One of VolunteerFD.org’s members emailed me with a problem of a member taking over power within their department. He is not the first, and the problem of ‘who’s in charge’ is an issue throughout the industry. His problem started with a member who appointed himself in charge. The member was doing good things for the department at first so they let him get away with it. Now he is abusing the power, and it is hard to remove him from his ‘position’ even though he officially doesn’t hold one.
The heart of the problem has to do with the different types of power and authority. In this case, the member did not have an elected or appointed ‘legitimate’ position. So if he was not elected an officer, how could he have any power? The member’s power actually came more from the department’s inaction then actions. The department allowed the member to act as if he had power, and therefore granted him the appearance of legitimate power.
In this case, the member’s assumed power actually can be more powerful then if he had a title. You can remove a title, but how do you remove someone from power when you never placed them there? We need to start by looking at different types of power and how people gain power in order to remove them. Two psychologists, French and Raven classified power into six areas; Legitimate, Reward, Coercive, Referent, Expert, and Information.
Legitimate power is the easiest to recognize. These are the people in the white helmets elected or appointed by the membership or governing body. They carry a title, such as Chief or President, and the rights, responsibilities, and authority of that position. The problem is, just because they legitimately hold the position does not mean they have the respect of the membership or are truly in charge.
I think Douglas Adams put it best in “The Hitchikers Guide to the Galaxy”. In his books, Zaphod Beeblebrox is the President of the Universe, but is truly in charge only as a figurehead. Further, Zaphod was appointed to the position because he would never realize he really wasn’t in charge. The one you truly want in charge is often the one who wants it least. There are many Chiefs and Presidents who hold the title but those in the department know that they are just ‘figureheads’ good at shaking hands and being a public face for the department.
Legitimate power should be strictly defined. Not only should the power be defined as to rights, responsibilities, and authority, but should also explain who the person is responsible to. The last thing we want in a fire department is a monarchy. I have actually seen departments that do appointments for life and it really scares me. There needs to be checks and balances, and with legitimate power, it is easy to keep the power in check.
Legitimate power often goes together with coercive and reward power. Simply, if you have the ability to reward or punish people, you have power. The problem is, that this type of power can be easily abused. The limitations of coercive and reward power should be closely defined. This takes out the ‘favoritism’ that often occurs in volunteer organizations. Someone who wields reward or coercive power too freely will not be taken seriously.
Referent power is most often thought of as the power that comes from celebrities and other public figures that people want to be like… (Be like Mike…) In fire departments it is usually the ‘cool’ person that ‘heads’ a group of ‘popular’ people. If the person is a good role model, it can be positive for the fire department. The opposite is true also. Think of the person in your department that entices others to attend training versus the one that entices ones to drink and party to excess.
In the volunteer departments with election processes that are ‘popularity based’, referent power often becomes legitimate power. The problem is obvious that referent power leads to favoritism when the leader becomes ‘legitimate’. This is why you need to set strict definitions of legitimate power, and assure that your appointment or election process is not fueled by referent power.
Expert and information power often go hand in hand. It is the old cliché of ‘Knowledge is Power’, and it is true. Where the member that is the subject of the email got his power is in these two categories. Think about this, who would you rather follow into a burning building? The guy who was just elected Chief, or the ‘dinosaur’ that has been doing it for 30 years, and have all the certifications? Obviously the Chief has the legitimate power, but the expert may be more effective in getting people to follow them.
This is how you get yourself into the situation that we started with. The one with information or is an ‘expert’ is listened to and gains power by his actions and knowledge. The department starts following the member, and if they are not ‘kept in check’, their power grows. As long as the power is used appropriately, then there will not be problems.
The problem is, what makes an ‘expert’? The old saying is that an expert is anyone from more then 50 miles away, or NYC. I spent two years working in NYC and you would be surprised how much ‘power’ that gives you. Just because someone has every certification available does not mean they should be given power. Remember the column a few weeks ago about embezzlement and the one before that on background checks? Prevention is the best medicine.
So the question is, how do you take an expert out of power? It is a long process and involves establishing strict guidelines on who has power. Those in legitimate positions need to step up and establish themselves as experts, and gain referent power. When the legitimate powers are lax, those with expert or referent power will step up. Once that happens, it is too late. It may take sanctions from the department to remove those with expert power. Remember, it is easy to remove someone with legitimate power, but those with other types of powers need to be undermined in order to be removed.
The second column this week will look at submissions of election and appointment procedures and ways to outline job duties.