EVALUATING AND IMPROVING THE ORGANIZATIONAL CULTURE OF THE UNIVERSITY PARK FIRE DEPARTMENT

EXECUTIVE DEVELOPMENT

BY: David W. Litton, B.S. University Park Fire Department University Park, IL

An applied research project submitted to the National Fire Academy as part of the Executive Fire Officer Program

December 2001

Appendices Not Included. Please visit the Learning Resource Center on the Web at http://www.lrc.dhs.gov/ to learn how to obtain this report in its entirety through Interlibrary Loan.

2

ABSTRACT

In order for any organization to be effective, a strong culture must be present. In

addition to having a strong culture, an organization must be adaptable and be able to

change when necessary.

The problem that was identified using the Campbell Organizational Survey (COS)

instrument was that there were seven key areas in need of improvement in the University

Park Fire Department. The purpose of the research was to improve key, identified

elements of the University Park organizational culture. The reason that this research was

important was that left unchanged, the general morale of the fire department would

decline. This could lead to a decline in the organizations productivity and effectiveness.

The research utilized the evaluative and action methods in order to identify and

implement solutions to each area. The research set out to answer three questions:

1. What is organizational culture?

2. How important is organizational culture within an organization?

3. How can the University Park Fire Department improve their culture?

The COS instrument was originally given to the eight most senior line personnel

of the University Park Fire Department as part of the feedback to be provided to the chief

as part of the Executive Development class at the National Fire Academy. A literature

review was conducted along with the use of focus groups consisting of all members of

the UPFD in order to identify the thoughts, problems, and solutions that could be

attained.

The results of the review show that there is a need to improve in the areas

identified. Pay, benefits and working conditions although not in the direct control of the

3

fire department administration, would need to be addressed, so that the other areas: co-

workers, supervision, top leadership and feedback could be addressed in a variety of

ways. Better communications, a revised evaluation process, training of officers,

continued research, and a follow-up COS instrument were the recommendations that

were arrived at.

4

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ABSTRACT........................................................................................................................ 2 INTRODUCTION ………………………………………………………………………..5 BACKGROUND AND SIGNIFICANCE.......................................................................... 6 LITERATURE REVIEW ................................................................................................. 13 PROCEDURES ..…………………………………………………………………….... 32 RESULTS ......................................................................................................................... 36 DISCUSSION................................................................................................................... 40 RECOMMENDATIONS ………………………………………………………………..45 REFERENCES ………………………………………………………………………….48 APPENDIX A (CAMPBELL ORGANIZATIONAL SURVEY) …………………….. 51 APPENDIX B (FOCUS GROUP INTERVIEWS: EMPLOYEE COMMENTS) ……..64 APPENDIX C (MEMORANDUM REGARDING EVALUATIONS) ………………...67

5

INTRODUCTION

“Every organization develops its own way of working over time. We call this

everyday way of doing business a corporate culture”(Fairfield-Sonn, 2001, P. 35). An

organizational culture is developed or exists because of the shared beliefs, expectations

and shared values of the stakeholders. These stakeholders are all members of the

organizations including the leaders, both formal and informal, the management team, and

the subordinate employees. Gordon (1993) defines organizational culture as:

A pattern of basic assumptions, invented, discovered, or developed by a given

group as it learns to cope with its problems of external adaptation and internal

integration that has worked well enough to be considered valid and, therefore, is

to be taught to new members as the correct way to perceive, think, and feel in

relation to these problems. (p. 171)

The organizational culture affects the way that the organization does business. The

culture guides decisions made by employee groups and serves as the basis that managers

use to measure the effectiveness of the organization. Establishing acceptable behavior

between members to providing guidelines on how to treat customers is also part of the

culture of the organization. Gordon (1993) also points out that the culture of an

organization has a significant impact on its effectiveness. Emphasis on employee

involvement in decisions, strength and consistency, facilitation of adaptability to

organizational change and clarity of mission are key predictors of organizational

effectiveness.

6

The problem that has been identified using the Campbell Organizational Survey is

that the administration has identified a general dissatisfaction with the culture of the

University Park Fire Department. It is not known how long this problem has existed,

however, it is felt that if the problems are not addressed at this time, that there will be a

general decline in morale which will lead to poor performance and a decline in the

overall effectiveness in the operation of the fire department.

The purpose of this research is to evaluate and improve key, identifiable elements

of the University Park organizational culture. The reason that this research is important

is that left unchanged, the employees could become disenfranchised from the fire

department initially and from the Village as a whole. Once this occurs, morale will suffer

followed by a decrease in effectiveness and ultimately the public image will falter. This

study used the evaluative and action methodologies to answer the following questions:

1. What is organizational culture?

2. How important is organizational culture within an organization?

3. How can University Park Fire Department improve their culture?

BACKGROUND AND SIGNIFICANCE

The Village of University Park (VOUP), Illinois is a small suburban community

approximately 35 miles south of Chicago. The population of University Park, according

to the United States Census (2000), was 6662. The VOUP encompasses 15.5 square

miles and consists of a distinct residential/commercial area on the eastern side of the

Village and a large industrial base to the west. The Canadian National Railroad that

dissects the village separates these areas. According to the census (U.S., Census 2000)

7

there are a total of 2,380 occupancy units consisting of 1324 owner occupied residents

and 929 rental units. There were 127 vacant occupancies at the time of the census. There

are five high-rise buildings in the residential area with the tallest building at fourteen

stories. The industrial area contains 47 companies with a wide mix of uses. These uses

include chemical manufacturing/storage, steel warehousing/distribution, rolled paper

storage, plastic bottle manufacturing and general warehousing. The largest single facility

has 700,000 square feet under roof. The village has a state university (Governors State),

which has an enrollment of approximately 5000 students. Interstate 57 borders the

VOUP on the western boundary and there are three lakes within its boundaries. All of

these characteristics indicate the many target hazards that exist within the village.

The manager/council form of government is used with a strong manager hired by

the elected board to run the day-to-day operations. There are seven departments

consisting of police, fire, public works, parks and recreation, cable television, community

relations and finance. A chief officer or a department head directs each of these

departments.

