I have to admit that I'm a pack rat. It seems like I never throw anything away. Anyone who has ever visited my home, office or backyard barn can attest that I seemingly find value in some of the most insignificant pieces of paper. Among those various items, however, I frequently find something that reminds me why I kept it in the first place.

For example, I recently found my report cards from grade school. I'm not about to reveal what those grades were, but I was reminded of a concept as I read through one of them. It was a comment made by a teacher: “Plays well with others.” Although that sounds like something you might hear in a kindergarten class, I believe we need to think about that concept in the adult world. Exactly how well do we play with others?

The degree to which individuals interact successfully with others is often a determining factor in their success as people. In the case of a fire chief, or for that matter anybody in our profession, that ability can sometimes be either a huge advantage or a severe liability.

At the firefighter, getting along with each other is absolutely one of the premiere elements of fire station life. We spend a great deal of time in rookie academies trying to make sure people understand that getting along is important. As a matter of fact, more firefighters probably have been terminated during their probationary period for their unwillingness to be team-players than for almost any other reason.

Traditionally, we prize compatibility in the firehouse because it's a firefighter's second home. Interestingly, as individuals emerge from the cocoon that a fire station provides, they may become less concerned about getting along with others. Consider the shift wars between battalion chiefs, divisional wars between fire prevention training and operations, and the unseen warfare that often goes on between fire departments. While we might prize compatibility at the fire station level, we seem to lose emphasis on it as individuals gain more and more power in the fire service.

That change might be good, however. As you begin to develop leadership skills in the fire service, you probably will aggravate someone as you rise in the chain of command. Of course, you also could try to please everybody to the point where you please nobody. I'm sure you've noticed that a person who goes along to get along often suffers the same lack of credibility as someone who oversteps.

So what's a person to do? Are you going to be one of the white hats, or are you going to wear a black hat some of the time? Differences of opinion and other conflicts can prevent entire organizations from achieving their overall objectives. This phenomenon is almost always behind statements like “we get along great at the field level, but the problems between our two chiefs are overwhelming.”

As I visit firehouses, I often overhear random conversations about the level of cooperation between organizations. I'm always startled when I find an environment that's openly hostile. After all, if we all started out in the same firehouses, what is it about a new life as head of a department that makes someone not play well with others?

When I examine disagreements between chiefs, I'm sometimes surprised to find that neither chief officer has a superior position on a particular issue, but each has drawn a line in the sand that forces the other to remain hostile. There are also times when one person is basically coming from the right place, and the other is deliberately choosing not to accept a set of circumstances. In either scenario, the conflict is kept open like a seeping wound or becomes an emotional scab that can't heal because it's being picked at constantly. Whenever two individuals who possess strong opinions have the ability to articulate those differences without dissension, I often find that there can be dislike and even disagreement, but not dysfunction.

This made me think about character attributes as they relate to “fire chiefing.” Who's right? Who's wrong? Are those who play well with everybody really that good, or are they merely seeking the middle road of compromise to avoid conflict? Do those who are openly confrontational really have a point, or are they merely continuing the argument for argument sake?

Very effective leaders have an ability to deal with conflict without rank. What character attribute does a person need to remain a strong individual while simultaneously being considered a team-player by others? I think the answer may have something to do with the rule of three. As a young officer, I was advised to be firm, fair and friendly. Nobody gave me any explanations of what those three words stood for, but the implication was that you could be approachable without being a pushover. I discovered that you could be firm in your convictions, but you had to balance factors evenly as you pursued fairness.

We live in a world of harsh realities. Those who are overly complacent may be rolled over like roadkill. We also live in a world where people who can't get along with others often find themselves shut out of the decision-making process. They even may be rendered irrelevant because they're no longer a value to the overall group. In other words, chief officers need to think about their working relationships with their partners in the profession. If those relationships are working, you should have some real good reasons why they're working. If they're not working, you should have the desire to examine why they aren't to discover how they can be improved.

Very few people want to live a life of misery. When someone's experiencing difficulties with other individuals, it's unlikely that he's a very happy soul. Such a condition should cause anyone to sit back and ask himself why he's experiencing such negative feelings. A strong mind focused on such an issue can't overlook the fact that playing well with others also means being willing to compromise, and in some cases to consider the other person's point of view.

Perhaps this is a phenomenon that you need to consider the next time you stand in front of a mirror. As you examine your personal behavior, do you find that people look forward to interacting with you, or are you someone that people avoid? Do you contribute to the group's effort, or are you someone who subtracts from it? On a scale of one to 10, how do you rank yourself as someone who influences the outcome of a particular process? If your input is rejected, do you remain angry, or do chalk it up to the fact that you win some and you lose some?

It may seem like a long way from the sandbox on a playground to the top office in a fire department. If the kindergarten teacher who thought you played well with others were to evaluate you today, what do you think would be written on your report card?

---

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.