Emergency Management is not about Heroism
Heroism belongs to those in Emergency Services. And in Homeland Security and our military. Sometimes though, Emergency Managers do need to be courageous and brave. But…
I believe nothing we do in Emergency Management should be considered heroic. Usually the term “hero” is a label applied by someone else. Many of the people I have heard of performing acts of heroism, candidly shun the title themselves. They were in the right place at the right time. They had to do something to save someone else. It was the right thing to do. The next thing they knew…
And there are those ordinary people who do extraordinary acts in saving the lives of others, usually with a disregard for their own personal safety. Heroism is rarely planned, as a set of actions, performed usually in pursuit of the life safety of someone else. Heroism is a leap of faith beyond courage and bravery and is not part of what we do in full cycle Emergency Management, or even any of our own specific missions in Response. We wear hats, not helmets. Emergency Managers may help others in Emergency Services to be in that right place at the right time for them to do something heroic, but we also have an ethical and moral responsibility to help keep everyone safe – including those Responders themselves. There’s no Safety Officer on the battlefield of war, but there is one in a proper Incident Command – and that person is responsible directly to the Command and Control leadership to override or suspend any missions which are unsafe to perform. When you see Urban Search and Rescue (USAR) teams halting their rescue efforts and evacuating because the scene is unstable, that is an example of where the Safety Officer’s role is so very critical. Same for the CBRNE teams who respond to radiation incidents: those team members all wear personal dosimeters. Your lifetime dosage limit is your own, and no amount of PPE or Time, Distance and Shielding should keep those teams on the job beyond their limits. Those USAR and CBRNE teams must come back and do these missions again and again – their safety must be the top priority; and what they do day-in-and-day-out is certainly courageous and brave. And heroic.
Emergency Managers certainly must have a strong moral compass. We must be ethical and professional. Sometimes we too, must also be courageous and brave – but I have found this can happen when we “stick our neck out” in order to advocate for the unmet needs of our constituents, especially those with social vulnerabilities/are part of marginalized populations and those who cannot effectively advocate for themselves. It takes courage and bravery to stand up to a politician (who is most likely your employer) and challenge missions put to Emergency Management, which are not ethical or moral. And sometimes it takes courage to get in the middle - between competing departments within your own jurisdiction, and who themselves may have competing priorities/agendas – and help get everyone on the same track (NIMS fans, you know what this one is called!). It takes courage and bravery to facilitate others – especially the heroes of Emergency Services – collaborate, coordinate, cooperate, and communicate (the four C’s) with each other, as well as with outsiders such as non-governmental organizations. Sometimes it might feel like we are the lion tamers in a circus act (aka ‘herding cats’ and meta-leadership), but one should describe a lion tamer’s job as brave and courageous, but not heroic. And lion tamers need to consider their own safety above all else – and then the safety of the lions and the public – always in an ethical and moral manner.
When everyone is working together – with the resource support, training, and guidance from Emergency Managers - Emergency Management works best. The National Incident Management System calls this “Unity of Effort”. I believe Emergency Managers should be held to a high set of standards, but we must also be protected and shielded ourselves, from retaliations and reprisals, when we conduct ourselves morally and ethically. There are times when we must be courageous and brave within our own organizations. There has been a movement for some time now to further “professionalize” the practice of Emergency Management, with a Code of Ethics. My two cents, weighing in on this question is a bit complex. Do I think we need a formal Code of Ethics or official state/federal licensing to recognize the work we do is really (seriously) a profession and not just a skill? Nope. While there is little in this proposed set of ethical codes, which I would consider to be scandalous, objectionable, or even “crazy talk” – do we really have to distinguish ourselves as a profession – say, from lawyers, plumbers, or doctors – by specifically stating the obvious: that we need to act ethically and morally? On the other hand, do I think colleges and universities should integrate ethics, morals, and professionalism into their Emergency Management degree programs? Absolutely. Taking that question a step further (and something the professionalization proponents are advocating): do I think you need a college degree to be a professional Emergency Manager? Not at all. And I’ve got two degrees myself. Neither made me a more moral and ethical emergency manager (full transparency, I got one after I became an emergency manager). I would, however, recommend every Emergency Manager become a Red Cross volunteer (at least take their Disaster Cycle Services general volunteer and mass care sheltering training) to help build/rebuild their own moral compass. The Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement’s Fundamental Principles of Humanity, Impartiality, Neutrality, Independence, Voluntary Service, Unity, and Universality, while remaining autonomous of the governments they operate within, are certainly a set of ethics to aspire to.
My thoughts on the “Duty to Employer” section of the proposed Code of Ethics for a professional Emergency Manager
The paragraph in question is as follows:
While emergency management professionals take direction from their employers, they do not deviate from their professional standards. The standards are intended to uphold the integrity of practice and serve as support for ethical practice in the face of challenging decisions. When an emergency management professional is under pressure from an employer or legislator to pursue a course of action or make a decision that is in conflict with effective and ethical practice, the standards should serve as a shield. If the provided guidance is not followed, emergency management professionals have a duty to document the guidance provided and that sufficient objection was made.
