Fatigue is a major concern for folks when in the middle of an emergency, disaster, or during a grid-down event. And the longer duration of the incident, the more fatigue and the worse the impact on a person from that fatigue.
But there are different kinds of fatigue. There is; 1) Food Fatigue, 2) Cognitive Fatigue, 3) Decision Fatigue. In this article I will just touch briefly on each…no need for lots of details, you can easily figure it out.
This is a simple one, and you may have already suffered from it. Let’s say the grid went down…and you are in day 204. For breakfast you are again eating oatmeal. The eggs, bacon, sausage, pancakes, etc. are long gone…so oatmeal it is! Oh wait, the sugar is gone, the honey is gone, the raisins are gone, the fruit is gone… so it is just plain oatmeal…for the 90th straight morning.
Do you think that might get a little boring?
So for lunch you have soup…containing; dried carrots, wheat berries, and pinto beans…for the 92nd straight lunch.
Then for dinner you have stew…containing; dried carrots, dried onions, wheat berries, and black beans…for the 103rd straight dinner.
Yeah, all the salt, pepper, garlic, and other seasonings ran out 3 months ago. No chocolate, no Pepsi, no sugar, no honey, no candy, no cookies…not much of anything that makes meals and snacks great.
So do you think food and eating gets a little boring? Yeah, I think I do.
Now…another couple months later…how you doing? Yeah, that is food fatigue…eating the same boring food day after day. Sure, you are grateful for the food, at least it is something in your belly. But it is drudgery…boredom…and fatigue.
Food Fatigue is easily avoided…store and grow foods/herbs that keep meals interesting, tasty and enjoyable. Keep the ingredients around, or grow/acquire them, to make cookies once in a while. Hideaway some candy for long winter nights. Keep some Spam hidden for that morning you actually have real eggs to cook.
This is a condition that you can probably readily identify with…and more than likely you have already experienced it. Officially it is essentially the process of acquiring knowledge, thinking about it, processing it, coming to conclusions about the knowledge acquired. You could look at it as Situational Awareness overload. Many folks suffer from it at work due to an overload of information and/or tasking…or a very long day working with dummy folks in a stressful situation.
Cognitive fatigue can result in a person shutting down mentally and/or physically. Yup, it can get that bad. It comes from the brain being overloaded with information and its circuit breaker just flips off and a person goes into self-preservation mode mentally.
A good way to help fight cognitive fatigue, and fatigue in general, is to stay hydrated and eat right such as:
And you try and get decent rest if at all possible. Allow for some “down time” where sensory input is nonexistent or at least kept to a minimum.
This is the worst fatigue of all! And so designated for several reasons; 1) it disproportionately affects leaders, 2) it can lead to poor, even fatal, decision making, 3) can ultimately affect a whole group or family.
Decision fatigue is basically a condition where a person has to make too many decisions consistently over too long period of time. It can be a little hard to explain but it is easy to see when it is in front of you.
Say you are dealing with a protracted incident…example…two-weeks. And the leader of the group is constantly making decisions all day…every day…decisions, one after another. It is multiplied by a factor when the situation is, or could be, life-threatening. They have very short nights of sleep because people are constantly coming to them asking for decisions to be made and advice given. Pop! Their head explodes.
The results can be everything from poor decisions to angry outbursts to violence against people. Of course they could also simply shutdown entirely; virtually becoming uncommunicative. And how would any of that work out for the harmony of the group?
One of the reasons why wildland fire personnel are limited to 2-week deployments on fires is this very problem…especially among leadership. A special process is required to extend a deployment to 3-weeks…and it ain’t all that easy to get approved. Why? Because a wildland fire leader (i.e. Division Supervisor, Ops Chief, Type 3 Incident Commander, etc.) has a whole lot of responsibility, works 16 – 18 hours days, and gets asked a ton of questions all day long…not to mention the potential for loss of life and property.
Now imagine food/water shortage, no power, looting, bad weather, no stores open, potential for violence against your family, etc. See the potential for problems when it comes to making hundreds of decisions, great and small, all day long?
Ask anyone who has to, or has been, in a high state of readiness or has to maintain high Situational Awareness for days or weeks straight. It can wear you out. Ever hear the term “1000-yard stare”?
To avoid it you can:
Cognitive and decision fatigue can kill you…and/or those around you. You have to be able to recognize it, obviously. And from the very start you have to be able to combat it.
Please don’t ignore food fatigue to keep people happy.
Please don’t ignore cognitive fatigue and decision fatigue to keep people alive.
2009 - 2022 Copyright © AHTrimble.com ~ All rights reserved No reproduction or other use of this content without expressed written permission from AHTrimble.com See Content Use Policy for more information.
A person only needs look to countries such as the former Soviet Union, current Russia, China, and North Korea to see the most fully implemented examples of such behavior. And the European Union countries are examples of almost fully implemented authoritarian media controls. But here in the USA the First Amendment has protected, for the most part, our right to free speech for over 230 years…until now.
Let’s be honest…the media has been earnestly bullied and attacked since the Nixon years. And since Clinton the effort to transform the media into an extension of the government propaganda arm has become serious and focused. Every President since Nixon has gone after the media and the people therein…some Presidents with gusto, others more subtly. And for the most part, the media has complied and become little more than shills for the US federal government.
And to be fair, there are a couple major media outlets that still maintain some margin of objectivity and fairness in reporting. However, and unfortunately, they tend to be conservative agenda driven organizations. And being such, almost exclusively promote a conservative agenda vs true objectivity.
The US government has for the most part been discreet, subtle, and used subterfuge to bring the media into compliance. However, they are not above using threats, intimidation, and the legal system to bring the most wayward of media under their control. The most recent example is the NSA’s spying on Tucker Carlson. But Carlson is not alone…the NSA has been well-documented to be spying on all of us. But government spying on media personnel is especially troublesome. And for this article I won’t even begin to discuss the truly troubling programs the FBI has and is using against specific journalists.
Now to my point…On July 14th, 2021 the US Government went from subtle anti-free speech program towards full blown censorship. On 7/14 the US Surgeon General released a report outlining how big technology companies, especially social media platforms, are to censor any dissenting speech that falls outside of federal government approval. While stopping short of criminalizing dissenting speech, the government declared exactly how big-tech was to use all methods at its disposal to silence dissension.
This is no small development…actually, it is the largest single outright blatant attack on the US Constitution and Bill of Rights that I can remember in my lifetime. This is a huge development, although not a surprise at all for those who have been reading my website for even a few months.
