When a blind person says “I see,” that statement is a misrepresentation of the literal truth. However, people who are deprived of sight can see in their own way.

Some of you may have heard about the six blind men who offered different descriptions of an elephant based on the portion of the elephant's anatomy to which they had access. According to this old fable, the blind man who touched the trunk thought the elephant looked like a snake, and the one who touched the leg thought the animal was more like a tree. The mental image a person sees doesn't always match what's seen by the eye.

As for what “I see” on the fireground, it all comes down to two letters: IC, the acronym for the incident commander. And there may be just as many ways of describing that role as there is an elephant. Not unlike the wide range of leadership styles that individuals exercise in non-emergency scenarios, incident commanders have a wide range of leadership styles under stressful conditions. Some are absolutely and totally dictatorial — the totalitarian approach. Others are laissez-faire to the point of benign neglect. There's a tendency for some people to think that because they're the IC, they will be automatically admired and respected. Noting could be further from the truth. An incident commander is not a person, it's a position.

Setting up the incident command has sometimes been the subject of criticism. I have even heard the term “IC-ing a fire to death” in reference to avoiding any danger on the fireground. In other words, an organization arrives at the scene and starts setting up the incident command structure instead of putting water on the fire. IC-ing a fire to death is a perversion of why the concept was created.

The opposite is refusing to set up incident command, even when the proverbial bottom is falling out of the bucket. Allowing chaos to reign supreme on the fireground is almost a surefire predictor that somebody is going to get hurt. If we truly believe in the National Fallen Firefighters Foundation mantra of “Everybody Goes Home,” then somebody better be in charge.

In essence, being the incident commander and acting like the incident commander are two different things. You can assume command and start giving orders without too much effort, but maintaining command and control requires a set of behaviors that are not only structured but also are responsive to the needs of those being commanded.

The Field Operations Guide defines the incident commander's position with a relatively straightforward — if not outright simplistic — formula. The guide describes an IC as follows:

The references following position titles in the checklists refer to the Incident Command System position manuals, which describe the full duties and responsibilities of that position.

Incident Commander (ICS 220-1): The Incident Commander is responsible for incident activities, including the development and implementation of strategic decisions and for approving the ordering and releasing of resources.

• Obtain incident briefing and Incident Briefing Form (ICS Form 201) from prior Incident Commander.
• Assess incident situation.
• Conduct initial briefing.
• Activate elements of the Incident Command System.
• Brief Command Staff and Section Chiefs.
• Ensure planning meetings are conducted.
• Approve and authorize implementation of Incident Action Plan.
• Determine information needs and inform command personnel of needs.
• Coordinate staff activity.
• Manage incident operations.
• Approve request for additional resources and requests for release of resources.
• Approve the use of trainees on the incident.
• Authorize release of information to news media.
• Ensure Incident Status Summary (ICS Form 209) is completed and forwarded to Operations Coordination Center and dispatch center(s).
• Approve plan for demobilization.

Now let me ask you a real tricky question. Exactly how well does an incident commander perform at the scene of an emergency if these parameters are treated lightly? How much of a problem can an incident commander create those parameters are treated as mandates that force an extraordinary amount of pressure on subordinates?

The reason for raising these questions is to reflect a little bit on how society is now beginning to blame “the person in charge.” In the good old days, the person who wore the white hat, stood in front of the building and shouted orders was some kind of hero. More and more, however, we're finding that the person who assumes that responsibility accrues liability depending on job performance. Incident commanders are responsible for everything that happens under their jurisdiction. Along with that responsibility comes a high degree of accountability. Seasoned and competent incident commanders are very much aware of the fact that if it happens on their watch, it's their problem and nobody else's.

Despite the fact that incident command systems have been around practically since the creation of the industrial age of fire protection, there's still an awful lot about being an incident commander that's left to personal wit, wisdom and judgment. While our training programs have successfully shown people what to do, they haven't necessarily told them how to do it or how important their personal behavior is in doing it.

At one point in my career I worked with an individual who saw himself as an excellent fireground commander, yet he demonstrated extremely predictable personal behavior: The bigger the fire, the louder he shouted. In other words, he lacked what you may have heard called “command presence.” I defy anybody to define command presence, yet I can almost guarantee that most of you know when it exists. It's a form of quiet confidence that emerges from an incident commander who knows full well that he or she is responsible for what's happening without transferring the pressure of that responsibility to anybody else nearby.

