Resource conservation lies at the heart of getting ready for the future, at least as it relates to the fire service. Resource allocation decisions make up the primary task of the modern fire service administrator. Informed decisions as to how a fire agency’s resources will be committed are at the forefront of the stimulation of organizational success.
Whether it is dollars, people or equipment, their effective use is the key to administrative and organization success. Current and prospective fire administrators must understand the environment where the battle is fought for a share of the annual budgetary pie. Failure to understand the terms of battle dooms any attempt at cost-effective resource acquisition and use before it even starts.
The astute manager of fire department finances must realize who the players are and which are on whose side in the budgetary battle. To do this, break the sides down into the enemy within and everyone else. That’s right, people within an agency can have personal agendas, which place them at a divergence with their own department. This is a commonly overlooked factor in the battle for dollars.
What also usually is underestimated is the vicious nature of the players from other departments in government. It is a fact that people from other agencies have a vested interest in their own programs. It also is a fact that fire service people classically underestimate the zeal with which these people will fight when their programs are challenged.
Internal efforts
One of the keys to working through any internal strife at budget time is the encouragement and management of confrontation.
The fire service administrator should seek the advice of every level in his/her organization to come up with ideas for the budget proposal. Bear in mind that each bureau and division that’s in the department has its own agenda. The fire administrator must mediate disputes and maximize the gains to each competing interest. This is more difficult than it once was. There are new fire department factions that seek advantage for their programs. Where it once was a suppression-only world, we now have training, code enforcement, fire prevention, public education, arson investigation and community relations squabbling over the available funds.
This wide range of ideas makes confrontational management so important. Brain-storming sessions are an excellent mechanism for getting ideas on the table for debate. It is important that everyone at the meeting wins a few battles—but loses a few, too. It leaves a bad taste in everyone’s mouth when the chief’s favored person (or division) seems to get the lion’s share of resources.
The manner in which your organization is structured can help a great deal during this process. By having an established mission statement, all members of the department can know why they exist and what they must do. A mission statement sets forth the purpose of the department and outlines basic reasons for its being. It must be easily understood.
An example of a mission statement might read something like, “The fire department will strive to provide an adequate level of fire protection to the community at a reasonable cost to the taxpayers of our community.”
By stating this, the parameters are defined. The level of protection is adequate, not best or worst. Note that the statement stresses fire protection in general, not just fire suppression, and that the cost is at a level that’s reasonable to the community. This throws us back to the concept of cost-effective fire protection that’s tailored to the identified needs of the jurisdiction. It targets us on a level of resource allocation that’s commensurate with the jurisdiction’s actual needs.
Once the mission is set, a series of goals is developed to describe how the mission is to be fulfilled. A goal statement describes broad areas of actions and activities that an organization intends to perform. It would state, in general terms, the response that would drive an organization in the direction of its stated mission.
A goal that’s tied to the above mission of adequate fire protection at a reasonable cost might involve developing a response program to meet the actual needs of the community. It could suggest that a fire department pumper arrive on scene within four minutes of a call for help being received.
As a fire administrator becomes more specific, objectives are laid out to lead in the direction of the identified goals that the department strives to reach. The objectives define the output of the agency in measurable terms or operational levels, which must be attained to achieve the department’s identified goals.
For example, it might be decided that one objective that’s tied to the above goal of adequate fire department response at a reasonable cost involves planning to combat 95 percent of all working fires with on-duty personnel. By conceding that additional help will be needed in 5 percent of cases, the administrator has a measurable goal toward which to work.
It must be stressed that the process of organizational structuring goes from mission statement to goals and from goals to objectives. At this point, a sharper focus emerges as to where an agency’s resources might best be committed to get the job done effectively and efficiently.
As one might imagine, being able to work toward common objectives is extremely helpful. It makes the confrontation among competing groups within the department easier to manage. The fire administrator can tailor each division or bureau within the agency around the existing framework of missions, goals and objectives.
Many years ago, the fire department in Louisville, KY, had a great deal of success with this mechanism. During the tenure of my friend Russell Sanders, who is a retired chief of department, a formal mechanism was developed for bringing ideas into the mainstream operation from all levels of the city’s Fire Division.
Definite time frames were set for bureau submissions of data input to the budgetary process. Sanders then personally met with each level of the organization to discuss its progress toward meeting stated objectives.
We must hasten to point out that conflict is a critical factor in such situations. The organizational framework serves as the target for which all members of the organization should aim.
This method could work for you and might fit very well into the context of keeping confrontation to a minimum in an organization. Once the framework of concepts is determined and priorities are arranged by the fire administrator, dollar figures can be developed, and a budget proposal can be prepared. This is a straight-forward way to do business.
The external environment
It is essential to the health, welfare and success of the conscientious fire service administrator that a thorough understanding of fellow department heads be developed. A failure to anticipate conflict guarantees defeat. A good way to keep things in perspective is to picture your fellow department heads as a combination of: The Three Stooges, biting, poking and kicking; Hulk Hogan, ready to tear your heart out and hand it to you for a birthday present; Albert Einstein, with a formula of success, but no place for your fire department in the equation; and Clark Kent, seemingly mild-mannered when, in fact, the strength of Superman lies behind his calm and easy smile (see “Budget Justification,” Fire Command, NFPA, August 1986). A failure to heed this advice can be bad for the fire administrator at budget time.
How can one guard against these pitfalls? Thoroughly prepare to present the department’s case to the governing body that holds the department’s fate in its hands. Also: Build a base of support in the community through a judicious use of the media and personal appearances. In these ways, the department stands the best possible chance of maximizing its request-to-receipt ratio when the dollars are allocated. Without dollars, your department can be condemned to second-class citizenship in the community. None of us wishes for that to happen. So do the work for the dollars.
