Changes in global trends
Introduction
Changes in global trends have necessitated changes in the modules of operation. With technological, social, and political changes, the plane of operation for most activities has taken a drastic shift. This has been particularly true for emergency management and the entire scope of public administration. To a great extent, the changes are desirable since they compel the authorities to change tact in handling disasters across the world. In a bid to remain in control of the events as they unfold, several steps have been adopted in the United States that have adopted a logical and concise way of handling disasters as they unfold. This paper seeks to look into what amounts to leadership in a crisis, the core principles and practices that ought to be taken into consideration in emergency management, and finally, the role of leadership in times of crisis.
To accurately demonstrate the changes that have taken place over time, …in the article, ‘The Changing Paradigm of Emergency Management: Improving Professional’ posits that ”emergency management has been subjected to a vast array of fast-moving and radical changes which have presented significant challenges to the men and women in this profession.” Further, these changes have had a ripple effect on the conceptual understanding of leadership and the principles to be adhered to. To this end, several literature materials have been developed in a bid to offer succinct and appropriate guidelines while formulating policies regarding emergency management.
To better understand the concept of emergency management, it is paramount to debunk what amounts to leadership in a crisis. In times of crisis, acting with speed and precision are some of the key defining features of the leadership. This is explained by two models that integrate the available resources and, taking into consideration the possible variables. The net effect is that the type of leadership model undertaken in one way or the other determines the success of the operation following a hazard in a given area. This, therefore, insinuates that the substance of leadership in a crisis is determined by the substance of the operation. It is the total of the procedure as well as the substance of the decisions made.
The article, The Changing Paradigm of Emergency Management: Improving Professional Development for the Emergency Manager, by Robert Grist provides a classic approach to debunking leadership in crisis in the context of emergency management. The federal agency mandated to cater to emergency management and response in the USA; the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) provides an overarching definition of what amounts to management. The discipline involves a comprehensive scope of operation. This is because, in all situations, FEMA seeks to attain “the protection of the civilian population and property from the destructive forces of natural and man-made disasters through a comprehensive program of mitigation, preparedness, response, and recovery”. This forms the fundamentals of leadership as explained below.
To begin with, the Emergency service model is one of the key indicators of leadership in crisis. On this, the author posits that the model is geared towards “the coordination of first responder resources to maximize the ability of the community to respond to major emergencies and disasters. The emergency manager performs his craft through a series of tasks and work responsibilities, somerequiring specialized skills and knowledge.” The crux of this model is that in times of crisis, the first responders and the most resourceful individuals around are the people in the area. This demonstrates the ability to leverage the available resources in times of crisis with precision and model a suitable solution. The synthesis of this model presents the opportunity to work with the community to avail help. According to FEMA, this model in cases of crisis is most helpful in instances where the severity of the hazard is manageable. It however is a desirable model in understanding leadership in times of crisis.
The second model is the public administration model. This model assumes public good and that the sole purpose for the establishment of the agency is to cater to the needs of the public. To this end, in times of crisis, leadership is best demonstrated by employing all resources available for the benefit of the people. Here, more emphasis is laid on “emergency management’s role as an element of the overall administration and governance of a community. Its intent is maintaining the continuity of operations in an effective and integrated manner in times of crisis. This model views emergency management more as a profession than a craft or skill”. It introduces the concept of professionalism and objectivity in times of crisis. They serve as the guiding compass in the models of operation of the emergency responders thus serving as constant checks towards the attainment of the goal.
What is leadership in a crisis 1 page
Principles and practices of leadership that we need to be aware of 2 page
There are established theories of leadership that chart the way forward on emergency management. One of the key thoughts communicated is that developing a theory of operation sets the path to be trodden upon by the individuals. This is critical for two reasons. First, a theory embodies divergent thoughts and creates a tangible train of thought to be looked into. In this regard, David Mcentire in his article…….. defines a theory as an embodiment “to the ideal or preferred conditions that academics are trying to promote in the world around us.”. Though a theory may not be rightly defined as a principle or practice, it is a solid thought that paves the way for the accomplishment of the aim. In this regard, a theory of operation forms the bedrock upon which all other principles are developed. Further, David Mcentire indicates that the firmness of thought is largely dependent on adherence to the theory of operation.
