Risk management is an elusive term, one that invokes thoughts of safety surveys, intrusive inspections, arbitrary rules and penalties for violations. Private industry has long been aware of the benefits of a good risk management program; however, the fire service has traditionally taken a more cavalier attitude toward this topic. Historically we have accepted risk as a part of the job, sometimes to the extent that we haven't done everything we can to protect ourselves.

I am a proponent of every department having a risk management plan. The plan may be as simple as “It is not OK to die in a structure fire.” I personally like the Phoenix Fire Department's model, which basically says accept risk to save lives, accept only structured risk to save property, and accept no risk to save that which can't be saved.

The risk management plan also can be as detailed as the rules of engagement published by the International Association of Fire Chiefs, but regardless of the actual wording, every fire department must have a risk management plan, and that plan must be communicated throughout the organization.

Let's consider five levels of responsibility for risk management: task, tactical, strategic, executive and organizational.

Adverse affects

When we speak of risk management, we have to recognize that decisions made at the strategic level often adversely affect the task level. Decisions, or lack thereof, at the organizational and administrative levels set the environment for the operational levels to either be safe or unsafe.

It's the task level personnel who experience the adverse affects of risk when fireground situations go awry. In many cases the fireground strategy is defective, causing unforeseen — not unforeseeable — consequences. In other situations, the task-level personnel take unnecessary risks, operating from sense of being invincible.

We need to emphasize to the task-level firefighters that they need to communicate their needs to the incident commander so that the strategy may be properly adjusted. These needs include safety issues. We also need to train task-level personnel to refrain from taking unreasonable chances or doing things that result in injury.

These unreasonable chances often are taken in the name of rescuing the occupants, putting out the fire and keeping everybody safe — tremendous responsibilities that fall on the tactical level, or fireground sector officers. In some cases, the assignment given by the incident commander doesn't reflect the actual conditions being experienced by the sector personnel.

Here again, communication is critical. Tactical officers are the IC's eyes and ears. Every piece of pertinent information must be passed on. That information is the only way the fireground action plan can be adjusted to ensure safety for personnel and the most effective handling of the incident. Both the task level and the tactical level are instructed to report position, progress and needs. Needs include safety concerns and dangers. That information is not only for their safety, but also for everyone on scene. The incident commander will do a good job of keeping everyone safe with the correct information.

But it's at the strategic level where we make or break the safety continuum. The IC must use every particle of his or her experience to predict outcomes and develop a strategy that will keep personnel safe. The IC's job is easier if there is a written, clearly understood risk management plan in place with a high-level emphasis on safety for operating personnel. With proper training and indoctrination, the IC will think about safety first, then about potential outcomes, then about strategy. If safety isn't the highest priority, it can get lost in the shuffle of fireground concerns. It's up to us to make safety job number one.

The IC is uniquely situated to accommodate both safety and hazard mitigation. Both jobs are important; let's err on the side of safety if necessary. At all incidents the strategy — and the strategist — must be flexible and able to change with rapidly changing conditions.

Executive leadership

The fire chief and all of his or her subordinates must embrace and stress safety. It is impossible to overstate the need for safety in both fire and non-emergency operations. The executive level sets the tone for the department. Human nature is such that people forget that which they do not see on a regular basis. We must show safety in every possible forum.

Rules and regulations must be explicit on safety issues. We must enforce safety rules, such as wearing and using SCBA, driving properly, wearing seatbelts and so on. The list is long, but we must never become tired or complacent in the reminders and enforcement. We must have, publish and extol our risk management plan — every employee should be able to recite it from memory. This is not a rote memory exercise; it is a process whereby members can remind themselves of the safety standard.

The executive level also provides and promotes safety training within the department. Part of this training should review case history on firefighter deaths and injuries to remind all of us how firefighters are dying. Those of us in executive-level positions need to be able to answer the question: “Have I done everything possible to keep my people safe, and if not, why not?”

This need for safety standard enforcement reaches up to the organizational level. Does your parent organization support your efforts to preach safety, or is it just another obscure policy in some manual? In many cases, the fire service can be an example to the rest of the city (county, state, etc.) in safe operations. It's imperative that safety be an organizational priority. Personnel who are permitted to be unsafe in any work environment will not, of their own volition, suddenly become safe in the face of risk. The organization must set the standard by which all employees are measured.

Who is keeping you safe? We need to watch all others' backs so that everybody goes home. It's up to all of us.

---

Dick Knopf is chief of the Lancaster (Texas) Fire Department, where he has served since 1999. His fire service career began in May 1965 in Eastlake, Ohio. Knopf has held firefighter and lieutenant ranks in two fire departments, and has been a fire chief since 1977, serving in Portage, Mich.; Abilene, Texas; Irving, Texas; and now Lancaster. Knopf holds an associate's degree in fire technology and a bachelor's degree in public administration. He is Texas-certified as a master firefighter and holds an advanced instructor certificate. Knopf has taught college-level fire management courses in Ohio, Michigan and Texas. He has published several magazine articles and the book Fire Chief's Handbook.