighters. ProQuest: UMI 3481816.
Klein, G. (1999). Sources of Power: How People Make Decisions. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Reilly, D. (11 April 2012). Four keys to a successful accountability system. Firefighter Nation Magazine. Retrieved 6 April 2013, www.firefighternation.com/article/command-and-leadership/four-keys-successful-accountability-system.
Weick, K. E., & K. M. Sutcliffe (2007). Managing the Unexpected: Resilient Performance in an Age of Uncertainty. San Francisco, CA: John Wiley & Sons.