In public administration and particularly emergency management, there are several sets of principles and practices that one needs to be aware of. These principles help navigate the murky areas in times of crisis. This is because the order in which the events unfold is generally unchartered and unprecedented. Though there are plans laid out for any eventuality, the hazards do not strike as anticipated. Undoubtedly, there is a need to have fundamental principles that can be tweaked in cases of emergencies to provide optimum solutions. The CDC report on emergency preparedness indicates that having set principles and practices is akin to having actual standards in handling emergencies. In light of the emergencies, it is critical to note that “Each capability standard identifies priority resource elements that are relevant to both routine public health activities and essential public health services. This helps support an “everyday use” model in which applying the capability standards to improve day-to-day effectiveness builds a stronger foundation from which a jurisdictional public health agency can surge when an emergency incident occurs.” In the end, the standard of preparedness is the measure of success of the agency.
Some of the key principles and practices to be observed in emergency management include:
- Effective communication
- Disaster prevention
- Disaster preparedness
Effective communication
Emergency response involves a drastic change of events with no time to prepare for the changes. Though the Department of Homeland Security has had the opportunity to prepare for disasters, there has been a surge in disasters. They present as new and unprecedented cases. There are too many variables in the planning that it is not easy to isolate the disaster that may strike next. With this in mind, the authorities are “constantly recognizing a plethora of causatives of disasters”. This has prompted the inclusion of communication as one of the key principles in public administration and specifically for disaster management. The report published in October 2018, by the Centre for Disease Control on Public Health Emergency Preparedness and Response Capabilities: National Standards for State, Local, Tribal, and Territorial Public Health, shows that the essence of communication cannot be gainsaid. In this regard, accurate communication as to the progress in every step of the process is indispensable. To do this, the authorities must be able to “Leverage community networks to disseminate information during an incident”. Further, the report avers that accurate use of this principle will ensure success through the disaster and speed up the recovery process.
Disaster prevention
The long-standing aphorism that an ounce of prevention is better than a pound of cure has been greatly advanced in emergency management by David Macinter. In his article, The Status of Emergency Management Theory: Issues, Barriers, and Recommendations for Improved Scholarship, David notes the peculiar position occupied by disaster prevention as opposed to disaster management. There is a need to have in place all measures and mechanisms that may be required to avert the incoming danger. The path to be followed in disaster prevention comprises of an array of decisions to be made. In this regard, there is need to set up the academic qualifications to be able to rightly position individuals for the tasks ahead. The centrality of disaster preparedness is illustrated by the assertion that “preparedness” before a disaster and “improvisation” in the aftermath are the twin foundations in emergency management. The practice of collecting data and having in place all prevention mechanisms in place has been lauded by FEMA. As a principle, it is accurate to state that the work is put into preparing and averting a disaster, the faster the response and the less the casualties. It is therefore accurate to assume that disaster prevention is a top-notch principle that cannot be gainsaid.
Disaster preparedness.
Robert Grist, while elucidating on the concept of the changing paradigms in emergency management underscores the need for disaster preparedness. His averment that “Emergency Management is the process of making public officials think about things they don’t want to think about, spend money they don’t have, and prepare for something they don’t believe will ever happen”diligently captures what the principle entails. As established earlier on, it is true to note that the cyclic nature of disasters may not come to an end. This is due to the advancements in technology, changes in the political environment, and growth in the economic sphere. As a result, the threats posed in the past may have evolved. This necessitates changes in structure and approach for the authorities to be able to handle the disasters.
The concept of disaster preparedness may also be measured by the response rate of the authorities and the decision that may be made. These changes are well documented as they cumulatively form a chartered path of follow-up. The successive administrations in the United States of America have had a fair share of duty in developing disaster preparedness of the country. The novel duty has been pegged on the need to protect the citizenry and have a well-secured nation. In analyzing the administrative duties of various governments,……….
