The Ultimate Guide to Excellent Crisis Leadership

By Dr. Jeffrey C. Fox

This book is for anyone who is interested in crisis leadership. The concepts offered apply to anyone whether he or she is a seasoned leader or inspiring new one, for public or private life, for any type of crisis or any type of discipline. This is a comprehensive examination of all aspects of crisis leadership. We will cover several overarching themes. We will look at the skills needed to be an effective crisis leader. We will examine leadership styles, how best to communicate in a crisis, and the human component of a crisis. We will examine the team concept of crisis management. We will look at how leadership can and should function during the prevention, mitigation, preparedness, response, and recovery phases of a crisis. We will examine decision making and problem solving. We consider how we might use after action reporting to enhance future responses or prevent, prepare for, or mitigate crises.

• Language: English
• Publisher: Xlibris US
• Release date: Apr 22, 2024
• ISBN: 9798369417898

Dr. Jeffrey C. Fox

n/a

Book preview

Copyright © 2024 by Dr. Jeffrey C. Fox.

All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the copyright owner.

Any people depicted in stock imagery provided by Getty Images are models, and such images are being used for illustrative purposes only.

Certain stock imagery © Getty Images.

Rev. date: 04/22/2024

Xlibris

844-714-8691

www.Xlibris.com

857414

To the victims of

the Uvalde mass shooting

CONTENTS

Illustrations

Preface

Acknowledgments

Chapter 1   Understanding Crisis Leadership

Chapter 2   Crisis Management

Chapter 3   Effective Crisis Leadership

Chapter 4   Leadership Style(s) Recipe for Success

Chapter 5   Effective Crisis Communications

Chapter 6   The Human Impact of Crises

Chapter 7   The Human Elements of Disaster/Emergency Management and Incident Command

Chapter 8   Preventing, Preparing for, and Mitigating Crises

Chapter 9   Responding to Crises

Chapter 10   Recovering from Crises (Resiliency and Bouncing Back)

Chapter 11   Utilizing Intelligence and Situational Awareness

Chapter 12   Problem-Solving and Decision-Making for Crisis Leadership

Chapter 13   After-Incident Analysis (After-Action Review Reporting) and Learning from the Past

References

About the Author

ILLUSTRATIONS

Four-Level Crisis Classification Scheme

Leadership Actions

Crisis Leadership Competencies

Levels of Leadership

Crisis Management Should Entail These Five Phases or Stages

The Elements of a Crisis Response

Crisis Intervention Cycle

Disaster Management Flowchart

Phases of Crisis Management

Draft Crisis Management Policy

Actionable Activities during the Phases of a Disaster

Crisis Stages

Crisis Management Perspectives

Integrated Model of Extreme Crisis Leadership

Hierarchy of Capabilities

Leadership Competencies during a Crisis

Comparing ICS with Crisis Leadership

Principles of Leadership in a Crisis

Leadership Styles

Goleman’s Six Leadership Styles

Integrated Leadership

Transformational Leader

Engagement from Passive to Active

Situational Leadership Curve

Juxtaposing Servant and Traditional Leaders

Traditional Leadership

Servant Leadership

Types of Communication

How We Communicate

Contact and Information Centers

Crisis Communication Strategies

Juxtaposing Good and Bad Communication

General Adaptation Syndrome

Phases of Disaster

Levels of Stress

The Arousal Continuum

Stress Continuum

Trauma Responses

Burnout versus Stress

Pathological Chronosystem of a Crisis Event

Expanding Comfort Zones

Achievement Pyramid

Peak Performance Curve

High-Performance Pyramid

Performance Level

The Stress Process

Same Goals but Different Foci

The Five Cs

Leaders’ Relationships

Components of Trust

Five Dysfunctions of a Team

Generated Demands

Strong Sense of Teamwork

Emergency Management Continuum

An All-Hazards Emergency Management Cycle

Planning Life Cycle

Business Continuity Management

Business Continuity Life Cycle

Linear Model

All-Hazards Approach

Elements of an Effective Crisis Management Program

The All-Hazards Continuity of Operations Continuum

Example—Contingency Risks

Contingency Plan Hazard Identification and Control Process

Plan Development

Formulation of Plan

Continuous Improvement to Enhance Critical Infrastructure

Risk Assessment Process

NIMS Components

Universal for all Incident Types

Incident Command System

The Planning P

Recovery Timeline

Phases of Postdisaster Recovery

Resilience Indicators

Elements of Continuity of Operations Planning (COOP)

