Written by:Shari IretonDirector of Communications · Web view2018. 3. 8. · Beer/Ping Pong. Stress management. Leadership. Not flexing her leadership style based on what is transpiring

Recommendations on the formation, operation, leadership and

evaluation of a sustainable Joint Information Center

Authored by:

Joseph Best, Jessica Bowman, Nicolette Brennan, Mike Halliday, Joel Gordon, Erin Hedlun, Carly Hose, Shari Ireton, Michael Jachles, Heather Marie Konschak, Gary Laing, Gregg Losinski, Lisa Maitland de Hernandez, Pamela Mooring, Monique Rodriguez, Carma Roper, Jessica Sexton, Christian Sliker, Steven Solomon, Kirk Sturm, Kathleen Tuck

August 28, 2017

Abstract

The purpose of this document is to make recommendations on the formation, operation, leadership and evaluation of a sustainable Joint Information Center (JIC). Emergency managers often cannot control which individuals are assigned to a JIC by other organizations, but the use of these guidelines may aid leaders whose focus is to activate a successful JIC. The suggestions below are based on observations of the Advanced Public Information Officer course functional exercise by Master Public Information Officers during the federal fiscal year 2017. This exercise included a controlled scenario and accompanying set of injects.

A key to successful JIC operations in an expanding incident is recognition of and response to a need for accurate, coordinated, and timely information. The Incident Command System (ICS) allows for flexibility within the JIC to keep pace with the incident demands. The Lead Public Information Officer (PIO) must be able to communicate needs and benchmarks to the Incident Commander in a timely manner so that JIC members remain proactive.

Through the observation and analysis of multiple JICs, there are several factors that surface relative to the successful setup and operation of a JIC:

Utilization of ICS practices in the JIC Acknowledgement of the use of strategy versus tactics The importance of team health, including stress management Relationships and leadership styles Inclusion of an Observer in the JIC organizational chart Acknowledgement of biases Structure of the JIC Adaptability and flexibility Skills assessment

It is through the understanding and implementation of these factors that leaders can create efficient and collaborative JICs that respond well to the unfolding needs of an incident.

Key words: Joint Information Center (JIC), Joint Information System (JIS), Public Information Officer (PIO), leadership, Incident Command System (ICS), interpersonal relationships, crisis and risk communications, emergency communications, media relations, emergency management, National Incident Management System (NIMS)

Master Public Inforamtion Offcier Program Fiscal Year 2018 Cohort #1 Joint Information Center Observation Report – part one

How to communicate more effectively in a crisis

December 2, 2016

Written by: Shari Ireton Director of CommunicationsSnohomish County Sheriff’s Office

Kathleen Tuck Director of Research Communications & ProjectsBoise State University

Jessica Bowman Firefighter & Public Information OfficerLexington, KY Fire Department

Gary Laing Community Relations OfficerDelaware Emergency Management Agency

INTRODUCTION

As part of the Master Public Information Officer (MPIO) Program, students observed the establishment and management of a Joint Information Center (JIC). The two and a half-day, in-depth exercise was a component of the Advanced Public Information Officer (APIO) Program. The purpose of observing the exercise was to evaluate how the PIOs interacted and worked together in a highly stressful environment using the principles they learned in class.

MPIO students used the Exercise Observation techniques laid out in the Homeland Security Exercise and Evaluation Program (HSEEP) to examine the skills used by the PIOs in the JIC as they learned how to coordinate messaging and work collaboratively. Points of observation included structure, communication, coordination, interpersonal relations, team building, stress management, leadership, progression of improvement, conflict resolution, and strategic thinking. (Appendix I)

Strengths, challenges, and missed opportunities were identified for each category. Common themes and trends that rose to the surface were categorized and a set of best practices were developed. Best practices should be able to be utilized by any PIO with any amount of experience and at any time in the life of a JIC, from the first hour to the sixth day. Best practices do not focus on specific tactics, such as how to create messages for the media, but are meant to be implemented at the 30,000-foot level.

LEADERSHIP

Strong, focused leadership is crucial to the success or failure of the JIC. JIC leaders (including the lead, manager, table managers, etc.) provide guidance on team organization, what messages to put out and the most effective ways to communicate lifesaving information to the community. As the JIC progresses in incremental steps from the early hours of crisis management to long-term recovery, the role of the leader also evolves. It’s vital that the JIC be built on consensus and that leaders are able to adapt to meet changing demands.

Several actions in the Liberty JIC highlighted the importance of this. First, the JIC Leader volunteered himself for the top post and appointed a second-in-command as well as a JIC manager and table liaisons. This leadership committee then organized the JIC by assigning people to tasks according to their real-life agency disciplines. This was done without buy-in from the group, leaving some team members dissatisfied and devalued. While the JIC leader initially appeared confident, his increasing reliance on advice from the second-in-command soon weakened his position and left team members confused about expectations and a clear command structure. Over time, this resulted in fractured leadership, with small groups eventually compensating by creating their own ad-hoc management.

Strengths

The JIC leader started strong, providing clear guidelines for internal communication and addressing stress through humor and acknowledgement of people’s feelings. The JIC manager kept each table on track, acting as liaison to the Lead. We observed several instances where table leaders checked in with their team to gauge stress levels, individual concerns and time management issues.

Missed Opportunities

As it became evident the original JIC organization wasn’t working, corrections were made in the assignment of table roles, but individual skills were never taken into account. This could have been addressed at any time and would have elevated morale and productivity within the JIC. Leadership also failed to periodically assess the situation. Regular briefings and simple questions aimed at “taking the pulse” of the operation would have provided critical information and opportunities for adjustment. In addition, some leaders attempted to wear too many “hats” rather than delegate responsibilities, which would have allowed them more time to focus on their own tasks.

Best Practices

Provide concise descriptions for each section of the JIC organization chart, including expected outcomes and necessary skills for each job assignment

Promote consensus among team members by soliciting opinions and comments Identify a clear leader and a process for communicating expectations Schedule regular check-ins with team members Recognize that the role of the leader will change over time, as well as the need for adaptability

(strong participatory leadership when setting up the JIC, coaching during crisis, maintenance leadership during recovery, etc.)

Be aware of possible red flags indicating dissatisfaction among team members and encourage JIC leaders to review at regular intervals

SKILLS AND EXPERIENCE

A JIC often includes members with varied levels of skills and experience. Some agencies employ public relations professionals while others appoint first responders to cover PIO duties. A 30-year veteran may share a desk with someone hired three weeks earlier. While every team member brings skills to the table, their understanding of communication tools and their role in the JIC will vary. A successful operation relies on clear organization and an easily understandable definition of roles.

The Liberty JIC was not lacking in talent, with skills ranging from traditional news writing and social media to graphic design, broadcasting and translation, among others. The problem we observed was that skills were not matched with assignments. In fact, a survey of skills was never taken by leadership, resulting in many team members being underutilized, or even ignored, and disengaging in the exercise. In some instances, roles were assigned based on real-world discipline (ie: city police) rather than abilities and experience. We also noted a lack of understanding among many regarding the role and responsibility of the PIO within the JIC, as opposed to their role within their agency.

Strengths

At times the team was able to effectively identify and communicate critical information, getting the right information to the right people at the right time. They worked well together as a coordinated team and proactively created messaging, graphics, and other products as needed, as well as coordinating media interviews, talking points, and press conferences.


Developing an inventory of skills and experience, as well as preferred roles within the exercise (not necessarily tied to that person’s regular job duties) would have facilitated matching team members to responsibilities, while also ensuring that no one was left without a role. Allowing people to excel leads to an increase in engagement and overall satisfaction and success. We also saw confusion regarding the roles of specific teams, particularly for the group tasked with “operations.” Simple descriptions of the role of each section would have provided clear expectations and shortened the learning process.

Best Practices

Provide a clear overview of JIC structure Conduct a skills assessment as a first step in assigning roles in the JIC Regularly evaluate level of engagement and adjust assignments accordingly

COMMUNICATION

The level of communication in Liberty County on the part of senior leadership hampered full and successful operation of the JIC. Opportunities for internal communication were missed on multiple occasions, and as a result, communication to the public was delayed and incomplete.

It has been said that those who work in communication often have the worst internal communications. Oddly, that is true on too many occasions. Communications professionals can become affected by tunnel- vision, more concerned with how to communicate with a specific outside audience, while forgetting the importance of internal communications among team members. But a failure to establish strong internal communications can have a negative impact on external communications. The Liberty County JIC, while sometimes slow to deliver product to the community, did, at times, provide full and accurate information to the affected community.

Strengths

In the absence of defined communication channels from JIC leadership, JIC staff developed a system of communication. The communication strengths developed from the bottom up, when finally realized and implemented, were stronger than if the systems had been mandated by leadership. Interpersonal communication between people working at the same table, and eventually with other tables, moved the JIC forward.

The most effective communications were between individuals. As each JIC staffer was given a task or duty, or defined their own role, they began to communicate verbally with others. They asked questions, shared ideas, and helped their colleagues with technical issues.

Interpersonal communications were possibly enhanced by the fact that JIC staff could not email or message each other. As a result, they were forced to speak with others, moving about the JIC to obtain or share information. Inflection of voice and body language, combined with the actual words used, raise communication to a level that is unmatched by electronic communication.


Opportunities for internal communication were missed on multiple occasions, and as a result, communication to the public was delayed and incomplete. Leadership missed the initial opportunity to communicate goals and objectives to JIC staff. Staff was left waiting for – and wanting – direction.

Communication is a two-way street – not only was staff left wanting to hear from leadership, but JIC leaders missed the opportunity to get feedback from staff by failing to conduct briefings and hot-washes. A debrief at the end of a shift serves two purposes: communicating important information to the following shift, and assuring that all staffers are on the same page and working toward a common purpose. Leadership actually acknowledged the internal communications problems at one point, but much of the damage had already been done. Scheduled in-JIC briefings to staff would have brought people together and helped them understand the relationship between the multiple disciplines, facilitated information sharing, and reduced the levels of stress created by a lack of information.

Best Practices

The skills assessment addressed previously gives workers an immediate opportunity to communicate not only their abilities, but concerns and ideas, while opening up the important avenues that will be used throughout the process between leadership and staff

Leadership needs to regularly update workers from time to time of the total picture, providing people working on a particular task or subject with an idea of how their role fits into the entire effort

At the same time that updates are given, briefings allow staff to provide more information to leadership that may not have been previously conveyed or was overlooked

STRUCTURE AND ENVIRONMENT

The structure and environment of the JIC were identified as trending themes that repeatedly emerged during our observation. The comfort level of team members, or in this case, the absence of comfort appeared to contribute to increased stress levels. Small work space, a crowded room, high noise levels, and warm conditions all contributed to higher stress levels that resulted in increased conflict.

Likewise, the command structure of the JIC also at times contributed to the stress level in the room. The Incident Command System has already identified that a single person can only effectively manage three to seven people, with five being optimal. Our observations supported this finding.

Strengths

We observed the structure of the JIC change throughout the incident. In the beginning, we observed 30 relative strangers thrown into a room trying to establish their bearings. Even though they placed themselves into small groups, they continued working as one large group for most of the first day. This led to many voices talking over one another, a high noise level, indecision, and frustration due to the confusion and chaos. Over time they began working within their small groups and we observed higher levels of effective communications, productivity, conflict resolution, and overall satisfaction.


Due to the crowded conditions and large-group mentality many people were underutilized and confused about their role. This resulted in frustration. The physical environment also led to stress. Had leadership taken the time to check in with team members on a regular basis, stress could have been addressed before it led to conflict and underutilized members could have been identified.

Best Practices

Divide into smaller, more manageable groups, as early as possible and work within those groups Regularly monitor the working conditions of the room Consider using break-out rooms, as needed, to accomplish a specific task without distractions Provide water, snacks, breaks, and regular stress-level checks

PROCESSES

Clearly defined and understood processes are necessary for PIOs to function well in a JIC. PIOs often work under high levels of stress with very short turnaround times to deliver objectives. PIOs often are deployed to the JIC from different jurisdictions, with a variety of skills and experience, and from diverse types of agencies. The way a PIO will perform a specific task will vary from person to person. JIC processes can include how information is shared internally, staffing for breaks and shift change, establishing briefing schedules, and defining how information will be disseminated to the media. Confusing or unclear processes are one of the most common stumbling blocks.

The Liberty JIC struggled with getting processes put into place and, even when they were in place, not all team members understood how those processes worked, or why there were doing it. The group relied on using face-to-face communication to share information internally, primarily because the processes created by one individual to share information was seen as cumbersome, confusing or time-consuming by other members of the team. Often, key information, such as clarifying whether or not the water in Central City was safe to drink, was unclear because the process for sharing information internally was not clear to all PIOs. JIC leadership did not establish a clear process for releasing PIOs for lunch or other breaks, often leaving a whole “function” of the JIC (ie: information dissemination) unstaffed for long periods of time.

Strengths In the first hour of establishing the JIC, leadership recognized that there were internal communication problems. Table leaders were able to create clear processes for communicating among their group. The information gathering and information dissemination groups were able to find a “communications groove,” sharing information back and forth to each other using a folder system to organize messages that were awaiting approval, were approved and disseminated.

Missed Opportunities The Liberty JIC was crowded, which made relying on verbal communication as their primary form of sharing information difficult. Since they identified this as a challenge early on, it would have been a good opportunity for JIC leadership to establish a new or refined process of internal communication. While JIC

leadership would make occasional announcements to the whole group, there were never any official briefings to the team as a whole. Regularly scheduled briefings involving two-way communication would have significantly helped the internal communications struggle. Briefings would also have given the group a chance to identify other processes that may have needed to be developed or clarify the ones that were already being used.

