Firefighters, Do You Know Your Job? Developing a Response Playbook

Georgetown house fire

By Robert Ulrich

We can assume that when most firefighters read the above, the most common reaction would be: “Yes! I know my job and how to do it!” That is probably the case, but the issue deserves closer scrutiny.  It isn’t just the question of: “Am I a proficient nozzleman? Truckman? Rescue guru? Apparatus operator? Company officer?” The question is more about your functions and responsibilities on the incident scene.

You may be reading this thinking: “My department has seating assignments. I know in any seat I am riding there is an inscribed tag that says what my assignment is such as ‘irons,’ ‘nozzleman,’ ‘primary search’ or has a tool loadout.” Or perhaps as a company officer you’re thinking: “First-due engine initiates fire attack, second-due truck acts as RIT…my fire department has standard operating procedures (SOPs) to tell me what to do.” 

But let’s go “deeper,” taking what you may or may not be doing and translating it beyond an inscribed tag or SOP. This isn’t designed to be a one-size-fits-all solution, but rather a thought process that has been proven in multiple industries and organizations in fields beyond the emergency services.

Many of these theories and practices have been taught to me throughout my private industry and emergency services career. Each of these “systems” attempt to provide the critical elements of operational standards, consistency of outcome, and game planning by assignment. Are these elements of our goal as operators on the incident scene? You may or may not be using the following systems, but keep in mind that each have their individual limitations that can lead to a loss of continuity or, worse, be a vehicle for disguised micromanagement.

Process Organization

Many industries use some type of organizational format system to guarantee replication of production, and therefore a consistency of service (example ISO 9001). The simplest function in an organization has a flow chart of how said function is completed consistently every time with minimal deviations.  On paper is the recipe to produce the “widget.” That widget will be consistently the same size, shape, orientation, and cost in both time and money every time. If there is any deviation in the process, it is documented, examined, and, if needed to create consistency, implemented into a new revision of the process.

The problem often voiced with this system is that if the procedure is flawed, it only produces garbage consistently. Now you may be saying: “We are in emergency services, we don’t MAKE anything, so your quasi-manufacturing reference just don’t float.” I would respectfully disagree. We are in the high-speed, problem-solving, customer service business.  Wouldn’t it be great if we had consistently created an aggressive, safety conscious (through education) system that could produce consistent outcomes in the form of incidents solved in a consistent, non-fly-by-the-seat-of-your-pants approach?  Of course, we aren’t necessarily producing cloned outcomes, because none of the incidents we respond to are ever identical.

Orders and Guides

I have experienced multiple different kinds of SOPS, guidelines, or general orders pertaining to how we are supposed to do our jobs.  It may be as simple as box card or dispatch assignments regarding how many engines, trucks, rescues, ambulances, or tenders required for a response.  It may spell out the general or in depth of assignments for each first-, second-, or third-due of each of these resources, depending on the nature of the incident (commercial, residential, high occupancy, etc.). They serve as our “objectives” or what needs done, such as fire attack, rescue, ventilation, water supply, or patient care. This is helpful as it helps us begin to bring order to the chaos and complexity of emergency scenes as we arrive on scene. But they generally don’t drill down to the “tactics” or the nuts and bolts of how that assignment is to be done; if they do, they stray into the micromanagement form of leadership. But in specialized situations you can add tool loadouts specifically needed for the job at hand.

Riding Assignments

I have seen multiple “riding assignment” systems, but I have always been skeptical of seat assignments. In my volunteer days, on one response we would have an overflowing apparatus (not enough seats for all the people), whereas the next call would have just one firefighter and the driver, at best. We had similar issues on the career side. Yesterday I had four people assigned to the rig; today we had two callouts and I have three guys, and one of them is a replacement from a different company.  What if that seat isn’t filled?  Do I need an “irons guy” showing up with a halligan and flathead ax on a lift assist? Riding assignments have their merits but can be overly generic.

These systems and guides are great in providing organization and structure that hopefully helps firefighters calm chaotic situations. But sometimes they fall short because of a disconnect or detract from critical thinking and problem solving that we desperately need.  If, as is often heard, we need “thinking firefighters,” we need to provide them some room to make their own decisions not dictated by policy. 

Playing Like a Team, Empowering the Individuals

What is the answer? How do I know my job?  We have adopted a “playbook” approach with some success. The playbook isn’t a new idea, we see it in many sports, drawn on a chalkboard, where each player knows what their “goal” is: if I am a lineman in football, I might know on any certain play I have to block a player in front of me. But such a role doesn’t restrict the creativity of the player. He can use a swim move, a stunt, or a counter to make that block. The same would apply to the individual in an emergency situation.  If one of our backstep firefighters knows his assignment is to deploy an attack line to initiate quick fire attack, I don’t have to spell it out step by step. That firefighter can use creativity to bypass fences, obstacles, read situations and use their knowledge to meet the objective.

As an officer, the less time you spend speaking in the first five minutes of any commonly encountered situation means more time spent focusing on the overall, unfolding incident scene. Starting with crew training, we created a “hit list” of commonly responded-to dispatches, including public service calls. We then asked:  1. What absolutely must be done without question? 2. What do we want to get done if we can?  3. What more can be done?  We also considered questions to be asked depending on conditions within the first 10 minutes of each situation.