COOP—The Simple Explanation

COOP—A Holistic Perspective

The Intelligence Cycle

Intelligence for Emergency Management

Features of Actionable Intelligence

Situational Awareness Levels

Situational Awareness: Risk, Safety, Security, and Resilience

Pyramid of Situational Awareness

Four Stages of Situational Awareness

Character- or Emotion-Driven Behaviors

SARA Problem-Solving Model

OODA Loop

Rational Decision-Making Process

Intelligence in Action

Factors Affecting Decision-Making in a Crisis

How Bounded Rationality Works

Bounded Rationality—Constraints to Rational Decision-Making

Problem-Solving Models

Process of After-Action Reviews

Features of AARs of Different Sizes and Scales

Initial Prompts for Focusing the Discussion for before, during, and After-Action Reviews

Sample Improvement Matrix for AAR

After-Action Review Table Covering Guidance and Notes

AAR Design

PREFACE

This book is for anyone who is interested in crisis leadership. The concepts offered apply to anyone, whether he or she is a seasoned leader or inspiring new one, for public or private life, for any type of crisis or any type of discipline.

This is a comprehensive examination of all aspects of crisis leadership. We will cover several overarching themes. We will look at the skills needed to be an effective crisis leader. We will examine leadership styles, how best to communicate in a crisis, and the human component of a crisis. We will examine the team concept of crisis management. Further, we will look at how leadership can and should function during the prevention, mitigation, preparedness, response, and recovery phases of a crisis. We will examine decision-making and problem-solving as they relate to crisis management. Finally, we will look at how we might use after-action reporting to enhance future responses or prevent, prepare for, or mitigate crises.

This book is written from and for a dual perspective or audience. In other words, for the internal workings, concerns, and functions of any type of company, agency, or organization, houses of worship, families, and communities. Second, from an external perspective—this being first responder type agencies, such as but not limited to emergency medical services, emergency management, fire, police, transportation, public works, volunteers, faith-based agencies, and many other nongovernmental organizations. Remember, it is difficult to help others until your own house is in order.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The completion of this book would not have been possible without the support, patience, and love of my wife, Pam. Without her, I could not have accomplished this work. Most important, I owe any success I have had in my life to God. In Him, all things are possible. I thank God for allowing me to have and understand my calling(s) in life.

I am thankful to those leaders who enter the arena. You do not fear acting and are not afraid of failure. You understand it is not the critic who counts; not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles, or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. You understand the credit belongs to the man or woman who is in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood; who strives valiantly; who errs, who comes short again and again, because there is no effort without error and shortcoming; but who does actually strive to do the deeds (Teddy Roosevelt).

To all my sheepdogs. Keep protecting the flock.

CHAPTER 1

Understanding Crisis Leadership

There can’t be a crisis next week. My schedule is already full.

—Henry Kissinger

These are the times that try men’s souls.

—Thomas Paine

You probably already saw the symbolism of the book cover with the stormy sea and strong lighthouse casting out its light. Great crisis leaders are like lighthouses. Lighthouses represent direction, hope, and safety. They serve as beacons of light in times of darkness, guiding ships to shore and offering a sense of security. Throughout history, they have been associated with resilience, overcoming difficulties, and circumnavigating life’s challenges. Lighthouses stand strong. They do not retreat. They stand alone in times of great tumult. Are you a lighthouse for others? I hope so.

Control the situation. Do not let the situation control you.

You may or may not be familiar with the National Response Framework (NRF), the National Incident Management System (NIMS), and the Incident Command System (ICS). These are all great guidelines and tools for handling pretty much any incident or event. However, none of these great tools offer a particular leadership style to use during an event. This is all left to chance. That is why I wrote this book.