Best Practices Establish JIC processes as early on as possible, preferably as they are identified Make sure processes are clearly understood by all team members, including the objectives (the

why) Use briefings as an opportunity to review existing processes, solicit suggestions for streamlining

those processes, and propose new processes that may be needed to help coordinate JIC functions

Create processes that can expand and contract with the incident and that would be applicable during different life stages of the JIC

PERSONNEL

When working in groups many personalities will emerge. Some personalities are better suited for different types of work. The JIC environment combines group dynamics with pressure and deadlines, a combination that can lead to stress and eventual failure if not properly managed.

Strengths

The longer the Liberty County JIC was operational the stronger the relationships became. Members of this JIC arrived as strangers and some left as friends. As friendships developed, conflicts were resolved faster, patience was given, and grace extended.


We observed several personality types that added to the chaos and stress of the JIC: the dominant/Type-A, the frantic-frenzy, the worker-bee, and the disengaged personalities to name a few. Cliques quickly emerged based, in part, on prior working relationships that led to power-plays, perceived competence and assignment delegation. A “survival of the fittest” mentality is what established roles early on. Stronger personalities appointed themselves to prominent positions, while more subdued personalities were left with menial jobs, or no jobs at all. Had they assigned roles based on skills and qualifications rather than who was the loudest, most confident, or most popular then the structure and outcome of the JIC would have been different, and arguably better.

Due to unconscious biases some team members were dismissed and underutilized, while others wore too many hats. We observed a generational disconnect between the younger, self-appointed JIC leaders and some of the older team members. Specifically, we observed the two oldest members of the class repeatedly ignored, dismissed, and underutilized, until they were eventually transferred to the other JIC. Consequently, these two members were frustrated and dissatisfied. While these members had valuable skills they were labeled as irrelevant. Had the JIC leader taken an inventory of the member’s skills and interests at the onset

he could have distributed tasks more evenly and run a more efficient JIC. The ripple effect of such would have led to higher team member satisfaction.

Best Practices

Conduct a skills assessment as previously mentioned, to identify where people are best suited Identify personality traits that could undermine or influence the best interests of the JIC

CONCLUSION

In making our assessment, we endeavored to remember the built-in artificialities of exercises that tend to create some initial difficulty. We also understood that many of the people working in the JIC have never experienced a JIC, and are fulfilling new roles, keeping in mind that this situation could actually occur.

Personalities and relationships are important to the success of a JIC. Some people may not appear to be suited to a leadership role based on personality, experience, or training, but could be thrust into the role because of circumstance or statute. The JIC manager has to interact with all participants. Aloofness, authoritarian behavior, or on the opposite extreme, hands-off management styles will damage the work of the JIC and could make it dangerously ineffective. In order to help negate traits or practices that could impede the work of the JIC, defined checklists and processes should be in place and exercised to assure their effectiveness. Emergency managers often cannot control which individuals are assigned to a JIC by other organizations, but the establishment and use of best practices can often overcome most obstacles.

Master Public Information Officer Program Fiscal Year 2018 Cohort #1 Joint Information Center Observation Report – part two

It’s Not Easy Being Green – an Evolution of Success

December 2, 2016

Monique Rodriguez

Joe Best

Pamela Mooring

Carma Roper

Master Public Information Officer Program (MPIOP) students were tasked with observing two Joint Information Centers (JICs)—Green and Liberty counties. Due to the size differences between Green and Liberty (Green being significantly smaller), we designated three out of eight MPIOP students to observe Green County, with a fourth student dedicated to follow the four Liberty Advanced Public Information Officer (APIO) students who transferred to Green County the final day of the JIC operation.

The goal for Green County JIC observation wasn’t to concentrate on outputs; rather it was to identify the overarching strengths, challenges and missed opportunities that were observed in Green County and summarize the Best Practices that emerged. Ten observation categories (structure, communications, coordination, interpersonal relations, team-building process, stress management, leadership, progression of improvement, conflict resolution, strategic thinking) were utilized to assess the Green County JIC; we have attached the analysis for reference (see page 5).

The Green County JIC consisted of 14 individuals (10 male and four female). On the final day of the JIC, four APIO students were identified to transfer to Green County (two males, two females) bringing the total amount of JIC participants to 18. The environment of the JIC was an indoor classroom setting with various technologies (computers, TVs, projection screens, desks and supplies (flip charts, markers, etc.) needed.

Strengths (Green County Specific):

Warm communication styles. Examples: open ended questions, welcomed staff, identified skills, “coaching” leadership.

Creative and useful tracking processes. Examples: Green County JIC Item Tracking Grid, Information Triaging Process: Source Item> Team> Strategy Wheel> Product Final> Open/Closed.

Physical set-up was conducive to progress. Teams were broken up into strike teams (numbered teams 1-5). This helped clearly define roles.

Flexibility. Adapted to new challenges; including leadership change, additional personnel, and mission change.

When progress was made it was made as a team. Staff was valued and integrated quickly. When the four Liberty County PIOs transferred they were welcomed and their skills were identified; immediately became part of the team. Once the Liberty PIOs felt valued they emerged as great team players.

Thoughtful and respectful of others. Receptive to constructive feedback, and made changes accordingly and willingly.

Challenges (Green County Specific):

Inexperience in JICs (including tactics meetings) promoted disorganization and confusion. Example: the Lead PIO was not prepared during tactics meetings with the necessary information – they were reporting out versus looking ahead.

Differentiating between JIC role and professional roles – settling into the designated lane for the JIC. Example: noticed that several JIC team members could not differentiate between how work progresses in their respective agency versus the JIC (working through, “This isn’t how we do it where I come from”).

Keeping the JIC team working toward a common goal – clearly identified briefings can provide the communication necessary to proceed in a unified way.

Working with strong personalities and addressing conflict. Teammates that are not engaged – diagnosing the problem and solving it. (Maybe

different issues are occurring such as skill level, didn’t get assigned a task, not up to speed with JIC functions, etc.)

Effectively using team members to maximum advantage. Solution is aligning tasks with skills.

Technology challenges (a variety of tech challenges emerged throughout the exercise). Stress management – ensuring that JIC staff is checked in with, a “pulse check”. Real life

intrusions will happen. Self-appointed leadership and power struggles.

Missed Opportunities (Green County Specific):

Debrief post-tactics meeting. Had they debriefed they would have appointed a strategy team to concentrate on projecting needs for the next operational period.

Strategic communication (projecting out and foreseeing needs) – proactive versus reactive. Green County never developed a strategic communications team (or person).

Initial skills assessment would have allowed the leader to know staff and delegate roles accordingly. It should be noted, that as the JIC progressed skills were better assessed and roles were made clear.

Media management and assessment. Establishing a media inquiry log for checks and balances (ensuring you’re closing the loop and being responsive to issues that are unanswered).

Utilizing SMART objectives and SMART speech. Clearly articulated objectives leads to effective communication and credibility with internal and external stakeholders (speaking the same language).

Best Practices (for any JIC):

Internal Communication – including defining roles and responsibilities. Skills assessment to determine best use of staff (resource allocation).

Checking in with staff or a “pulse check”; periodically ask JIC staff (individually) how they’re doing, is everything okay, if they need anything to better function, and determine if they’re engaged.

Establish and publish a schedule of briefings (use a common place to note timing of briefings such as on a white board). More clear and frequent communication so all JIC team players are informed and in the loop. This also pulls JIC members out of their work silos so they are aware of what is going on outside of their own identified role.

Flexibility/adaptability (staff, leadership, and processes). As the JICs evolves it is important to frequently assess policies and procedures and be willing to change if necessary.

Different leadership styles during different times:o Different leadership styles work best at different times as the JIC progresses.

Initially a more authoritative style is helpful; as the JIC progresses leadership style should be flexible.

o For example, a “coaching” style seemed to work well and assist with conflict resolution.

SMART objectives – develop overarching objectives to guide actions as a whole, but also on a granular level when communicating with internal and external stakeholders (i.e. tactics meetings, working with command staff, operations, underserved demographics, et al.).

Consider including a dedicated IT person in the JIC to assist as technology issues emerge. Establish standardized systems/reports/processes for the JIC – such as…

o Strategic communications planning (eight-step process)o Media monitoringo Tracking system that prioritizes and assigns tasks, and notes whether incidents

are open or closedo Predeveloped JIC org chart – similar to an ICS-based org chart and scalable for

the size and scope of the incident include roles such as (JIC Manager, PIO Lead, strike teams); this will expedite set up of JIC.

In conclusion, the best practices observed are universal and should be able to translate into any future JIC formation (both large and small), and are not incident specific. Challenges observed are common to any JIC. As a side note, observers felt that JIC trainings should consider establishing an “observer” role. We believe this can offer additional best practices and ultimately contribute to a better functioning JIC. It is also important to underscore that “better” in our perspective does not equate to output, rather it equates to good interpersonal skills, communication, conflict resolution and leadership styles.

Analysis Reference

Structure

Physical setup was two tables (public safety and local municipalities). County and state PIOs at single tables at front. Lead asked staff to create signage to identify area.

14 total members (10 male, 4 female) – 8 in public safety table (1F, 7M) – State 1 (F) – County(M) – Local gov. 4 (2 F, 2M) ---

To develop physical setup and to put up an org chart it took 10 minutes (from 10:13-10:23) Didn’t identify county PIO right away. He was with the locals then moved up to the front per the

Lead. Plan for being flexible (e.g. for more writers) Some people volunteered to work on two things when others did not speak up at all e.g. A staff

member took social media as a task but then said she would help another staff member with writing.

Communication

Communication style: open ended questions by the team Hot topics: A staff member wrote up top 3 discussion to lead (took 11 minutes to develop) The Lead advised there would be a stand up reporting session and asked who will do what ---

phone line monitoring? Social media? Liaison with the EOC?

Coordination (collaboration)

Team members offered to help each other Shared map of county to create situational awareness

Interpersonal relations and or reactions

Saw someone on Outlook email (disengaged, quiet. Did not hear him speak once) But he did test Simdeck

Team Building process

Team members brought nameplates for the county

Stress management

Leadership

Democratic process in selecting a leader was not conducted. The Lead was strong from the beginning and maybe assumed because she was the state PIO that she was lead. One staff

Tuesday, 11/29 at 10 am (Green County)

member asked who is lead and she (The Lead) said we have one— state. Self-appointed but no one disagreed; after-the-fact she said “ I have been a PIO for 2 months thought I was going to come here to learn from you all but if someone else wants it…”

The Lead used many questions such as “Would it be helpful if…” or “Who in this group is a good press release writer?”

The lead was very direct with flow of what needs to happen (e.g., passed out phone list to everyone, said they needed to create org chart and someone got up and wrote it).

The Lead acknowledged that she did not know everything.

Progression of Improvement

Conflict Resolution

One staff member was fighting the scenario. This was repetitive for multiple scenarios within the event (cancelling the event, Sheriff scenario that it is countywide). Passive Conflict Resolution --- on the Lead’s end as it was outside of the scope and she advised this gently and then walked away.

10:56 am Staff/staff tweet situation re: mass messaging. The Lead saw it and tried to mitigate provided her suggestion it seemed that one of them wanted to do this when it was to be the other.

Strategic Thinking

The Lead briefed the entire team on the SICCL call and predicted that what was happening north would flow down and impact them so they should be ready

Structure

Communication

Asking questions re: EOC – The Lead wrote down, and asked EOC and then reported out to group.



Two JIC team members were helping another team member prepare for the report out because the lead asked that team member to report out because she was writing on the white board.


Stress management The Lead advised a staff member to take a breath when she wanted to call the media but they

were called back to the large meeting room. But then on this note, the Lead said “I’ll do what I do with my media and call them back.” She did and said “working on the answers and we will get back to you.” (THIS SHE SHOULD HAVE DELEGATED / SUGGESTED FOR the other JIC staff member TO Do)

Leadership


Figured out that they needed to write down the JIC roles on the org chart along with their assigned roles.

Conflict Resolution

Strategic Thinking

Tuesday, 11/29 at 1:45 pm (Green County)

Structure

Left someone off the org chart. For over a day! Missed opportunity: social media person missing from the org chart

Communication

The leader checked in with JIC staff, asking things like, is this information helpful? One slightly frustrated staff member said she still needed more info and The JIC leader sat down with her. She used affirming statements, for instance; “That is a good point. Please write that down so we don’t forget.” And “Thank you for reading that out loud, now I see the word is missing.”

Internal comm mention from some. They wanted an avenue from this. One active team member clarified the agency page was external.


One JIC staff member was asking another for advice. They were very open to sharing with each other. Openness and collaboration between public safety entities.


A few are quiet. A few then left out.


Beer/Ping Pong

Stress management

Leadership

Not flexing her leadership style based on what is transpiring. She is going from the “hot item of the moment” to the next “hot item” and not delegating.

Missed opp: The slow time is the time to develop everyone to double check and make sure they know what to do

Problem right now is the style of leadership. One person is running the show.


Conflict Resolution

Trying to come up with SMART Objectives (The Leader was stumbling. One staff member said those are messages. Then the Leader held her hand up and said stop everyone) They took a time out from the action. Tom explained SMART objectives and that diffused the situation and at that point everyone relaxed and sat down.

