Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by John Crabbe on September 25, 2009 at 4:59pm

Question 1:
Personally, I would say a good leader will have attributes of both groupings in order to be an effective leader, but since the question is asking to choose, I would go with Knowledge, skills, and abilities. KSA's are going to be the backbone of what we are doing and a good leader has to have a good working knowledge in order to ask others to perform the tasks required and to be aware of condidtions in order to keep the crew safe. These are the core tasks where a good leader is going to be scrutinized, these are the basic issues the crew will see and will make the determination if the leader is going to lead by example, or talk the game. One does not have to be an expert in everything, but will be alongside the crew in trainings, will be open to new ideas, will work alongside the crew, will promote training etc. Leadership, mgmt, and operations, while also important can also be honed skills that a leader can progress through as time in the position grow. Having a good work ethic, being dependable, having good KSA's, and leading by example should have a faster impression on a crew than what their mgmt style is, what leadership skills they have etc. Leadership is also honed and learned as one moves up the ranks, it does not automatically come with the promotion of a rank.

Question2:
Minimum time in grade can vary because skill levels vary. The military has a minimum time in grade prior to being eligible to test for the next paygrade and those vary for each grade. A good dept should consider both a test score AND seniority or time in grade before one gets promoted. For the Navy the time in grade from E-1 to E-4 was 21 months (however one could come in at a higher paygrade) It was a year from E-4 to E-5, 3 years from E-5 to E-6 and 3 years from E-6 to E-7. Personally, I would say a minimum of at least 5 years on the job before being able to be eligible to take a promotion exam. However, there are variables that should be considered by each individual dept.

Question 3:
Should such certs and trainings be a prerequisite? Yes, for the job that one want to go into, they should have a fire officer cert prior to being able to be considered for a promotion. I don't believe any formal educational degree such as a AS or BS should be a requirement, but one should be certified for the position they want to go in. Any other coursework, training classes, NFA courses, etc should be considerations for promotion. While not requiring some things, those that show a willingness to better themselves, should have consideration over others.

Question4:
Having good work ethics, leading by example, looking to further learn new techniques and tactics, willing to learn from others, especially subordinates....most important, lead by example.

Question 5:
Yes, by leading by example, taking safety initiatives themselves, others will follow.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Ron Ayotte on September 25, 2009 at 10:13pm

I pretty much agree with John, with the exception of question 3 about certifications.

Being "certified" does not necessarily mean that one is qualified.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by John Crabbe on September 25, 2009 at 11:13pm

I do agree Gonz. I was trying to finish up before getting to an appointment so I didn't explain that question too clearly. I recall one of the heated C vs V threads where this was mentioned, my take is someone saying I have this and this and that certified so I should have the job, is BS. I could care less about what certs you have. Here I'm saying that if there is a certification for the position one is looking to go into, they should have that certification before getting the promotion. Basically a person is not promoted to engineer if they are not driver operator certified.

As for other certifications, yes they also don't mean someone is qualified, but it does show initiative on a person's behalf. We are a seniority based system here and I have seen guys doing the bare minimum and get promoted and are not very effective leaders. I have seen others that have taken initiative to better themselves, to learn "reading smoke" "first due" taken advantage of the NFA etc. Some are more knowledgeable, but may not be an effective leader, but some things can be honed. As a FF, I would prefer to work with someone who has looked to better themself, took advantage of additional training opportunities, learned new techniques and perspectives, vs the person who just sat back and leads with a "this is how we always done it" approach. I would prefer a system as I mentioned based on testing with seniority, but if looking for something which shows someone is more deserving of a promotion (tiebreaker) those intiatives should be considered over the person who just sat their time and waited.

Yes, certs do not mean one is qualified, but I do think they should be part of the process. Kind of like FF1,2, Driver Operator, etc. A person may not have a driver operator cert to be an effective engineer, but there are important points learned during such certs that may not otherwise be known. A D/O cert goes through things like drafting, relay pumping, etc....if a dept typically doesn't do such operations, they may not be taught. Yet, it may come where such operations are needed and if a person has that certification, then they can't really play the "I was never taught this" card. A cert ensures the subject matter has been covered.

I don't know about other states, but here in WI we do have a fire officer cert that all our dept officers need in order to get promoted. I also took this cert and there was stuff that was learned that may be useful in the future and considerations that can better prepare someone to be in the role. (for us, the certs are worked on before one does get promoted as a bare minimum, and the dept does offer that training if one doesn't already have it. We recently had a lengthy officer course for those getting close to promotions to ensure they have the certs.)

• ▶ Reply

▶ Reply to Discussion