I am a fan of three leadership styles in general—servant leadership, transformational leadership, and situational leadership. I would argue that these are all applicable during a crisis but in different ways and to varying degrees. I would put a heavy dose of situational leadership into the mix of a crisis, with a dose of servant leadership and then a little transformational leadership. I would add one more style that runs along with transformational, and that is transactional. During a crisis, we do not often have time to take a poll or do a lot of voting. We should collaborate in a unified command when determining priorities and goals. The one style I never want to put into my leadership stew is laissez-faire leadership.

Understanding Emergency and Incident Management

Kemp (2004) stated that there are four phases of emergency management, which are mitigation, preparedness, response, and recovery. I argue for a fifth phase, which should come first, and that is prevention. The NIMS is applicable across all four/five stages. The ICS is mainly found to function within the response and recovery stages. Kemp went on to state that ICS should not be confused with mutual aid agreements. The ICS provides a structure or framework within which to work. Mutual aid agreements cannot take the place of ICS or NIMS in general. All emergencies are local in nature. Kemp went on to state that local agencies that use the ICS have a functional chain of command, reduce the possibility of duplication of services, and are overall more effective in the response and recovery phases. Lastly, an all-hazards approach must be adopted by all agencies, both public and private (Alexander 2002, 2002a; Bullock et al. 2006; Canton 2007; Klann 2003; Lindell et al. 2007; Maccoby 2000; Walsh et al. 2005; Wise and Nader 2002).

Command, control, coordination, cooperation, collaboration, and communications are considered key elements to effective incident management (Alexander 2002, 2002a; Brunacini 2002; Molino 2006; Rosenthal 2003; Wise and Nader 2002). Molino (2006) described the emergency response priorities, which are life safety, incident stabilization, and property conservation/preservation (Brown 2005; Brunacini 2002; Reardon 2005). According to Molino (2006) and Flin (1996), in a small incident, there may be one officer, one fire chief and several firefighters, one transportation supervisor and workers, one wrecker driver, and so on. Incident command could change several times throughout the incident. Yet there can be disagreements about who does what and when. Individual personalities may play a role, along with missions, organizational cultures, past experiences with one another or one another’s discipline, levels of experience, and leadership styles, among many other factors (Allred 2004; Canton 2007; Klann 2003; Mitroff 2004).

Most incidents are small and remain local in nature, but then we have events such as a Washington, DC, sniper-style attack; attacks by terrorists, such as those on the Pentagon, Twin Towers, and Flight 93; or even a larger-scale crisis event such as Hurricane Katrina or COVID, and issues increase exponentially. Unified command may be within a single discipline, such as a county police force, a state police force, or a federal law enforcement agency, or across other disciplines or agencies (Alexander 2002, 2002a; Allred 2004; Boin et al. 2005; Brunacini 2002; Lencioni 2002; Lester and Krejci 2007; Smits and Ally 2003).

Governmental agency personnel respond to incidents, emergencies, and disasters daily (Boin et al. 2005; Bourne 2005). While the dynamics of each incident may differ, there is one common thread: it will take decisive and appropriate leadership to resolve the situation (Bitto 2007; Bourne 2005; Howitt 2004; Mitroff 2004). Lester (2007) stated that it will take transformational leadership, coupled with NIMS, to achieve success during all phases of a disaster. Guidelines have been provided regarding how to prepare for and respond to incidents in a uniform manner throughout the country (Bourne 2005; Hanneman 2007; Perry 2003). What appear to be lacking are guidelines on how to lead during such incidents. Team or group leadership has been the subject of much research (Avolio et al. 2003). What remains to be examined in detail is individual, group, and/or team leadership during an actual incident. Even in the limited number of studies completed regarding team or group leadership, the focus has been on groups who have been established and function in a less-than-hazardous environment (Avolio et al. 2003; Fox 2009; Jung and Sosik 2002; Kearney and Gebert 2009; King 2002).