Tuesday, 11/29 at 2:08 pm (Green County)

Strategic Thinking

STRENGTH of the day: Excellent at allowing things to be fixed. But some things they do not address so they let them slide.

Challenge of the day: Leadership style has stayed the same. This could blow up down the line.

Structure

The Leader suggested to a JIC staff member to ask teammates to assist with writing as she cannot do FB, Twitter, etc. on her own. The JIC staff member/writer suggested putting a team together when they reconvene.

Communication

County JIC Lead to find out if there is a joint account for social per a recommendation. He found out but did not share the info with the others.


Discussing what the process would be for the resources. Others talked through who would be responsible.



Stress management The writer was concerned about work product and getting dinged for not doing enough or

perfectly (she was concerned about no wife). The County PIO brought the stress level down by stopping the conversation and saying that no one is going to bleed to death or get hurt, it will be OK, etc.

Leadership

Shift in leadership for unknown reasons. There was one task that she was still leading yet there were indications that there could be a shift leading toward delegation.


Including someone who had not been included earlier. He suggested Special Needs audiences and the State Lead said we already have that yet the writer wanted to explore that further and backed Jack up- and the end result was good. They ended up identifying those who either couldn’t hear, or those who had other needs.

Conflict Resolution

Strategic Thinking

Assumption: maybe something happened in the pub last night ie, some type of bonding or team building (fun) and/or did they discuss this over the pool game.

Wednesday, 11/30 at 8:40 am (Green County)

Green County JIC 10

Structure

They achieved reorganization at 10-11 a.m. The original Lead said, “I just took leadership <<of the JIC>> because I was the State.” (reaffirming what we thought, that it wasn’t a discussion point, she just took it.) One JIC member led the first part of the re-org, saying that there are two ways to do it. They settled on Public Safety-Govt. They will have their own messages, some of them overlapping, run them up through the top two leaders and they will put them together at that point. The Leader asked for two strategists. She led a little strategy meeting and told another team member, “Since you are lead on this, you need to assign someone. (Delegation!) Then said look at our SMART objectives, identify audiences and channels.” The assistant lead went to SICCLE call. Then they got into different groups.

We walked in and the lead and a team member were at the board talking about the org chart (10:07 am) – The JIC member said we have one person writing and that needs to change.

o New org chart: The JIC member proposed 10 min. later that they do this two different ways. This was proposed to the group.

A specific press release org chart was interesting.

Communication 10:10 am Missed OPP: Taking breaks as needed but not establishing a key way to tell others that

they are gone. No sign out sheet or signs made. JIC team member noted that the messaging all needs to come out from a unified command

(Strength in communication). He said this to the entire group (his reason also for the two diff messaging structures then being funneled back to the lead and assistant lead).

Adding graphics into messaging to tell the story. This was good. Great way to consolidate messaging and show what they were trying to say.


They decided on a process to coordinate the injects and how they would handle them. System involves them adding their initials to the injects each person is going to handle.

Scott suggested collaboration with all police and fire messaging (good! This is a strength as they will have unified messaging)



Stress management

One of the instructors came in and explained the role of the evaluators and the Master students and this lowered the stress level for the group.

Leadership

FEMA came in to announce a meeting. Assistant lead asked the lead if she wanted to go and she said no can you and come back and brief everyone (Delegation)


Missed opp: scheduled briefings and round table discussion. Not everyone knows everything is going on.

Wednesday, 11/30 at 10:00 am (Green County)

Green County JIC 10Conflict Resolution

Not much conflict, but there are a couple in there who got tired of hearing the lead talk about. how she does things in real life with the governor, etc.

A team member mentioning graphics and someone else disagreed.

Strategic Thinking

Strategy meeting called by former lead. She asked the leads from each area to join her.

Assumption: Things are definitely happening when we are not here. Sticky papers up with key attributes. One paper said “SUCCESSFUL” at the top. Noting things that they could do to be successful. -- organization, staffing, Direct line to EOC, Cooperation and coordination, productive, skill mix, flexible, orderly, respectful, team

IDEA: Have a box ready with items that may be needed to have ready and help guide. Using a checklist or form/ job action sheet as the ICS does to help guide them to a quicker org chart

Structure

Communication

White board with running messages worked well until it went to 2 pages, then it wasn’t effective.


instructor asked them what happened to the EAS message. They said it took an hour to show. They weren’t familiar with the process, but now they are and feel like they can handle.



Very quiet

Stress management

Leadership


Conflict Resolution

Strategic Thinking

14:00 hrs- The lead did stop the group in a time-out and said let’s all stop for a few minutes and think about where we are. It is late afternoon and these things are going to happen (lists them). What do we need to be messaging?

Missed opportunity: they were staying in their lanes but communicating, now they are in their own tunnels, doing their thing but not communicating with the wider JIC.

- Living in the now not really having anyone strategize about the future- Not having someone play the devil’s advocate and ask the questions, what Media would ask and

the community. Foresee these questions so you have answers

Wednesday, 11/30 at 12:00 noon (Green County)

Page 2 of 30

Structure

Some members of the group stayed late Wednesday night to plan their re-organization. They planned for the entry of four Liberty County PIOs. They planned as far as where they would sit (together at Team 2) but did not plan their jobs/roles. When PIOs did not show up at 8 am, our JIC leaders asked “Who can do social media?” Etc. A transplant JIC member from Liberty, spoke up and took on the missing team members job (Green county member who was doing social media had not yet shown up). New leader put the new process and structure on the white board and at the morning briefing they went through these.

From my perspective coming from Liberty JIC – the Green County JIC was well organized; everyone had clear and identified jobs and the responding PIOs knew what their responsibilities were.

The structure was changed to teams and numbered. Each team number would handle a particular incident and communication need. On the white board, it noted that teams should use the Strat Comm form and note their Team ID#.

Missed Opp: Strat Comm Form should be saved as a “read only” so that people do not save over a template. This forces a hard “save” vs. “save as.”

As late staff arrived, they went back to 5 teams vs. 4 teams. Went from 14 people to now 18 people (12 M, 6 F)… added two more male and two more

female

Communication

Good communication, positive communication. Coaching from leaders, participating from the group.

Briefing was provided in the morning and as people came into the JIC updates were provided. Strength is that the leader is providing briefings but there is still a missed opportunity for a roundtable (quick scheduled debrief or noting on the whiteboard “Next debrief at this time.” Since not everyone knows what everyone is working on).

When people required assistance (or help) with what their assigned role was, they were provided the necessary information to be successful.

Strength: Created a folder on the shared drive that all current messages can be pulled from for all teams to see. All teams asked to drop their info in as completed so that if they are asked for a briefing at any given time, they are able to pull that info.

New leader wrote on board “No Tribal Victim Names” --- also conveyed verbally to public safety to advise their internal staff not to mention this via radios etc. so that their people in the field also know (but did this 10 minutes later)

Missed Opp: Someone did not fact check or proof. Add in a fact checking/proof reading process or staff member somewhere. They were calling Pony High School Ponel HS for an entire day. Media corrected them on this.


Staff member came in from Liberty and took on a few jobs until she got too many. Another Green county team member noticed. I don’t think I heard anyone say that it was happening, I think she just noticed it and said, “She has too much right now. Someone needs to help do media monitoring.” Two new folks spoke up and said they could assist and they did.

Thursday, 12/1 at 10:00 a.m. (Green County)

Page 3 of 30

When a former Liberty person (now Green team member) had to do the media briefing, the info the team member provided did not have tribal info so for the sake of time, the lead joined the person doing the media briefing so that she could brief media regarding tribal situation.


Personnel: They noticed that two people were missing. Didn’t hear another person’s name being mentioned (this is one of the quiet individuals). At 8:10 am is when they realized they had to restructure because team members were missing. They went from five teams to four for the time being. They realized they would have to reassign roles in the interim. From an interpersonal relation/reaction standpoint, someone did say, “Where’s the “social media person”, He’s our most important person.” Realizing that his job role was critical. However, no one called to find out if the missing people were OK or if they may have been impacted by the disaster….

Staff member helping lead to login to Simdeck. Personal things also come up: One team members husband was laid off and her team members

briefly talked to her about it because her comment made it seem as if she was not as focused initially. As a suggestion and Missed Opp: The leadership could do a Pulse check with staff; either individually by going around to see how folks are doing or do an overall announcement. Still no established way to take a break or signs to advise when people leave the room to: eat, Restroom break, etc.


As each Liberty County person arrived, the former lead welcomed them individually. Three showed up on time, one was delayed. They were welcomed officially to the team during the briefing meeting. A new team member (one that was moving from Liberty county) came late (they delayed him) so his integration wasn’t as complete/smooth, but they did finally get him welcomed to the group. All four had jobs within 20 minutes of arrival to the JIC. The two older individuals weren’t as comfortable jumping in to the roles, but they sat next to each other and I noticed they supported each other well—working off of one computer on single tasks. It might even be a best practice if you have two individuals who are not strong, to put them together for tasks.

While they noticed people were missing, there was not an acknowledgement that they had casualties. They tried room phone numbers but not cell phones.

Coming from Liberty County where people were literally ignored, and significantly underutilized (especially the two older participants); it was so great seeing the four Liberty transplants valued in Green. All four received a quick skills assessment and were provided positions in the JIC. When they were valued, they began to emerge as solid team players.

A new team member (former Liberty member) was getting ready to do a media press conference and did not have all info needed. A team member helped her by showing her where the updated forms were electronically as well as printed the document for her. This was 2.25 hours into the new member joining Green County. Existing Green County person coached her and said you’ll do great. The team clapped when she announced to everyone that the new team member was going to do the briefing.

New JIC leader said “thank you” to the new Liberty person.

Page 4 of 30

Stress management

Noticed that when a couple of the people (especially the newer transplants from Liberty) were confused and their individual stress was ramping up, there was a genuine effort from some ofthe leaders to check in with them, ask them what they needed, get them on the right track, then allow them to work autonomously.

Sign on the screen that noted, “If plan A didn’t work, the alphabet has 25 more letters. Stay cool.”

Leadership

Today, a team lead is moving around the room more of a leader. She had spent more time at the computer producing products until today. She is a good leader, coach. New lead is also getting into the groove of a coaching style of leadership.

o Agreed. A new leader is rising as an informal leader but is speaking up and trying to keep all informed (e.g. asking new Liberty person who he was and introducing herself. Missed opportunity from the new lead and the group was to also introduce themselves and welcome the new folks publicly. Former lead did welcome them individually as they arrived).

Strength: Selected strong spokesperson(s)


Definitely employing more of their people resources today. Only down side today is that they are losing some of the stimulation/urgency that they had.

Strength: More organized. They now have an assignment desk and a “Green County JIC Item Tracking Grid” on the projector which lists the incident, team # assigned, progress (step at which the team is currently on from the strat wheel), and it is color coded based on priority (red, green, yellow). They have a legend to identify what each color means. Someone’s sole job is to do this. Best practice.

They now have new signage up to identify the team numbers, assignment desk etc. They had left up old signage for areas for about an hour.

Now had a person writing meeting times on the whiteboard (new person from Liberty doing this). However, they should have had this for some time so that they do not forget important meeting requests (Instructor urged them to do this).

Conflict Resolution

I am not seeing any yet today.

Page 5 of 30

Strategic Thinking

Their new structure and process are strategic. Clearly on the whiteboard, they noted out their process of how teams should handle

information as incidents are assigned to them.o Source item > Team > Strategy Wheel >Product Final >Open/Closed

Missed opportunity: In a real-life incident, more than one media station will be calling the JIC. Someone should keep a “Media Call Log” with the date, time, name of the outlet, reporter name and info (cell and email), and whether or not a response has been made.

Missed opportunity: Debriefing after this morning’s tactics meeting. Leadership seemed to not understand that a tactics meeting is to project ahead versus report out. This was a concept that they struggled with until early afternoon.

Overall

Many of our themes overlap and go hand in hand. It will take a while for the team to develop a rhythm no matter what.

Page 6 of 30

GIVE ME LIBERTY OR EVERYONE DIES!

How to communicate more effectively in a crisis

Written by: Shari Ireton Director of CommunicationsSnohomish County Sheriff’s Office

Kathleen Tuck Director of Research Communications & ProjectsBoise State University

Jessica Bowman Firefighter & Public Information OfficerLexington, KY Fire Department

Gary Laing Community Relations OfficerDelaware Emergency Management Agency

Page 7 of 30

INTRODUCTION

As part of the Master Public Information Officer (MPIO) Program, students observed the establishment and management of a Joint Information Center (JIC). The two and a half-day, in-depth exercise was a component of the Advanced Public Information Officer (APIO) Program. The purpose of observing the exercise was to evaluate how the PIOs interacted and worked together in a highly stressful environment using the principles they learned in class.

MPIO students used the Exercise Observation techniques laid out in the Homeland Security Exercise and Evaluation Program (HSEEP) to examine the skills used by the PIOs in the JIC as they learned how to coordinate messaging and work collaboratively. Points of observation included structure, communication, coordination, interpersonal relations, team building, stress management, leadership, progression of improvement, conflict resolution, and strategic thinking.

Strengths, challenges, and missed opportunities were identified for each category. Common themes and trends that rose to the surface were categorized and a set of best practices were developed. Best practices should be able to be utilized by any PIO with any amount of experience and at any time in the life of a JIC, from the first hour to the sixth day. Best practices do not focus on specific tactics, such as how to create messages for the media, but are meant to be implemented at the 30,000-foot level.