I have been writing extensively about the federal government’s efforts to destroy the Constitution for a very long time. I have outlined how big-tech was nothing more a tool of the US government, both working towards the same goal. This latest move is simply a blatant public release of the goal the federal government of the United States, with the assistance of big-tech, is moving us towards. And that goal…a solid and unchallengeable authoritarian/totalitarian state.
The most dangerous specifics in the policy statement:
Yes, there are more statement points to be made that prove beyond even a shadow of a doubt that the US government is now actively, publicly, blatantly, and seriously going public in their program to crush any dissenting speech. Meaning…the US Government is now openly suppressing/eliminating free speech. Free Speech…the most fundamental of God-given rights guaranteed to us under the Bill of Rights.
I have written repeatedly that from the perspective of the US Government, and its renegade agencies (FBI, NSA, CIA, DIA, DHS, etc.), the US Constitution is dead and gone. Period!
The only saving of the US Constitution will come from dedicated and committed people willing to give all to defend its principles.
The US Government, all branches, have no desire whatsoever to uphold the Constitution. That has been made clear by decades of eliminating rights, freedoms, and liberties. Till now they have been the evil lurking and working in the shadows…but that has now changed. They have now moved into the full light of day…unafraid of showing their evil for exactly what it is!
I want to state clearly, and hear me clearly… on the 14th of July, 2021 the US Federal Government, under the direction of an authoritarian Biden/Harris regime, made it public that they are now working openly to eliminate ALL rights that have been previously guaranteed under the US Constitution and the Bill of Rights. And they started with the most fundamental and the most needed right of all…Free Speech.
This latest version of an authoritarian regime is the most extreme in philosophy and action than anything previously seen in the USA. This is the most major and significant -and dangerous- step ever taken in modern times to subjugate the citizens of the US to the point of no return.
For those of you who are aware and informed…this is the FULL implementation of “1984”… make no doubt about it.
Where do they go from here? I am not 100% sure…but it will become obvious fairly soon. This bold step towards the destruction of the last vestiges of the US Constitution is a major mile post…one that will be followed up rather quickly by those dark and evil powers that now control every aspect of the US federal government.
Now, one more extremely disturbing point…I am sure you are aware, but let me remind you…The US Surgeon General holds the rank of Vice-Admiral. Yup, that means they are a member of the 8 branches of the armed/uniformed services of the United States of America.
I told you earlier this year that we have lost the military…this recent move makes it crystal clear that the US uniformed services no longer honors their oath to support and defend the Constitution against all enemies foreign and domestic. Those organizations are now rogue…and working openly against US citizens.
Once again…YOU HAVE BEEN WARNED!!!
Take such actions to prepare yourself, your family, your congregations, and your communities against further implementation of authoritarianism. Failure to act now ensures you will have to comply with their demands in the future…and become nothing more than sheeple.
Who is US Surgeon General Vivek Hallegere Murthy? <click here to find out>
Note: I am attaching the official full report (US government PDF file) for you to research and conclude your own opinions. < click here for the OFFICIAL-surgeon-general-confronting-health-misinformation July 14 2021 statement>
2009 - 2021 Copyright © AHTrimble.com ~ All rights reserved No reproduction or other use of this content without expressed written permission from AHTrimble.com See Content Use Policy for more information.</pre
note: While this article has been posted in previous years, I am posting it again this year because it applies…maybe even more so. And yes, I tried to do some more editing to make it read easier and flow better…and apply even more to our current 2021 situation in America.
2021 note: I would like you to seriously consider where your principles stand; your commitment to the morals. ethics, and concepts as outlined by the Declaration of Independence. In 2020/2021 we’ve seen two tragic things; 1) a huge overstep of all levels of government to control the citizens of this great country, 2) a monumental compliance of sheeple that should shake you to your very core. As we celebrate this holiday please take time to consider just how committed you are to the; 1) Republic (USA), 2) true freedom and the responsibility that goes with it, 3) the Declaration of Independence, 4) your willingness to act. Think about this…All the food and water storage in the world won’t mean a thing without a core set of principles that guide you and your family.
Independence Day (a.k.a. 4th of July) historically July 4th is the day for celebrating declaring independence from Great Britain. However, on July 2, 1776 the American Revolution leadership declared the legal separation of the Thirteen Colonies from Great Britain after the American Congress had voted to do so. And the 4th is when they actually signed the document. So the 4th of July is actually more about the Declaration of Independence becoming our first American historical document. For me…I would love to celebrate the 2nd – the 4th of July !!
And it is good to remember, open warfare had broken out a year earlier between the tyrannical British government military and American freedom fighters.
“When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands…”
The Declaration of Independence was all about dissolving the tyrannical government that had been imposed upon Americans by the British ruling class. In other words, the Americans were fed-up with the governmental tyranny they lived under and were finally doing something really serious about it. The Declaration of Independence was an explanation of what the Americans were doing and why.
But you also have to understand by what “authority” they felt they had to take such drastic actions –
“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.–That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, –That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government…”
They stated unequivocally what the problem was with the British government –
“…the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States…”
If you are reading this post you are more than likely not a first visitor to this website. And that being the case, you know I am not some blogger that wants to be all warm and fuzzy. I don’t believe in sugar-coating currents events and I
damn darn sure don’t want to give false hope and impressions of what is going on or where we as a country are headed. I always want to give you the straight talk and the straight, honest answers. But remember, these are only my opinions. Seek out, research, and come to your own conclusions of what is happening in our country today (well, over the last 120 years actually) and why.
In this day an age of misinformation and “deepfake” I want you to trust no one but yourself, and hopefully your spouse. I am confident you can figure out this situation, I just want to share some thoughts that I think are important to where we are as a country and people right now.
The Declaration of Independence listed approximately 26 grievances against the government of Britain. Among those I found these specific items to be especially interesting:
Let me make a note of those just for conversation’s sake:
So, I guess some things haven’t changed much since the days of British government tyranny.
Well, that isn’t exactly true:
Pretty much according to every negative aspect of life prior to the American Revolution, we have it ten-fold worse here in our lives…in our current day good ol’ USA. Right here, right now…in our day and age!
So what does that mean? To answer that question let’s look at who signed the Declaration of Independence:
Heyward Jr., Thomas
Lee, Francis Lightfoot
Lee, Richard Henry
Lynch Jr., Thomas
Nelson Jr., Thomas
Paine, Robert Treat
Collectively how do we refer to these men today?
We call them, or at least use to call them, freedom fighters, patriots, honorable men, and Founding Fathers. We revere them, we honor them, we appreciate and marvel at their great sacrifices that they made in founding our country. They provided a rich heritage of freedom, rights and liberty for a new country.