I have worked in corporate banking and retail brokerage in both leadership and compliance roles - as careers prior to working in Emergency Management. I have also held state licenses for insurance and real estate – all of which have rules for ethical conduct which put professional standards towards clients and the public ahead of a duty towards one’s employer. And none of these were life safety decisions! Employers have their own ‘best interests” as their priority (it does not matter if you work as an Emergency Manager for a government, a corporation, or a non-governmental organization; whether it is profit or cost-savings, or political capital, etc.). All the aforementioned non-EM professions have independent governing bodies (mostly the states themselves – which would pose a conflict of interest for governmental EM) who provide oversight and the “teeth” to enforce ethical conduct by both individuals and the organizations they are employed by. When you are paid by commission or get performance bonuses, for example, you walk a very fine line every day when it comes to professional ethical behavior. It is my opinion that without such a non-governmental oversight entity (such as FINRA or a state’s Bar Association), Emergency Management professionals will not have the courage nor the bravery to stand up to employers and charge them with ethical violations of a Code of Conduct. I propose this become a new function of EMAP, which could effectively penalize jurisdictions who fail in ethical activity (or whose sub-jurisdictions are determined to have failed), by rescinding or suspending accreditation. While this may not help every EM in every jurisdiction, it would certainly put the majority of states on notice, that ethical behavior is a must have.
But I do want to see some “teeth” in a Code of Ethics. While there needs to be more advocacy by Emergency Management trade/professional associations, there also needs to be a recognition by State, Local Government, Tribal and Territorial governments in the United States that we are a profession and that we have standards and practices which we must adhere to. Failure to support such ethical and moral actions by Emergency Managers (including those times when the direction by their leadership is immoral and/or unethical, especially when adversely impacting the life safety of anyone) must have consequences for that governmental jurisdiction. Witness the court ordered consent decrees issued to (and the lawsuits lost by) multiple jurisdictions, over multiple disasters, when it comes to compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA).
Can you imagine a firefighter being concerned about being sued by a homeowner for cutting a vent hole in their roof, to help suppress the conflagration? Are there politicians (and the media) who criticize Emergency Services groups when they don’t risk their own lives to rescue people from their homes in the height of a hurricane or in the middle of a tornado’s touchdown? Can an Emergency Manager reject orders to “kick the can down the road” and make their problem some other jurisdiction’s, without utilizing the 4 C’s? That last one is a key question I would like to see answered in the debate about making Emergency Management more professional.
Emergency Managers must have IDEA built into their own moral compass. Those letters represent trail markers, which should be taught, trained, and exercised. Shampoo, Rinse, Repeat. Inclusion should belong in the procedures, processes, protocols, plans, and people of Emergency Management itself. We need to practice what we preach. Wow, that was a lot of P’s in row. But here are two salient points I want to make in conclusion:
First, Emergency Management as a profession, is fairly new (if you don’t count our Civil Defense origins, it was only in 1979 that FEMA was created). I like to think of Ben Franklin as our nation’s first emergency manager, but the idea that anyone should be able to grow up and become an Emergency Manager and champion the unmet emergency/disaster needs of others who are not like them, is relatively novel. A Google search indicates the first law school was around 1100 AD in Italy. The Encyclopedia Britannica indicates the first physician was Imhotep around 3000 BC. And until I wrote this piece, I thought he was just a villain in the Mummy movie series. My point is that Emergency Managers must grow into this concept of having courage and bravery to be ethical and moral. Maybe not organically, but rather kicking and screaming along the way. What I also think is key to this growth is that society – and our own profession - should not be inherently discriminating against an existing Emergency Manager because they do not personally characterize the community they serve. I wrote more of my thoughts on this aspect of Emergency Manager professionalism in my April, 2023 post entitled Prismatic, on the EMN. I do think it is interconnected with the concept of further professionalism for Emergency Management, as a whole.
When you look at the issue of professionalism in Emergency Management or how Emergency Management is much more than supporting the Response work of Emergency Services, you are taking a wiser approach to the subject. We need to always be advocating for our profession and the work we do before, during and after disasters to help all communities be more disaster ready/resilient. This is what Emergency Management Intelligence is all about. Learn more and be a part of this paradigm shift at www.cemir.org.
Second, the same terrible level of vitriol and in-fighting amongst advocacy groups in the general public about IDEA (see DEI debates and stories all over social media if you want – I am not going to amplify them here), exist in and around those advocating for systemic changes in Emergency Management. And when I say in-fighting I mean actively putting a specific priority of need (race, gender, orientation, disability, etc.) above any and all others. I believe this truly adds to the marginalization of everyone. And passively doing the same, by leaving someone – or any group or groups - out of the recipe of belonging for all, is just as bad in my opinion. Granted, it’s not easy to keep up with all the marginalized groups out there, but if you want to advocate for change in Emergency Management, it should be liberal and just. And the concept of the acronym IDEA itself, needs to represent all the various parts of Emergency Management which must become more inclusive, diverse, equitable, and accessible. That last letter in IDEA is important – I was shocked to see something different now in my research for this post. It’s not ‘A’ for anti-racism, to the expulsion of people with disabilities. The struggle over representation in professional Emergency Management seems to follow the same struggle in other parts of government bureaucracy, as well. Ultimately, our work of moving forward toward better life safety before, during and after disasters needs to be performed by everyone – judged individually by the content of their character, ethics and morals, and their own actions or inactions.
And I should not have to contemplate whether I am courageous and brave enough to have to point all this out.