Phillips (1999) stated that the incident commander is responsible for establishing command, ensuring responder safety, and assessing incident priorities. Furthermore, the incident commander is responsible for developing and implementing the incident action plan, developing an organizational structure as necessary, and maintaining a manageable span of control. Finally, the incident commander must manage incident resources and coordinate overall emergency activities. According to Hanneman (2007), most incident commanders initially see a problem from their own areas of expertise or duty. Incident commanders can easily become fixated on their own perspective and bound by the biases of their discipline, legal, or functional responsibilities. However, visionary or progressive incident commanders can look beyond the paradigms of their discipline and incorporate or understand the views of commanders from other disciplines (Canton 2007; Klann 2003; Lester and Krejci 2007; Nemeth 2013; Yukl 2006).

Klann (2003) declared that a leader’s influencing skills are critical during a crisis. Murgallis (2005) argued that team confidence begins with those who lead the team. Klann stated that leaders should concentrate on three key influencing skills during a crisis: communication, clarity of vision and values, and caring for others. These influencing skills fit the definition of transformational leadership. When considering crisis, emergency, or incident response, the team leader is actually the agency commander on the scene. Hence, unified command (UC) and incident command (IC) need more attention in the context of NIMS and ICS (Klann and Cartwright 2004; Lennartsson 2006; Lester and Krejci 2007; Moran, Perrin, and Blauth 2005).

Lindell et al. (2007) set forth the seven basic principles of ICS, which are standardization, functional specificity, manageable span of control, unit integrity, unified command, management by objectives, and comprehensive resource management (Annelli 2006; Cardwell and Cooney 2000; Herron 2004; Jamieson 2005). Canton (2007) and Connor (1997) stated that ICS developed out of the need to manage the response of participating agencies. The fire service was the first to implement and use ICS. It remained solely in use of the fire service for many years. It was only in the 1990s when other disciplines, such as some agencies, adopted ICS. Only since 9/11 has a mandate come down that all agencies must use ICS. This mandate is tied to federal funding (Alexander 2002, 2002a; Brown 2005; Buntin 2001; Molino 2006; Nemeth 2013; Quarantelli 1979, 1998; Quarantelli and Perry 2005; Wilcox and Rush 2004).

According to Canton (2007), in 1971, Firefighting Resources of Southern California Organized for Potential Emergencies (FIRESCOPE) identified six major problem areas found while fighting California wildfires. These six areas were lack of common organization, poor on-scene and interagency communications, inadequate joint planning, lack of valid and timely intelligence, inadequate resource management, and limited prediction capability (286; Buntin 2001; Cardwell and Cooney 2000). While commanders are to be guided by the concepts of ICS, how they carry out these functions will likely vary (Comfort 2002; Connor 1997). Furthermore, it is acknowledged that some will carry out the concepts of ICS rather reluctantly (McCeight and Hagen 2007). According to Buck (2004), using a UC under NIMS should take into account the missions of all responding agencies (Canton 2007; Klann 2003; Mitroff 2004; Quarantelli 1979, 1998; Quarantelli and Perry 2005).

According to Flin (1996) and Molino (2006), fire/EMS, police, and transportation agencies have various roles, objectives, and/or missions to play in many incidents. However, transportation agencies are sometimes not considered as being on the same response level as fire/EMS and police. Helman (2004) stated that the other participants, labeled secondary responders, consisted of transportation agencies, towing and recovery service providers, and hazardous material contractors (Corbin et al. 2007; Hopkins 2001, 2007). Typically, in highway incidents, fire/EMS personnel may arrive and set up command before the police arrive. Transportation agencies have a significant stake in highway incident management but usually have no direct control over when to open the highway, since statutory authority usually rests with the police or fire agencies (Allred 2004; Miller 2007). Canton (2007) added an opposing view regarding the utility of ICS, based on Dr. Russell Dyne’s comments concerning community emergency planning. Canton stated that the military model assumes that preemergency social organizations will collapse, and commanders will be incapable of useful personal action. Canton argued that ICS is based on a military model. Canton’s argument relies on the assumption that responding agencies had a preemergency social relationship to begin with. Such a prosocial relationship did not exist between the New York City police and fire agencies on 9/11 (Nicholson 2003). Canton discussed Botterell’s laws of emergency management: stress creates an opportunity for unintelligent decisions; the problem is at the starting point; regardless of who one trains, other untrained people will respond; and expectation is reality. Canton’s argument has some merit, but overall, I do not agree with his premise. Now that we have laid out some fundamentals of emergency management, let us delve deeper into understanding crises (Canton 2007; Klann 2003; Mitroff 2004; Quarantelli 1979, 1998; Quarantelli and Perry 2005).