The “I see” of being an IC is the ability to see yourself in terms of personal skill sets and behaviors that you exhibit when you're an incident commander. Some folks understand this and others don't. Every behavior demonstrated by incident commanders is very quickly judged by both superiors and subordinates in the context of expectations. Nothing shakes up a group of individuals on the fireground more than a semi-hysterical incident commander. Nothing is more frustrating to active, competent and aggressive fire officers than an IC who is disorganized and indecisive. There's a relationship between what the IC thinks, says and does with what actually happens once the various boxes of the incident command structure are plugged in.

Many people have forgotten that the overall Incident Command System was originally spawned by reviewing the techniques used to plan the invasion of Europe during World War II. Gen. Dwight D. Eisenhower may well have set the bar very high for most incident commanders when he was planning that event. What has been revealed many years after the invasion was that he had penned a letter to the president of the United States. This letter stated simply that if it had reached the president, it was because the landing on Normandy had failed. Eisenhower's letter went on to say that he was solely responsible for that outcome. He set the bar very high by saying that accountability and responsibility rest on the shoulders of whoever is responsible for giving direction to large numbers of individuals in combat conditions.

Many modern firefighters also are unaware that the chief fire officer of the London Fire Brigade in the early 1870s published an extensive paper on the need for the officer in charge of a fire scene to manage the event using military techniques. With his background as an army officer, Sir Eyre Massey-Shaw was writing about the Incident Command System before it even had a name.

Unfortunately, the responsibility of commanding an incident is often placed on the shoulders of individuals who are incapable of understanding the simple concept that I've always referred to as “on my watch.” If you're in charge, everything that happens to the people who work for you is on your shoulders. Every incident commander who arrives at the scene of an emergency has two very basic responsibilities. The first is knowing when to take over; the second is recognizing when to relinquish command.

Taking over the command of an incident is not a trivial process. Most people assume that command is immediately transferred from the company officer who rolled up to the scene as soon as a chief officer arrives. I don't agree with that assumption at all. Moreover, I believe that anybody who does has never looked at the IC position description. An incident commander has some very specific responsibilities that are not just tossed over the shoulder to the next person. Upon arrival on the scene, a command officer needs to “take command” through the series of actions listed previously. An IC should spend a sufficient amount of time ensuring that all of the checkpoints have been addressed.

So what's meant by a transfer of command? In many texts you will see the phrase “face to face,” which can be replaced easily by “eyeball to eyeball.” The implication is that when you relinquish command, you look the person who is now accepting that mantel of responsibility in the eye to make sure that what has transpired is clearly understood. It is not an accident. It's a very specific personal behavior.

Something else that's definitely lacking in the policies and procedures of many fire agencies is how to determine when it's appropriate to transfer command to other individuals. Just because someone of higher rank shows up on the fireground, there's no reason to transfer command. On the contrary, if you're the IC then everybody else is an observer until you're longer the IC. Proximity on the fireground doesn't imply the exchange of responsibility. The role of an incident commander is something that has to be kept under control. Not unlike an airplane pilot, you are the holder of everybody else's destiny when you have your hands on the yoke.

Termination of command is the last step for an incident commander. When an IC has determined that the emergency is over, it's appropriate for the status of the emergency to be declared terminated over the radio. Some organizations do this in rather formal fashion, depending on department policy. Others choose to treat it rather casually. In my opinion, it should be done as formally as conditions will allow. A radio transmission at the end of an event is a time stamp that clearly indicates “all clear.”

While writing this column, I have no doubt that hundreds, maybe thousands of chief officers were on the streets of local communities traveling to the scene of an emergency. As you might imagine, we haven't heard a thing out of 99.9% of those incident commanders. On the other hand, one has only to look into the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health archives to see the importance of an incident commander in preventing firefighter injury or death. We seldom think of the man or woman standing out in the street as the hero of an event, but we all know of the FDNY incident commander who chose to enter a set of circumstances that resulted in his name being etched on the memorial of the fire service for eternity.

In various brainstorming sessions with members of my staff, I have joked about the term IC. It can stand for “I'm crazy” or “it's chaos,” or it can mean “I can.” Depending on your brand of humor, we can make fun of the job of being the person out in front of the building all we want. But in reality, everything that happens at the scene of an emergency is under the aegis of that individual and is the responsibility of that individual. When you come down to it, IC also may stand for “I'm competent” and “in charge.” Or “I care.”

---

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.