One of the sure-fire ways to be an unsuccessful human being is to try to please all of the people, all of the time. This is especially true for leaders. Anybody who tries to please everybody runs the risk of the inconsistency and indecisiveness that often cause an organization to lose its bearings. However, it's also true that if nobody likes you, there's a good possibility nobody is following you. You have to please some people some of the time, or you won't have any friends or followers.

Fire Chief recently received an anonymous letter from a fire department member about a person's perception of this phenomenon. The letter was forwarded to me for my observations about what its contents could mean in terms of fire service leadership. Because I know neither who wrote this letter nor from where it came, I am using it only as an example of an internal issue that almost all leaders have to be concerned about: What is your impact on the people who work for you?

The letter reads:

“I am writing to you/your magazine because I know it gets out to a lot of chiefs and departments. I have a short story and but one simple question. The short story goes like this. A department in a small, politically corrupt town. Several volunteer companies, small number of union career personnel. A chief that became a ‘paid full-time chief.’ A town where the citizens are clueless of what goes on inside. I am a life member of one of the companies and over the past years I have been a member, recently a significant amount of good firefighters quit because of this person that has become an untouchable. What I mean by this is he changes rules and regulations and run procedures daily. He basically bullies around the volunteer members and just about everyone in the department, both career and volunteer, have had enough of this guy. The problem is, he is untouchable. Town council will not listen, public safety director will not listen and the town manager will not listen either. They think he is the best thing since sliced bread because he made all members become state-certified so he could get a variety of grants. This town is broke beyond explanation. One thing is for sure though, they could have hired two police officers and/or fixed a million potholes that cover most of the streets with the salary they are paying him. In addition to this, he has a town-owned vehicle that he uses for personal use, which is not allowed. The good-ol'-boys theory is in full effect in this town. Now how do you get rid of a guy like this? This guy is doing more harm than good and ruining a once-great department. His attitude is he don't have to explain anything to anyone. He is the chief. If anyone don't like it, then quit. What do your professionals think? I am asking in a confidential letter because we are about to attempt to bring this issue to council and I hope you may have some tips that could help us out.”

Is this person talking about you? Or does somebody in your fire department feel this way about you? I would almost bet that the vast majority of people reading this column are thinking “that can't be directed to me because I am a good leader — a good manager — a good person — a good whatever.”

Yet this letter and ones like it surface in organizations from time to time. They are blatant criticisms of the leadership style of the individual running the department. To be very blunt, if that chief wants to create that kind of environment and is doing it on purpose, then it's likely that the chief has a reason for creating that kind of world to live in. I haven't a clue why a chief would want to do that. But I will tell you that there are people who are very much aware of how their own people feel about them and choose to exhibit personal behaviors similar to what's described in this letter.

What's a chief to do? If you try to please everybody you aren't going to please anyone. But if you please just a few people and have the vast majority allied against you, then you are not going to be very effective as a leader. This dynamic conjures up the specter of internal credibility as it relates to the relationship between the fire service rank and file and fire department leaders.

I have heard many say that these kinds of problems are driven by the lack of interpersonal skills of those who have emerged as chiefs of departments. However, in my own personal experience I also have seen comments of this nature by people who are cynical, dissatisfied and disgruntled with the organization from the core. It raises the question as to whether a letter of this nature is justified and if it reflects something deeper.

While reading this letter, one of the first things that came to my mind was the sense that there has been a loss of respect within our industry. While many fire departments enjoy good morale and a high level of mutual respect, there are just as many fire departments that suffer from morale problems related to interpersonal behavior that start the deterioration of respect. It reminds me of almost-childlike behavior where one child accuses another of wrongdoing, and they engage in a dialogue that goes something like “Did too!”“Did not!”“Did too!”“Did not!” If you have any small children around your house, either your current crop of offspring or your recycled crop of grandchildren, you may have seen that tit-for-tat approach in which one person's opinion of another deteriorates.

In fire departments where the fire chief shows no respect for the members of the department, it's not uncommon for the department members to lose their respect for the chief. You'll notice that I refer only to a loss of respect. I didn't say that they no longer fear the chief, and I didn't say that they no longer obey the chief. I didn't say that they would run away in an organizational sense. The loss of respect usually starts when one party demonstrates little respect for the opposite party, which results in the opposite party doing likewise.

This is one of the manifestations of interpersonal relationships in the fire service that often turns into an organizational free-for-all. Having visited hundreds of fire departments in my career, I have witnessed how some of these events start. Sometimes it's a snide remark at a staff meeting. Sometimes it's something said in response to a news story. Sometimes it's a statement made at one of the various functions in which fire departments are involved. In any case, it almost always starts with a deprecation and disrespect for the opposite side.