But what if all of that freedom fighting, resisting and generally all of that Declaration of Independence stuff was all occurring in today’s world?
What if a group of well-known and honorable men got together, outlined a long list of unjust tyrannical actions of today’s federal government against US citizens?
And then these pillars of society declared that whenever any form of government becomes destructive of freedom, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish that government, and to institute new government…even it meant with force and violence. What would happen to these individuals?
Well, let’s look at what DHS and the FBI has to say about it.
You are considered a potential domestic terrorist if you are any of the following:
• Americans who believe their “way of life” is under attack;
• Americans who are “fiercely nationalistic (as opposed to universal and international in orientation)”;
• People who consider themselves “anti-global” (presumably those who are wary of the loss of American sovereignty);
• Americans who are “suspicious of centralized federal authority”;
• Americans who are “reverent of individual liberty”;
• People who “believe in conspiracy theories that involve grave threat to national sovereignty and/or personal liberty;”
• Anti-abortion advocates (a.k.a. Pro-Life).
• Bulk purchasers of food.
• People who pay with cash.
• People who want internet privacy.
• People who display “liberty” or “freedom” oriented bumper stickers.
• People who display the American flag.
• Men and women who are veterans of the military.
So there is little doubt if the Declaration of Independence was written and signed today, all of those original Founding Fathers, all those patriots and freedom fighters, would be swept up in massive FBI raids, using no-knock warrants with fully-militarized SWAT forces. Many shot and killed in sanctioned killings such as Levoy Finicum in 2016.
Now, what does that tell you about the condition of our country today?
What does that say of our freedoms, rights and liberties?
What does it say of our massive system of government, especially at the federal level?
What does it all have to do with an “emergency preparedness” website?
Let me make it real clear for you…The major threat to America today is the loss of those rights, freedoms, and liberties…the implementation of a police state. No, not the threat of a police state…the growing police state that we live under right now. And that very same police state that grows ever stronger each and every day.
At some point an event will occur, and the country will be thrown into confusion and chaos the likes of which you have never ever seen before in history. January 6th 2021 was a close call and an example.
And when that catastrophic confusion and chaos event happens the grid will come smashing down and it will come down completely. When that happens I want you and your family to be prepared. Better yet I want you to have a group of like-minded preparedness folks organized and supportive of each other. And best of all…if you could have a whole congregation or community ready for emergencies and disasters…that would be my dream!
Folks it is coming. I assure you of that. A country, a government can’t survive much longer imposing tyranny on its citizens as our currently is…history has proven that over and over again. Please prepare yourself and your family for the emergencies and disasters that are coming.
In the mean time, because your are prepared, you will be ready for wildfires, recessions, hurricanes, earthquakes, unemployment, retirement, epidemics/pandemics, and most other natural and man-made disasters as well. And because you are prepared you shall not fear.
Just please understand what we are dealing with right now…and what is coming in the near future. Please prepare yourself and your family. And while you’re at it…enjoy your 4th of July, Independence Day, by remembering what this day represents, who was there originally, why they were there, and what principles they believed in.
Be a modern day patriot…be a Founding Father!
How committed were our Founding Fathers? “And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm Reliance on the Protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes, and our sacred Honor.”
Please consider those words, their commitment to divine principles of freedom, and their willingness to give all…even their very lives for the cause of freedom and liberty…and a break from the tyranny of an unjust government.
2009 - 2021 Copyright © AHTrimble.com ~ All rights reserved No reproduction or other use of this content without expressed written permission from AHTrimble.com See Content Use Policy for more information.
Its been a long time since my last post…a solid month and a half. Some of you might have been wondering what was going on with me…where was I…why hadn’t I posted. A few of ya’ll who are my most dedicated, kind, and caring folks actually emailed me and asked what was happening. There was even a phone conversation with with my oldest friend.
And yes, I am sure there were a few folks who were glad to see me so quiet. I bet there were even some fed LEO types that were wondering what had happened.
I would like to say there was some earth shattering, life altering, major event that took place…but sadly, no.
What I have been doing is a number of things:
The first four items are rather boring…albeit time consuming. The last item…man-oh-man…now there is a lot there…25 pages in a Word document to be exact. And that count is as of today…maybe more by Monday.
So starting on Monday May 3rd the SitRep will be posted. Well, technically the first part of the SitRep will be posted. The SitRep is so long I decided to break it into parts to make it easier to read and less time consuming than a single reading session.
I don’t think you are going to want to miss that SitRep !
Now another update…my second shot of the Moderna vaccination. I got it right at the 3 week + 2 day mark. A very interesting experience. Now, I had done my due-diligence and knew to expect some level of reaction to the shot. I am glad I did that research.
So I got the shot about 1pm on a Friday. Barely felt the injection and went on my way shopping at Safeway.
Without realizing the “why”, I felt tired Friday evening…and retired early for a good nights sleep.
Saturday morning I got up early as usual and began my chores. By noon I was feeling more tired than usual and a little sleepy as well. I laid down for a little nap…it lasted about 30 minutes. I got up finished another chore and started feeling really tired and a bit “achy” as well.
By 3pm I was sore all over, tired, and feeling “yucky”…and I figured out why…the shot. I laid down to watch TV and maybe fall asleep again.
By 5pm life sucked!! Every muscle and joint in my body was sore…to say the least…and I felt exhausted.
Fortunately I knew these were relatively common side-affects…my body just responding to the shot contents as if I really had contracted COVID.
I then went to bed about 7:30 pretty sure I would never wake up. Just kidding…going for dramatic effect. I was running a 99.7degree fever and felt like I had the flu. But no coughing, etc. Slept hard through the night.
Woke up at 7am Sunday and felt as if nothing had ever happened…I was perfectly fine…felt like a million dollars. Felt great ever since.
So that is the sum total of my Moderna vaccination experience.
2009 - 2021 Copyright © AHTrimble.com ~ All rights reserved No reproduction or other use of this content without expressed written permission from AHTrimble.com See Content Use Policy for more information.
So I came home, walked in the door, plopped down on the couch, turned on the TV and started watching a show. I have no idea what show it was, no idea who the cast was or even if it was in color or black and white. Then my wife walked in about 15 minutes later. I was quiet and barely said “hello.”
The dogs greeted her, she set her bag down, walked over and kissed me on the cheek. So far so good; then it went downhill real quickly, she started to talk to me. Oh boy, wrong move.