The answers were sometimes simple, and it was a great training exercise to see the objectives that each of the members of my company thought was critical, important, and optional.  It became a daily ritual (and got us some good training hours) for about a month.  After each “training/brainstorming” session, we would formalize whatever situation we had discussed into this simple format.  The example I am using is the simple EMS call.  Keep in mind this was for our ladder company, in a career department with minimal staffing of three and maximum staffing of four, ALS equipped, quint company operations. 

Response playbook EMS call

Each riding position is assigned by the department: Alpha refers to the driver-operator, Bravo the officer seat, Charlie and/or Delta the backstep firefighters. Following across you will see listed the first, second, and third job functions for that given situation. This can seem overly simple for a “garden variety” call, but this playbook sped up our cohesion as a team. Additionally, if we did have a “replacement” player in for the day, it was easy to get that person up to speed.

In many of the “plays,” it was left up to the Charlie/Delta members as to how and when they were going to complete their tasks. There were some very “interesting” high-speed conversations that I overheard from my backstep while enroute to calls. Was it up to me to “sort it out”? No—they knew their assignments and they needed to work out own their own how they were going to meet their assignments.  When you train, drill, and trust your people, it is amazing how much they can accomplish.

Golden Rules

Next is a sample of a single-family, residential reported structure fire response. It is the same format as the previous. One might look at it and say: “Duh, they should know already how to do this.” I agree, but if you take for granted the simplest thing, assuming that “we are all on the same page,” you are tempting fate to prove otherwise! Avoid complacency. Our job to have the conversations, play out the situations in our heads, and prepare for everything and anything on the fireground. When you look at the basic “playbook” there are some constants, variables, and “givens” that need to be addressed. The following card after the playbook, lays out some of the “golden rules” we lived by in many situations.

Some may argue: The situations we encounter on the incident scene are too complex or variable to “game plan” down to the micro detail. You are absolutely right. These are guides, with simple benchmarks that most situations require, but they are merely guides. They are not the 10 commandments or chiseled in stone, never to change.  The plays in the playbook must be reviewed and adapted as needed. We have real and honest conversations after incidents, training, and practice to pull feedback from the members of the team and adjust the playbook.

Outcome of Using the Playbook

After implementing the playbook system, we had much quieter responses across the board, from medical calls to structure fires. After training, practicing, and in-field implementation, things became smooth. Everyone knew their job objectives, but they knew they could employ any tactic they could justify to achieve their objectives.

Then the “unscripted” call came in (we were still developing the playbook) in the form of a multi-vehicle accident out of our jurisdiction. Still, the crew knew their jobs, there was some interfacing with partner agencies, but in general the “high-speed” conversations no longer were about the basics. We were all able to look “up and out” for changes and challenges, and the team had the time to forecast outcomes.

Crew cohesion became much tighter. When you know and understand your job and how it interconnects with everyone else’s, you become comfortable and understand all the things that must occur. That knowledge in turn built trust among team members. When we did have a replacement player in from another company or shift, our company could shift roles; my engineer knew my job as well as his. This made riding up very easy. The senior backstep was qualified as a reserve driver, so riding up was easy for him. The only person who needed guidance was the “replacement.” The playbook served as a guide to bring an “outsider” up to speed.

The playbook system was developed on a quint company. After several years we (the company) were transferred to the newly formed rescue company, which was an vastly different concept and response. Yet the development of a playbook system worked well there, also. We expanded it to include the two sister companies (the other shifts assigned to the rescue), which helped to streamline replacement training.

This system can be applied to any department or company, regardless of the size or assignment. The keys to it are:

Inclusion: Everyone gets a voice; the officers do not know everything. If you want people to participate and take ownership, honest inclusion is the key.

Conversation: Have genuine conversations about responsibility, expectations, and boundaries. You need to know what your people need from you just as much as they need to know your expectations. Giving your people latitude to use the tactics of their discretion absolutely needs to have the boundaries set (don’t make them too tight)

Development: The development needs to be in a format and layout that everyone can buy into and reinforces the SOPs, policies, and procedures of the Department. Don’t go rogue.

Training: Build your training around real-world expectations that you laid out in your play book. Scenarios can be put out and discussed in terms of: “In this given situation, at this given time, and you are riding this position…” Use the playbook to set up training and the training will provide feedback for the playbook. Borrowing a term from the military, the Immediate Action Drill (IAD) could be based on a page or element from the playbook that has a measurable, defined outcome.

Continual reassessment and revision: No system is simply “set it and forget it.” Have real debriefing sessions after both training and incidents. Take the good and the bad adjust if needed.

You may be surprised by building your own playbook how quiet the first five minutes of an incident can be!

Robert Ulrich is a firefighter/EMT with the City of Georgetown (SC) Fire Department and an adjunct instructor for the South Carolina State Fire Academy. He has 30 years of fire service experience and has held various ranks in multiple departments, from shift officer to chief of department. He has also worked as an adjunct instructor for the Pennsylvania State Fire Academy, Bucks County (PA) Community College, and Agricultural Rescue Program with the Penn State University.

Steve Shaw and DJ Stone

Perspectives on Leadership: Navigating Leadership, Standards, and Innovation in the Fire Service

Steve Shaw speaks with guest DJ Stone about the transformative power of mentorship, the importance of community relationships, and the evolving standards within the fire…
LAFD SUV in the ocean

Los Angeles Firefighter Swept Into Ocean as Mudslides Hit CA

A Los Angeles Fire Department vehicle was pushed into the ocean as heavy rains sent debris across several roadways.