The University Park Fire Department (UPFD) employs 28 personnel consisting of

fifteen paid staff and thirteen paid-on-call personnel. The paid staff includes the chief,

deputy chief, three lieutenants, and ten firefighters. All of the paid staff, including the

chief officers is cross-trained as paramedics. The paid-on-call staff has an assistant chief

position supplemented by twelve firefighters. The department operates out of two

stations: one located in the residential area and the other in the industrial park. UPFD

responded to 1277 emergency calls in the year 2000. Of the 1277 calls, 723 were for

medical emergencies and 554 were fire related (automatic fire alarms, structure and

8

vehicle fires, hazardous material releases, and other miscellaneous calls). The

department’s mission includes public education and fire prevention, emergency medical

service at the paramedic level, fire suppression, hazardous materials response and rescue

services on the emergency side. Other responsibilities include all activities of the

building department as well as property maintenance and code enforcement. The UPFD

is a member of the Mutual Aid Box Alarm System (MABAS) and our assigned as

division twenty-seven. MABAS is the largest organization in the State of Illinois that

provides mutual assistance when local resources are not sufficient. According to Jay

Reardon (personal communication, November 19, 2001) MABAS may be the largest

such organization in the United States with over 400 fire departments as part of the

system. The department also participates in automatic aid agreements with the Villages

of Crete, Park Forest, Richton Park, Steger, and the Crete Township Fire Protection

District. This automatic aid provides additional personnel to the scene of structure fires

in order to comply with Federal and State mandates.

Over the past fifteen years, the department has seen a dramatic increase in the

number of requests for emergency service from 489 calls in 1985 to 1277 calls in the year

2000. This represented an increase of 261% during this period. Subsequently, the

department underwent significant change in the organizational structure of the

department. In 1985, the department was staffed by two firefighter/paramedic’s Monday

through Friday during the day from 8 a.m. until 5 p.m. During all other times of the

week, emergency responses were covered by the paid-on-call staff that responded to the

station after being alerted to the call. The paid staff worked the above hours because that

time frame represented when most of the paid-on-call staff were working at their full time

9

employment. Over the next fifteen years until the present time, the department evolved

into an organization where most of the emergency calls are handled by the full time staff.

The paid-on-call staff currently augments the paid staff on those calls that are manpower

intensive, or where there are multiple calls at the same time. The reduced role of the

paid-on-call staff has led to fewer and fewer people who are willing to “volunteer” their

time. The mandates for increased training, the demands of family life, the myriad of

other activities that are available for entertainment in the present society has also played a

factor in the decreased participation in the paid-on-call staff.

The switch from mainly a paid-on-call department to a paid department has had

an effect on the organizational culture of the department. It is unclear whether these

changes occurred over time, have changed over a very short period of time, or if the

changes have been a result of some other internal/external forces. The reality of the

situation in the UPFD is that the change in culture has been affected by a combination of

these factors.

In June of 2001, this researcher, who is also the chief of the UPFD, attended the

first year of the Executive Fire Officer Program at the National Fire Academy (NFA).

The class titled “Executive Development” (ED) included 12 modules including: working

as a team, professional development, research, managing creativity, following and

leading, labor relations, organizational culture, ethics, outside perspectives of elected

official and city manager, service quality/marketing, legal issues, and research project

reports.

One of the tools that are used in the organizational culture unit is the Campbell

Organizational Survey (COS™). The survey was distributed to the eight most senior full

10

time staff of the department excluding the deputy fire chief. The eight individuals

included the three lieutenant’s and five firefighters. All of the eight respondents were

members of the local bargaining unit (International Association of Fire Fighters, Local

3661). The researcher, because of the management function of the position, excluded the

deputy chief. However, the chief did take part in the survey in order to show the

differences between what the chief perceived and what was actually being thought by the

“troops”. Hersey and Blanchard (1993, p. 164) “While it is important to recognize that

managers have different styles, it is also important to remember that styles is not how

leaders think they behave in a situation, but how others (most importantly) the followers

perceive their behavior”. While the chief’s responses generally followed the survey

group’s score pattern, the researcher was surprised at the level of dissatisfaction that was

identified in some areas. The responses of the chief and of the survey group were

distinctly separated in the feedback graphs and breakdowns. The complete survey is

attached at the end of this research listed as Appendix “A”.

The COS measures 17 different features of the “climate” of the organization,

which can be directly linked to the organizational culture of the UPFD. The areas

measured included: work itself, working conditions, stress-free, co-workers, diversity,

supervision, top leadership, pay, benefits, job security, promotions, feedback, planning,

ethics, quality, innovation, innovation, and general contentment. The problem that was

identified through the use of the COS was that there was a general dissatisfaction with the

culture of the department in eight specific areas. These areas included working

conditions, co-workers, supervision, top leadership, pay, benefits, promotions, and

feedback.

11

After returning from the Executive Development course, the chief spent several

months reflecting on the COS and other units of the class that could be identified for use

in the applied research project. In the end, the researcher decided to use the COS as the

basis for the project. As identified before, the purpose of this research is to improve key,

identified elements of the UPFD organizational culture. The reason that this research is

important is that left unchanged, the general morale of the department may decline. This

could lead to a decline in the organizational productivity and effectiveness.

“Effectiveness (or the lack of it) is a function of the values and beliefs held by the

members of an organization. Specific values, or agreement on specific values, influence

effectiveness”(Dennison, 1990, p. 5). Dennison went on to point out that:

Effectiveness is a function of translating the core values and beliefs into policies

and practices in a consistent manner. The vision of the leader must be

operationalized through action. Building a “strong culture” implies that values

and actions are highly consistent. This from of consistency often has been

mentioned as a source of organizational strength and as a way of improving

performance and effectiveness. (p. 6)

Though the fire service is a public agency, there can be some correlation between

the public and private (corporate) sector. Much of the published literature on the subject

of culture has been geared towards the corporate side of the equation. Fairfield-Sonn

(2001) asked the question: “Why does corporate culture help to explain varying levels of

profitability and longevity?” Fairfield-Sonn provides this answer:

The fact is that culture impact organizational performance, team performance, and

12

individual performance. The performance connection stems directly from the fact

that cultural norms and values affect “how” everyday decisions are made about

the way work gets done. (p. 42)

The means by which public sector agencies are measured is effectiveness while the

private/corporate side is generally measured by profitability.