First she asked me how my day went, did I stop and get milk on the way home, and did I remember we had a meeting that night with some friends. Before I could really get much out of my mouth she then asked me if we would be able to do… That is when I asked her if we could talk about it later, for now I just wanted to relax. She then started asking why I needed to relax, did I have a bad day? Oh boy, wrong move…
I finally just told her in my day-job command voice that I just wanted to relax and we could talk about all those things later. And that was a wrong move on my part. Fifteen minutes later she was still asking me questions and I was still telling her I just wanted to relax. Sound familiar?
I was suffering from “decision fatigue” in a big way and I had no idea that I was…suffering from it. I had never even heard of such a thing then, now I have.
Decision fatigue is a psychological phenomenon that has only been in the research and discovery phase for about four years now. However, its effects have been felt for many thousands of years.
Decision fatigue manifests itself in:
Decision fatigue is caused by making decisions. Yes, you read that right. If you were doing hard physical work all day, far beyond what you were used to doing, there would come a point where you would become physically exhausted and unable to continue the work. The very same thing happens in your mind when living one of those days where you find yourself having to make continuous decisions all day long. And the more stressful the decisions are, the more wear and tear on your brain. Eventually your brain starts having real problems making good-quality decisions and will ultimately completely shut down your ability to make decisions at all.
Yes, all decisions take energy whether they be simple decisions or complex decisions. Stressful decisions take more energy than easy decisions. “Do you drink the white milk or the chocolate milk with breakfast?” is an easier decision. “Do we take a chance on this firefighting tactic and increase the risk of life safety?” is a much tougher and more stressful decision and thus takes far more energy.
Making a decision at breakfast will come easier than one in the evening. Why? Because you’ve been working your brain all day making decisions and you brain is more tired in the evening. If those decisions you’ve been making all day are stressful then you will be mentally exhausted and the decision you make will make in the evening be of lesser quality. Alternatively, you may become paralyzed and unable to make any decision at all.
“What would you like for dinner sweetheart?”
“I don’t care.”
“No sweetie, really, what would you like to eat tonight?”
“I don’t care at all. Whatever sounds good to you is fine with me.”
“Well, it sounds like you had a rough day. I would like to fix you whatever you would like to make you happy.”
“I don’t a crap what you fix or even if we eat tonight!”
So how does that affect us during an incident? Every day, all day and in ways you may not have thought about it. We find ourselves having to constantly make decisions throughout the day. Some decisions are significant, other more trivial, but all are important in one way or another. Understanding the physiological issues is the first step to reduce decision fatigue.
Here are the ways to reduce decisions fatigue:
Stressful environments where decision making is demanded of you can be mentally costly to you. Understanding decision fatigue and appropriate mitigation options can go a long way towards keeping you in the game and performing at acceptable levels. And “acceptable” means safe and productive in the field where your people depend on you.
Don’t neglect (i.e. ignore) decision fatigue…it cost you too much.
2009 - 2019 Copyright © AHTrimble.com ~ All rights reserved No reproduction or other use of this content without expressed written permission from AHTrimble.com See Content Use Policy for more information.
note: I think this is one of the single most valuable pieces of information you will ever read for a grid-down event. When the violence is knocking at your door you better understand this concept or you will get killed. Yes, it is that important and I am that serious.
I am sure everyone has heard the saying “I was out of the loop on that” or some variant. Generally it is meant that a person wasn’t aware of something that was going on. However, the origins of the saying is a fascinating story itself. It goes back to the early days of the Air Force and man by the name of John Boyd, a Colonel.
Col. Boyd developed this model to assist the training of military pilots. Dogfights occur at a very high speed in a three-dimensional environment. A pilot must not only have lightning fast physical reflexes, he must be able to out-think his opponent as well. To win a dogfight a pilot must be able to get his plane inside the decision loop of his opponent to line-up a kill shot…and do so without himself being shot down. It is a daunting task in the best of circumstances. And the speeds at which is occurs is unrealistic and unfathomable to most of us mere mortals.
Any high-stress, high-risk environment tends to be high-speed as well, or at least at critical points in time. A person must be able to function in that environment to the point of success. Failure to function successfully in these types of situations can lead to injury or death of yourself or someone else. Boyd developed a system that trains a person on success under stress, in high-risk environments. That system is all about acquiring information, processing that information, making a decision, and then acting on that decision.
The decision making model he developed is called OODA.
That is an acronym for; Observe, Orient, Decide, Act.
Broken down it means –
While it would be convenient to allow those brief explanations stand on their own, it is impossible if you want to truly understand how it all works together for success.
One of the best explanations of the complete OODA cycle was by Harry Hillaker –
“The key is to obscure your intentions and make them unpredictable to your opponent while you simultaneously clarify his intentions. That is, operate at a faster tempo to generate rapidly changing conditions that inhibit your opponent from adapting or reacting to those changes and that suppress or destroy his awareness. Thus, a hodgepodge of confusion and disorder occur to cause him to over- or under- react to conditions or activities that appear to be uncertain, ambiguous, or incomprehensible.”
What I am understanding Hillaker to say is fairly simple – Embrace the confusion and use it to your advantage to defeat your enemy. I think I have that understood pretty clearly but that explanation is purely for a military or tactical situation.
What about when there is no person as an enemy?
How do you even describe “enemy” is these terms?
For this discussion I will revert back to our discussion on “objectives” as the enemy. We must “win” in terms of meeting the objective. If we can’t claim a “win” then we “lose.” Losing means that our objective was not met. And success in this arena is based on achieving our objectives, hence “losing” is the enemy.
To review the 2-part series on “objectives and priorities” that appeared on August 8th and 11th.
Based on the foundation I just laid out where there is no person as an enemy, there is no option to turn confusion against our enemy. Confusion in this sense only hurts our team and hinders the successful accomplishment of our objective. However, we can easily state with certainty that seeing through, and/or eliminating, any confusion would make attaining our objective far easier. We can now agree that we only need to go half way on the confusion issue, remove it vs. install it on our non-person enemy.
In retrospect haven’t we already started down the path of confusion elimination?
Back in Objectives and Priorities (Part #2), when we were given Leader’s Intent we can/did ask for clarification to ensure a solid foundation of understanding. On the other hand, if we are the one delivering Leader’s Intent we used the SMART model to clarify the task. So exactly what confusion is left to clear-up?If you look closely at the OODA Loop you will notice that there is a very close relationship between the “OO” and the Situational Awareness. In plain English the “Observe” and “Orient” matches perfectly with the concept of Situational Awareness (SA). If your SA is good, your OO functioning correctly as well.
