LSI #13- Behavioral Health Part 2 of 2

Last article we looked at upcoming opportunities to improve upon our behavioral and psychological health models.  A complement and solid footing to those models is an effective, organizational After Action Review (AAR) system.  This is because when we are in the regular practice of conducting AARs, we have the capability to evaluate ourselves, our team, and our practices, so to that end, we become more familiar with those elements and are more able to identify when there is a behavioral difficulty to be addressed. 

Think of times in your career when you have been “accidentally successful.”  Have you shared those times to the betterment of others, or has that lead to a “normalization of deviance?”*  Over time, normalizing deviances will lead to deficient yet acceptable practices, which will yield a culture of firefighters being less safe.  The question, then, becomes, what are you going to do about it?

While we can trace AARs back to ancient battlefields over campfires, modern military AARs have made noteworthy strides beginning just after Vietnam.  Yet it’s only in recent years that increasing technological capabilities (such as radio recordings, official and bystander photos and videos, GPS and GIS capabilities, and thermal imaging transmitting) have exponentially refined the AAR process, giving an opportunity for a near-effortless transition to our fire service. 

While we have likely been conducting AARs our entire careers we probably have referred to them as: hotwashes, tailboard reviews, critiques, post-incident analyses or “bull sessions,” or they have even been so informal that we didn’t even put a name to them.  Regardless, they are pointed towards the goal of increasing our performance, thereby increasing our level of service.  Unfortunately, it seems, many of the opportunities discussed, problems identified, or solutions agreed upon, are not carried out.  Why is this?  On the surface, we can usually spot a lack of accountability or responsibility; however, if we dig a little deeper we can distinguish a more underlying cause, such as the lack of a successful system.  My hope in this article is that we can give you the framework for an effective AAR system so that real-life incidents and actual experiences can be the platform for organizational growth and increased levels of service. 

Most of us have been to a poorly run AAR session that ended up being non-productive or even counter-productive.  What could have gone differently to make it time well spent?  Would a systematic approach towards the AAR cause more good than harm?  Hopefully so.  And yes, we should even, at times, conduct an AAR on the AAR. 

Please view the video below to view an excellent model of how AARs can significantly improve our competence, thereby improving the lives of citizens and the firefighters we serve.

NFFF AAR training video (one hour):

http://flsi13.everyonegoeshome.com/after-action-review.html

Attached is an example SOG.

*Normalization of Deviance-  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jK_r0F51CFI

__________________________________________________________________________________

Section Letter:  F	Effective Date:  May 1, 2013
Guideline Number:  xx	Revision Date:  x
City of Lancaster Fire Department
Standard Operating Guideline
Title:  After Action Reviews so Everyone Goes Home                         DRAFT
Originator (Signature/Date):     Battalion Chief Franklin                                          -                    .

INTRODUCTION
An After Action Review (AAR) or debriefing is a professional discussion of an event, focused on performance standards and expectations that enable a team to sustain strengths and improve on weaknesses. Debriefings can maximize learning from every operation, training event, or task. This review is extremely valuable in improving procedures and incident operations.

PURPOSE
To establish expectations regarding the types of events that benefit from AARs, the responsibility for conducting AARs, and a common format and method for conducting AARs. The focus of every AAR should be on training/event objectives and incident performance. It deals with the “what” and the “why” and not the “who”.

BENEFITS

• Emphasize meeting the standard for performance or objective.
• Encourage crew/team members to discover important lessons from the event.
• Allows the whole crew/team to take part so lessons learned can be shared.
• Helps build teamwork and motivate crew/team members because everyone participates in the crew’s/team’s improvement.
• Reinforces strong communication skills.
• Assessment of safety practices and related procedures.
• Assessment of training needs for department personnel.
• Assessment of the department’s working relationship with outside agencies and other community departments.

PROCEDURE and FORMAT

An AAR should be conducted after any significant incident (structure fires, MCI, HazMat, etc.), training exercise or event where objectives were established and success in meeting those objectives should be evaluated. It is the responsibility of the Incident Commander, Company Officer, or Team Leader to conduct an AAR after these events and to share any significant lessons with everyone who may benefit. This does not preclude the leader of any team or crew from conducting an AAR after any event or occurrence where lessons may be learned.  In fact, it is encouraged to review every incident, training, and department process using this format.

AARs after larger scaled incidents may not be conducive to a single AAR meeting.  Instead, the Incident Commander should organize individual AARs at the company or team level to build a foundation for the AAR at the incident level.

A key for After Action Reviews to be constructive is for the process to be non-punitive.  Members will be free to speak their minds without fear of reprisal.  If members are repressed in their ability to voice their concerns, the opportunity for our department to improve our level of service will be equally repressed.

The AAR answers, as a minimum, the following questions:

1. What Was Our Mission?

• Review of primary objectives and expected incident action plan.
• Safety hazards or dangers identified in the incident action plan.
• Crew incident goals.

2. What Went Well?

Review the events actions:

• Reconstruct event chronologically; preferably using incident audio/visual documentation.
• Identify and discuss effective and non-effective performance.
• Identify barriers that were encountered and how they were handled.
• Discuss all actions that were not standard operating procedure, or those that presented safety problems.

3. What Could Have Gone Better?

• Discuss the reasons for effective, ineffective or unsafe performance.
• Inquiries and analysis should concentrate on what is right, not who is right.

4. What Might We Have Done Differently?

• What are some actions, approaches, or techniques that could have heightened safety, or enhanced outcomes?
• Identify solutions that were not implemented and discuss why they were discarded.
• Determine lessons learned and how to apply them in the future.

5. Who Needs To Know?

• Discuss how lessons learned can help our organization and how that information will be disseminated.
• Discuss who else might experience a similar situation.

It is the responsibility of the Incident Commander to provide a vehicle for communicating AAR findings and outcomes to the entire department; and initiate the process for necessary administrative and operational changes.