Because the UPFD has undergone significant change over the past 15 years, both

in terms of emergency response calls and how the organization is structured in terms of

personnel, it is important that the UPFD has a strong culture that can be adaptive to the

changes that have occurred. Fairfield-Sonn (2001, p. 46) also referenced work done

earlier by Ketter and Heskett in 1992. Ketter and Heskett (1992) found that:

Firms with strong cultures that were adaptable and changed with the times were

successful over time. On the other hand, firms with strong cultures that became

complacent or arrogant were as likely to fall on bad times as firms with weak

cultures.

This research points out that even though the culture is strong, if an organization is

unable or unwilling to change and adapt to the times, then they will not be effective or

profitable much in the same way as organizations with a weak culture.

Without a strong culture and the ability to change and adapt to changing times,

the literature indicates that an organization is doomed to poor effectiveness and/or

profitability. The lack of effectiveness and profitability could eventually lead to the

extinction of an organization. Bruegman (1997) a nationally recognized leader in the fire

service summed up this point by saying:

13

The need for change is evident, and the old saying “If you always do what you’ve

always done, you’ll always get what you’ve always gotten” (or maybe even less)

holds true for many fire service organizations today. We continually read about

public-sector services being privatized to become more efficient, and often we’re

the first ones to decry this move as unfair and unnecessary. (p. 86)

Chief Bruegman point reinforces the fact that organizational culture, the lack of a strong

one, or one without leadership, will result in the department being ineffective which

could lead to it’s extinction (privatization).

This research is relevant to the Executive Development class in two areas:

following and leading, and organizational culture. Specifically, in the Executive

Development student manual (SM 5-2) “Given an understanding of followership and

leadership, the student will be able to provide consistent, effective transformational

leadership to design and build a positive culture in their organizations” (objective #3).

Secondly, in (SM 7-2) “The student will use the COS instrument to interpret self and

observer feedback data regarding their organizational culture” (objective # 4) and to

“complete an abbreviated plan to further assess and analyze the organization’s culture

and climate” (objective #5).

LITERATURE REVIEW

The literature review was conducted in order to summarize what had

been previously published in order to gain a comprehensive understanding of

organizational culture. The review showed that there are many different interpretations

of the subject, but that most if not all contained similar elements. The impact of the

14

review led the researcher to understand the impact that a good or bad culture has on

organizational effectiveness. Some authors related what is needed to change the culture

of an organization in the areas that could be in need of improvement. Many pointed to

the need for effective leaders and followers in organization and how effective leadership

has a significant impact in a positive manner. Two key elements of this effective

leadership model were evident: First, that providing positive, proactive motivation to the

personnel of an organization is imperative, and second, that employees need, and for the

most part, demand information and feedback regarding the organizations endeavors. Unit

seven of the Executive Development course at the NFA recognized these same basic

principles:

A. Any organizational culture is comprised of shared values. What are

the values, and to what degree are they shared? B. Cultural change is an

alteration of values (in grand scale). C. The executive leader is in a very

influential position to influence the organizational culture. D. What is

said or done by others may not represent how they feel. E. Cultural fit is

a reality that many refuse to assess, interpret, and acknowledge.

F. Never fail to estimate the positive power of collectively held values.

(NFA, SM 7-14)

Organizational Culture

The first question that needed to be answered in this research project was: What

is organizational culture? One of the earliest definitions that were found was by Jaques

(1951). Jaques stated that organizational culture is:

15

The customary and traditional way of thinking and of doing things, which is

shared by all it’s members, and which new members must learn and at least

partially accept in order to fit in to the organization. Culture is part of second

nature to those who have been in the organization for some time. Ignorance of

culture marks out the new members, while maladjusted members are recognized

as those who reject or are otherwise unable to use the culture of the organization.

Although this statement is 50 years old, it still is relevant in today’s environment. What

Jaques said was that people in an organization have a way of doing things through

repetition, or that there actions are guided by a rule or procedure that acts as the guide for

behavior. Jaques rightly pointed out that a new member must be absorbed into the

culture over a period of time and that those employees that fail to be absorbed, are either

ostracized from the group or find themselves unemployed.

Grant and Hoover (1994, p. 60) described organizational culture as “A system of

customs and traditions, sometimes coupled with beliefs that influence and drive daily

activities and methods of interaction”. It’s how we do business here or the way that we

get things done. “Every organization develops it’s own way of working over time. We

call this way of doing business a corporate culture” (Fairfield-Sonn, 2001, p. 35). Daniel

R. Dennison, who earned his doctoral degree and who was a professor at the University

of Michigan published a book titled “Corporate Culture and Organizational Effectiveness

as part of the “Wiley” series on organizational assessment and change. This series was

concerned with all aspects of how organizations should be managed, changed and

controlled. Dennison (1990) wrote:

16

Culture is the underlying values, beliefs, and principles that serve as the

foundation for an organization’s management system as well as the set of

management practices and behaviors that exemplify and reinforce their basic

principles. These principles and practices endure because they have meaning for

the members of the organization. They represent strategies for survival that have

worked well in the past and that the members believe will work again in the

future. (p. 2)

This statement ties in with the earlier work of Jaques in that members/employees both fit

in and use the engrained culture or that they may not survive or keep their employment

with the organization. “The styles and expectations of an organization are determined by

the history and tradition of the organization, as well as by the organizational goals and

objectives that reflect the style and expectations of present top management” (Hersey and

Blanchard, 1993, p. 169). They went on to say that “Over a period of time, an

organization, much like and individual, becomes characterized by the certain modes of

behavior that are perceived as its style”.