There is a vital need, the OODA loop outlines the entire process along with explaining the “why.” The “why” being defeating your enemy, or accomplishing your objective(s). I see the OODA loop as a bridge between two more detailed systems –
If you go back to Hillaker’s explanation there is a key part “…operate at a faster tempo to generate rapidly changing conditions…” That integrates a true sense of urgency into the overall process. The need to move at a sufficient pace to outperform your enemy. Is it not reasonable to assume that if you outperform your enemy that you win?
When you consider the different aspects of an inanimate foe, the process can be both more difficult, and yet easier. When dealing with a person as a foe you have to assume many things about that person and hope you are right. A smart foe can do things entirely unpredictable which subsequently disrupts your SA and hence, the outcome. However, an inanimate objective can be almost as unpredictable, but it is lacking the ability to purposely be unpredictable. The end result is there are pluses and minuses to both situations, animate vs. inanimate foe. For this discussion we will focus on the inanimate foe, an objective.
Let’s review what the Swiss Cheese model of risk management looks like –
If you were to chart the OODA Loop process as consisting of a combination of Situational Awareness and Risk Management it would something like this.
Here we see the OODA loop link two systems that were previously envisioned as “stand alone.” While both of those systems were valuable and applicable, they did form a complete picture for our purposes. However, there is a third system that is still missing that carries considerable influence, if not total control, over everything – Leader’s Intent.
While some could argue that Leader’s Intent would be one of the “filters” of the SA process I would disagree. I think Leader’s Intent drives all of the systems from the very beginning. Thus I propose the proper graphic representation of the system should look more like this.
Nonetheless I still maintain that the graphic reorientation is still lacking a key piece. No doubt that you would accomplish the object, but in the graphic it is implied, not explicit. And, depending on the situation you may or may not be able to undertake planning process formally, it may have to be done “on the fly” and not in written form. I am of course referring to planning as a key element.
In my way of thinking Situational Awareness is a more complete system/process to define and accomplish the observe and orient of the OODA loop. And, Risk Management encompasses the decide and act aspect of the OODA loop. Clear Leaders’ Intent drives the whole loop in harmony. How does planning work into the process?
Planning is actually a combination of orient and act parts of the OODA loop with a heavy influence of leader’s intent. Have no doubt that planning will be a key element of any success in accomplishment of an objective. However, General Eisenhower said,
“In preparing for battle I have always found that plans are useless, but planning is indispensable.”
What he was trying to get across through that statement was the fact that though the planning process we find the weaknesses, strengths, and alternatives to the environment in which we will operate. A good example of that is “combat loading” of ships. If you loaded a ship for an invasion such as D-Day the same way you would load a normal cargo ship, you would be doomed to failure.
Why? All the ammo would be loaded together in one area, all the trucks parked in another, tanks in another, Humvees it yet another area, etc.
As the invasion takes place do you need all the Humvees at one time? No. How about needing all the trucks at one time? No. And the same is true for tanks, ammo, medical supplies, etc. The military loads ships in a manner that the supplies come off in the order in which they are needed. You may only need 20 trucks at first, but you need 10 tanks before that, and 15 Humvees along with the tanks and trucks. But a sufficient amount of fuel, ammo, and medical supplies need to off-loaded with the appropriate vehicles. The planning process allows for the discovery of such issues and making the appropriate adjustments.
Another example would be the same situation of the actual invasion. The leader’s intent would be to secure town “x.” While in the planning process it becomes obvious which beach in the best to land on due to any number of factors. But, good planning demands that you have multiple alternatives. The same would be true for routes to get off the beach and to the town you are supposed to secure. Once again, in the planning process you are looking at maps that show the best/fastest way to reach the town. And yet again, you must have multiple alternatives in case your run into resistance or other obstacles with the primary route.
As the invasion unfolds different invading units run into problems getting off the beach for any number of reasons. However, since the planning process revealed multiple routes to the town, the local unit leaders can pick alternative routes as the battle unfolds. And, those choices can be made without running it up the chain of command because the optional routes are already in the plan…and approved. Hence, the local leader on the ground is still operating within the authorization given through leader’s intent.
Had there been no formal planning, the alternative routes would not have been identified ahead of time. The leader on the ground would have to discover the optional routes causing loss of time and jeopardizing successful completion of the objective.
Yet another revision of the entire process would look something like this…
How about…do I have your eyes glazed over yet?
That is obviously not my intention or objective.
What I do what you to think about is how to be successful when it comes to surviving after “grid-down” when all your prepping comes into play. But, surviving is a whole lot more than just beans, bullets, and band-aids! It is about how you become a successful prepper to become a successful survivor. And success depends on skills. No, not skill…SKILLS !
And you need to understand how to use systems such as OODA Loop, Situational Awareness, and Risk Management to improve your odds of success. If you can improve your odds of success in a grid-down situation, then it will be much easier for emergencies and disasters as well. But it all takes time, effort, and commitment.
2009 - 2019 Copyright © AHTrimble.com ~ All rights reserved No reproduction or other use of this content without expressed written permission from AHTrimble.com See Content Use Policy for more information.
Three days ago in Part #1 in this two-part series of articles I went into detail about Leader’s Intent and how to set SMART objectives. And yes, I explained why this subject was relevant. But, it will be up to you to decide how it applies to your prepping.
I can imagine some folks started reading the article a few days ago and became disinterested quickly. Or after a few paragraphs of reading some people may have become bored. And that is OK, this subject may not be for everyone. Or, some people may already know the material well enough. But, the information contained in the previous article coupled with today’s information is extremely valuable for group/team operations.
It is nice to have some cans of food stored, a gun or two, plenty of ammo, and other prepping gear. But, do you know how to bring a group together to accomplish life-saving goals or how to set priorities correctly?
Can you do so in a high-stress environment of an emergency, disaster, or grid-down? No fear! I explain how you can do just that…with confidence in your process and your decisions.
If you haven’t read the previous article three days ago you should before reading this one because today’s article builds on that one.
Now let’s move on…
There is a significant need for being able to set correct priorities in high-stress situations – which most emergencies, disasters, and grid-down events are…high stress. Without being able to set priorities consistently and correctly, a mission or group is doomed to failure. Priorities are also based on a mutual belief foundation that the entire team has agreed to.
While possibly stating the obvious, different cultures do have different beliefs…hence, different priorities. The need for the team to share a common set of beliefs and priorities is paramount.
Without an agreed upon set of beliefs and priorities I propose that any team would struggle to make good decisions. And I propose that is especially true when it comes to high-stress, high-value decisions.
Upon what basis would/could/should common priorities be set?