LEADERSHIP

Strong, focused leadership is crucial to the success or failure of the JIC. JIC leaders (including the lead, manager, table managers, etc.) provide guidance on team organization, what messages to put out and the most effective ways to communicate lifesaving information to the community. As the JIC progresses in incremental steps from the early hours of crisis management to long-term recovery, the role of the leader also evolves. It’s vital that the JIC be built on consensus and that leaders are able to adapt to meet changing demands.

Several actions in the Liberty JIC highlighted the importance of this. First, the JIC Leader volunteered himself for the top post and appointed a second-in-command as well as a JIC manager and table liaisons. This leadership committee then organized the JIC by assigning people to tasks according to their real-life agency disciplines. This was done without buy-in from the group, leaving some team members dissatisfied and devalued. While the JIC leader initially appeared confident, his increasing reliance on advice from the second-in-command soon weakened his position and left team members confused about expectations and a clear command structure. Over time, this resulted in fractured leadership, with small groups eventually compensating by creating their own ad-hoc management.

Strengths

The JIC leader started strong, providing clear guidelines for internal communication and addressing stress through humor and acknowledgement of people’s feelings. The JIC manager kept each table on track, acting as liaison to the Lead. We observed several instances where table leaders checked in with their team to gauge stress levels, individual concerns and time management issues.


As it became evident the original JIC organization wasn’t working, corrections were made in the assignment of table roles, but individual skills were never taken into account. This could have been addressed at any time and would have elevated morale and productivity within the JIC. Leadership also failed to periodically assess the situation. Regular briefings and simple questions aimed at “taking the pulse” of the operation

Page 8 of 30

would have provided critical information and opportunities for adjustment. In addition, some leaders attempted to wear too many “hats” rather than delegate responsibilities, which would have allowed them more time to focus on their own tasks.

Best Practices

Provide concise descriptions for each section of the JIC organization chart, including expected outcomes and necessary skills for each job assignment

Promote consensus among team members by soliciting opinions and comments Identify a clear leader and a process for communicating expectations Schedule regular check-ins with team members Recognize that the role of the leader will change over time, as well as the need for adaptability

(strong participatory leadership when setting up the JIC, coaching during crisis, maintenance leadership during recovery, etc.)

Be aware of possible red flags indicating dissatisfaction among team members and encourage JIC leaders to review at regular intervals

SKILLS AND EXPERIENCE

A JIC often includes members with varied levels of skills and experience. Some agencies employ public relations professionals while others appoint first responders to cover PIO duties. A 30-year veteran may share a desk with someone hired three weeks earlier. While every team member brings skills to the table, their understanding of communication tools and their role in the JIC will vary. A successful operation relies on clear organization and an easily understandable definition of roles.

The Liberty JIC was not lacking in talent, with skills ranging from traditional news writing and social media to graphic design, broadcasting and translation, among others. The problem we observed was that skills were not matched with assignments. In fact, a survey of skills was never taken by leadership, resulting in many team members being underutilized, or even ignored, and disengaging in the exercise. In some instances, roles were assigned based on real-world discipline (ie: city police) rather than abilities and experience. We also noted a lack of understanding among many regarding the role and responsibility of the PIO within the JIC, as opposed to their role within their agency.

Strengths

At times the team was able to effectively identify and communicate critical information, getting the right information to the right people at the right time. They worked well together as a coordinated team and proactively created messaging, graphics, and other products as needed, as well as coordinating media interviews, talking points, and press conferences.


Developing an inventory of skills and experience, as well as preferred roles within the exercise (not necessarily tied to that person’s regular job duties) would have facilitated matching team members to responsibilities, while also ensuring that no one was left without a role. Allowing people to excel leads to an increase in engagement and overall satisfaction and success. We also saw confusion regarding the roles of specific teams, particularly for the group tasked with “operations.” Simple descriptions of the role of each section would have provided clear expectations and shortened the learning process.

Best Practices

Page 9 of 30

Provide a clear overview of JIC structure Conduct a skills assessment as a first step in assigning roles in the JIC Regularly evaluate level of engagement and adjust assignments accordingly

COMMUNICATION

The level of communication in Liberty County on the part of senior leadership hampered full and successful operation of the JIC. Opportunities for internal communication were missed on multiple occasions, and as a result, communication to the public was delayed and incomplete.

It has been said that those who work in communication often have the worst internal communications. Oddly, that is true on too many occasions. Communications professionals can become affected by tunnel-vision, more concerned with how to communicate with a specific outside audience, while forgetting the importance of internal communications among team members. But a failure to establish strong internal communications can have a negative impact on external communications. The Liberty County JIC, while sometimes slow to deliver product to the community, did, at times, provide full and accurate information to the affected community.

Strengths

In the absence of defined communication channels from JIC leadership, JIC staff developed a system of communication. The communication strengths developed from the bottom up, when finally realized and implemented, were stronger than if the systems had been mandated by leadership. Interpersonal communication between people working at the same table, and eventually with other tables, moved the JIC forward.

The most effective communications were between individuals. As each JIC staffer was given a task or duty, or defined their own role, they began to communicate verbally with others. They asked questions, shared ideas, and helped their colleagues with technical issues.

Interpersonal communications were possibly enhanced by the fact that JIC staff could not email or message each other. As a result, they were forced to speak with others, moving about the JIC to obtain or share information. Inflection of voice and body language, combined with the actual words used, raise communication to a level that is unmatched by electronic communication.


Opportunities for internal communication were missed on multiple occasions, and as a result, communication to the public was delayed and incomplete. Leadership missed the initial opportunity to communicate goals and objectives to JIC staff. Staff was left waiting for – and wanting – direction.

Communication is a two-way street – not only was staff left wanting to hear from leadership, but JIC leaders missed the opportunity to get feedback from staff by failing to conduct briefings and hot-washes. A de-brief at the end of a shift serves two purposes: communicating important information to the following shift, and assuring that all staffers are on the same page and working toward a common purpose. Leadership actually acknowledged the internal communications problems at one point, but much of the damage had already been done. Scheduled in-JIC briefings to staff would have brought people together and helped them understand the relationship between the multiple disciplines, facilitated information sharing, and reduced the levels of stress created by a lack of information.

Page 10 of 30

Best Practices

The skills assessment addressed previously gives workers an immediate opportunity to communicate not only their abilities, but concerns and ideas, while opening up the important avenues that will be used throughout the process between leadership and staff

Leadership needs to regularly update workers from time to time of the total picture, providing people working on a particular task or subject with an idea of how their role fits into the entire effort

At the same time that updates are given, briefings allow staff to provide more information to leadership that may not have been previously conveyed or was overlooked

STRUCTURE AND ENVIRONMENT

The structure and environment of the JIC were identified as trending themes that repeatedly emerged during our observation. The comfort level of team members, or in this case, the absence of comfort appeared to contribute to increased stress levels. Small work space, a crowded room, high noise levels, and warm conditions all contributed to higher stress levels that resulted in increased conflict.

Likewise, the command structure of the JIC also at times contributed to the stress level in the room. The Incident Command System has already identified that a single person can only effectively manage three to seven people, with five being optimal. Our observations supported this finding.

Strengths

We observed the structure of the JIC change throughout the incident. In the beginning, we observed 30 relative strangers thrown into a room trying to establish their bearings. Even though they placed themselves into small groups, they continued working as one large group for most of the first day. This led to many voices talking over one another, a high noise level, indecision, and frustration due to the confusion and chaos. Over time they began working within their small groups and we observed higher levels of effective communications, productivity, conflict resolution, and overall satisfaction.


Due to the crowded conditions and large-group mentality many people were underutilized and confused about their role. This resulted in frustration. The physical environment also led to stress. Had leadership taken the time to check in with team members on a regular basis, stress could have been addressed before it led to conflict and underutilized members could have been identified.

Best Practices

Divide into smaller, more manageable groups, as early as possible and work within those groups Regularly monitor the working conditions of the room Consider using break-out rooms, as needed, to accomplish a specific task without distractions Provide water, snacks, breaks, and regular stress-level checks

PROCESSES

Clearly defined and understood processes are necessary for PIOs to function well in a JIC. PIOs often work under high levels of stress with very short turnaround times to

Page 11 of 30

deliver objectives. PIOs often are deployed to the JIC from different jurisdictions, with a variety of skills and experience, and from diverse types of agencies. The way a PIO will perform a specific task will vary from person to person. JIC processes can include how information is shared internally, staffing for breaks and shift change, establishing briefing schedules, and defining how information will be disseminated to the media. Confusing or unclear processes are one of the most common stumbling blocks.

The Liberty JIC struggled with getting processes put into place and, even when they were in place, not all team members understood how those processes worked, or why there were doing it. The group relied on using face-to-face communication to share information internally, primarily because the processes created by one individual to share information was seen as cumbersome, confusing or time-consuming by other members of the team. Often, key information, such as clarifying whether or not the water in Central City was safe to drink, was unclear because the process for sharing information internally was not clear to all PIOs. JIC leadership did not establish a clear process for releasing PIOs for lunch or other breaks, often leaving a whole “function” of the JIC (ie: information dissemination) unstaffed for long periods of time.

Strengths

In the first hour of establishing the JIC, leadership recognized that there were internal communication problems. Table leaders were able to create clear processes for communicating among their group. The information gathering and information dissemination groups were able to find a “communications groove,” sharing information back and forth to each other using a folder system to organize messages that were awaiting approval, were approved and disseminated.


The Liberty JIC was crowded, which made relying on verbal communication as their primary form of sharing information difficult. Since they identified this as a challenge early on, it would have been a good opportunity for JIC leadership to establish a new or refined process of internal communication. While JIC leadership would make occasional announcements to the whole group, there were never any official briefings to the team as a whole. Regularly scheduled briefings involving two-way communication would have significantly helped the internal communications struggle. Briefings would also have given the group a chance to identify other processes that may have needed to be developed or clarify the ones that were already being used.

Best Practices

Establish JIC processes as early on as possible, preferably as they are identified Make sure processes are clearly understood by all team members, including

the objectives (the why) Use briefings as an opportunity to review existing processes, solicit suggestions

for streamlining those processes, and propose new processes that may be needed to help coordinate JIC functions

Create processes that can expand and contract with the incident and that would be applicable during different life stages of the JIC

Page 12 of 30

PERSONNEL

When working in groups many personalities will emerge. Some personalities are better suited for different types of work. The JIC environment combines group dynamics with pressure and deadlines, a combination that can lead to stress and eventual failure if not properly managed.

Page 13 of 30

Strengths:

The longer the Liberty County JIC was operational the stronger the relationships became. Members of this JIC arrived as strangers and some left as friends. As friendships developed, conflicts were resolved faster, patience was given, and grace extended.

Missed Opportunities:

We observed several personality types that added to the chaos and stress of the JIC: the dominant/Type-A, the frantic-frenzy, the worker-bee, and the disengaged personalities to name a few. Cliques quickly emerged based, in part, on prior working relationships that led to power-plays, perceived competence and assignment delegation. A “survival of the fittest” mentality is what established roles early on. Stronger personalities appointed themselves to prominent positions, while more subdued personalities were left with menial jobs, or no jobs at all. Had they assigned roles based on skills and qualifications rather than who was the loudest, most confident, or most popular then the structure and outcome of the JIC would have been different, and arguably better.

Due to unconscious biases some team members were dismissed and underutilized, while others wore too many hats. We observed a generational disconnect between the younger, self-appointed JIC leaders and some of the older team members. Specifically, we observed the two oldest members of the class repeatedly ignored, dismissed, and underutilized, until they were eventually transferred to the other JIC. Consequently, these two members were frustrated and dissatisfied. While these members had valuable skills they were labeled as irrelevant. Had the JIC leader taken an inventory of the member’s skills and interests at the onset he could have distributed tasks more evenly and run a more efficient JIC. The ripple effect of such would have led to higher team member satisfaction.

Best Practices:

Conduct a skills assessment as previously mentioned, to identify where people are best suited Identify personality traits that could undermine or influence the best interests of the JIC

CONCLUSION

In making our assessment, we endeavored to remember the built-in artificialities of exercises that tend to create some initial difficulty. We also understood that many of the people working in the JIC have never experienced a JIC, and are fulfilling new roles, keeping in mind that this situation could actually occur.

Personalities and relationships are important to the success of a JIC. Some people may not appear to be suited to a leadership role based on personality, experience, or training, but could be thrust into the role because of circumstance or statute. The JIC manager has to interact with all participants. Aloofness, authoritarian behavior, or on the opposite extreme, hands-off management styles will damage the work of the JIC and could make it dangerously ineffective. In order to help negate traits or practices that could impede the work of the JIC, defined checklists and processes should be in place and exercised to assure their effectiveness. Emergency managers often cannot control which individuals are assigned to a JIC by other organizations, but the establishment and use of best practices can often overcome most obstacles.

Page 14 of 30

Analytics of how the Liberty JIC group approached the assignment(Jessica, Kathleen, Gary, and Shari)

Divided into two groups, of 5 and 3 and one participant serving in the transfer position (to go from the Liberty JIC to the Green JIC). Originally divided 4 and 4, but our decision of the 5 and 3, with one transfer, was the right way to go.

Developed a template with the 10 categories we wanted to observe (structure, communication, coordination, interpersonal relations, team building, stress management, leadership, progression of improvement, conflict resolution and strategic thinking). We ended up not using the template as a form, but many did continue to refer to the categories.

Observed each of these categories for: strengths, challenges, and missed opportunities.

