Standard Firefighting Orders: Shifts in Meaning and Authority

(1950s-today)

**Answers** to questions like...

*What are the Fire Orders for?*

*How should they be used?*

...**have** **changed over time** as:

*approaches to managing people have changed*

*approaches to managing fire have changed*

[Before the Fire Orders (1930s-1950s)]{.underline}

> "**Heroes**" were publicly praised for displaying two **virtues**
> (e.g., in *Fire Control Notes*):
>
> **keeping fires small**
>
> *while also*
>
> **keeping crews safe**
>
> Failures were publicly singled out.

*But they were also offered second chances...*

> "Praise and blame" approach eventually considered unfair:
>
> "Same actions praised in one situation is criticized in another."
>
> Many called for standardization:
>
> **"There ought to be a rule..."**

[Standard Firefighting Orders (developed,1957)]{.underline}

Chief convened a safety task force (1957)

> Analyzed 20 years of fatality fires
>
> Focused on 5 fires where 10 or more firefighters were killed at once
>
> e.g., Inaja Fire, California, 1956 (11 dead)
>
> Also examined "successful" fires
>
> "**Sinners**"
>
> "Men who know better...just did not pay adequate attention" to small
> details when it mattered most. (*Considered a problem of forgetting.)*
>
> "**Coolheads**"
>
> Someone who "sized up a local change in fire behavior and figured out
> what would happen in time to get the men to safety."
> (*[How]{.underline} they did so not really understood.)*
>
> Found 11 common factors among the failures
>
> Successes attributed to: "**Someone did not fail** in one of these
> critical categories."
>
> Turned them into **orders**
>
> Rearranged, edited down to 9
>
> Chief McArdle added #10:
>
> "Fight fire aggressively but provide for safety first"
>
> (Note that Fire Order #10 looks a lot like "keep fires small" and
> "keep people safe" \-- the two heroic virtues)

[Ten Standard Fire Orders (first revision, 1987)]{.underline}

> Now applied to all agencies through the NWCG
>
> Reordered for easier memorization
>
> Fire Orders [shifted]{.underline}...
>
> ...from an individual to an **organizational list**
>
> *"Checklist" for evaluating individual fires*
>
> ...from a list of virtues to a **list of duties**
>
> *Accident reports started to find Fire Order **"violations"** in
> 1990s*
>
> *Violation of employee-employer contract*

[TriData Study (1996-1998)]{.underline}

> Revealed a **split in opinion** over the precise authority of the Fire
> Orders. *(1,000 firefighters were surveyed)*
>
> Some called them "**guidelines.**"
>
> Some called them "**hard and fast rules.**"
>
> http://www.wildfirelessons.net/documents/WFSAS_Part_3_Chapter_4.pdf

[Standard Firefighting Orders (second revision, 2003)]{.underline}

> Many called for NWCG to get "**back to the original intent**" of the
> Fire Orders
>
> Steps to be followed in order
>
> Aligned with concept of "risk management"
>
> Fire Order #10 changed to:
>
> "Fight fire aggressively ***having provided for*** safety first."
>
> (i.e., permission to fight the fire is earned after the first nine
> items are completed)

[Same Items, Three Different Kinds of Lists:]{.underline}

> 1957 Personal taskbook for individual transformation
>
> 1987 Orders to follow in all situations (e.g., even driving)
>
> 2003 Tool for broader organizational "risk management"

[Same Items in Same Order, Different View of the Group
Process:]{.underline}

> 1957 Fire Orders are described as a tool for the **group** to help the
> **individual** to not forget things they already knew *(until the
> individual virtues became automatic).*
>
> 2003 Fire Orders are described as a tool for the **individual** to use
> to question a decision emerging in the **group** *(e.g., Cramer Fire
> accident investigation report).*