Without a common set of priorities, how easy would it be to make decisions? I suggest it would be increasing difficult to make decisions that would be acceptable to everyone as the stress increases. Conflict would ensue, splits would emerge, and finally the fracturing of a group or team.
Now, we could get into a whole discussion of “morals” as it relates to beliefs and priorities but that is best left for a conversation around a campfire in your own camp. For the purposes of this article I will stick to a non-religious, non-cultural based concept that has proven to work in emergencies and disasters. Over my decades in emergency services I have seen a system that works every time, in every situation. Yup, it works every single time…it is that good of a system. It is called L.I.P.S.
Back in 2005 I was at the National Fire Academy in Fredricksberg, Maryland attending a week-long course to be an instructor of instructors for all levels of ICS (100 – 402). ICS was relatively new to the structure fire department world and I was there to acquire national certification to teach ICS to students and to be able to certify other instructors. During that class the head of the national ICS course development team asked us to peer review the new ICS training materials for FEMA/DHS. Now that was interesting!
One of the areas we spent a lot of time on was the L.I.P.S. system of priority setting. It was something new to just about every aspect of emergency services at the local level. Our class developed the “S” part. But it was too late to get it into the materials. Fortunately I have my notes from that review process.
The goal was to develop and refine a decision making system that would be consistent across every emergency situation that first responders would find themselves in. It had to be applicable to hurricanes, structure fires, HazMat scenes, wildfires, floods, building collapses, plane accidents, train wrecks, vehicle accidents, bridge collapses, etc. It had to be universally applicable in every conceivable emergency situation. The outcome was L.I.P.S.
L.I.P.S.. stand for –
Life Safety – The physical safety of people is always paramount. Stated again…People’s safety is always the number one priority. There are two areas of thought on this and they vary rather widely. I refer to them as; 1) traditional, 2) New Age.
The traditional view of “life safety” puts the safety of the person being served as the most important. The person’s life doing the act of service is secondary. Example…In my structure firefighting world we would risk our life to save the life of a person trapped in a house fire. No, we wouldn’t do it stupidly, but in the traditional view, the other person’s life (the victim) had great value and was worth taking a significant risk. Even to our own potential peril.
The New Age view of life safety says the value of the person providing the service (responder) carries far more value than the person needing the service (victim). The “risk” threshold was much lower, “reasonable risk.” In other words, the rescuer would take far less risk trying to save someone, placing a much higher value on their own life then that of the victim. The new fad of thought manifested itself when I saw the newer firefighters being hired (mid-1990’s) making statements such as, “Hey, I have go home at the end of the day.” Or, “My life is more important to me than theirs.” The New Age folks also use the justification that “If we get killed or injured doing our job, then who will take care of the victims?”
There is a middle-ground…mitigating risks. There is always risk in any high-stress dangerous situation such as emergencies and disasters. Actually, even the “stress” itself carries risk to a person’s health. So the key is mitigating the high-risk actions down to “reasonable” or “acceptable” risk categories. And that is a decision, a standard, that each team must set for themselves.
Let me be clear, all emergencies, disasters, and grid-down events will have high-risk elements to them. It is impossible to avoid risk but a smart person will mitigate those risks. But, sometimes risks simply must be taken. Which ones? Well, how about rescuing your child from your burning house and risking your own life? How about saving your wife from an outlaw gang and risking your own life? Is that worth the risk, almost certainty that you might die trying?
That is the decision you must make…Is the act worth the risk?
Whichever philosophy you adhere to, traditional or new age, the common ground is life safety is the number one priority whether it be life safety or the person you are trying to save or yourself, the rescuer.
Incident Stabilization – This principle is pretty easy to understand when you realize that when an emergency or disaster has occurred, people are having a bad day. One of your primary goals is to ensure that you don’t make it worse. In other words…you want to stabilize what is happening so it doesn’t continue to escalate in terms of loss of life and property.
A good way to view this is through an example –
As a firefighting crew we would respond to a house fire. It was important that we arrive on scene as quickly as possible. Upon arrival we could then attempt to rescue people inside the structure or begin firefighting operations if no victim’s lives were at risk. However, none of that would be possible if the fire engine driver drove recklessly and had an accident on the way to the fire. If an accident occurred there could be multiple injuries, fatalities, property damage, and then tying up more emergency personnel that would need to respond to the accident vs. the house fire. In this situation…don’t make a bad day (house fire) worse by having an accident and not being able to get the fire engine and crew to the fire.
Another example would be a wildfire burning in industrial area with woods on three sides. On the fourth side was a large number of propane tanks in close proximity to a gas station. Where should the firefighters focus their actions? Of course, prevent the fire from affecting the propane tanks and gas station. If the wildfire spread to that facility the wildfire would transition to a structure fire and a HazMat situation, potentially on a large scale.
Your actions should help remedy a bad situation, not make it worse.
Property Conservation – This particular principle changed into “property/environment conservation” not long after the course material was released. I personally would rather it state “resource conservation” but LIRS wouldn’t sound as cool as LIPS. Regardless, the principle is…while responding to a problem don’t destroy anything you don’t have to.
The reasoning behind it is fairly straight forward. Everything has value; don’t destroy anything if you don’t have to. I will add to that, because you may need it later. Bottom line, don’t tear stuff up unless there is a really good reason to.
The perfect example of this comes to mind taking me back once again to my structure firefighting days. One of the early methods of fighting a house fire was to enter a house with the water flowing from the nozzle as you searched for the fire itself. The concept was to push the heat and smoke away from the firefighters. However, it also put thousands of gallons of water in the home doing tremendous damage.
That tactic was changed to not flowing water till you found the base of the fire. Then you put only enough water on the base of the fire to extinguish it. That saved 10’s of thousands of dollars of damage to the home. I remember clearly one day my crew rolled up on a house fire, the fire was located in the kitchen. My nozzleman and another firefighter pulled the 1-3/4” attack hose and headed for the kitchen. Before they could spray any water, and flood the kitchen, I had the driver run the 5 gallon pressurized water extinguisher to us. I used about 3 gallons of water/foam mixture from the portable extinguisher to put out the fire. Attacking the fire with the large hose would have probably dumped 500 – 750 gallons of water into that same kitchen. But, we put out the fire with only 3gals of water. Which tactic did less damage?
Don’t destroy or damage any resource you don’t need to, you may need it later.
Societal Restoration – This is a somewhat nebulous principle, even for emergency responders. Naturally, emergency personnel are trained to come into a bad situation and stop that situation from getting worse and not doing further damage. Once the immediate threat has been resolved the responders normally pack up and leave. But, what about the victims? Their problem is only half resolved, maybe the easiest half.
