POLITICS & POLITICAL INFLUENCE
I've often been asked about the role of politics in my career. I believe this question was a common one when people learned that I was at that time or had been in the past a municipal fire chief. There seems to be a natural assumption that politics and political influence permeate city governments. That may be the case in some or many communities, but it wasn't evident where I worked.
From the rank of Firefighter up through the rank of Assistant Fire Chief, I have no recollection of "political influence" being a factor in anything involved with me or having been mentioned at all. I don't remember hearing anyone's supposition that politics was evident in local government operations in the communities where I served as a fire chief.
During my periods of service as a fire chief, I recall two instances of "politics" being mentioned in general terms - not with regard to "political influence" - as a topic of discussion
First Instance of "Politics" Being A Potential Job Factor
The first instance when the concept of "politics" was mildly apparent occurred when I was the Fire Chief in Boise, Idaho. At the time I served in this position, the elected Mayor served as the chief executive of the City of Boise. The department directors such as Police Chief, Fire Chief, Public Works Director, Airport Director and others were appointed by and served at the pleasure of the mayor. A mayoral election occurred during my tenure in Boise. The Mayor that hired me as the Fire Chief decided to end his lengthy and successful career by not running for reelection. Other than the usual curiosity about wondering who would win the election and become Boise's new mayor, I avoided any political involvement by making sure that I didn't participate in any conversations or activities about the mayoral candidates, their proposed platforms and their stated opinions regarding the Fire Department and/or public safety. I remember meeting with one of the mayoral candidates at my office after he requested an appointment to discuss general fire protection issues. There was no direct nor indirect influence of politics or the appearance that political influence was an issue during my time as the Fire Chief in Boise. Wise fire chiefs avoid becoming involved in elections or other processes that determine who will become the chief's next supervisor or a member of the policy-making body, and I was striving to be a wise fire chief.
Second Instance of "Politics" Being a Potential Job Factor
The second instance of "politics" being somewhat apparent occurred when I was the Fire Chief in Little Rock, Arkansas. At the time I served in this position, the Mayor and the elected members of Little Rock's Board of Directors (similar to city council persons in other jurisdictions) selected the City Manager when vacancies arose, but the Mayor and Board Members were not the administrative heads of the city. They served as the policy makers. The City Manager, in turn, selected the department directors. The Mayor did not change during my tenure as the Fire Chief for the City of Little Rock. However, the City Manager changed during my tenure in Little Rock, and speculation existed among some members of the community that "politics" was a factor. Because I did not enter into discussions about why there was an administrative leadership change, I wasn't in a position to obtain details about why the change occurred. Several years later, the Mayor was selected by the voters to become the chief administrative officer and serve as the full-time executive whereas previous mayors served as elected officials, not as municipal employees. The changeover to full-time mayor occurred after my tenure in Little Rock, and the supervision of department directors was divided between the Mayor and the City Manager.
Don't Let A Perceived or Actual Problem Create Personal Paranoia: Use It As a Chance to Solve A Problem
Two interesting events occurred in my career that might cause some people or employees to think that "political influence" was a possibility. I've selectively shared these events with fire chief candidates because there are lessons to be learned from every encounter with unhappy citizens. I believe there is value to sharing them here. There were strong perceptions among some fire department members that "political influence" might be called into play in each instance.
Fire chiefs and other municipal leaders often place themselves and their positions in peril by becoming involved in politics. The best philosophy to have is that we work with everyone to help address their concerns and enable them to fulfill their legitimate needs. To achieve these results, we must focus on being servant leaders, not on being a leader that avoids being a servant.
"Political Threat" Event # 1
One afternoon, the Chief Fire Marshal (Assistant Fire Chief rank) came into my office and shared information regarding a complaint he just received by telephone. The call was received from a local architect. Apparently, the architect had just received notice from a job superintendent that a Fire Marshal had inspected a construction site and "red tagged" the installation of wall insulation. As I recall, the Fire Marshal discovered that the wall insulation had been installed backwards. The side that was supposed to be adjacent to the sheetrock in each wall was actually facing the outside or rear side of a common/adjacent interior wall. When the Fire Marshal provided notice that the insulation was installed backwards and needed to be removed and properly reinstalled, the job superintendent wasn't very happy. The apparent reaction of the architect was to call the Chief Fire Marshal and try to persuade him to overrule the Fire Marshal's directions to reverse all of the wall insulation. The architect and job superintendent didn't want to go to the expense of paying folks to reverse the insulation. Their conversation did not go well, and the architect told the Chief Fire Marshal that he - the architect - was going to get his job. He told the Chief Fire Marshal that he was going to get him fired. At that point, I knew that I needed to get involved.
As I was dialing the architect's phone, I reminded myself of two of the Absolute Rules of Being An Effective Supervisor: Rule # 2: The next-to-worst thing a supervisor can do is fail to support his or her subordinates when they are doing their jobs correctly. Rule # 1: The very worst thing a supervisor can do is criticize his or her subordinates for doing their jobs correctly when pressure is put on them!
I reached the architect and listened to him express his opinions. I was patient, and the architect was afforded the opportunity to share his thoughts and suggestions. After I listened to him, he correctly concluded that I wasn't going to change the Fire Marshal's instructions when I told him that he might as well go ahead and get me fired when he went after the Chief Fire Marshal's and Fire Marshal's jobs. Our conversation ended shortly thereafter.
