Emergency response services are the most visible that any fire rescue department delivers. These services not only form the basis for external customer expectation, they also significantly influence how those inside the department feel about their jobs and identify themselves. For the fire rescue service, this operational identity is directly connected to their ability — both real and perceived — to perform operationally. For chiefs and company officers, operational skill and ability to manage incidents are connected. If an officer’s command skill isn't regularly used and exercised, it can dwindle to the point that it affects not only the individual but the organization. This circumstance can be termed “command atrophy."

Atrophy is defined as “weakening or lessening of some ability." Another definition is “the shrinking in size of some part or organ of the body, usually caused by injury, disease or lack of use." The extent or degree of the atrophy often depends on the condition of the organ or appendage prior to the lack of use. In the same way, command atrophy is the weakening or lessening of command ability that occurs in fire rescue personnel. The extent to which it occurs depends on the state of the individual’s command skill prior to the lack of use.

Every member of the fire-rescue service will go through periods when they don't use command skills. These gaps are associated not only with the number of incidents or events to which the individuals respond, but to the extent to which they use their skills when opportunities arise. Many fire-rescue departments require the use of IMS on every incident. These departments feel there will be less skill degradation if IMS is used on medical alarms and dumpster fires. Though this approach may have some merit, it also can be seen as making command skills rote and mechanical. In fact, if there isn't any additional training and simulation, command skills at the initial stage may be strong, but responders may lack the “full range of motion” necessary to manage rapidly escalating events.

There's also a correlation between the extent to which command atrophy may occur and an individual's baseline skill set. Often incident management isn't seen as important until an incident occurs. However, to be effective incident management must be applied systematically throughout the organization, beginning with a strong incident management training program.

Training in incident management should be based on job descriptions, not personal characteristics. Too often incident management training is based on a person’s perceived level of competence. Often, after a serious incident where command is deemed to be an issue, a back-to-basics approach to training is implemented, resulting in a hastily prepared training program that may be focused more on the department’s exposure to liability than building competence in command personnel. Command training should be established through policy rather than by crisis and should ensure that all members of the organization have a level of command competence commensurate with their expected duties.

Beyond the risk of command atrophy from a lack of opportunity to apply command skills, there's a particular challenge faced by personnel assigned to non-operational assignments for period of time. Though there are exceptions, many departments limit the involvement of non-operational personnel in emergency operations until the event overwhelms the available operational resources. Some also assign personnel to non-operational positions because they believe that these individuals can’t perform effectively in an operational role. This can result in situations where personnel not practiced in operational command are dispatched to major emergencies and expected to function based on their rank in the organization. Unfortunately, command skill is not inextricably connected to one’s rank, and this can be particularly evident when it involves a chief. Chief officers and other personnel assigned to non-operational positions must receive ongoing IMS training if they are expected to serve in command capacities as a part of their jobs.

One approach to addressing the problem of command atrophy is the use of credentialing to ensure that command personnel receive both basic training and ongoing training to perform the duties necessary to function in the Incident Management System. The NIMS Integration Center is in the beginning stages of producing a national credentialing process for the nation, and the National Fire Protection Association is developing a standard for IMS professional qualifications. Additionally, the NFPA is adding requisites to other existing standards that will require local agencies to establish credentialing and training requirements for local incidents. One day it will be possible to evaluate an incident management position in much the same way we evaluate a Firefighter I or Driver/Operator effectiveness: by comparison to a performance standard.

Command atrophy is an organizational issue rather than a personal one, but officers can reduce their possibility of being affected by concentrating time and effort on keeping their command skills high through regular training and responding to incidents where their command skills can be used. Another opportunity for honing incident management skills is during preplanned events. There are more opportunities to use IMS during planned events than there will ever be during emergency incidents.

With command atrophy, a person not using a base skill set for a period of time actually will reduce his or her capability to use the skills. The degree to which the skill degrades depends on the base level that existed when the decline in use began. The lower the base level of IMS skill, the greater the impact on the safety of those who would be exposed to command personnel with this malady. Those who will be expected to perform in an IMS position must have ongoing training and would also benefit from a system to evaluate and recognize their skill, as well as monitor its development over time. Though this is an organizational issue, it’s also personal. In the end, it is the individual who either can or cannot function in an IMS role, but others can be affected by that person's lack of command competence.