Retiring ‘Bubba’: The Imperative for Professional Emergency Managers through National Accreditation

By Michael Barrick

In late 1973, at the age of 17, I worked my first shift on an ambulance in rural Doddridge County, W.Va. As the fates would have it, before I had even completed my training as an Emergency Medical Technician, I was faced with the prospect of delivering a baby. Fortunately, mom had been there – seven times before. So, she guided me and my equally green partner (and best friend) through the process.

Much has changed in the passing 35 years. The world in which we live is far more complicated and clearly more dangerous. Consequently, just as I was over my head in the back of that ambulance then, so too are many within the Emergency Management sector today. This is not an indictment of folks who I classify collectively as “Bubba.” Rather, several factors – rapid technological change, systems thinking, media savvy, public policy, political pressures, decision-making skills, and a world that does not have the luxury for turf battles – demand that we abandon the old ways of preparing for and responding to disasters, whether natural or man-made.

That means that it is time to retire “Bubba” and replace him with expertly trained emergency managers through National Accreditation.

Just recently, Chairman Arnold Punaro of the Commission on the National Guard and Reserves told the Associated Press that roughly 90 percent of the National Guard and Reserve units in the United States are not prepared for an attack upon the United States homeland. Commenting upon this frightening scenario, Punaro said, “…in the world we live in – you’re either ready or you’re not.”[1]

The same is true with Emergency Management. While some efforts have been made to address this deficiency – most notably the establishment of the National Incident Management System (NIMS) – much work remains. Consequently, it is imperative that steps be taken immediately to increase the professionalism of emergency managers through formal education, specialized training, professional certification and salaries commiserate with the heady responsibilities essential for leading all levels of government to prepare for and respond to disasters as the American public has come to expect and deserve. A glaring example – the response to Hurricane Katrina – only underscores this need.

Claire B. Rubin addresses both the deficiencies in current emergency management practices, and more importantly, the challenges facing the field which have created the deficiencies. Speaking to the most notable change in our lifetime – the rise of Al Qaeda – Rubin notes, “Unfortunately, their brand of terrorism is likely to plague the world for generations.”[2] Additionally, she noted the challenge of finding the proper niche for the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS), saying, “…problems with implementation of the programs and activities of DHS will probably provide topics for research and discussion for decades.”[3] Noting that public health officials, in particular the U.S. Centers for Disease Control also face new challenges, Rubin acknowledged, “…the growing importance of the health and medical aspects of threats and disasters along with the essential need for the emergency management community to create or improve working relationships with their health and medical counterparts.”[4] In short, as she noted, “The relationship between homeland security and emergency management remains to be worked out at every level of government.”[5]

These challenges can only be addressed by a cadre of professionally trained emergency managers. Why? The reasons are numerous. Because emergency management agencies are largely political entities, the ability to negotiate the intricacies of political debates and turf battles requires people with the skills to negotiate the political process while relentlessly fighting for resources, assets and flexibility. Otherwise, we will remain as our military is now – not ready! As noted, flexibility is essential because circumstances are changing so rapidly. Our representative “Bubba” is generally inflexible. A rapidly changing environment requires constant education. So, people responsible for emergency management must be able to manage their jobs while also being willing to constantly train and learn. Again, those resistant to change will fail in this environment. The advent of NIMS demands a change in thinking – both among first responders and first receivers, such as hospitals. This requires systems thinking and problem-solving skills that are not dogmatic. Management by Objectives demands adaptability. Those who won’t change as circumstances warrant present a danger to the public they wish to serve.

Turf battles must end. The first and most important characteristic of a leader is a servant nature and attitude. While a leader must be willing to “take charge,” he or she must also be willing to share power and knowledge. Those accustomed to holding on to knowledge because it means they hold on to power put the public at risk.

The emergency managers of the future – of now, really – must embrace strategic thinking and systems approaches. They must demonstrate the ability to learn quickly and discard old thinking when proven to be outdated. They must be able to learn and utilize the latest technology. They must understand the role of the media and be able to communicate through them without developing an adversarial tone. They must understand legal issues, to embrace life-long learning, and make quick decisions without expecting a medal for simply doing their job.

All of this means that it is time to retire “Bubba.” Otherwise, we’ll be waiting for his funeral. If we do, we are risking that our own funerals may be held at the same time.

© Michael Barrick, 2008.

NOTES

1. “Military unready for homeland attack, says study,” Associated Press, 2 February 2008 [Online] <http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/02/01/guarding.america.ap/index.html>

2. Claire B. Rubin, “Emergency Management in the 21^st Century: Dealing with Al Qaeda, Tom Ridge and Julie Gerberding,” “The George Washington University Institute for Crisis, Disaster and Risk Management” and “The Natural Hazards Center, the University of Colorado, Boulder,” May, 2004, p. 3.

3. Ibid.

4. Ibid.

5. Ibid, p. 4.

 

BIBLIOGRAPHY

“Military unready for homeland attack, says study.” [Online]. Associated Press, 2 February 2008.

Rubin, Claire B. “Emergency Management in the 21^st Century: Dealing with Al Qaeda, Tom Ridge and Julie Gerberding.” “The George Washington University Institute for Crisis, Disaster and Risk Management” and “The Natural Hazards Center, the University of Colorado, Boulder.” May, 2004.