Unconventional Crises
Require Unconventional Leadership
by
Ed Beakley
Director, Project White Horse 084640
If you “Google”
leadership, you will find that there are 158 million sites noted. Yet the
events of this century make me wonder if we really understand what leadership
must be in our current environment, and lead me to ask on the opening page of my
Project White Horse website, that what if
nothing leaders have ever been taught or experienced is sufficient to face the
problem?
The implication
is that there is more to survival in worst case disasters than just “who’s in
charge,” and that we as citizens need to be less expectant of the arrival of duex
ex machina by way of the cavalry is on the way, and become more able to be an
active part in our own survival when worst cases occur. Leadership required –
but maybe of a different kind.
The nature of
worst cases is that the complexity and chaos generated, almost by definition
mean that no leader by himself is capable of the multi-faceted decisions
required.
Many types of
emergencies occur every day and are routinely mitigated by local first
responders. In certain areas hurricanes, flooding, earthquakes and fire are
seasonal or typical of the area. The manifestation is well understood and
planning well thought out and resourced. While they move past routine
emergencies based on magnitude of destruction and/or significant loss of life,
physical response assistance goes no higher than county or state mutual aid and
the need for federal assistance is basically limited to financial aid. Command and control during the event and
recovery follows the locally developed “playbook.” A Category 3 level (CAT 3) hurricane is a
good example of a large emergency or conventional level disaster event, with
potential for significant damage, yet normally it is well understood with only a small
possibility of response being overwhelmed at the local level.
But researchers note that there are “disasters
that go beyond typical disasters.” The latter have come to be noted as
“catastrophes.” Most notably would be
9/11, the 2004 Tsunami, Hurricane Katrina in 2005, and in 2010, the earthquakes
in Haiti and the Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill. indeed, earthquakes, heat waves,
floods, volcanoes, super typhoons, blizzards, landslides and droughts killed at
least a quarter million people in 2010 — the deadliest year in more than a
generation. More people were killed worldwide by natural disasters that year
than have been killed in terrorism attacks in the past 40 years combined.
By virtue of unusual scale, a previously
unknown cause, or an atypical combination of sources, responders face
challenges that are indeed novel, the facts and implications of which cannot be
completely assimilated in the moment of crisis. These events are not only characterized by high
stakes—the likelihood of major losses (to life, limb, property, heritage, or
other highly valued social or private assets) – but they have shared striking
similarities, inasmuch as they foster destabilization
of
leaders in charge of response and reconstruction efforts, and the whole of
communities.
Dr. Erwan Lagadec in Unconventional
Crises, Unconventional Response: Reforming Leadership in the Age of
Catastrophic Crises and Hypercomplexity further defined these events as
follows:
Conventional crises rarely require high levels of inbuilt
resiliency from our systems. This is because such events tend to affect
circumscribed “ground zeros,” and therefore can be tackled by bringing to bear
the “normal” assets and strategies of the unscathed outside on the impacted
area. On the other hand, catastrophic or
hyper-complex events will destabilize entire systems, forcing leaders and
public alike to abandon “normality” altogether, and look for a coherent fallback
position. However, it is eminently difficult to organize an orderly general
retreat, especially when leaders must redefine a new line of defense while on
the run, and from the ground up. Miracles at Dunkirk are
precisely that: miracles. Even
before the planning phase, and more fundamentally, the makeup of our systems
itself must anticipate the destabilizing effects of unconventional events by
weaving resiliencies (visible or “hidden”) into their fabric.”
The level of personnel training, system performance
and system-system interoperability acceptable for routine or conventional
crisis events does not guarantee usefulness when the environment becomes hyper-
complex and severely stochastic. Nor does the 1) training and experience of key
decision makers in the lower end of the spectrum, nor 2) “planned for in the
playbook script” leadership insure that the magnitude and novelty of the
emerging catastrophe does not overwhelm communities and emergency management,
or simply negate “the plans” and won’t destabilize the entire response
structure.
Unconventional/Hyper-complex/Catastrophic level
events are often noted as Low Probability, High Impact events. but we should
keep in mind that these events are actually Absolute-Certainty,
Low-Predictability, High-Impact incidents that take place all the time.
Hyper complexity makes it near impossible for
“traditional” leaders to plan, let alone coordinate response efforts. Extrapolation of training and system
evaluation suitable for routine emergencies and conventional disasters as
suitable for unconventional or catastrophic operational response is an
intrinsically flawed strategy.
So, what can be done?
To start, we must recognize and acknowledge the
differences between crisis/disaster types and the different set of challenges
in planning, execution, and required forms of leadership. Additionally, we must
accept that we will most probably require new and innovative analytical methods
and metrics, and methods for learning - not just training.
We must ask
what accounts for whether the first response process will be able to provide
effective mitigation of unfolding disaster incidents. How can that effort best
be organized to respond to novel or unconventional crises?
Then, what must
be done in advance to create the capacities needed in the face of unconventional
crises? The real "new" must
be recognizing the need to put higher level leadership - beyond incident
management and the trained response force - into complex crisis exercises with
intent on learning how to think and not on "feel good" check in the
block exercises, that leave senior decision makers with the parting thought
" all is good, I got this."
More information about Project White Horse 084640 can be found at: http://projectwhitehorse.com/