Frequently debriefed to share what we observed and noted trends and themes, eventually refined down to six.

From our notes, we were able to identify best practices that addressed recurring themes

Best practices were written to be utilized by PIOs with any level of experience at any time during the life of a JIC at the 30,000 foot level

The Liberty JIC group divided the final paper into the six themes, as well as an introduction and conclusion. Before convening for the evening we agreed on a format for each section, which included the issues observed, strengths, missed opportunities and the best practices we developed as a group. Each member was responsible for writing two sections of the paper.

Page 15 of 30

Master Public Information Officer Program Fiscal Year 2018 Cohort #2 Joint Information Center Observation Report

Page 2 of 30

LEADING JOINT INFORMATION CENTERS: AN

OBSERVATIONAL ANALYSIS

A research paper submitted to the faculty of theEmergency Management Institute, Federal Emergency Management Agency, Department of

Homeland Security for the course:

E0393 MASTER PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICER, PART 2

By: Nicolette A. Brennan, Lisa M. de Hernández, Joel D. Gordon, Mike T. Halliday, Heather M. Konschak Jessica N. Sexton, and Kirk B. Sturm

August 2017

Page 3 of 30

LEADING JOINT INFORMATION CENTERS:

AN OBSERVATIONAL ANALYSIS

INTRODUCTION

A small incident may require one public information officer (PIO) to gather information,

perform research, and disseminate information to the media and public. But, as an incident grows, these

tasks become too much for one PIO, so additional staff are added. As more PIOs are added, someone

must make decisions about leadership, team objectives, strategy, organization of the PIOs,

communication protocols, team dynamics, and other leadership decisions. Depending on the size or

complexity of the incident staff could include a Lead PIO, and Assistant PIO, branch supervisors, and

any number of PIOs (Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA; 2007). Teams of public

information officers often work in a Joint Information Center (JIC; FEMA 2007).

According to FEMA (2017), a JIC is:

Established to coordinate all incident-related public information activities,

The central point of contact for all news media at the scene of the incident, and,

The location that PIOs from agencies participating in the incident should collocate

The purpose of this research paper is to identify the best practices for leading a JIC. Specifically,

this research paper describes how two different Lead PIOs formed and operated their respective JICs

including, establishing team objectives, developing strategy, organizing the people, establishing

communication protocols, and dealing with team dynamics. The aim of this research paper is to inform

and improve the public information profession as a whole, and, specifically the formation and operation of

a JIC.

Page 4 of 30

RESEARCH QUESTION

The research was guided by the following question: How is a JIC formed and developed? This

research question is important because not all JICs are created equally or at the same pace. This is

important because a JIC is used to manage public emergencies where getting information to the public

could save lives, improve living conditions, and help people more quickly recover from disasters. These

factors become important in terms of effectiveness, efficiency and benefitting the public (Beebe &

Masterson, 2012; Burn, 2004; Cragan, Kach, & Wright, 2009; Sturm, 2012). This research question is

also significant because it fills a gap in knowledge regarding the formation of JICs (Phil Politano,

personal communication May 15, 2017).

RESEARCH DESIGN

This is a mixed methods research paper incorporating qualitative and quantitative research

methods (Teddlie & Tashakkori, 2011). Qualitatively, this paper relies on observation research methods

which is important for three reasons. First, it offers thick, rich descriptions of participant actions and

behaviors (Creswell, 2009, Denzin & Lincoln, 2008; Guzzo, Salas, and Associates, 1995; Levi, 2011;

Merriam, 2009; Northhouse, 2011; Porter, 1998; Sharritz & Ott, 1992). Second, participants are seen in

their natural setting (Angrosini & Rosenberg, 2011, p. 467). Third, as we were only observing, there

was no interference with the participants during their FEMA training (Creswell, 2009; Merriam, 2009;

Phil Politano, personal communication May 15, 2017). Quantitatively, this paper relies on descriptive

statistical analysis and the generation of graphs to compare two JICs. According to Teddlie and

Tashakkori, mixed methods research often proves to be the most valuable source of understanding

complex phenomena (2011, p. 286).

Page 5 of 30

SETTING: Seven researchers collected the qualitative data by observing 37 participants for three

days. The participants were students in PIO training at FEMA’s Emergency Management Institute, in

Emmitsburg, Maryland. FEMA’s Course Manager, Phil Politano, controlled the course logistics,

administration, operations, and the functional exercise. Mr. Politano placed the 37 students into two JIC

teams during the functional exercise where they worked in two simulated counties: Liberty and Green.

Once in their respective JICs, each of the teams selected their respective leaders. The researchers

observed the two JICs as they went through formation and operational considerations. We divided

ourselves into two teams and rotated between the two JICs every 45 to 60 minutes.

GROUND RULES : Our interactions with the students were guided by the following FEMA ground

rules (FEMA, 2017, p. 23):

Do not participate in the functional exercise

Do not interact with the students during the functional exercise

Do not interfere or influence the functional exercise

Do not hover around the students, stay in the back and on the sidelines

Do observe the students in both JIC

Do work as a team to observe, analyze, and report our findings

OBSERVATION DATA : We developed a data collection matrix which allowed us to transfer our

notes onto paper for further analysis. Initially, the data collection matrix had four columns: information,

people, time, and decisions and four rows: leadership, communications, interpersonal (team dynamics),

and other. After our first observation, we changed to columns to strength, weakness, opportunities, and

threats while the four rows remained unchanged (See Appendix A). The change allowed us to follow a

traditional SWOT analysis (Jacobs, Arjen, & Christe-Zeyse, 2013). Just before lunch and dinner

(supper) we met to analyze our notes and determined what observations would be added to the data

Page 6 of 30

collection matrix. Before any observations made it onto a data collection matrix there had to be group

consensus that, in our professional opinion, an observation data point assisted or hindered getting the

right information, to the right people, at the right time, so they could make the right decision (FEMA,

2011; Thomas H. Olshanski, personal conversation, May 15, 2017). We texted between themselves to

coordinate the switches between JICs and to alert the other researchers to new topics to watch for.

STATISTICAL DATA . We analyzed the Data Collection Matrices by assigning

points as follows: Each comment in a Strength cell was awarded 2 points while each comment in a

Weakness cell was awarded -2 points. Each comment in an Opportunity cell was awarded 1 point while

each comment in a Threat cell was awarded -1 point.

We then totaled the points across the four rows: leadership, communication, interpersonal, and other.

After the points were totaled, graphs were generated for each JIC. Finally, we combined the data for the

four rows to get a JIC versus JIC analysis.

DEFINITIONS: For clarity and consistency, this research paper developed or used the following

definitions:

Communications means the internal JIC communications between and among the public information officers rather than the communications a JIC was creating and disseminating to the media and the public.

Leadership means behaviors or communications used for decision making, self-correcting, mission development, goals and objectives. In addition, these activities needed to be intentional versus accidental.

Interpersonal (team dynamics) means silos within the JIC teams, the health of the JIC teams, group dynamics, demographics, and team culture.

A public information officer is responsible for communicating with the public, media, and/or coordinating with other agencies, as necessary, with incident related information requirements (FEMA, 2007).

Strategy is the intentional movement of an organization from its present position to a desirable but uncertain future position (Galbraith, 2014; Kaplan & Norton, 2001).

Page 7 of 30

FINDINGS

What follows are the findings for Green County:

STRENGTHS : The strengths found in Green County’s JIC included leadership that grew into the role throughout the functional exercise, the communications branch lead stepped in to continually do “status checks” and get products out to the public in the absence of the Lead PIO, and their team members acknowledged times where changes to internal JIC structure were needed and followed through on said changes.

WEAKNESSES : Weaknesses occurred in the Green County JIC throughout the week, including mistakenly categorizing tactics as strategy and objectives, struggling to prioritize appropriate communications needs, and missing opportunities to brief the entire JIC with new or updated information. This JIC also missed opportunities by refusing to acknowledge differing opinions or communicating why those opinions were not considered by JIC leadership as appropriate means of problem solving. Refusing to provide internal feedback on differing opinions furthered the effects of unintentionally-created silos in the JIC and led to unaddressed conflicts. Increased situational awareness would have helped Green County avoid some of these issues.

OPPORTUNITIES : Conversely, Green’s JIC team had several strong members in non-leadership roles that stepped up when the Lead and Assistant PIOs were out of the room. Members of the Green County JIC had intent to collaborate directly with members of the JIC in Liberty County, but never quite effectively completed said attempts. While the JIC location for Green County left some things to be desired, the team could have done more than they did to make opportunities for enhanced collaboration.

THREATS : Green County did not fully use the EOC and incident commander as a resource, posing a threat to JIC operations. Leadership did not establish accountability measures for staff or resolve issues with interpersonal attitudes and related problems. Information sharing across sections of the JIC were hindered by perceived micromanagement by JIC leadership, as the Lead PIO directly conveyed information to each involved party via one-on-one basis and missed the opportunity to share key points by briefing the all of the members of the JIC.

THREATS : The Lead PIO set a precedent of not wanting JIC members to retain their home agency identity while in process of the exercise, creating communications issues. Members did not want to answer home agency phone calls, but needed to use cell phones during the exercise. Since calls from JIC colleagues came from non-local, unfamiliar numbers, communications opportunities were missed, potentially creating cognitive dissonance from being unable to address potential at-home threats and issues.

THREATS : The need for streamlined JIC processes which allows a Lead PIO to clearly see when to push staff towards a goal versus letting the JIC machine push further down the path on its own.

What follows are the findings for Liberty County:

Page 8 of 30

STRENGTHS : The observations of the Liberty County JIC revealed natural leaders, many of whom had experience working in emergency management. As a result, the members were able to start quickly and organized themselves by skill sets and areas of need. The JIC leaders were skilled at empowering members of the JIC to feel needed and to use their skill sets where needed.

STRENGTHS : As a whole this JIC excelled at interpersonal communication. The members of this JIC took time on the first day of the exercise to learn about each other and their strengths and weaknesses. There was good collaboration between the groups and between most individuals. As the members became more comfortable with each other, banter and humor was noticeable. Dissenting opinions were also handled in a manner that those participants who voiced those opinions felt heard and respected. The only weakness in terms of interpersonal relationships was some participants hid in plain sight in the JIC and were nominally involved.

WEAKNESSES : The strong leadership and depth of experience for this JIC also translated into a weakness with an inability to transfer from organization to operations. There were several hours of analysis on both messaging and how to organize this JIC. The several iterations of reorganization led to some team members feeling left out or not entirely understanding their roles in the new structure. While communication among branches was generally not strong, the media analysis branch was noted as one for collecting data and seeking direction for resolution.

OPPORTUNITIES : This JIC was so focused on details that both the leadership and the members did not think and prepare from a strategic standpoint. The members struggled to identify and write objectives to drive workflow and messaging for the JIC. This could have been solved easily by asking the IC for EOC objectives during the briefings.

OPPORTUNITIES : Opportunities for this JIC revolved around utilizing the Incident Commander (IC) and the Emergency Operation Center (EOC) frequently during the exercise. It should be noted this JIC asked the IC to leave shortly after a briefing session started and that incident could have made for an awkward relationship in a real-world experience.

Page 9 of 30

BEST PRACTICES

After analyzing the findings from Green and Liberty County, we saw the following trends and

themes that we offer as JIC best practices in the areas of leadership, communications, and interpersonal

dynamics:

Leadership

Lead PIOs need to establish a succession plan when they leave the JIC to maintain continuity

Members of a JIC need to assume leadership roles during chaoso This is especially important when a JIC is starting as it sets the tone and pace

for the JIC

Lead PIOs need to empower the members of the JIC

Lead PIOs and Branch Supervisors should not micromanage

Lead PIOs and Branch Supervisors should know about group dynamicso For example: knowing Tuckman’s four stages of group development

Members of a JIC should be aware of environmental factors that harm team efficiencies and effectiveness such as work space, technology, room layout, lighting, temperature, etc.

Leadership is each member’s responsibilityo This is especially true when there is weak JIC leadership

Members of a JIC should recognize when they are transitioning from organizing to operations

Members of a JIC should maintain focus on the Incident Commander’s objectives and FEMA’s primary objective

Communications

The Lead PIO and members of a JIC need to maintain situational awareness with the incident

The Lead PIO and members of a JIC should think strategy before tactics

Page 10 of 30

Communications should impart empathy for those impacted by the incident

Members of a JIC should be aware of all the tools in the toolbox

The Lead PIO should coordinate between the JIC and IC/EOC

When in doubt, defer to the IC

The Lead PIO should establish communication channels with other JICs

The Lead PIO should give, and members of a JIC should demand, team briefings both regularly scheduled and as needed

Interpersonal Dynamics

Lead PIOs should encouraging team participation

Addressing team departures and recognizing that a healthy debate is not a departure.

Lead PIOs and Branch Supervisors should identify strengths and weaknesses of team members. Lead PIOs and Branch Supervisors should be aware of team health

o Appropriate humor, encouragement, nutrition, stress management, etc.

Lead PIOs and Branch Supervisors should identify and eradicate disruptive group behaviors such as sniping, loafing, hiding, whining, passing blame, freelancing, etc.

Members of a JIC should respect differences of opinion

RECOMMENDATIONS – FEMA COURSE MANAGER

FEMA should consider the following to better understand how JICs are formed and developed:

Determine if, how, or should functional exercise controllers play a role in the formation and development of a JIC?