It doesn't make any difference who makes the original gesture — what it boils down to is whether the opposite side chooses to respond in kind. Because this magazine focuses on chief officers and the leadership and management of fire organizations, I am going to focus on the role of a fire chief in creating a culture of respect. The worst thing that could happen for your credibility as a fire chief is to be the one who initiates this kind of disrespectful behavior. The second-worst thing is for you to be the recipient of disrespectful behavior that you handle in an inappropriate fashion.

If you follow this logic, I suggest that it's very important for fire chiefs to never allow themselves to personalize any process that results in the denigration of anybody in the organization. Such behavior is counterintuitive to being the leader of an organization, and it also demonstrates that you think your people are incompetent, incapable or insincere. I bet that some of you are thinking of times when this may have happened. Sometimes we say things we wish we had never said; sometimes we say things to specific people that we wish we could take back. Being disrespectful is like ringing a bell; once it has occurred you can't unring it.

I suspect that some of you are thinking about times when people have attacked you and hurt your feelings. It's only natural to defend yourself, and it's even more natural to fight back if you come from the line of typical fire service individuals — being combative is almost part of the job. But two wrongs absolutely will never make a right.

In addition to respect, this letter allows me to discuss introspection and acceptance. When you read that letter and wonder if that person is talking about you, it requires you to reach inside and consider how you behave in your relationship with your organization. Do you create that culture of respect even when there are differences of opinion? Or have you allowed yourself to foster a level of disrespect that makes it easy and in some cases almost enjoyable to attack others? Nobody knows the answer to these questions except you. It is your own evaluation of your character and your characterization of how you deal with people that determines whether your people feel that you are a credible, competent leader.

If someone is reading this who is a leader in some other capacity than chief of department, I would ask you to do a little bit of soul-searching to see if you have contributed to this problem. Have you made statements about other people with whom you work that demonstrate your lack of respect for them? Before everybody runs off to a corner thinking that I'm trying to create a Pollyanna attitude where everyone in the fire service hugs, that's not my intent. Fire service leaders should operate at a level of professionalism that doesn't encourage a dysfunctional culture.

I recently read a relatively small book about communication. Patrick M. Lencioni's The Five Dysfunctions of a Team: A Leadership Fable contains some very good suggestions on how to break the cycle of dysfunction. I could discuss how this book applies to fire service culture all day long. Many of you have heard the stories around the firehouse table. You have seen events that have resulted in ruptured relationships. I would like to focus on just one extremely simple and yet absolutely important element of conflict resolution: One of the sides that is in conflict must make a choice to resolve the disagreement rather than continue fighting. That is what Lencioni's book is all about. It makes no difference if the chief started the conflict. It makes no difference if the individual who started it is in another rank of the department. The question is, which party will first realize that the organization is being damaged much more than his or her personal credibility?

I have seen this particular phenomenon play out to the extent that people were dismissed from their jobs. Votes of no confidence have been cast when relationship between leader and followers reaches this level of personal dissatisfaction. Families, lives, careers and organizations have been damaged by an unwillingness to realize the level of dissatisfaction with each other's performance.

There is no simple solution to this problem. There is no textbook with foolproof methods of making everybody happy. However, Lencioni's book does discuss how to operate effectively even when there is conflict. People need to be very much aware of how their interactions descended into such turmoil, and they need to be willing to extend themselves to better their relationships — that is how organizations survive conflict.

Going back to our anonymous letter writer, what I am reading in between the lines is a case of winners versus losers. Eventually people will ally themselves with one perspective or another in the organizational context, and the organization will be shaken to its core by the struggles for supremacy. This is such a terrible waste of resources and capacity. Any organization worth its salt should be able to process conflict without dissension. I've even seen organizations that have addressed conflict in an appropriate fashion come out stronger in the long run.

I invite you to reread the letter from our anonymous writer and ask yourself, “Is there anybody in my organization who feels this way about me?” If the answer is yes, you have got some work ahead of you. Read Lencioni's book. If the answer is no, I would hope that you would do everything you could to sustain an organization that prevents it from happening in the first place.

---

With more than 40 years in the fire service, Ronny J. Coleman has served as fire chief in Fullerton and San Clemente, Calif., and was the fire marshal of the State of California from 1992 to 1999. He is a certified fire chief and a master instructor in the California Fire Service Training and Education System. A Fellow of the Institution of Fire Engineers, he has an associate's degree in fire science, a bachelor's degree in political science and a master's degree in vocational education.