It's Week Three of the Blog-A-Day Challenge. This means we're 3/4 of the way done. My brother, Dan, Allan, Jeff, any other marathoner... call this time (mile 18-22) "The Wall." It's where you just don't think you can possibly go anymore. But, at the same time, you already have so much invested in the journey that there's no way you're going to give in. Five more posts. Four after this one. I can totally do this.
I spent last Wednesday night and all weekend at an Incident Command Course for Operational First Responders. The course discusses strategies and tactics for staffing the command post (where the decisions are made) for major incidents and natural disasters. The course is designed to include people from many response agencies rather than just provide an inside view. This helps us "play nice" and also understand the needs and goals of other responders. Fire departments are obviously interested in putting out the fire. EMS are the ones that want to help the victims. Police want to control a perimeter and manage traffic congestion. The Civil Air Patrol (the US Air Force Auxiliary that I volunteer for) wears many hats. If it's a plane crash, first we want to find it. If it's found, we need to secure the scene for the FAA/NTSB, etc. If the emergency location beacon is still on, we need to shut it off. If the situation calls for a ground team (for searching, filling sandbags during floods, etc) we want to know what equipment we need and where we're going.
Incidents require an incident command system, and a large incident requires all agencies to work together to solve the issues in the quickest, safest way possible. This is the reason for Unified Command. You put one person from each agency onto the decision-making team (3-7 people) and they make informed, collaborative decisions. Everyone has their specialty and everyone is needed. The mission will not flow (or survive) if this doesn't take place.
I think many of the basic principles taught in this course are very similar to basic principles we need to remember while doing our work. Faculty want to teach... the best way possible hopefully. Students want to learn and not have their time wasted. Designers want to improve courses. So are we all thinking of each other and taking other backgrounds and needs into account?
Since I'm an instructional designer I'm going to keep my examples based on that. In a course redesign, designers may rush toward making changes without thinking of who the other players are and how the changes affect each person. For example, if we were adding a new technology, are the faculty ready to be the front man for the new teaching process? Are the students ready to learn what is needed to use the technology? What other groups could this trickle to? Training Services? Are they ready? How do we make it the best for all involved?
I'm not using this post to answer these questions. Just to merely get people to take a step to the "30,000ft level" of the situation. Notice everyone down there. Write down their names and draw lines connecting all players to the other people they will interact with. Almost like a cloud chart. You may think "ok dumb," but it works. Just try it. Visualize yourself looking down at everyone else. You'll be surprised at who you may see from above that you didn't notice over the heads of those standing next to you when you were among the group.
I spent last Wednesday night and all weekend at an Incident Command Course for Operational First Responders. The course discusses strategies and tactics for staffing the command post (where the decisions are made) for major incidents and natural disasters. The course is designed to include people from many response agencies rather than just provide an inside view. This helps us "play nice" and also understand the needs and goals of other responders. Fire departments are obviously interested in putting out the fire. EMS are the ones that want to help the victims. Police want to control a perimeter and manage traffic congestion. The Civil Air Patrol (the US Air Force Auxiliary that I volunteer for) wears many hats. If it's a plane crash, first we want to find it. If it's found, we need to secure the scene for the FAA/NTSB, etc. If the emergency location beacon is still on, we need to shut it off. If the situation calls for a ground team (for searching, filling sandbags during floods, etc) we want to know what equipment we need and where we're going.
Incidents require an incident command system, and a large incident requires all agencies to work together to solve the issues in the quickest, safest way possible. This is the reason for Unified Command. You put one person from each agency onto the decision-making team (3-7 people) and they make informed, collaborative decisions. Everyone has their specialty and everyone is needed. The mission will not flow (or survive) if this doesn't take place.
I think many of the basic principles taught in this course are very similar to basic principles we need to remember while doing our work. Faculty want to teach... the best way possible hopefully. Students want to learn and not have their time wasted. Designers want to improve courses. So are we all thinking of each other and taking other backgrounds and needs into account?
Since I'm an instructional designer I'm going to keep my examples based on that. In a course redesign, designers may rush toward making changes without thinking of who the other players are and how the changes affect each person. For example, if we were adding a new technology, are the faculty ready to be the front man for the new teaching process? Are the students ready to learn what is needed to use the technology? What other groups could this trickle to? Training Services? Are they ready? How do we make it the best for all involved?
I'm not using this post to answer these questions. Just to merely get people to take a step to the "30,000ft level" of the situation. Notice everyone down there. Write down their names and draw lines connecting all players to the other people they will interact with. Almost like a cloud chart. You may think "ok dumb," but it works. Just try it. Visualize yourself looking down at everyone else. You'll be surprised at who you may see from above that you didn't notice over the heads of those standing next to you when you were among the group.
Leave a comment