There were two other authors who had a slightly different view of organizational

culture. Kuczmarski and Kuczmarski (1995) talked about the human state of mind and

the conscious actions of humans. They stated:

Culture is a state-of-mind that gets translated into a set of actions,

communications, and responses. It is a series of human signals that includes

verbal, physical, and emotional signs. Culture therefore resides in our brains,

which are frequently deciphering the signals we receive daily from others.

Culture is a human product. Humans decide what it should be. Humans use it,

17

enhance or poison it. It involves developing and sharing a common set of beliefs,

norms, attitudes, goals and information. Humans are the thread that creates a

culture. The culture in turn integrates all individuals into the organization.

(p. 167)

According to Umiker (1999, June):

Culture is the way things are done when there are no supervisors around. It is

values, beliefs, and norms that are shared by a majority of people in an

organization. The true culture of an organization is revealed in how employees,

customers, and the community are treated. (p. 22)

Finally Fairfield-Sonn (2001, pp. 36-41) defined the four levels of organizational culture.

The four levels were artifacts, history, core ideology, and core values. Specifically:

1. Artifacts were described as the physical facilities, formal policies, procedures

and rules, the organization chart or structure and hours of work.

2. History was described as the rites and rituals, symbols, and language that were

specific to the organization. Examples included a symbol or a phrase and

internal code words to describe complex situations. The language was

identified as giving direction to individuals on how to conduct themselves

within the organization.

3. Core ideology included the mission statement that described the cultural

imperatives of the organization.

4. Core Values were described as powerful guides to how decisions will be made

today and in the future because they are just the way that a “good”

organization should run.

18

Regardless of which definition the researcher looked at, there were some simple,

key terms that had a common thread throughout when organizational culture was

being described: customs, traditions, way of doing things, beliefs, values,

principles, practices, procedures, style, expectations and norms.

Organizational Effectiveness

The second research question was “How important is organizational

culture within an organization?” As this project progressed, it became very

apparent to the researcher how organizational culture has an impact on the

effectiveness and performance of any group or organization. Much was said

about the ability of an organization to change with the times, to be adaptable and

to recognize the employee’s value as an asset to the organization. Failure to

recognize this important fact, was cited as a downfall in many organizations.

Because the COS had identified areas that members of the UPFD rated as low, or

in need of improvement, this research proved invaluable in helping to evaluate the

culture as well as to formulate a plan to make the improvements. According to

Halas (1993, February, p. 8) “Leaders and managers in emergency services must

realize the importance of our human resources. Without the effective utilization

of human resources, the technical resources such as apparatus and equipment will

be far less useful”. What Halas was saying was that you can have all of the

newest, cutting edge, technology and equipment, but if your personnel are not

trained, motivated, and properly lead, all of these resources will not be as

effective as they can possibly be. Ron Coleman, a former fire chief and, Deputy

State Fire Marshal in California, and the current President of Fire Emergency

19

Training Network (FETN) also discussed this important part of motivation in the

effectiveness of an organization. “It does not take long to see motivation of a

person reflected in the motivation of an organization. One does not require

complicated analysis to measure whether a fire department is dynamic and on the

move, static, or regressing” (1981, February, p. 11). Ketter and Heskett (1992)

found:

Firms with strong cultures that were adaptable and changed with the times

were successful over time. On the other hand, firms with strong cultures

that became complacent or arrogant were as likely to fall on bad times as

firms with weak cultures. (p. 46)

Ketter and Heskett’s research seamed to indicate that regardless of the presence of a

strong culture, that the organization still needed to grow, adapt, and be willing to change

with the times or the organization would face the same ineffectiveness that firms with

weak cultures faced. In another study, Collins and Porras (1994) found that corporations

that they identified as having strong cultures outperformed other companies by a factor of

15 to 1 over a period of 50 years. The common thread in the effective group that

outperformed their peers was identified as being a central set of strong corporate values

that had been intact from the beginning.

Hersey and Blanchard (1993) identified another important part of organizational

culture that has an impact on effectiveness. They said:

1. It is important to point out that it is not always necessary for supervisors and

employees within an organization to have similar styles. People do not have

to have the same personalities to be compatible. What is necessary is that

20

they share perceptions of other’s roles and have common goals and objectives.

(p. 175)

2. To be effective in the long run, we feel that organizations need an open

dialogue in which there is a certain amount of conflict, confrontation, and

differing points of view to encourage new ideas and patterns of behavior so

that the organization will not lose it’s ability to adjust to external competition.

(p. 176)

3. What is often needed in organizations is more emphasis on team building in

which people are hired to compliment rather than replicate a manager’s style.

(p. 176)

Howes (1999, December) summarized his research on the organizational climate in his

organization by saying:

Fire departments tend to focus on external customer service more than internal

customer service. Similar emphasis needs to be placed on internal customer

service. Employee morale and productivity seem to go hand in hand. Better

internal customer service would strengthen our organization. (p. 28)

This comment reinforces the need to focus on our personnel, their need for feedback, and

input relating to the organization. Finally, Gordon (1993, p. 176) listed 13 elements of

organizational effectiveness:

1. Team shares a sense of purpose/common goals.

2. Team is aware of and interested in its own processes and norms operating

within the group.

3. Team identifies and uses own relevant resources to solve problems.

21

4. Team actually listen and clarifies hat is being said and show interest.

5. Differences of opinion are encouraged and freely expressed.

6. Team is willing to surface conflict and focus on it until it is resolved.

7. Roles of the team are balanced and shared.

8. Focus is placed on the solutions rather than the problems.

9. Organization encourages risk taking and creativity.

10. The team is responsive to changing needs.

11. There is a commitment to evaluating the team’s performance.

12. The organization is attractive to its members.

13. Development of a climate of trust.

The literature review clearly identified that the effectiveness and performance of an

organization will be reduced if there is not a strong corporate culture that is willing and

able to adapt to a changing environment. The organization must recognize the

importance of its employees and work hard to make sure that everyone is moving in the

same direction. This is not to say that all employees must be exactly the same. Quite the

opposite, good organizations are made up of diverse individuals who are willing to take

risks, be open and honest, and focus on solutions rather than problems for the good of the

organization. Because of the COS, the UPFD recognized that changes needed to be made

in the culture to improve the effectiveness of the department.