Page 11 of 30

RECOMMENDATIONS – MASTER PROGRAM STUDENTS

Future students in the FEMA Master Program should consider the following to better understand

how JICs are formed and developed:

We divided our research team in two and rotated between the two functional exercise JICs every 45 to 90 minutes. You may want to have one or two members remain in each JIC throughout the functional exercise while one or two others rotate.

Each member of our research team generated his or her own notes and then we met before lunch and dinner to analyze the notes and determine what made it onto the data matrix. This seemed to work well.

Determine if workflow patterns identified in this document are consistent with future courses and real-world situations?

RECOMMENDATIONS – PRACTITIONERS

Practitioners should consider the following to better understand how JICs are formed and

developed:

The Lead PIO should give, and members of a JIC should demand, team briefings both regularly scheduled and as needed

Lead PIOs and Branch Supervisors should identify and eradicate disruptive group behaviors such as sniping, loafing, hiding, whining, passing blame, and freelancing

The Lead PIO and members of a JIC should think strategy before tactics

RECOMMENDATIONS – FUTURE RESEARCH

Future researchers should consider the following regarding the formation and operation of a

JIC:

Extend current leadership theories to a JIC

Extend group communication theories to a JIC

Extend group dynamics theories to a JIC

Page 12 of 30

REFERENCES

Angrosini, M. & Rosenberg, J. R. (2011). Observations on observation. In N. K. Denzin

& Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), The SAGE Handbook of Qualitative Research (pp. 467- 478). Thousand

Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, Inc.

Beebe, S. A. & Masterson, J. T. (2012). Communicating in small groups: principles and practices (10th

Ed.). San Francisco, CA: Allyn & Bacon.

Burn, S. M. (2004). Groups: Theory and practice. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth - Thompson Learning.

Cragan, J. F., Kasch, C. R., & Wright, D. W. (2009). Communication on small groups: Theory,

process, and skills (7th Ed.). Boston, MA: Wadsworth Cengage Learning.

Creswell, J. W. (2009). Research design: qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (3rd

Ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, Inc.

Denzin, N. K. & Lincoln, Y. S. (2008). Strategies of qualitative inquiry (3rd Ed.).

Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, Inc.

FEMA (2007). Basic guidance for Public Information Officers (PIOs): National Incident Management

System (NIMS) . (Retrieved from https://www.fema.gov/media-library-data/20130726-1623-

20490-0276/basic_guidance_for_pios_final_draft_12_06_07.pdf)

FEMA (2011). A whole community approach to emergency management: Principles, themes, and

pathways for action . (Retrieved from

https://www.fema.gov/ja/media-library/assets/documents/23781)

FEMA (2017). Glossary of Related Terms . [website] (Retrieved from

https://training.fema.gov/emiweb/is/icsresource/glossary.htm#J)

https://www.fema.gov/ja/media-library/assets/documents/23781

https://www.fema.gov/ja/media-library/assets/documents/23781

https://www.fema.gov/media-library-data/20130726-1623-20490-0276/basic_guidance_for_pios_final_draft_12_06_07.pdf

https://www.fema.gov/media-library-data/20130726-1623-20490-0276/basic_guidance_for_pios_final_draft_12_06_07.pdf

Page 13 of 30

Guzzo, R. A., Salas, E., and Associates (1995). Team effectiveness and decision making in

organizations. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Publishers.

Jacobs, G., Arjen, v. W., & Christe-Zeyse, J. (2013). A theoretical framework of organizational

change. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 26(5), 772-792.

Levi, D. (2011). Group dynamics for teams (3rd Ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, Inc.

Merriam, S. B. (2009). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation. San Francisco, CA:

Jossey-Bass PublishersNorthhouse, P. G. (2010). Leadership: theory and practice. Thousand

Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, Inc.

Porter, M. E. (1998). Competitive strategy: techniques for analyzing industries and competitors. New

York, NY: THE FREE PRESS.

Shafritz, J. & Ott, S. (1992). Classics of organizational theory. Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole.

Sturm, K. B. (2012). How leader behaviors influence task, procedural, and social goals in small group

decision making: a mixed methods approach. (UMI Number 3553781.)

Teddlie, C. & Tashakkori, A. (2011). Mixed methods research. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.),

The SAGE Handbook of Qualitative Research (pp. 285-300).

Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, Inc.

ATTACHMENTS

A. Example Data Collection Matrix

B. Graph: Analysis of Leadership Scoring, both JICs

C. Graph: Analysis of Communication Scoring, both JICs

D. Graph: Analysis of Interpersonal Scoring, both JICs

Page 14 of 30

E. Graph: Analysis of Other Factors Scoring, both JICs

F. Data Collection Matrices for Green County JIC (six each)

G. Data Collection Matrices for Liberty County JIC (six each)

ATTACHMENT A. Example Data Collection Matrix

JIC Name // AM-PM// Date

STRENGTHS WEAKNESSES 0PPORTUNITIES THREATS

Leadership

Communications

Interpersonal

Other

Page 15 of 30

ATTACHMENT B. Graph: Analysis of Leadership Scoring, both JICs

Page 16 of 30

ATTACHMENT C. Graph: Analysis of Communication Scoring, both JICs

Page 17 of 30

ATTACHMENT D. Graph: Analysis of Interpersonal Scoring, both JICs

Page 18 of 30

ATTACHMENT E. Analysis of Other Factors Scoring, both JICs

Page 19 of 30

ATTACHMENT F. Data Collection Matrices for Green County JIC (six each)

GREEN TUE AM 23 STRENGTHS WEAKNESSES OPPORTUNITIES THREATS

Leadership Lack of an apparent leader Leading stop and start discussions (no coordinated efforts)

Communications Org chart is in the weeds

Interpersonal The members of the JIC seem to get along with each other

Did not leverage their ability to work as a team

Other Members not using the FEMA exercise binders to get info

Page 20 of 30

GREEN TUE PM 23 STRENGTHS WEAKNESSES OPPORTUNITIES THREATS

Leadership Confusion about the task (deliverable) and no person attempts to resolve the confusion

Communications Mode of communications was predominantly side-bar

No shared understanding of task or deliverables

Interpersonal

Other

Page 21 of 30

GREEN WED AM 24 STRENGTHS WEAKNESSES OPPORTUNITIES THREATS

Leadership Allowing side-bar discussions during decision making

Lead PIO not leading

Communications Discussion on how information would flow through the JIC

Used group consensus to fill out the JIC Org Chart

Interpersonal

Other

Page 22 of 30

GREEN WED PM 24 STRENGTHS WEAKNESSES OPPORTUNITIES THREATS

Leadership Branch leaders concerned with JIC as a whole as well as their respective branches

Despite input from members about the room layout, Lead PIO did nothing to get members of a branch together (members were scattered around the room)

Despite input and discussion from members, Lead PIO remained happy with the JIC Org Chart

Communications Did not understand what a Media Analysis Report was and did nothing to clarify with the IC/EOC

Branch members were scattered around the room (rather than being together) which caused communication breakdowns

Interpersonal Members willing to raise roles and responsibilities confusion

Lead PIO and Branch Supervisors unwilling to clarify roles and responsibilities

Other

Page 23 of 30

GREEN THU AM 25 STRENGTHS WEAKNESSES OPPORTUNITIES THREATS

Leadership Lead PIO not in the weeds at this point (1030)

Lead PIO not micromanaging at this point (1030)

Lead PIO involved in the weeds (creating deliverables) (0830)

Lead PIO insists that all information flow through this position (0810)

Communications IC/EOC visits JIC and gives an update. No one follows up on clues about Casperville

No one was thought of, or was willing, to tell the Lead PIO to get out of the weeds

When the “late” members arrived no one stopped to give them any updates

Interpersonal Members hiding in plain sight

Other

Page 24 of 30

GREEN THU PM 25 STRENGTHS WEAKNESSES OPPORTUNITIES THREATS

Leadership While Lead PIO was out of the room productivity significantly dropped (due to micromanager and requiring all info to flow through that position)

Communications

Interpersonal Friendly relations (that could have been leveraged on Tue or Wed) are now a distraction to JIC goals or tasks

Because Lead PIO was a micromanager, members not taking action unless directed to do so

Other

Page 25 of 30

ATTACHMENT F. Data Collection Matrices for Liberty County JIC (six each)

LIBERTY TUE AM 23 STRENGTHS WEAKNESSES OPPORTUNITIES THREATS

Leadership A woman starts leading (1116)

No one led the discussion or took ownership regarding the deliverable and they floundered

Domineering leadership

Communications Identified personal strengths but did not do anything with the data

Wrote superfluous information on the white board that was in the Exercise Binder

One member raised an important issue but the team dismissed it and returned to the weeds

Interpersonal All-stop and took a vote on a topic, then one person counted the votes and disclosed the results

Rambling discussion about a minor issue and no focus on the deliverables

Discussion was agency specific and no for the benefit of the JIC as a whole

Other

Page 26 of 30

LIBERTY TUE PM 23 STRENGTHS WEAKNESSES OPPORTUNITIES THREATS

Leadership A member is leading a decision process without the current inject or summary report info

Communications Phone call from EOC, member repeated back the information to check for understanding

Once members realized they were missing summary reports, discussion got into the weeds about the new info

Three members who had inject information did not share it with the JIC as a whole

Interpersonal

Other

Page 27 of 30

LIBERTY WED AM 24 STRENGTHS WEAKNESSES OPPORTUNITIES THREATS

Leadership Lead PIO makes the decision to adjust a group process to save time

Lead PIO listening to input about strategy

Members volunteered for assignments with no assessment or re-assessment

Lead PIO did not recognize what was happening in the JIC was not mirroring the exercise

Communications Working well within branches but not between branches

Interpersonal Someone changed the layout of the room

Significant workload discrepancies between branches (Ops was the largest branch with little to do)

Other

Page 28 of 30

LIBERTY WED PM 24 STRENGTHS WEAKNESSES OPPORTUNITIES THREATS

Leadership Lead PIO willing to and does engage in hands-on leadership between branches

Lead PIO conducted “All- Stop briefings

Lead PIO constantly in the weeds (writing superfluous information on the white boards)

Lead PIO willing to and does engage in hands-on leadership between branches

Communications In the weeds on the 8-step strat comms plan (taking extraordinary amounts of time to get info for each step without regard to situational awareness)

Branch members sniping about the Lead PIO but unwilling to raise the issues to a high level with the JIC

Is the Ops Branch about Ops or is it about info on Ops (conflict on the purpose of the Ops Branch)

Interpersonal Disconnect between the Ops Branch (the largest branch) and JIC goals and workload

Other

Page 29 of 30

LIBERTY THU AM 25 STRENGTHS WEAKNESSES OPPORTUNITIES THREATS

Leadership Lead PIO creates a process for improving shared understanding within the JIC (create more copies to pass- around)

Temporary Lead PIO (45 min) immediately has All- Stop to discuss a team focus for deliverables

The Ops Branch is not working and other branches are sniping rather than raise the issue for resolution

Communications Not leveraging differing viewpoints about deliverables, processes, or organization

Interpersonal Members waiting for the Lead PIO to direct rather than taking initiative (consistent theme)

One branch realizes that the missing “late” members may be a clue to a bigger problem but do not raise the issue for analysis or resolution

Other

Page 30 of 30

LIBERTY THU AM 25 STRENGTHS WEAKNESSES OPPORTUNITIES THREATS

Leadership Lead PIO initiates a re-org to deal with the Ops Branch

Starts delegating tasks to branches

Lead PIO and Branch Supervisors not reflective about their opportunities for improvement and blame performance deficiencies on the members of the JIC

Communications No one declared an All-Stop to discuss the reorg: why and how it will now work

Interpersonal Re org shrinking Ops Branch and transitioning from a “Production Line” to a “Cradle to Grave” process

More members engaged

Other

31

Master Public Inforamtion Offcier Program Fiscal Year 2018 Cohort #3 Joint Information Center Observation Report

July 28, 2017

Right information. Right people. Right time. Right decision. The goal of every public

information officer (PIO) in an evolving incident is to craft an accurate message, deliver it to a

target audience in an expedient fashion in order to empower them to take appropriate action. In

FEMA’s Advanced Public Information Officer (APIO) course (E0388), students are tasked with

putting this mantra into practice by engaging in a simulated full-scale Joint Information Center

(JIC) exercise. Faced with an unfolding disaster that seems to expand by the minute, PIOs must

put their skills to the test to deliver timely and coordinated information to those who need it

most.

Master PIO (MPIO) students, as part of a year-long course progression, are tasked with

observing the activities of two established exercise JICs located in the fictional State of

Columbia’s Liberty and Green counties. The goal is to identify elements of JIC operations and

interactions whose analysis may prove instrumental to future real-world JIC activations. MPIO

Group Three, comprised of eight students, determined to observe eight key elements, including:

Structure

Communication

Coordination

Interpersonal relations and interactions

Team-building process

Stress management

Leadership

Progression of improvement

In an effort to further enhance and quantify observations, Group Three developed a survey

based on a 1 to 5 star rating system, with 1 being poor and 5 being excellent, on each of the

eight above listed categories, to deliver to both APIO students and the MPIO students in Group

32

Three. These ratings provided an overall capture of student’s experiences both participating in

and observing the JICs and offered an insightful look into the strengths and weaknesses evident

within each.

