This is a nice analogy, Patrick. It could easily be extended to illustrate the exact OPPOSITE problem. That's when you discover the players never learned to ice skate, the coaches are surprised that hockey would be played in a hockey rink, and the team managers have no knowledge of any other hockey game ever being played anywhere before.
Alex - you're absolutely correct and the analogy could be used to show that situation. In that case, though, attention should probably turn to the owner/executive who hired them, failed to manage them and set performance expectations, or accepted their poor performance by retaining them.
While this doesn't excuse poor performance or mean that I accept a lack of professionalism from people in the disaster field to learn and ready themselves, their organizations, or their communities, I do choose to believe that the field is mainly made up of people who want to do the right thing and serve their communities. But when judging performance, I think we do need to consider the incredible complexity that disasters present.
That being said, I also believe there is significant room for improvement. We need better systems, better tools, and better education to ensure we've done all we can to be truly ready for these disasters. It's one of the reasons why I have chosen to work in this field. But in that work, I've come across very few people who didn't realize the game they were playing.
As always Alex - I appreciate you reading and commenting. Thank you!
This is a nice analogy, Patrick. It could easily be extended to illustrate the exact OPPOSITE problem. That's when you discover the players never learned to ice skate, the coaches are surprised that hockey would be played in a hockey rink, and the team managers have no knowledge of any other hockey game ever being played anywhere before.
Alex - you're absolutely correct and the analogy could be used to show that situation. In that case, though, attention should probably turn to the owner/executive who hired them, failed to manage them and set performance expectations, or accepted their poor performance by retaining them.
While this doesn't excuse poor performance or mean that I accept a lack of professionalism from people in the disaster field to learn and ready themselves, their organizations, or their communities, I do choose to believe that the field is mainly made up of people who want to do the right thing and serve their communities. But when judging performance, I think we do need to consider the incredible complexity that disasters present.
That being said, I also believe there is significant room for improvement. We need better systems, better tools, and better education to ensure we've done all we can to be truly ready for these disasters. It's one of the reasons why I have chosen to work in this field. But in that work, I've come across very few people who didn't realize the game they were playing.
As always Alex - I appreciate you reading and commenting. Thank you!