Muskets to Master Streams: A Fire Service Culture of Resistance?

Any time that resistance to a new policy, procedure, tactic or piece of equipment is encountered, an old trope echoes through the halls: “200 years of tradition unimpeded by progress” or “Firefighters hate two things, change and the way things are.” Both are a quick and convenient means to dismiss what might be a legitimate concern or a failure of the person who presented the change. To state either is to ignore the good progress that the fire service has made.

Military and fire service intertwined

From the infancy of the American fire service, when bucket brigades and watchmen ruled the day, to the aerial devices and SCBA of today, progress might be slow, but it’s undeniably present. This isn’t a pattern that’s unique to firefighters. The military used muskets—technology that was invented in the early 16th century—all the way through the civil war, more than 250 years later. Muskets were readily available and sufficiently reliable and could be trained on easily. Today, you would be as successful in finding an infantry soldier sporting an Enfield 1853 as you would a fire company utilizing leather buckets for fire attack. However, our paths are intertwined, and many advances in military technology translate to the fire service.

Partially because of the pattern of service members joining a fire department post-military service and partially because of sheer utility in our operations, many pieces of what we now consider “standard” kit were tested first on the battlefield.

The thermal imaging camera, for example, is a technology that was developed for targeting and identification of enemy combatants. Of course, it now is used to improve searches for fire victims and to keep firefighters safe. GPS, which first was used to track units in austere environments and improve navigation capabilities, now is used to map response routes and to track firefighters during wildland operations.

‘Firefighters hate change’

Why is resistance encountered when something new is proposed? The most common causes of resistance are communication failure and misunderstanding by those who are expected to change. Although “firefighters hate change” might be accurate, it’s a little more nuanced than that.

Firefighters can hate change because they perceive that there’s no good reason for the change—or for no reason at all. Change for the sake of change is guaranteed to be met with opposition. Firefighters don’t want to “fix what isn’t broken.”

If there is a justification for the change, it must be explained to them. If something went wrong, it must be prevented from happening again. If a new tactic is safer or more efficient, that must be communicated. If a new piece of equipment is more effective, it must be proved. Firefighters must see for themselves.

The easiest solution to most of the opposition is just talking things through. Those who present the change must be prepared to answer why the change will be beneficial. Firefighters want to know why they do what they do; give it to them. If that doesn’t work, a trial might be in order. Often, transitions are opposed because they’re binary: Do it or don’t. Setting a trial period for a set amount of time provides for an opportunity to get the opinion of the crew. A new helmet, nozzle or hose load that you want to try? Use it at the drill ground. If it works there, trial it for a month. Let members see it with their own eyes and feel it with their own hands. Then, get feedback.

Give them a voice

Most firefighters simply want a voice. They want to know that they have a seat at the table. The worst thing that can be presented is an attitude of “because I said so.” The members are the ones who are expected to use the new product or tactic. Asking them first to test it is beneficial for multiple reasons.

This is where the military (to a degree) gets things right. There’s significant R&D before something reaches the ground-level troop. Almost nothing is handed over to the whole force without sizeable investment in testing and improvement. Specific units trial equipment and provide feedback. Tweaks are made if needed. More trials follow. The opinion of the end-user must be taken seriously.

The corollary to “firefighters hate change” and “firefighters hate the way things are” is similarly addressed: They must be given a voice. If they are expected to change, it must be acknowledged that they might have good ideas for progress. This can’t and must not be a one-way street. Many of the most impressive advancements in firefighting tactics and technology were given their birth by the fire floor scientist and the truck bay tinkerer, not the chief’s office.

Change is attainable

The reality of the situation is this: Many firefighters hate change for no reason, and others might hate the way that things are because no one takes them seriously. The old trope shouldn’t be used to shirk their concerns.

An added benefit of having the firefighter involved in the decision-making process is this: When it comes time to change, they’ll support the change. Like it or not, when it comes to effective change, the team must be involved. Something might be able to be forced on them, but it’s far easier when they do the convincing for you.

Tradition is—or at least it should be—important to every firefighter. Firefighters shouldn’t be expected to walk away from their past without a bit of a fight. Sometimes, tradition just wins. To be effective, they must be involved. They must be given their due. It’s a team effort.

A Ronald Reagan quote that serves as a solid guide to working with crew members holds true: “There is no limit to the amount of good you can do if you don’t care who gets the credit.” Let’s get better together, regardless of rank.

Change is slow, painfully so at times, but it isn’t unattainable. It’s all a matter of convincing.