Organizational Culture Change

The third question that was asked in this research project was “How can

University Park Fire Department improve their culture?” Before this question was

answered, it was apparent to the researcher that some discussion of change needed to be

22

addressed before improvements could be made. After all, the COS identified areas that

needed improvement, however, changes were going to be needed in the UPFD in order to

make the improvements. The research identified several factors that needed to be

addressed as part of the change model: Is there a need for change? What motivation

exists for the change? Are there any barriers to change? What questions can be asked in

order to diagnose the specific changes that are needed? Jensen (2000, p. 7) spoke to the

need for change saying that “If our organization is to accomplish all that we are asked to

do, we simply must have an accurate sense of employee morale or job satisfaction and be

able to make informed adjustments when and where it’s necessary”. John Cook, who is

the fire chief in Denton, Texas spoke about the changes facing the fire service and the

importance of assessing an organizations culture to prepare for the change. “It is

impossible to institute change without having a handle on the values, beliefs, and

behavior of the individuals that make up the organization” (1990, p. 85). Cook (1999, p.

24) cited Dennis Compton, fire chief of Mesa, Arizona as echoing this thought “Fire

departments must tailor change to their own culture and climate in order for it to be

implemented”.

A resistance or reluctance to change on the part of some or all of the organizations

employees is one to the factors to be considered. Hersey and Blanchard (1993, p. 168)

identified one aspect of resistance: “We mentioned managers who have a strong drive to

advance an organization. Some people, however, are satisfied with their present

positions. For these people, the expectations of their associates may be more important in

influencing their behavior than those of their supervisors”. Bruegman, (1997) said:

23

When cultures and strategies clash over a change initiated inside the organization,

presumably by you, invariably the culture will win out. If the organizations

culture does not embrace your change initiative, the overall change efforts will

often struggle and fail. The other side of the coin is when the change is externally

motivated, which places our organization and our people in their most vulnerable

position. If the change is externally motivated, be it political, economic, or

service driven, and the organizational culture doesn’t embrace the initiative, the

organization is a position where it may not survive. For the fire service, it’s that

we need to place ourselves in a position where we remain competitive with the

private sector, to maintain a given level of service, or to meat the growing

demands of our customers. (p. 89)

Fairfield-Sonn (2001) points out that change is not easy, or fun, but if the rewards

are sufficiently great, then the effort of change will be worth the struggle. “Fortunately

for us as individuals and as organizations as a whole, when necessary, habits can be

changed” (p. 35).

Finally, Hersey and Blanchard (1993) discussed skills that were needed by the

leadership of an organization and questions to be asked in order to implement change in a

positive manner. The skills listed included the ability to diagnose the problem and then

be able to implement a solution. In effect, changing the culture to move the organization

is a positive manner. By diagnosing the problem, the manager would be able to find out

what is going on now, what is likely to happen if no change is made, what the employees

would like to see happening and what are the barriers to the change model. The

implementation skill included translating feedback that was given by the employees,

24

setting goals and benchmarks to measure the change process and an on-going evaluation

of the change to make sure that the desired change is actually occurring.

The key questions that Hersey and Blanchard (1993) identified when undertaking

a change initiative were:

1. What leadership decision making and problem solving skills are available?

2. What are the motivation, communication, and commitment to objectives, and

climate (morale)?

3. What is the readiness level of the people involved? Are they willing and able

to take significant responsibility for their own performance?

4. What need level seems to be most important for people right now?

5. How are the hygiene factors and motivators? Are people getting paid enough?

How are the working conditions? Is job security an issue? Are people getting

recognition for their accomplishments? Is there much challenge in the work?

Are there opportunities for growth and development? Are people given much

responsibility?

The researcher found these questions to be exactly the questions that needed to be first

evaluated by the leadership of the UPFD, and then to be discussed with the members of

the organization. This model helped to evaluate the COS results for the fire department

and gave the researcher a path to follow in discussing the results of the COS during the

focus group sessions as part of the research. These questions helped to answer the last

research question “How can University Park Fire Department improve their culture”?

25

The literature review led the researcher to the realization that leadership was

going to be a key factor in helping the UPFD to improve their organizational culture,

specifically those areas identified in the COS.

Organizational Leadership

What is leadership? Grant and Hoover (1994, p. 14) define leadership as

“a perception or attitude held by both followers and leaders that drives the

organization and causes something to happen”. They went on to make a clear

distinction between manager and leaders by pointing out that “managers do things

right” and “leaders do the right things”(p. 17). Lastly, they indicated that

managers promote efficient delivery of services while leaders emphasize

effectiveness based on vision and judgment. Carter and Rausch (1994) wrote:

Effective leadership is a critical attribute of management in any

organization. It is especially important in the fire service, where

leadership skills are needed on the fire ground as well as in the fire station.

Leadership effectiveness involves many complex factors that are both

organizational and personal. Leadership is a process through which an

individual influences others toward the accomplishment of common goals.

It is a dynamic, ever changing, situational, and evolving, and it often

involves the melding of values and perceptions. (p. 18)

Hersey (1993, p. 165) cited work by Fillmore Sanford as far back as 1950 regarding the

importance of the leadership/followership dynamic. Sanford said “There is some

justification for regarding the follower as the most crucial factor in any leadership event.

Followers in any situation are vital, not only because they accept or reject the leader, but

26

because as a group they actually determine whatever personal power that a leader will

have”. Hersey went on to say “While it is important to recognize that managers have

different styles, it is also important to remember that style is not how leaders think they

behave in a situation, but how others (most importantly) the followers perceive their

behavior” (p. 164). Cook (1998, p. 151) also recognized the importance of the follower

in any attempt at transforming or changing an organization. He said “It is one thing to

talk about the virtue of followers. It is another thing to create a climate in which

followers and leaders can work together to transform an organization”.

