We’ll wager there isn’t a firefighter in the fire service who isn’t an advocate of training. But when you call that training “higher education” you start to get somewhat mixed reactions. Make higher education a prerequisite for some promotions, and now you’ve probably got some real disagreement.

What’s the correct balance between experience, training, and formal education? How do you measure experience against the other two? Which of them, if any, are indispensable? And if you’ve got formal education, what are you doing with it?

This episode had to be recorded remotely, so forgive some deficiencies with the sound quality. But it did mean that we have video to accompany our recording, so check us out on YouTube as well as all of the podcast listening platforms.

How do you figure out if someone is good for your team? Good for the organization? Good for you as a leader? What does it mean to build a diverse team, and how can different skillsets, talents, and perspectives be beneficial? Can they fill in the gaps that the team has, or that you don’t fill yourself? And when does it become unhealthy? When do differing opinions, or goals, or approaches become an obstacle to success?

In this episode, we attempt to answer all of those questions. Then Pabel proposes a system for evaluating risks and benefits, and we spend some time debating the challenges inherent in using it. In other words, what are the risks/benefits of using Pabel’s risk/benefit tool? Like the title of this episode says, you should surround yourself with people who will challenge you. We’re just practicing what we preach.

Photo by Konrad M from FreeImages

When you don’t agree with a decision made above you, is it wrong to let people know you don’t agree? For this Ten Rounds we discuss whether telling those you are supervising that you don’t agree with something undermines authority or whether it actually helps you get that thing done. Then, as is the nature of these Ten Rounds episodes, Pabel takes us in a completely different direction to talk about why turnout gear should be better designed for the individual.

No matter how hard we try to avoid them, screw-ups are going to happen. When they happen, we shouldn’t avoid acknowledging them. Don’t wear them like a badge of honor, but own them nonetheless. You’ve already paid the price for the lesson; you might as well get the benefit of learning from it.

In this episode, we go over some of our own personal biggest screw-ups (not counting the previous examples in Episodes 22, 25, 26, and 28) and how to really capitalize on the fact that you’re going to screw-up. We also take some time to talk about how to write your letter about your screw-up; what to include, and more importantly what not to put in it.

Photo by Gábor Suhajda on FreeImages

At the end of our last recording session we only had twenty minutes left to record, which isn’t enough for a full episode. So Hatch suggested we do Ten Rounds. It’s simple: any one of us can talk for two minutes uninterrupted on any topic we want. When the bell ends that round, someone else can either continue on the topic, or start on a different topic. They talk uninterrupted for two minutes, and then the next….well, you get the idea. Ten rounds of two minutes equals a 20 minute podcast.

Shane starts this one off talking for two minutes on managing expectations, and we go from there.

We all should be doing a size-up as we approach any scene. And if you’ve got other units responding with you, someone is ultimately going to be required to give some of what you’re seeing and thinking over the radio. So how important is the size-up? How good are you at giving them? How important are the words you choose to describe what you’re seeing to everyone else that’s still enroute? And what’s the most important thing to say about a building on fire?

In this episode, we sit down with Attorney Lance LoRusso to discuss the dangers of something almost all firefighters engage in: social media. And you can’t talk about social media without talking about the legal ramifications of firefighters taking pictures and video on scene. Even if you don’t post the pictures, you might be surprised where those pictures can get you.

We also tackle the very prickly topic of the limits of free speech, and answer the question, “When are you speaking for yourself and when are you speaking as a representative of the department?” And that’s something all of us should know, because it’s something that can get all of us in trouble.

There is a central concept that runs throughout Pete Blaber’s The Mission, The Men, and Me: that you should always listen to the boots on the ground. We really like that idea. Colin Powell said something similar when he described his “bias was toward the guys in the field.” But we also recognize some wiggle room within the concept, which prompted us to send out a survey to see where our listeners were on this idea.

In this episode, we talk about those survey results, where we think that wiggle room leaves us, the 1986 “boots on the ground movie” Aliens, and what happens when the left boot doesn’t match the right.

This episode is the second part to our conversation with Todd Edwards. We pick back up where we left off last time: with Todd’s view on how to approach the problem of underperforming firefighters in your station. Granted, if you’re good at rehabilitating firefighters, you usually get sent more “projects,” and as Todd explains, it can begin to seem like Groundhog Day. On top of that, you’re not going to succeed every time. We discuss the nature of success and how many times you might fail for every time you succeed.

Todd then goes on to tell us about his latest endeavor making better firefighters. His class “Breaking Barriers” is training for responders on how to interact with people who have special needs. You may be asking, “So a bad-ass firefighter isn’t teaching tactics? Instead he’s teaching how to be more understanding and sensitive?” You bet your ass he is, and it’s pretty remarkable.

If you’re interested in more information about the class after listening to the episode, Todd can be reached at [email protected].

The illusion of a perfect fire is a tempting one, but it’s also just that: an illusion. In the first part of our discussion with Todd Edwards, we talk about the “perfect fire,” the nature of evaluating our performance at every fire, and Todd’s approach that there are at least three things on every fire that we did well. And when we turn our attention to those things we didn’t do well, Todd explains that we should always start with “Why?”

We also talk to Todd about his desire to pass along realistic leadership to the fire service, and what Todd defines as The Leadership Stack Effect. Then we turn our attention to Todd’s ideas about firefighters who aren’t that engaged.