About twenty minutes after I completed the conversation with the architect, I called the City Manager's secretary. I gave her a brief summary of what had transpired, and I advised her that I was heading to City Hall to give her a better overview and hopefully be able to explain the Fire Department's perspective to the City Manager. She told me that she hadn't taken a call from the architect. Based on what the architect had told me, I felt the City Manager - my boss - would have received a telephone call from the architect as soon as he ended the call with me.
When I arrived at the City Manager's office, I learned the City Manager still had not received a call from the architect. I was surprised. In the past half hour, I had heard the architect's frustration with the Fire Department. I didn't have to remind him that it was "his" job superintendent that worked with the superintendent's crew members that either were illiterate (the insulation was marked with large words "This Side To Face Outward" in multiple locations on each roll) or they simply didn't care about doing things properly. He knew those things without my having to voice them.
I then realized the architect would have to face some tough questions from the City Manager if the architect called later and delivered his complaints to my boss. To my knowledge, the architect never called the City Manager. No one from the City Manager's office ever called me about the matter. No Fire Department members were fired. No personnel changes occurred. No memos were placed in employee files. But, the insulation was changed so that it was installed correctly. <Insert Big Smile Emoji Here>
"Political Threat" Event # 2
One morning, I received a telephone call from a local business owner. He called to express his extreme displeasure following a conversation he had with a Fire Department member. I told the owner that I would meet him at his office. I then went to his business. As I recall, the member had gone to the business that morning to pick up an item ordered for the Fire Department. Either an incorrect item had arrived or the item that arrived was defective. I can't recall with clarity which situation had occurred.
However, I won't forget the business owner's anger towards the Fire Department member. The anger wasn't over the fact the item was damaged or that it was an incorrect one. It was based on the fact the member had remarked to a store employee that he would no longer make any personal purchases at the business. The owner said the member shouldn't be making that comment while on duty. I could not say anything that reduced the owner's anger, and I felt that he was going to take the matter to the City Manager or City Council. We concluded our conversation after I told the owner that I would talk with the Fire Department member and then contact the owner afterwards.
When I met with the Fire Department member, I heard his side of the story. Although there was no Fire Department rule about expressing his opinion as to where he was going to shop for personal purchases, it probably wasn't beneficial that he tell an employee what his intentions were regarding future purchases at the business, nor was it helpful to the situation where we still needed to acquire the item for the Fire Department. I took the initiative to discuss this with my supervisor, the City Manager. I learned the business owner was known for strongly expressing his opinions on a variety of things, and the City Manager and I agreed that citizens have that right. After meeting with the City Manager, I called the business and asked to speak with the owner. He wasn't available. I left a message asking that he call me at his convenience. I never received a return telephone call.
I learned two important factors during this event: first, some people get upset more easily than others, and they most often feel they need to get rid of their anger the quickest way they can; second, some people aren't likely to change, meaning that those of us that receive complaints need to take them seriously and gather the facts because we will never know when or whether the facts may be needed to explain the Fire Department's side of a situation.
The Fire Department member's comment about changing his shopping practices was one of those items that should have not been shared verbally at the store or elsewhere. However, it wasn't meant as an insult, but the owner certainly took it that way. Once the owner felt that his concerns had been addressed, nothing further was done or said by him as far as I could determine.
These two instances could have become "political" matters. Calls to Mayors, Council members and City Managers could have been made or letters could have been written. However, neither occurred. Making an effort to hear and address citizens' concerns and explaining the Fire Department's position often will reduce anger and avoid escalation of citizens' concerns.
I share the above examples for three reasons.
First, don't presume that every angry person with whom you have contact is going to go directly to the Mayor or City Manager and work down from there. Some folks just don't know what to do or say other than infer what they might do or not do. Expressing one's concerns to higher city officials is not playing "politics" - it is a citizen expressing concerns. This is the way municipal government is supposed to work.
Second, if you are a fire chief or the fire department member contacted by an unhappy person, realize it is your instantaneous duty to do what you can to address the person's concerns. Don't take on someone else's job responsibilities, but make certain you do everything you can to identify the concerns and determine whether you can or can't help alleviate the concerns. If you say that someone will call the party back, make a commitment to ensure that a return call is made. If the matter is controversial or involves Fire Department members or otherwise needs to be guarded, put your comments in written form and ensure they are confidentially delivered to the appropriate party.
Lastly, approach these matters with compassion and the desire to acquire facts so that this and future similar problems are addressed. Avoid getting upset or intimidated by the citizen. Whether you think the citizen is right or wrong, remind yourself that the citizen's concerns need to be heard. Do your part to make sure the concerns and the citizen's contact information are received by the appropriate member of the Fire Department. Don't tell the person to call "Chief So-And-So at 123-456-7890." Tell the upset citizen that you will route his/her concerns and contact information to <fill in the blank>. While you can't promise a return call, you must accept responsibility for delivering the message to the proper party's point of contact, email or voice mail. If you fail to forward the citizen's concern(s) to the proper person, you may become a participant and potential recipient of the citizen's concerns about your organization.
What appears to be "politics" often is the open or unrestrained expression of an unhappy citizen. Take responsibility for helping get the problem to the person that can address the matter. When we are able to listen closely and learn what has upset the citizen, we are more likely to be able to address the citizen's concerns and avoid having an unhappy citizen take the problem to elected officials or the chief administrative officer.