Structure

APIO Rating Liberty: 4.50 MPIO Rating Liberty: 3.38

APIO Rating Green: 3.58 MPIO Rating Green: 3.71

Liberty County : Liberty County implemented an Incident Command System (ICS) based organizational

chart in structuring its Joint Information Center (JIC). A lead Public Information Officer (PIO) was

established just prior to full exercise play, by exercise design. A deputy PIO and two assistant PIOs

comprised the leadership team within the JIC. An administrative assistant and a liaison were also

included within the JIC structure. Areas of focus were broken down into sections and included

information gathering, planning and products, news desk monitoring and analyzing and social media

(Figure A).

Figure 1Figure A

33

Liberty County utilized a unique approach in selecting its lead PIO. The group collectively identified

four potential leads and appointed the position via majority vote. The individual with the second most

votes was named deputy PIO and the remaining two representatives were assigned to the assistant PIO

positions. The remainder of the open roles were filled by a “call out your name” approach based on

individual’s stated skill sets and experience.

Seating arrangements within the JIC were based on task groups and were designed to enhance work flow

throughout the exercise (see attachment B). Though seated by focus groups, the flow of information within

the JIC faltered at times. This may be due in part to the interpersonal dynamics at play among JIC

representatives as well as the large size of JIC operations (Figure B).

34

Figure D

Green County : Green County utilized an ICS based organizational chart in structuring its JIC in a

format similar to, but slightly varied from, the Liberty County JIC. The group collectively assigned a

JIC lead, as well as a deputy PIO and a JIC coordinator. Three sections were placed under this

leadership team, including information production and collection, information dissemination and

liaisons. PIOs were assigned to various sections based on their identified skill sets and a “call out your

name” approach similar to the method used in the Liberty County JIC (Figure C).

Initially, seating arrangements within the JIC were random and not arranged by specific focuses or task

groups. According to the lead PIO, individuals began to work “wherever they happened to put their bag

down” and the process “seemed to just work itself out”. However, halfway through the exercise, JIC

representatives determined that work flow could be more streamlined if the group implemented a seating

structure reflecting that of its organizational chart. Therefore, the group reassembled into three tables that

included production and collection, dissemination and liaisons (Figure D).

The structure within the JIC served well to enhance the flow of information coming in and going out as

well as to streamline operations. Communication seemed to flow freely within the JIC and members

35

interacted well with one another in an effort to remain ahead of the massive flow of information and

continually unfolding events of the exercise.

Communication



Communication involves a sender and a receiver, but it also involves a number of variables that can

affect the quality of the information being transmitted. This analysis only addresses the mechanisms

utilized; other sections of this report touch on the other variables involved.

Both JICs were staffed with professionals of varying degrees of expertise as PIOs, yet both functioned

from the start of the exercise in a very serious manner when it came to managing communications

amongst the various members of the JIC. It is clear that even though some of the members were unsure

of their exact duties or about knowledge of exact processes to be followed, they all understood the

importance of clear communications. Both JICs made great efforts to ensure that information being

conveyed in communications was based on confirmed facts and recorded in writing before moving

forward to transmit the information wherever it needed to go. This attention to detail from the start was

critical in making sure that mistakes did not snowball and require time and energy to be corrected.

Both JICs made extensive use of smart boards and flip charts to record information and keep it posted

so that if questions existed about a given issue, it could be verified with a quick glance. Another method

utilized by both JICs was having each individual write information on sticky notes that were then

posted on smart boards as part of organizational flow charts and assignments. This helped to reduce the

possibility of errors occurring. Once the information was solidified, lists were typed from the posts and

hard copies were printed and distributed to JIC members and used to create products for distribution to

the public. Both JICs made extensive use of the computer projection screens as a method to keep all

members informed of information for a specific incident or project.

Because the exercise was designed so that emails could not be sent amongst the participants , the

majority of information exchanges took place verbally, although some handwritten notes were passed

and some information was printed via computers and then disseminated. The JIC participants were able

36

to share some information electronically by placing documents in the JIC folder on the desktop of their

computers, but documents could not be modified by one person unless all other copies that had been

opened on other computers were closed. The removal of the ability to use emails increased the need for

face-to-face communication and also meant that no electronic paper trails existed to verify a majority of

the information exchanged.

Both JICS eventually made extensive use of all of the features of Simulation Deck to check facts, see

what was being posted by other agencies and monitor how their information outputs were being

utilized by the public and media. Both JICs had personnel who were able to utilize their writing and

graphics skills (utilizing the basic Microsoft Office software available) and create products for both

online and other potential audiences.

Ultimately, by focusing on the basics, both groups did a very good job with communications that

resulted in effective JICs.

Coordination



Liberty County: The preliminary stages of the establishment of the JIC appeared to be very disorganized

with one dominating individual who was not only very aggressive but also alienating other students

from feeling that they could step up or speak up. This was clearly visible to anyone observing this

group.

There were many sidebar discussions among students with no clear observation of any sense of

direction or ability to determine objectives as the day continued. The atmosphere of this JIC was very

tense and stressful.

Although instructors of this course attempted to run interference and mitigate the situation unfolding in

this JIC, the dominating individual continued to bully the other students in the room creating animosity

and resentment.

Only when one of the lead instructors placed this individual into a liaison position did the flow of the

room become productive. The tension in the room appeared to decrease and the leadership began to

37

clearly identify objectives, assign tasks and the flow of the exercise appeared productive. While this

group struggled with overcoming the obvious issue from the beginning, in the end they were able to

make a coordinated effort to complete their mission.

One of the positive things that I noticed was that the lead PIO (Ben) actually identified the stress in his

room during the middle of the exercise and gave the entire room a stress break by taking phones off the

hook for 5 minutes, allowing the entire room to take a break. Those short 5 minutes made a big

difference.

Green County: The atmosphere in the Green County JIC was pleasant. While there was a clearly

identified dominating personality in the room at the onset; there was also confusion and imbalance in

the way the three tables were set up with inexperienced individuals at one table and those with JIC

experience at another table. The third table included individuals with little to participating in exercises.

Once the JIC leader was identified, the above issue was resolved and this group worked very well

together in a coordinated effort to complete the mission. As the injects increased with intensity, the stress

level of the JIC leader became very obvious. Once this individual stepped away and took a break, things

appeared to be less stressful for him.

There were more positives than negatives in this JIC. Lunch rotations went smoothly and the

coordinated effort with this group worked well.

Interpersonal Relations and Interactions



Liberty County: Liberty County JIC was larger in size as compared to the Green County JIC and

navigated through an equal amount of interjections during the exercise. The atmosphere within the

Liberty County JIC seemed to have a higher level of stress. The JIC was initially divided into several

different sections, which allowed for flow of information among the table, but not throughout the group.

A hurdle related to the flow of information throughout the group seemed to come from members

pushing their “real world” expertise upon others, which lead to animosity within the group.

38

During the course of Day 1 of the exercise, an offensive bleat on Simulation Deck was sent out as a

joke. It seems that the ramifications of the bleat were not fully considered and in a real world setting

would create public outrage. Looking at it from an interaction stand point, it shows the frustration that at

least one member of the Liberty County JIC was feeling during this point of the exercise.

As the exercise progressed and some of the more difficult personalities were given specific assignments,

the interpersonal tension seemed to lessen within the group. The continuation of a power struggle was

observed later in the morning in which one of the strong personalities asked to be removed from the JIC

because the other participants were not open to her ideas. After a conversation with the instructors, the

student returned to the JIC and appeared to stop pushing her opinion so strongly upon other members.

Green County: The Green County JIC was smaller in size as compared to the Liberty County JIC, but

navigated through an equal amount of interjections during the exercise. The atmosphere within the

Green County JIC was busy but seemed to have a free flow of information between JIC members. The

JIC members were initially not seated into specific sections, but ended up dividing into sections to

assist with work flow.

Green County JIC members showed mutual respect for the skill sets of each individual as they engaged

in an open dialog among one another. When students in the Green County JIC observed peers becoming

over worked, they took actions to mitigate the stress.

Interpersonal relations play an important role in the successful operations of a JIC. When members come

into the JIC with mutual respect for the skill sets of other professionals it allows for a more cooperative

working environment with an even flow of information throughout the JIC. It seems that when there is

mutual respect for the skill sets and opinions of other JIC members, the operations run smoother. That

does not mean that conflict is not present, it is just addressed in a professional manner.

It appears that both JICs would have benefited from leadership having been appointed sooner in the

exercise. The delay in appointment opened the door for power struggles to playout within the groups

and contributed to the rise of tensions.

Team-Building



39

It is interesting to observe the role that personalities and experience play in the team-building process.

Green and Liberty County Joint Information Centers’ players exhibited similar behavior, for the

most part, as they developed their teams, but applied differing processes to get there.

One difference was the length of time it took for each JIC to build their respective teams. Although

Liberty’s group was larger, Green County took longer to assemble their team because they did a

comprehensive skills assessment of each of their members before assigning roles.

Several very strong personalities emerged in Liberty and there was an evident jockeying for power,

while Green focused on strengths and experience of their entire group before proceeding. Despite the

power struggle, Liberty used a democratic process to identify interested leadership candidates. Five

people raised their hands and they were sent out of the room so the remaining participants could discuss

and vote. Two candidates received the majority of the votes, so they were assigned the lead PIO and JIC

manager titles. The remaining candidates filled out the remaining leadership roles. The remaining JIC

staffers were assigned roles based on their strengths. An informal discussion in Green County identified

an individual with impressive credentials that culminated with this candidate being asked if he would

accept the lead PIO role. Then the group, as a whole was asked for consensus. The remaining roles in the

Green JIC were assigned through group discussion with members, using the members’ previously noted

strengths and weaknesses.

There were two significant events observed (one in each JIC) from the team-building perspective that

should be included in this summary. During the exercise, four PIOs from Liberty were requested to re-

deploy to Green County to assist in their response efforts. The four were selected by leadership. While

common practice would be to remove the least valued, or most difficult members, there was one

participant that was clashing with the majority from the outset. The Liberty JIC leadership made an

unexpected decision of retaining that individual, realizing that despite the personality and opinion

differences, that individual possessed a skillset that would be viewed as an asset to the team.

In Green County, the lead PIO made an unusual move on Thursday in the thick of things when he

assembled JIC leadership and asked for their help. The lead PIO was very hands-on and worked through

the exercise without taking a break, taking on an excessive task load. He was not delegating enough of

the workload and was on the verge of being overwhelmed when he called in the JIC leaders and asked

for help. He was told to take a break, which gave him an opportunity to disconnect briefly from the

exercise. First, the fact that he recognized this and second, that he had the gumption to ask for help, is

not a sign of weakness, but the sign of a leader.

40

41

Stress Management



Neither of the observed JICs formally addressed the subject of stress management for its staff during the

functional exercises.

The Centers for Disease Control cautions that emergency responders may have to deal with seeing

human suffering, run the risk of personal harm, could have intense workloads, might have to make life-

and-death decisions, and will be expected to handle separation from family.

The Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration states that symptoms of stress may

include fear, anxiety, sadness, shame, feeling numb, disorientation, difficulty concentrating, trouble

sleeping, being “on edge,” and problems while working. Some will experience even more severe

reactions, including severe anxiety or depression, posttraumatic stress disorder, and using more alcohol

or other drugs.

For the most part, participants in the simulated JICs conducted themselves professionally and no one

was observed to be unable to cope with their situations. Participants self-excused themselves for breaks,

whether to use a restroom, get coffee or have lunch. On the other hand, those taking a break did not

always communicate their intention to others.

FEMA stresses to each deployed staff that stress prevention and management is critical in order for

responders to stay well and to continue to help in the situation. FEMA states that to take care of others,

responders must be feeling well and thinking clearly.

Specifically, FEMA suggests that deployees talk to someone and seek professional help for disaster-

caused stress. Talking with someone about feelings of anger, sorrow, and other emotions is strongly

urged. Exercise participants were not observed doing this. In addition, FEMA says that seeking help

from professional counselors, if available, is advised. Participants did not request access to professional

counselors during the exercise.

42

The standard advice for disaster responders is that they should:

eat healthy

rest

exercise

relax

meditate

There was no way to observe if participants were doing any of the above, but it is assumed that with

more or less regular hours and a well-stocked dining facility at EMI, that participants were able to take

comfort from most of the above.

It is also important to note that as in any real-life situation, there were clashes in the JICs. There were

participants who were more outgoing, or Type A personalities, than others. In stark contrast, there were

a few participants who rarely spoke over the course of several days of observation. It was observed

multiple times that a few individuals assumed leadership roles through the sheer weight of their forceful

persona. Participants generally let these self-appointed leaders “do their thing,” while some were seen off

to the side rolling their eyes. The most frustrated were these Type A leaders, who complained that they

weren’t being followed, than the participants who just worked around those they considered to be bullies.

Leadership



Liberty County : The Liberty County JIC was larger in size and had more dominant personalities. One

individual initially emerged as overbearing and bossy and was instructed to tone it down by the

teachers. She struggled with this and took some comments personally but managed to back down

somewhat.

As a group, they pulled together well and organized a command structure with clearly delineated

sectors.

Participants in this JIC were higher energy in general. The JIC coordinator was well spoken, stood in

front of the room, and had a natural leadership presence. On day one she said "I'm sorry" a couple of

43

times, which is language that can be eliminated, especially since it pertained to issues that did not

warrant an apology.

This JIC also put together an organization chart with clear roles and appropriate span of control.On day two, one member created an offensive cartoon caricature meant to be funny and shared it on the

Bleat Deck. It was highly inappropriate and resulted in a firm admonishment from the EMI instructor

group.