Once again take the example of the house fire. Firefighters come in and extinguish the flames, get the smoke out of the house, and even remove some of the water that they used to put out the fire. But they also did what’s called “overhaul” to ensure there is no more fire, so some of the walls and ceilings now have large holes in them. The last of the fire trucks drive away. Is the nightmare over?
Maybe the imminent threat to life and property is, but is that family immediately back to a normal life? Hardly!
The family now has to secure the home, find a place to live, contact the insurance company, deal with the adjuster, find home repair contractors, have the home repaired, replace damaged personal possessions, and try to salvage family treasures. The fire may have taken a couple of hours, or a couple of minutes, to put out…but it may take months for that family to live in their home again.
Now, take that same concept and expand it to an entire community, town, or state. The idea is to return society, family, or community, to the same condition it was before the incident occurred.
Let’s go back to the wildfire jeopardizing the propane tanks and gas station. You are the Captain of the first fire engine to arrive on the scene. What are your priorities?
Here are my suggestions according to LIPS:
Notice I took care of my crew, we have to be functional to be effective, and there were no other lives as risk so I didn’t have to put my crew in jeopardy trying to save someone else. Next we had to ensure that no one would be hurt if the fire reached the gas station or propane tanks so we just had them leave the area. Then we got to work stopping the fire.
Does that priority-based action make sense? I protected life, then attempted to stabilize the incident by not letting the fire turn into a major explosion.
Let me do a little hypothetical to make my next point, please indulge me. I have a fence between my engine and the fire. To effectively suppress the fire mentioned above I have to get to the other side of the fire…with the fence preventing free movement. There are a few options –
Which is the better decision? I hope you picked #2.
OK, we just pulled up to the fence, it’s locked. We could –
Assuming we are cutting the lock on the gate…where do you cut it? Don’t worry, that is a trick question. You actually don’t cut the lock, you cut the link of chain right next to the lock. What you have left over is a lock that still works and a chain that is probably still long enough to secure the gate.
So far, we protected the safety of the civilians in the gas station, and didn’t destroy the fence, the gate, or the lock; and we haven’t damaged the fire engine. Now we can go about the business of preventing the fire from creating an explosion at the propane tanks and gas station.
Next step in our scenario…We’ve been fighting the fire for 5 minutes and have made no headway, the fire is growing and we haven’t had much success in stopping the movement of the fire towards the propane tanks. We are almost out of water, maybe another minute or two of waster is all we have left. The next fire engine is 5 minutes away. What do we do?
OK, now go ahead, what do we do?
There could be a number of right answers, but I hope you were thinking that we needed to load up the crew and drive to a safety zone. Since we weren’t being effective in stopping the fire and we were running out of water, it was too much of a risk to the crew and potential damage to the fire engine as well. We had little choice but to leave.
I hope these examples have helped show you how to use LIPS to set priorities and then make decisions based on those priorities. But how does that tie SMART and LIPS together?
Using the same wildfire approaching the propane tanks and gas station scenario, knowing that he only has about 20 minutes before the fire reaches the gas station and propane tanks, the leader does this…
Using SMART he made the decision on what actions to take:
You can see that following the LIPS priority guidance and implementing SMART objectives you can accomplish quite a bit, even in a high-risk, high-stress environment.
Let’s see you put LIPS into action. Answer the following questions –
Since this is a time-sensitive operation the Captain wouldn’t lead the crew through writing down, discussing/reviewing, and then implementing the plan according to SMART. However, the Captain and his crew would surely be making decisions on what will be done using the SMART principles of objective setting. But they would be doing rather informally and quickly. When time is less critical you can use the full formal SMART process and actually write everything down, documenting each step and task.
As leaders develop and grow into the LIPS and SMART systems to priority setting, decision making and objective setting become second nature and virtually automatic. But, it takes learning, training, and practice to acquire those skills to be able to do that. You can learn it now, or you can learn in when the high-stress, high-risk emergency or disaster hits. Your choice.
I hope I have helped you learn a proven way to set priorities and make decisions on what actions to take. When you experience an emergency, disaster, or grid-down the ability to set priorities and make decisions quickly in high-stress and high-risk environments will be common place. I hope and pray you are a little more ready now.
2009 - 2019 Copyright © AHTrimble.com ~ All rights reserved No reproduction or other use of this content without expressed written permission from AHTrimble.com See Content Use Policy for more information.
Have you ever asked either question about any project that loomed in front of you?
Well, this article is all about answering those questions with a rock-solid, bullet-proof system. And there is only one logical place to start – Leader’s Intent.
An easy way to understand what Leander’s Intent means is to ask this question, “What does success look like?” Yup, that easy. When we are done, and we are successful…what does that success look like?
Now, just for the record…this is no light reading! This is not a short article to dump some little tip out there. It is not some tidbit of info on radios or how to harvest onion seeds. This article is a heavy-duty, in-depth article that will take a lot of reading and thinking. Some of you may not be in the mood for it, I understand that. But the information contained in this article is rock solid information on how to get things done. And in emergencies, disasters, and especially during a grid-down…you better know how to operate effectively as a group to get things done. Failure will not be an option!
Here you go…
Under most circumstances a single leader will define that “intent” for the group. They will outline what the successful outcome will be, or what it will look like. Yes, a good leader will also take input from all team members and allow everyone the opportunity to participate in defining that outcome. If they are a good leader they won’t, or shouldn’t, get into the details, they should only set the “goal” or the “vision.” The details are left to the individual experts that will be assigned tasks (objectives) within the project.
Whomever the leader is must be very clear and specific about what the “success” actually looks like. This is sometimes referred to as “end-state.” While latitude in accomplishing objectives is encouraged for team members, the leader must make their intent, or end-state, very plain so everyone fully understands it. This will also allow subject matter experts (SME) a significant opportunity to provide appropriate and valuable input during the planning process…and virtually a free hand during the implementation stage.
Once the team understands the end-state, they can work on individual objectives for the team. Sometimes this might be limited to a core of individuals who will be ultimately carrying out the action or mission. Other members of the team may only be responsible for providing support, so their participation in the primary planning would be limited. Their input/participation would come later in a meeting where it was determined if the whole team could “support the plan.”
“We will plant a garden large enough to provide at least 50% of all our vegetable needs the first year and 75% of all our vegetable needs the second year.”
From that statement there should be no confusion concerning the “end-state” or what “success looks like.” If there is confusion there are two options; 1) the leader continues to share their vision and information until all team members come to a full understanding, 2) Leader’s Intent is modified to meet the capabilities of the team.
