On the one hand, we like ‘or’ questions because they are simple – it’s either one or the other. For example, do we use traditional aggressive interior firefighting tactics or do we use the results of recent research on fire behavior and flow control to drive a new approach to structure firefighting? Or, who wins - management or labor? It has to be one or the other, right? Or what is more important, civilian or firefighter safety? And while we’re on the subject, being safe versus being aggressive? We position issues as black or white with no other options.
It has been my observation that we in the fire service are often trapped by the tyranny of ‘or’. And in almost every instance, there is a sweet spot somewhere in the middle that does a pretty good job of meeting needs on both sides. When we substitute ‘and’ in place or ‘or’ we open up our range of choices or solutions to the infinite number of options that are between A and B. In brief, his concept is that when we consider a decision and position it as an ‘or’ proposition (we must choose A or B), we are confining ourselves to only one of two choices – and they are usually at opposite ends of the spectrum. One of his concepts that has significant applicability to fire service leadership is the title of this post – the tyranny of ‘OR’ and the genius of ‘and’.
One of my favorite business authors is Jim Collins and he has probably shaped my business and leadership thinking more than anyone else.
0 kommentar(er)