Motivation was shown to be the one of the most important aspects in the

leader/follower relationship. The research showed that a poorly motivated employee

would be less productive which in turn would result in the organization as a whole not

being as effective while the motivated employees had higher morale which led to greater

performance. Grant and Hoover (1994, p. 162) described motivation as “an inner urge

that prompts a person to action with a sense of purpose”. “Motivating plays a large part

in determining the level of performance of employee, which, in turn, influences how

effectively the organizational goals will be met” (Hersey and Blanchard, 1993, p. 6).

Hersey and Blanchard (1993) also cited a study done by William James of Harvard that

showed that employees could work at 20-30% of their maximum ability and still keep

their job. The study also showed that a highly motivated employee would work at 80-

90% of their ability. This shows the significant importance of the leader/follower

relationship in regards to motivation. A highly motivated employee will certainly be

more productive which was shown to result in greater effectiveness of the organization.

Grant and Hoover (1994, p. 162) summed it all up by saying “Motivation improves the

27

function and operation of a fire department and results in a better service to the residents

of a community. Motivation is a valuable leadership skill that can produce visible

results”.

Carter and Rausch (1994, p. 8) pointed out that there needs to be an atmosphere

that is conducive to motivating. “People are more apt to find motivation for their work in

a favorable environment. It is the manager’s job to see that a favorable environment is

developed, if it does not already exist, that allows people to find higher levels of

motivation”. This thought was echoed by Grant and Hoover (1994):

Even under the best of circumstances, there are conditions challenging efforts to

motivate. Some of the best efforts to stimulate personnel have been thwarted by

the tradition, policies, rules, regulations, misunderstandings, poor

communications and cultural differences. The fire officer must consider the

nature of the organization and the limits to his or her discretionary power.

(p. 163)

One of the key points that were identified by the COS was that the employees of the

UPFD were very dissatisfied with their pay and working conditions. This fact was

confirmed during the focus group sessions. Grant and Hoover (1994) cited the

motivation-hygiene theory of Herzberg in regards to motivation. Herzberg identified the

hygiene and motivation needs as the only two elements of motivation. Hygiene needs

were identified as work conditions, pay/benefits, supervisory relationships, and

administrative policies. Motivation needs were identified as job advancement, additional

responsibility, recognition of one’s efforts and personal achievement. If the hygiene

needs are met, then they will have little impact of the employee’s satisfaction. However,

28

if they are not met, Herzberg related that this will contribute significantly to employee

dissatisfaction. Pay increases and bonuses, promotions, job assignments, recognition,

and praise were all motivational techniques cited by Grant and Hoover (1994, p. 172).

They pointed to labor contracts, civil service procedures and rules, staffing as potential

roadblocks to increased pay, promotions and job assignments. However, they pointed out

that the only roadblocks to recognition and praise were timing and schedule, both of

which could be controlled by the leader.

The use of good communications, praise and constant feedback are all tools that a

good leader can use to motivate the followers of an organization. Hersey and Blanchard

(1993) found:

The best business plan is meaningless unless everyone is aware of it and pulling

together to achieve its objectives. Good communications are the lifeblood of any

enterprise, large or small. Communications are essential to keep our entire

organization functioning at maximum levels and to make the most of our greatest

management resource – our people. (p. 327)

Kirkham (1997, April, p. 121) studied fire department management in regards to

organizational culture and found that perspective has a great deal to do with success.

“Management must understand that what they perceive as a clear initiative or goal may

not be understood by the troops. Open communication is vitally important for any

initiative or goal to be successful.”

During the course of this project, the researcher realized that the COS instrument

was the first step in this communication/feedback cycle. The COS identified areas that

29

were in need of improvement and the literature review provided additional points to be

considered. Margerison (1982) identified the importance of such surveys:

To embark on such a survey approach invariably means moving to a participative,

consultative style of managing. People like to get feedback. Moreover, they will

expect to be consulted. So a survey cannot be seen just as another managerial

tool. It is a part of the managerial process. (p. 119)

Another part of the communication process must be a willingness by the top leadership to

get the process started by talking with the employees. Carter and Rausch (1994) says:

Although many officers are apprehensive about even limited self-disclosure to a

subordinate because of a fear of loosing a leadership role, some amount of self-

disclosure about one’s feelings, opinions, and experiences can help relax the

subordinate so that open communication can start and continue. (p. 96)

Hersey and Blanchard (1993) cited work by Genie LaBorde in which LaBorde says that

the leader must be cognizant of the ways that a leader communicates with the employees.

They point out that only 7% of your meaning is from followers’ interpretations or

perception of your words. 38% of communication is conveyed by their perception of

your voice and how you say the words. A full 55% comes from interpretation of your

nonverbal signals.

Kuczmarski and Kuczmarski (1995, p. 210) identified the use of “descriptive

praise” as a way of communicating or providing feedback in a positive manner to the

employee. Descriptive praise is using words to describe behavior to let the employee

know how their behavior had a positive effect on the organization. They feel that this

adds a whole new dimension to the employees’s view of themselves and that the

30

workplace now has a motivated employee. One example cited was for an employee that

had just given a presentation to other employees. Instead of saying “good job”, a

descriptive praise would be “that your presentation helped teach other employees

important information using a very effective style of presenting material”. Comments

such as “good job” and “great work” are global phrases that do not specify exactly what

was good, or how the work benefited the organization.

The last part of the communication/feedback model that was researched was the

process of employee evaluations. One of the key points of the focus groups was that the

employees did not feel that their evaluations were effective. The employees of the UPFD

felt that they should have a chance to evaluate their supervisors as well as their peer

group. The group also felt that events that occurred close to their annual evaluation had a

disproportionate affect on their ratings. Fairfield-Sonn (2001) recognized just these

problems.

It is understood that while a subordinate works for a boss, and bosses opinions are

important, employee effectiveness is also a function of how well he or she meets

the needs of customers, peers, suppliers, and so on. It does not make much sense

in a customer-focused, continuous improvement work environment to argue that

individuals contributions should be determined primarily or solely by his or her

official boss. Particularly since manager and supervisors are now so often

stretched that they cannot see the work of their so-called direct reports. Instead, a

better approach is to have multiple raters, peers, and customers collectively

involved in evaluations. (p. 140)

31

An alternate to the annual appraisal or evaluation is that of ongoing coaching as a means

of enhancing an employee’s commitment to the organization. Fairfield-Sonn (2001)

listed four distinct types of coaching: counseling, mentoring, tutoring, and confronting.