Technically there could be a third option as well. If there is a single team member that is not comprehending the end-state, that person could be replaced with someone that does. I would caution against that option. Let me explain why.
The members of the team are there for a reason, hopefully due to their expertise in one or more areas of gardening. If that knowledge is sufficient in breadth and depth, then they could/should be considered subject matter experts (SME). While the end-state is being discussed an SME raised concerns or confusion, the leader would be well-served to reevaluate their end-state vision. The leader may need to look at the realistic expectation of the end-state. If an end-state is unrealistic, an SME will usually raise that question. A leader or team ignores those SME concerns at their own peril.
How do you determine if an end-state is realistic? To answer that question you fallback to a time tested set of parameters, “who, what, where, when.” Go back to the leader’s intent statement, or end-state. With that statement in mind, formulate the question –
“With the people we have and with what resources we have, can we accomplish that goal within the time and location we have been given?”
If the answer is anything but a resounding “Yes!” you might want to seriously review the leader’s intent as being realistic…or not. That is not to say that the team may not have to stretch their capabilities, or expand their own personal vision a little, but the question still stands…Is the end-state realistic?
If it is deemed not realistic then the immediate goal now becomes to find out why not. It may be a simple matter of the team lacking confidence in itself. Or, it may be there are just not enough resources to accomplish the task. And therein lies one of the keys to this issue, lack of resources. Customarily, the only reason a team cannot accomplish the desired end-state is due to a lack of resources. The “lack of” may be perceived or real. By that I mean that there is actually a lack of available resources to accomplish the end-state, or the team simply thinks that there is a lack of resources. That is a leader’s conundrum that the leader is responsible for deciding and should have both the ability and wherewithal to do so.
It is important to do this formally and systematically to specifically identify where the team is lacking. Without addressing each of the questions above, the team will simply flounder in project failure.
Project – “Move 125 trees from the logging area to the cabin area to complete the structures before the snow falls this weekend.”
To problem solve this the team must start brainstorming the four “W” areas mentioned. And, you go about it in the exact same order as outlined above.
Since it is not just mission accomplishment we are looking for, we are also looking for safety, effectiveness, and efficiency.
Example #1: Yes, we could get this done if we just used people to carry the logs and not use vehicles. And we would have to find 150 more people. Obviously not efficient and probably not very effective. So, the number of people becomes the problem. The initial “yes” becomes a “no” because we can’t find the people and even if we could, it wouldn’t be efficient.
Example #2: No, simply having more vehicles won’t help us accomplish this mission unless they are 4-wheel drive and large enough. Once again, we can spot that the option of more vehicles won’t help unless they are a specific type. The option of simply more vehicles lends itself to being ineffective.
Example #3: Yes, if we could accomplish the if one of two conditions could change; 1) we can accomplish the mission in another location where 2-wheel drive vehicles can operate successfully, 2) we could use 4-wheel drive vehicles that are large enough. And for this conversation let’s say that moving the location isn’t feasible.
Example #4: No, we don’t have more time to accomplish the mission, it must be accomplished within the time-frame set down because the snow will expose the families to the incoming deadly weather.
“What is the solution?”
Since you can’t change the location of the mission you must acquire 4-wheel drive vehicles that are large enough for the task. And since you can’t change the time-frame, you have to ensure that you acquire enough vehicles to get the job done. But no more than 10 vehicles, because you only have 10 people; assuming each person could drive a vehicle.
Let’s return to the end-state’s “realistic” question, the answer would be “no” unless the team could acquire the 4-wheel drive vehicles first. Without those 4-wheel drive vehicles, the end-state is completely unrealistic. That being the case a whole new end-state, or mission, must be decided on.
Let’s continue the discussion above and assume that the end-state must be met, that the time-frame is fixed, and you only have the people already on-hand to work with. What is your first objective?
It should be to acquire 4-wheel drive vehicles. If you can accomplish that acquisition then the rest of the mission is within the team’s realm of capabilities. But how do you go about setting that objective? The same way you go about setting any objective – S.M.A.R.T.
The SMART system of defining objectives has been around a long time. The general SMART system is attributed to Peter Drucker, and first appears in print is Management Review by George T. Doran as he was discussing “management by objectives.” The SMART system has been contorted over the years to meet personal opinion and specific situations, I will do the same here.
As I will use the term, SMART means –
Let me break down each one in detail:
Specific – The end result must be very specific in nature. There can be no room for error in what must be accomplished. The clarity must be understood and agreed to by all parties; the person making the assignments and the people that will carry out those assignments.
Measurable – You must be able to clearly determine that the result has been achieved, or not. It must be easily and readily apparent when the result has been accomplished. And the measurement system must be known by those involved. An objective without a way to measure the success can potentially result in a “completed” assignment that is not successful.
Action – An action must be present. The person(s) given the assignment must be responsible for carrying out some kind of act in the accomplishment of the objective. If the objective doesn’t contain an action, then the people assigned that objective have little to no control over its success or failure.
Realistic/Relevant – The objective being assigned must be realistic within the scope of training, experience, and skills, of the assigned resources. Consideration must be given to the objective vs. the person(s) assigned the objective and their potential for success in that assignment. The action that the people will carry out must be 100% relevant to the accomplishment of the mission.
Time-frame – The action for successful accomplishment of the objective must have enough time in which to complete it. The time allotted for the successful accomplishment of the objective must be sufficient in length, clearly stated, and realistic.
Here would be an example of a poor objective:
“We will plant a garden because we need the fresh food. Let’s go get that done.”
Here would be an example of a properly formed objective preceded by clear leader’s intent:
“We are short on fresh food, a garden can solve that problem. We will plant a garden that is two acres in size, consisting of a variety of foods to meet our dietary needs. We must have the garden soil ready for planting in 10 days, seeds planted within 5 days after that. Individual families will be assigned rows to keep them free of weeds. Those same families will keep plants watered on a daily basis or as needed.”
The objective(s) meet the SMART criteria using clear tasks, time-frames, and relating each action to be taken to the overall intent of the project.
Of course, once this have been laid out specific tasks would be assigned to meet each major objective of; soil readiness, seeds planted, watering, and weeding.
The process for setting objectives must be clear and used by all team members. The leader is responsible for laying out clear “intent” and overall “objective(s).” Subordinates are responsible for developing the tasks (also objectives) to meet that intent based on priorities.
And tomorrow I will finish up this article by going over “setting priorities” and how that fits with SMART objective setting.
Yeah, originally I was going to have this just be a single article…but it just grew too large for a single post. I hope you are getting something out of this…it has taken me 30+ years of incident management experience and training to learn all of this.