Skip to main content

For the Next Katrina

There are a few blog entries today Surrounding FEMA director Michael Brown here, here, and here Surrounding ex-FEMA director Michael Brown's interview in the NY Times.

Not much to add to what has already said. Brown had to go. Reading the interview, there was no other option.

Yet since I spent the majority of the 80s in Military Leadership, graduating two Army Leadership academies in the top percentile, i feel a little compelled to contribute.

I've got nothing to comment on Mr. Brown's 'resignation' - consider it the "Peter Principle" and leave it at that.

My commentary is more on the difference between "management" and "leadership", because if we are going to be ready for the next catastophie, we had better be clear on what characteristics will be more important.

While some would say I'm spitting hairs, there is a vast difference between Leadership (Leaders) and Management (Managers)

In short, Leaders lead people and managers manage tasks. There is a difference. Both should be qualities in the person who heads an agency such as FEMA, but they ought to be qualities throughout the agency as well. You don't have to be in charge to be a "leader", indeed the real heros we have seen thus far are true leaders, while most of the criticism has been directed at the managers. Michael Brown was a manager, albeit not a very good one.

Rick Moran is correct in saying the ulimate problem in the Katrina response is that "it appears that leaders at all levels – local, state, and federal – not only became captive to events surrounding the aftermath of the hurricane, but also failed to work together to get on top of the situation, wasting precious hours dithering about a “unified command structure” while the situation in the city spiraled out of control."

Amen. But this involves more than just the people involved, the system itself failed.

You can't fight a Grizzly bear with toothpick - a Natural Disaster (and that's what it was), cannot be fought with system not created to address it.

I've worked with FEMA on an off since Andrew and specifically during Andrew. FEMA was not, and is not designed from the ground up to address disasters on the scale of Katrina - period. The proof is that FEMA performed 'nearly' flawlessly during five consecutive hurricanes in Florida in the last year.

Sure there were problems - there are always problems. Yet when a storm such as Katrina with a significant variable in the effect (the levees broke), snapped the back of the system.

When you are preparing for an eventuality such as a diaster, you plan for the variables - the things in the "what if" column. This is called "thinking in multiples". Yet even when you have crossed every "T", things change, reroute, become "disorganized".

There is where leadership comes in. Managers are a dime a dozen. They are paid to manage. They manage everything from a warehouse to a city. They manage, but they don't necessarily lead. They are good when things go according to plan, not so good when they begin to hit road blocks.

However, leaders can manage, but they don't have to be managers to lead. Leaders don't need a "manual" or a "procedure" to act. Leaders improvise when there are no options. They declare "nuts" when told to surrender. They have no option but to succeed at all cost, failure is not an option to them.

What we witnessed with Mayor Nagin, Governor Blanco, and even Mr. Brown was the opposite of Leadership - but then it wasn't a failure of leadership because these three aren't leaders - they are managers. Managers generally complain and find fault when things become "unmanagable" it's in their nature.

Leader's on the other hand don't blame, they don't find fault - unless they are prepared to set it right and then they correct the situation and move on.

President Bush, for all the heat he has taken in this affair, exhibited leadership. You can fault his "slowness" to respond - that's a management fault (Blame it on that damn Harvard training). But when push came to shove, he declared the situation 'unacceptable", took responsibility and began to set things aright. Like him or hate him, he didn't blame or threaten or make excuses - that's a Leader.

For the next Katrina, I hope we have a hell of lot more leaders than managers.

Also AJ Strata, Junkyard Blog.




Filed under

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Calling Mr. Fitzgerald?

**UPDATED AND BUMPED****

As I told you about in this post yesterday as a source confirmed to me that the Justice Department has launched a probe into the NSA leak. Mr. Risen, you are in trouble - prepare your defense. I told you so.

The White House will be announcing the probe at about 12:30pm. My source tells me that this probe will most likely result in another prosecutor being assigned as of course Fitzgerald is still busy/dizzy on the Plame/Game No-Leak. Additionally, other probes into other recent leaks such as the CIA 'prisons'leak is in the works as well. As I said, this is the NEW Bush - on the attack - it's no more Mr. Nice Guy!

About time! Also covering Michelle Malkin

*****End Update*********

UPDATE II: Looks like I owe my source big time as yet another tip comes true as the Washington Post is on the target list as well for the CIA Prison leak.

****End Update II*************************************

Update III: Via Fox: "The government has no legal right to…

Is the lid about to be blown off Able Danger?

Those who have been wishing for a full blown Able Danger investigation are about to get their wish. The "gate" has been unlocked.

9/11 Iraqi Connection

With Democrats calling for yet more investigations into pre-war intelligence, and Republicans like myself pushing back to help their 'sudden amnesia”, the growing stories of Able Danger and even China Gate, are beginning to make news.

The three main theories about why Able Danger hasn't gotten out of the "blog stage", are 1) To hide Clinton era responsibility for stopping the 9/11 attacks, and/or 2) To hide the truth behind China-Gate, or 3) The facts show that there in fact was a direct link between Iraq and 9/11.

Taking either one you can see why the Clinton worshipping MSM for the most part hasn't touched the story. Of the later point, Democrats, the MSM and even some of our investigations state that there was no 'direct' link between Iraq and 9/11. Say otherwise and the MSM will slice and di…

Able Danger - Pulling Back the Covers of the real Clinton Legacy

First, let's dispense with the bull crap. The meeting between Mohammed Atta and Iraqi Intelligence officer Al-Ani, on April 8th, 2001 happened.

Yet, just don't mention it to the MSM, becaue since May of 2002, the MSM declared an all out assault on the story. A meeting incidently, that the Czech government has to this date stood by.

Let's review a little history:

October 13, 2001: Story of the meeting is leaked from somewhere in the Czech foreign service.

yet.....

October 20, 2001: Ny Times, John Tagliabue writes a story citing other Czech officials said the meeting never took place.

so.....

October 26, 2001: Czech Minister of the Interior, Stanislav Gross has a press conference not only confirming the orginal report but giving further details of Atta's other trip to Prague in June 2000.

then.....

October 27, 2001: The NY Times "recants" the October 20th denial.

The story continues it's oddessy of 'back and forth' until May 1st, 2002, when Walter P…