1. Counseling allows employees to vent strong feelings

2. Mentoring provides sensitivity to organizational culture and evokes a greater

commitment to the group.

3. Tutoring provides technical competence.

4. Confronting encourages improved performance. (pp. 140-141)

Summary

The literature review was significant to the research in that it validated many of

the comments that were voiced during the focus group sessions. Another important point

was that it expounded on the suggested remedies that are listed in the COS instrument for

improving those areas that have been rated as low. While this research was in no way

exhaustive on the subject of improving organizational culture, the literature did provide a

reasonable definition and understanding of organizational culture. Dennison (1990) said

that culture was the underlying values, beliefs and principles that served as the foundation

of the organization. These conditions existed because they had meaning for the

employees and had worked well in the pas and could be expected to work in the future.

The effectiveness of an organization was directly tied to a strong organizational

culture. Many authors cited a need for strong organizational culture in order to be

effective. The researcher felt that Dennison (1990) once again, made the strongest

argument amongst all of the authors cited. Dennison said:

32

Effectiveness is a function of translating the core values and beliefs into policies

and practices in a consistent manner. The vision of the leader must be

operationalized through action. Building a “strong culture” implies that values

and actions are highly consistent. This form of consistency often has been

mentioned as a source of organizational strength and as a way of improving

performance and effectiveness [emphasis added]. (p. 6)

The COS instrument clearly demonstrated a need for a change in the

organizational culture of the UPFD. “If our organization is to accomplish all that we are

asked to, we simply must have an accurate sense of employee morale or job satisfaction

and be able to make informed adjustments where and when it’s necessary” according to

Jensen (2000, p. 7). The literature review was critical in identifying roadblocks and

problems that can occur during the change process or initiative so that the UPFD could be

aware of, and avoid, if possible, these barriers.

The importance of the leadership/followership relationship was identified through

the course of the literature review. The research showed that the leader must be able to

motivate their personnel in order to maintain a certain level of effectiveness and/or to

make the necessary changes in the climate of the organization. Finally, the need for good

communications and two-way feedback were identified. The use of annual evaluations

was discussed as part of the feedback equation with some recommendations to improve

this process.

PROCEDURES

The purpose of this research report was to evaluate and improve the

organizational culture of the UPFD. Each participant in the Executive Development

33

(ED) class at the NFA is given a Campbell Organizational Survey for members of the

department to complete. The results of the survey are then given to the participant as part

of the classroom exercise during the two-week course. Because the COS instrument

identified areas which needed attention in the UPFD, the researcher decided to use this

tool as the “survey” or evaluative portion of the report. The researcher set out to improve

the organizational culture and used focus group sessions to specifically identify what the

department members felt could be improved. The research thus encompassed and

evaluative approach along with action research in order to identify and implement those

ideas that were found to be viable and feasible by the focus groups and the researcher.

Originally, the COS instrument was given to the eight most senior line personnel

on the department without regards to shift or station assignment. The researcher felt that

the senior members would have more experiences in the department and therefore could

more accurately assess the culture or climate of the department. This was strictly an

assumption made by the researcher. Eight surveys were used because that was the

number that was provided by the NFA. The eight respondents consisted of three

Lieutenants and five firefighters. Each respondent was given specific instructions by the

researcher as to the purpose of the surveys. The researcher stressed that the members

should answer the instrument honestly and without fear of repercussions. The

respondents were given five days to complete the surveys and place them in the mail

directly to the NFA. It is important to note that the researcher did not handle the surveys

once they were given to the participants.

The results of the COS instrument were distributed to the participants of the ED

class during the second week of the class. Before viewing the results, Charles Burkell of

34

the NFA discussed organizational culture and gave an overview of the COS instrument.

Participants were then allowed to view their individual results. It is worth noting that the

researcher of this project, while not shocked, was certainly not happy with the results.

After further reflection and time to review the results, it was realized by the researcher

that his individual ratings and that of the group ratings mirrored each other although the

group’s scores were somewhat lower.

After several months of reflection, the researcher decided to share the COS

instrument with all members of the UPFD because it was felt that things needed to be

improved. During this time, a literature review was conducted primarily through

Governors State University (GSU) and through the Inter-Library Loan system at the local

library. The Inter-Library Loan system was able to obtain reference materials directly

from the learning resource center (LRC) at the NFA. The literature review included

books, and journals at GSU while several journal and applied research projects were

reviewed from the LRC.

The researcher decided to include all full time members of the UPFD in the focus

group sessions to discuss problem areas and to identify specific steps that could be taken

to improve the areas that were identified as being low. It should be noted that the

researcher picked a score of 45 or less to identify those areas as needing improvement.

The COS instrument itself suggests the same approach. Interviews were conducted on

three separate occasions in order to facilitate meetings with each shift of personnel. Each

member of the shift was given a copy of the results of the COS instrument along with the

recommendations on how to improve the areas in question. Each member was told to

read the results and then to think about: 1. What they were thinking about when they

35

answered the survey (for those that did) and 2. What could be done to improve the areas.

Each shift was then given several hours to reflect on the results and then to meet as a

group in order to formulate their responses.

Before each session, the researcher strongly emphasized the need for honesty and

once again stressed that there would be no repercussions for their input. During the

interview sessions, these questions were asked:

1. What is there to celebrate?

2. What are our concerns (scores of 45 and below)?

3. What forces created these scores?

4. How can we make improvements?

5. What actions or plans should we as a group adopt?

6. What factors are under our control?

7. What must we accept?

8. How will we know if we have improved?

9. When will we retake the COS?

10. What do you think is the best thing that has come out of this process?

All of these questions, except for #10, were taken directly from the COS instrument

under the title of “Discussing Your Results”.