This does not appear to have been a function of weak leadership because at this point in these student’s

careers they are absolutely expected to know better.

Green County : Initially the Green County group seemed very unsure how to manage tasks. At one

point, a member of the group asked, "What should we do first?" No one had the answer. They were

timid and unstructured. No clear leader emerged on day one. Once the group began to gel, the

atmosphere in the room became more relaxed. Ultimately this dynamic led to a calmer JIC.

Once the leader was appointed, the room went to work. However, I found the JIC lead to be too involved

in task level activities. Much of his time was spent focusing on his computer instead of leading the

room.

The participants self-managed well once sectors were assigned but the JIC lacked cohesiveness. It

would have benefited from a manager who walked around, gathered information and retained a "big

picture" outlook. The group put together a solid organization chart on the board to define span of

control.

By day three, they worked smoothly, communicated well, and had a calm feel. However, the leader

never really “led” sufficiently.

Initially both groups did not seem able to "get into character". By day two they were much more

relaxed and seemed to understand that this is an exercise that required suspension of disbelief. This

could have easily been tackled by an incisive leader who brought the “back” to center.

One issue I saw as critical, both Green and Liberty County were ignoring radio traffic, news broadcasts,

and other outside information. When the mayor was killed, it barely registered a notice (one student

44

actually yawned as she looked at her computer). Again, leadership would have noticed this and

addressed the issue by assigning a sector to monitor.

The JIC leaders would have both benefited from a strategy on how to best address their groups and set

strategic objectives. Leadership in an atmosphere such as this is critical for staying on mission.

Leadership training would be valuable during day one morning lecture. All of the weaknesses present in

these groups could have been compensated for with strong direction.




Our group observed a lack of leadership and ownership in both of the Joint Information Centers during

the beginning stages of the simulation. Although the smaller of the two groups (Green County) had less

participants they were able to accomplish more in the time frame given. Liberty County’s Joint

Information Center incurred hurdles early on with no clear objectives met. A significant amount of time

was spent on introductions and self-promotion leaving little time to meet objectives.

During the following day both Joint Information Centers began to piece together overnight incidents

which proved to be a highly stress induced operation. Personalities began to clash in the Liberty County

JIC as certain individuals pushed real world experience and self- worth on others. Although this

occurred, both groups began to progress and continually overcome each obstacle. Interviews via phone

and television have become more prevalent in the exercise, delivering useful information. We began to

notice that both JICs were able to calm down and begin processing all information and incidents with

little to no lag.

During the final hours of simulation both JICs began to focus on tasks present and ahead working as a

well-oiled machine. We observed leadership beginning to lead instead of taking on tasks of other

positions. We also observed the JICs work staff begin to recognize the signs of the JIC leadership over

extending themselves and mitigate the symptoms with break out meetings. In conclusion we observed

both groups evolve into fully functioning Joint Information Centers with clear and precise tasks.

A final analysis of the star ratings showed a relative general consensus among scores in each category,

with the majority of scores recorded by the APIO students and MPIO students differing less than one

45

ratings point. The categories of stress management (for both Liberty and Green) as well as team-building

and interpersonal relationships and interactions (for Liberty) revealed a difference of more than one

ratings point, with MPIO students recording a lower score than the APIO students scored themselves.

This variance can be attributed, in large part, to the level of experience and real-world skill through

which both groups of students observed the exercise and rated their overall impressions. The MPIO

students are more aware of dynamics present within a JIC such as team-building and interpersonal

relationships and rated these categories with a more critical eye to these elements.

Ultimately, capturing strategic components of JIC operations through both thoughtful observation and

quantifiable ratings analysis provides PIOs with the opportunity to learn from simulated JIC

environments so that they may further enhance future real-world JIC activations in their local

jurisdictions.

46

AppendicesSurvey Ratings – APIO & MPIO Students

APIO Student Comments

47

Liberty County: APIO Response

MPIO Response

48

APIO Response

MPIO Response

49

APIO Response

MPIO Response

50

APIO Response

MPIO Response

51

APIO Response

MPIO Response

52

APIO Response

MPIO Response

53

APIO Response

MPIO Response

54

APIO Response

MPIO Response

55

Green County: APIO Response

MPIO Response

56

APIO Response

MPIOP Response

57

APIO Response

MPIO Response

58

APIO Response

MPIO Response

59

APIO Response

MPIO Response

60

APIOP Response

MPIOP Response

61

APIOP Response

MPIOP Response

62

APIOP Response

MPIOP Response

63

Recommendations on the formation, operation, leadership and evaluation of a sustainable Joint Information Center

APIO Student Survey Comments

Question 1: On a scale of 1 to 5, with 1 being poor and 5 being excellent, what is your opinion of your JIC's overall structure?

Beginning had too many chiefs with opinions and was shutting out people who had other ideas, which caused some to just not participate. It eventually got better once there was a structure, but at the end I realized the structure could have been made better. I don't think lead pio understood what lead pio meant.

This is Pam Collins. Green County JIC completed a skills analysis from the beginning which helped place people within organization.

Little direction from our branch lead within our JIC. Little confirmation of completion of tasks between individuals and between branches in our JIC. Too many opportunities for misunderstandings and miscommunication. But also LOTS of great things!! Ex: respect.Creativity. Professionalism.

I think by the end we got it to work, but I think we struggled with the work flow. I think if we separated out information flow, it would have got things moving faster.

One individual in particular who claimed a role that was not best suited for her.

I feel as though our JIC could have been more appropriately organized. I feel as though we were not consistent in our processes and/or command structure. I strongly feel we could have used a more detailed explanation as well as more leadership in the beginning.

The structure was useful and efficient, but it took some time to understand it.

Question 2: On a scale of 1 to 5, with 1 being poor and 5 being excellent, what is your opinion of your JIC's overall communication, both internally and externally?

Simply lack of experience in the room.

Communication was good I think. In the beginning it was a mess, but once there was structure implemented, communication was good. Took about a day for it to settle I think

Green County established a very effective internal communications process. External began to excel when they realized the benefit of a liaison position.

64


I think we could have done a much better job communication externally. Internally we did OK. We could talk to each other, and once we really started doing that, things worked much better.

We missed a lot.

I will be the first to admit that communication was our weakest point. Internally, I feel as though our communication, or lack thereof, lacked from our leadership. Our lead PIO, and his deputy, struggled to present a consistent message. Externally, I feel as though we also struggled to present a consistent message. I feel as though we did not utilize the proper and necessary channels when given the opportunity.

People were very good at relaying messages and checking in with those ahead and behind them in the order.

Question 3: On a scale of 1 to 5, with 1 being poor and 5 being excellent, what is your opinion of your JIC's overall coordination?

People reached out; excellent sense of heart.

Coordination was OK. It started off horrible because of several chiefs, but within a day coordination got better, but I think in this situation, it needed couple more days for people to realize their roles to coordinate better.

From day one, this group was extremely professional, respectful and cooperative in coordinating responsibilities and information flow.

Great attitudes

I think we had a lot of people doing the same thing, or not enough people doing a certain task. We got

better with time.

I feel as though coordination and communication go hand-in-hand. Though, our coordination was much more successful because I feel as though we all did have a common goal. I feel we struggled in communicating ways to meet that goal.

Every JIC has coordination issues, but overall I think this one was organized amongst the chaos of the ever-evolving disaster.

65


Question 4: On a scale of 1 to 5, with 1 being poor and 5 being excellent, what is your opinion of your JIC's overall interpersonal relations & interactions?

There were several disagreements, especially in the beginning. Instead of getting to the point, people tried to "professionally" disagree (i.e. i would like to respectfully disagree, but I shall interject your opinion with mine). Just get to the point and say what you have to say, so we can agree in on something else and move on. Eventually (by Thursday) it got a lot better

Even those with more experience quietly offered their knowledge when asked. All egos were checked and a cooperative environment was apparent from the very beginning.

I was very close to eating this 5 stars because overall I was incredibly impressed with the level of respect and professionalism. There was some level of defensiveness shown a few times by a few people, as well as disinterest in others thoughts/ideas. And a couple seemed to contribute much less. But considering the stress and relative newness of our environment and not knowing each other, I feel we did the best we could

Positive

Everyone was very respectful and courteous almost to a fault. I think we would have benefited from some people putting their foot down and saying hey this isn't quite right. That did happen, but quietly.

I am confident in saying that because of our interpersonal relationships, lifelong friendships have blossomed. And also, our interactions were very positive. Though it was a very stressful environment, we were very encouraging and uplifting towards each other

Having new people come in and out was tough, but I think everyone got along as much as they could in a stressful situation.

Question 5: On a scale of 1 to 5, with 1 being poor and 5 being excellent, what is your opinion of your JIC's overall team-building process?

The initial skills analysis helped them begin the team building effectively. Tremendous leadership was evident in each participant.

Again, little direction from branch leaders in our JIC and little status updates shared with the " lower level" folks.

HUGE! #JIClife

66


The team building process was our strong point. We were all in the same, stressful, situation and I feel as though we all excelled. I am very proud of my team and the work that we did, and I am pleased to admit that among all of the chaos, we did build a team

Having higher-ups check in with us showed integrity and set a strong precedent for the group.

Question 6: On a scale of 1 to 5, with 1 being poor and 5 being excellent, what is your opinion of your JIC's overall stress management?

I think some were stressed, but not everyone. I did not feel stressed and I know few others didn't either. However, some were overwhelmed. Especially if they had an incident from their own agency.

The PIO lead recognized the need for stepping away once the feeling of being overwhelmed began interfering with his ability to lead. He pulled is section leads aside and expressed his needs to them and each of them stepped up to be a strong leader and manager for their designated staff.

We checked in on one another

We did good. I think we rallied to help and adjusted when certain members need help. Once we did that we really started to function well.

We didn't support our lead PIO well enough but we did make sure everyone went to lunch, took breaks, etc.

Stress management should have been encouraged from the very beginning.

Breaks helped. I really think group members can help each other, but stress management really depends on the individual and their stress threshold.

Question 7: On a scale of 1 to 5, with 1 being poor and 5 being excellent, what is your opinion of your JIC's overall leadership?

I don't think the leader understood his role in the JIC. A lead is supposed to disseminate the information down and let his subordinates do the assignments and overall manage with assistance from JIC manager. I felt that was not the case and the lead misunderstood the role. JIC manager (we called it JIC coordinator) was OK.

Mike looked to each person to use their strengths. No micromanagement occurred rather delegation allowed individuals to perform their responsibilities.

67


Lack of communication from the EOCMike did a great job. It's a learning processes. I respect him a lot, especially for him to admit this isn't working and to make the adjustment. Most bosses I've worked for in the past (in TV) would not do that and would keep going down that path that they know isn't working because they refuse to admit they were wrong. Mike showed great leadership.Right folks in charge.

Both groups had capable leaders

Question 8: On a scale of 1 to 5, with 1 being poor and 5 being excellent, what is your opinion of your JIC's overall progression of improvement during the course of the exercise?

Def saw improvement, but 2 days was not enough to turn it into a well oiled machine. I'd like to add that the JIC exercise needs to be more class like and not eval like. We needed the inputs from the instructors to guide us. Watching 2 days of PowerPoint and then asked to make it work is not easy. The E387 (G0291) class should be set up so you understand the roles of people in the JIC and how to setup the organizational chart. Once you understand what the roles are and how the JIC is setup, you already understand how it is supposed to operate. If we had a better understanding of this, our progression would have been 3 star to 5 star. Since we went in there (most of us) not understanding how JIC works, it ended up being 1 star to 3 star. I graded it 4 star, because I think we went from 1 to 4 because we worked well at the end of exercise.

This group had very specific "ah ha" moments that allied them to develop in a strong JIC We made great strides

From OK what are we supposed to do? to what do you mean STOP? I've got a press conference?!!! That is incredible.

There was a nice sense of progression of improvement for the most part. However, I did not appreciate being pulled into the classroom at random times on day one and I feel as though that did take away from the actual exercise and durability to perform. I feel as though because of that it did take us a slightly longer period of time to get started in the exercise and to put a process in place.

Anyone in that group that didn't come out of the exercise more efficient and knowledgeable wasn't doing his or her job.

68


Appendix I

Analytics of how the Liberty JIC group approached the assignment (Jessica, Kathleen, Gary, and Shari)

Divided into two groups, of 5 and 3 and one participant serving in the transfer position (to go from the Liberty JIC to the Green JIC). Originally divided 4 and 4, but our decision of the 5 and 3, with one transfer, was the right way to go.

Developed a template with the 10 categories we wanted to observe (structure, communication, coordination, interpersonal relations, team building, stress management, leadership, progression of improvement, conflict resolution and strategic thinkings). We ended up not using the template as a form, but many did continue to refer to the categories.

Observed each of these categories for: strengths, challenges, and missed opportunities. Frequently debriefed to share what we observed and noted trends and themes, eventually

refined down to six. From our notes, we were able to identify best practices that addressed recurring themes Best practices were written to be utilized by PIOs with any level of experience at any time

during the life of a JIC at the 30,000 foot level

The Liberty JIC group divided the final paper into the six themes, as well as an introduction and conclusion. Before convening for the evening we agreed on a format for each section, which included the issues observed, strengths, missed opportunities and the best practices we developed as a group. Each member was responsible for writing two sections of the paper.

Documents

Written by:Shari IretonDirector of Communications · Web view2018. 3. 8. · Beer/Ping Pong. Stress management. Leadership. Not flexing her leadership style based on what is transpiring