What does leadership mean in a crisis 2
The rise or fall of an empire is largely dependent on the point of command. A well-developed command system is the focal point of the establishment. This is particularly true for the establishment of a disaster management system. In a bid to respond to emergencies, the development of a streamlined point of command is critical in ensuring its success. Disasters being occurrences that cut across various spheres, there must be support from the government of the day. This is because the political support of the agencies mandated with combating disasters will undoubtedly affect the performance of the institution.
The impact of the governments in developing the emergency management system and averting destruction has been accurately captured in an article Civil Defense and Homeland Security: A Short History of National Preparedness Efforts, a September 2006 publication. Here the successive governments of the United States and their role in averting disasters are accurately captured. Some of the glaring impacts that can be traced directly to the governments concerning disaster preparedness include; policy formulation, the funding, training, and staffing of the agencies and finally the priorities set by each government. Below is a critical analysis of how each of the factors mentioned above has affected the levels of disaster preparedness and consequent handling of the disasters in the country.
Policy formulation on disaster and emergency management.
The operation of the government is dependent on the policies formulated. This is particularly true for the administration in the USA. To buttress this, Homeland’s security preparedness report indicates that “Presidential administrations can have a powerful impact on both national and citizenpreparedness. By recommending funding levels, creating new policies, and
implementing new programs; successive administrations have adapted preparedness
efforts to align with changing domestic priorities and foreign policy goals”. The efforts put by each government are documented and passed on as a legacy to the next administration. This creates the continuity of the governments and cushions the citizen from the avoidable hazards that may arise.
On policy formulation, various instances indicate that the leadership of the day determines the success or failure of government preparedness in establishing a formidable emergency management plan. As early as 1950, during the Truman administration, there were various policies designed to establish a clear and workable method for handling disasters in the USA. It is recorded that the following some agitations on disaster preparedness, Truman administration “generated a new proposal called the Blue Book, which outlined a set of civil defense functions and how they should be implemented at each level of government.45
The Blue Book also recommended the creation of an independent Federal civil defense
Organization”. The adoption of this policy work saw the creation of a concise and accurate disaster management institution in the country.
Further on policy formulation and emergency management, the Carter administration on 20th July 1979, issued an executive order number 12148. This policy instrument led to the creation of the lead agency in disaster preparedness. The Federal Emergency Management Agency was created. This has remained to be the agency in charge of disaster management in the USA to date. The milestone achieved by the creation of this agency has been termed as the “Single largest consolidation of civil defense efforts in U.S. history”. This further reinforces the idea that the policies formulated by those in leadership play a critical role in the growth of the agency hence the causal link between leadership and its role in crisis management.
Funding.
In the current world, all transactions are dependent on the availability of currencies. The emergency management institution is no exception. Generous funding of its activities builds its capacity making it more receptive to the disasters that may occur in its jurisdiction. On this note, it is noteworthy that the funding patterns determine the ostensibility of the leadership in times of crisis.
Successive governments have understood the value of adequately funding the institutions vested with the role of ensuring that the country is prepared in case of an emergency. To this end, there has been sufficient staffing and consequent training of the people in these offices. This has been done to avert the repercussions that were seen earlier in the day as a result of understaffing. Following the September 11 attack, an agreement was entered into “within the Federal
government that homeland security required a major reassessment, increased funding, and
administrative reorganization. The changes would cater to revamp institutions with renewed energies.
Conclusion.
In conclusion, there is an undeniable link between leadership and the operations in a crisis. To ultimately achieve emergency preparedness, the leadership models in place must reflect the ideals for the establishment of the institution. There must be fundamental principles that are adhered to in a bid to ensure the success of the undertaking. Finally, the impact f leadership both at the state level and federal level cannot be gainsaid in emergency management in a country. It is therefore essential that those in authority undertake their tasks diligently to be able to buffer the activities of disaster management teams in the country.