What is a crisis?

A crisis is characterized by a high degree of instability and carries the potential for extremely negative results that can endanger the lives of people in a community (Klann 2003). The word crisis was used for this book, but there are many other words that are just as suitable for what the book covers and what you will face. Such words as catastrophe, disaster, and emergency are just as accurate. First responders often respond to calls or incidents. These terms can also be used (Alexander 2002, 2002a; Canton 2007; Klann 2003; Mitroff 2004; Quarantelli 1979, 1998; Quarantelli and Perry 2005).

According to Klann (2003), it is an event(s) that causes instability and can interrupt the continuity of an organization. It is a turning point and affects the emotions of employees and the workplace culture or community.

✓ It is characterized by a high degree of chaos and confusion.

✓ It can be internal or external.

✓ Expert leadership is necessary for guiding a team through a crisis and can greatly reduce the effects of a crisis.

Four-Level Crisis Classification Scheme

011_a_aa.jpg

(Canton, 2007; Harmening, 2014; Klann, 2003; Mitroff, 2004; Quarantelli, 1979, 1998; Quarantelli and Perry, 2005)

What are the threats and hazards we face?

We will spend an entire chapter on this topic, but it bears discussing early on. What is risk? Risk is the likelihood of a threat or hazard occurring to an object (person, place, or thing) that is to be protected. Threats and hazards are human caused (nonaccidental and accidental) and natural.

✓ Hazards can be natural or human caused and are generally unintentional or without malice.

✓ Threats are always human caused and are intentional with malice.

✓ Think all hazards (including threats).

✓ There are many variables—think local, regional, state, country, and global.

✓ There are cascading effects.

When determining threats and hazards and the risks associated with them, the key is understanding first what particular hazards threaten the object and situation under investigation and then the best possible methods to prevent or mitigate the hazards threatening the object. Risk is the potential for an unwanted outcome resulting from an incident, event, or occurrence, as determined by its likelihood and the associated consequences. Additionally, risk is the potential for an adverse outcome assessed as a function of threats, vulnerabilities, and consequences associated with an incident, event, or occurrence (Bennett 2007).

Why assess/manage risk?

✓ safety

✓ security

✓ protection

✓ cost reduction (in the long run)

✓ ethical

✓ compliance (policy, legal [liability], accreditation, etc.)

✓ grants

✓ morale

✓ increases the speed of response and recovery efforts (Bennett 2007)

We manage risk not only to ensure the safety of the object being protected but also to ensure the safety of the public and anyone who comes into contact with the protected object. We do this through an analysis of the threats to the object, ensuring the protection and security of the object (and others) from harm. We do not want a crisis to occur.

Hazard identification and risk assessment provides the factual basis for activities proposed in the strategy portion of a hazard mitigation plan. An effective risk assessment informs proposed actions by focusing attention and resources on the greatest risks. The four basic components of a risk assessment are as follows:

1) Hazard identification

2) Profiling of hazard events

3) Inventory of assets

4) Estimation of potential human and economic losses based on the exposure and vulnerability of people, buildings, and infrastructure (Bennett 2007)

Crisis Scenarios—Risks

Natural Risks

✓ hurricanes

✓ windstorms

✓ tornadoes

✓ floods

✓ diseases

✓ snow

✓ ice storms

✓ fires

✓ lightning

✓ earthquakes

✓ tsunamis

✓ derechos

✓ electromagnetic pulses (EMP)

Technological Risks

✓ power plants

✓ underground and above-ground pipelines

✓ chemical plants

✓ hazardous materials

✓ interstate interchanges

✓ rail transport

✓ water treatment

✓ air transport

✓ water transport

✓ cyber

Human Risks

✓ terrorism

✓ criminal acts

✓ health risks

✓ accidents

✓ unethical acts

Business Risks

✓ hostile takeover (change in group in power)

✓ financial catastrophe (budget reductions; loss of grants, mishandling)

✓ loss of facilities/resources

✓ employee sabotage/violence

✓ executive or employee(s) scandal/defection

✓ harassment issues

✓ civil litigation

✓ strike/boycott (Alexander 2002, 2002a; Aten and Boan 2006; Canton 2007; Harmening 2014; James and Wooten 2010; Klann 2003; Mitroff 2004).

Think all hazards.

Crisis leadership can be defined as the ability of leaders not to show different leadership competencies but rather display the same competencies under extreme pressure that characterize a crisis, namely uncertainty, high levels of emotion, the need for swift decision-making, and, at times, and intolerable external scrutiny.

What is crisis leadership?

✓ It is the ability to influence others during good times and times of instability.

✓ It requires the same skills and traits, but they are amplified during a crisis.

✓ The essence of crisis leadership can be narrowed to three principal areas:

o communication

o clarity of vision and values

o caring (Barton 2008; Klann 2003, 13–15; Oldham 2003)

Communication

✓ Be clear and concise.

✓ Not just verbal; need to understand nonverbals like emotion and tone.

✓ Emphasize that it will be okay.

Clarity of Vision and Values

✓ Leader is driven by values, either personal or professional.

✓ Establish what is important.

✓ Make sure the team has a common goal.

Caring

✓ It is sincere interest and genuine concern for people.

✓ It is relating to others and their emotions.

✓ People have a basic need to be valued. (Barton 2008; Klann 2003, 13–15)

Crisis: A Systems Approach

We are used to seeing organizations divided into divisions like finance, human resources, security, production, and so on. It is important to see an organization as holistic, as a whole entity instead of as parts of the whole. Picturing an organization as a whole, we can then understand how one crisis can set off a chain reaction of other crises (Barton 2008; Mitroff 2003, 2004, 23, 34, 36; Osborne and Plastrik 1997).

Leadership Actions

(Canton 2007; Justis 1975; Klann 2003; Mitroff 2004; Parachin 2003)

The first item you saw under action was sense making. You will see this term many times. It is critical that the leader be able to recognize what is about to happen or what is happening. This might sound basic, but on many occassions, leaders have been oblivous to their surroundings. At times, they might have even been ignorantly blissful! Also notice that each needed action has a skill that is needed.

Crisis Leadership Competencies

017_a_aa.jpg

(Alexander 2002, 2002a; Canton 2007; Klann 2003; Mitroff 2004)

Adaptive Competencies

✓ decision-making

✓ systems thinking

✓ sense making

✓ tacit skills

Task Competencies

✓ preparing and planning

✓ communicating

✓ colloborating

People Competencies

✓ inspiring and influencing

✓ leadership presence

✓ empathy and awareness (Canton 2007; Klann 2003; Mitroff 2004; Nudell and Anotkol 1997; Parachin 2003)

Levels of Leadership

First responder leaders will likely be better prepared to lead frontline workers for several reasons. They may have held those same positions most recently and will understand the task and how to carry it out. Second, they will likely be the normal first-line supervisor and hopefully will have built rapport and great team cohesion before the event. The executive, on the other hand, may have been away from line events for a good while or in some cases may have never done the line work. He or she may be a political appointee with no real-life experience. He or she might have come from another agency or from another part of the same agency. The executive is supposed to be looking at the bigger picture. The first-line supervisor will be the boots on the ground. Each has a significant role to play.

Summary

As leaders, it is important to begin leading people early on. This allows us to build relationships and make connections. All the while, we will be promoting vision and values through clear communication. Employees who know we care about them will produce great dividends when a crisis occurs. To be effective, this is a constant process before, during, and after an emergency. When planning and responding, we need to account for all sectors of the population and be able to establish an incident command structure for information flow and decision-making. If you are not a good leader on a clear day, it will be hard to be a great leader on a stormy day.

Real Life

A moment ago, I mentioned the executive leader’s position. Many years ago, I had to train a vast number of employees in all things NIMS and ICS. I was training a large group of employees, and it involved a lot of interaction and role-playing. On two occasions, the same thing happened. The room was filled with line supervisors, midlevel, and executives. Both times when the executives caught me alone during breaks, each severely chided me for them having to attend the training. They were very unhappy and saw no need for them to be there. It was rather beneath them, they