Limitations

It was assumed by the researcher that the COS instrument provided a snapshot of

the organizational culture of the UPFD at the time that the survey was conducted. It was

also assumed that the participants provided honest answers and that they understood the

directions that were given to complete the survey. It is noted by the researcher that some,

36

many or all of the participants in the focus groups might have been reluctant to share their

feelings openly and honestly in front of “the boss”. One of the limitations noted by the

researcher during the focus group discussions was the tendency for the participants to get

into personal issues that may have involved personalities amongst the members of the

department. However, the researcher made no attempt to stifle these conversations

because of a fear of loosing the openness that was being exhibited by the focus group

members. Instead, the researcher allowed the participants to finish their discussion and

then tried to re-focus the group on the issues at hand.

RESULTS

The results of this research project have provided answers to all of the original

research questions. Questions 1 and 2 were clearly answered in the literature sections of

the research. The answer to Question 3 “How can University Park Fire Department

improve their culture?” will be addressed in this section.

There were ten questions that were asked of the focus groups during the interview

sections. Because these questions were opened ended, the results will be discussed in

general in this section. The specific comments that were recorded by the researcher are

attached and listed in Appendix B.

The work itself, a stress free environment, a diverse work force, job security,

planning, ethics, quality of work, innovations, and general contentment were all areas that

the groups generally were satisfied with. They felt that there was “cause for celebration”

as the COS instrument would call it or a general contentment in these areas. The areas

37

discussed as being concerns were working conditions, co-workers, supervision, top

leadership, pay, benefits, and feedback.

The reasons that the working conditions were rated so low were readily apparent.

All of the groups identified the over-crowded conditions at station one as the cause of the

problem. The personnel at station one share quarters with the police department and

village hall in space that was originally planned for use by the fire department only. This

condition has worsened over the last five years because of the expansion of the fire and

police departments without clear-cut space boundaries of the departments. This condition

has led to cramped quarters with furniture, filing cabinets and other equipment crowding

even the hallways. The lack of privacy and control over supplies and kitchen utensils

were cited as big problems. The last item that was mentioned by each of the focus groups

was a need for a shower at station one. Shower facilities were never installed in the

station when it was built in 1974 because it was felt at the time that there was not a need.

Although the employees had been asking for a shower since the beginning of the 24-hour

shift rotation, which started in 1990, there was reluctance on the part of the chief to

provide this because of the lack of space and the promise of new facilities for the village

hall and police station. As a result of the COS and emphasis that was expressed during

the focus groups, a shower will be installed at the station. This took a great deal of effort

on the part of one of the fire personnel to win the cooperation of the police department in

giving up some space.

Generally, a lack of communication was cited as being the biggest problems that

caused the co-workers, supervision, top leadership and feedback areas to be rated as low.

There were numerous situations cited where there was a lack of communication from

38

shift to shift and from station to station. There was a sense of not knowing what was

going on “with the big picture” from the standpoint of the chief keeping the personnel

informed. This situation often led to rumors being generated, which just compounded the

problem. Other issues raised in regards to these areas included the need for improved

employee evaluations with the opportunity for the subordinates to evaluate their

supervisors. In order to correct these problems, it was decided that meetings between the

shifts and the fire chief should take place at intervals of four to six weeks. This would

facilitate the exchange of information and hopefully improve the communications

process. In addition, the evaluation process and standardized forms will be examined to

determine what is good and what needs to be replaced (see memorandum attached as

Appendix C). It was decided that the subordinates would be given the opportunity to

evaluate their supervisors, up to, and including the chief. Finally, although it was not

discussed by the focus groups, the researcher identified the need for additional training

for all lieutenants and chief officers in the area of leadership and communications. This

was due to the fact that many officers had never received formal training in these areas.

Pay and benefits were areas that did not need any explanation other than to say

that the group feels that they are underpaid and that the co-pay for family health

insurance was out of line. The group cited the on-going loss of employees to other fire

departments in the same geographic region. While if was recognized by the focus groups

that these issues were generally out to the hands of the fire department administration

(because of the collective bargaining agreement), it is recognized by the researcher that

this will be an on-going problem until the perception of the problem is corrected, or until

there are salary adjustments.

39

The focus group acknowledged that some of the changes listed above had already

been noticed. Specifically, the chief had started to meet regularly with the shifts after

returning from the ED class at the NFA. This was done as a first step by the researcher to

start the improvement process. All involved indicated that this simple, common sense

approach had already improved morale and this in turn was an important step in the

process. The employees emphasized the need for these meetings to be continued on a

consistent basis [emphasis added] regardless of the other work demands placed on the

chief. Kelman (2000, October, p. 99) recognized the idea of making changes to improve

the culture before a formal plan or recognition of the effort is realized. He said “Culture

change starts when people try new behaviors even before reformers can use supporting

studies or simple persuasion to make a solid case for change”. This was the most

enlightening comment for the chief and emphasized everything that was rediscovered in

the literature review. This focused the researchers attention on the most valuable asset

that a fire department has – its personnel.

Finally, it was decided that the entire department should retake the COS

instrument in a year to provide a benchmark on the progress of changing the culture of

the department. It was emphasized that while we are changing those areas that needed to

be improved, that the group must not allow those areas identified as being acceptable to

slip to an unacceptable level.

The last question in the procedures section of the research was “What do you

think is the best thing that has come out of this process”? The overwhelming response

was that the opportunity to discuss the problems, the ability to be honest, and most

importantly, the willingness of the chief to hear things that he probably did not want to

40

hear, and to make a commitment to improve the things that the chief could control was by

far the best thing that came out of the process.

Unexpected findings

Having been in charge of the operations of the UPFD for the last twelve years and

the chief for the past six years, the researcher did not expect to come to the realization of

how easily the culture of the department could become unacceptable due to the

inattention of the chief towards the employee group. The focus groups mentioned details

that the researcher initially thought to be insignificant. However, these details really

showed to the level at which the chief and other leaders of the department are under

constant scrutiny. In hindsight, the researcher acknowledges that much of this was

common sense. Having taken the reigns of management at the age of 27, the researcher

at that time complained about the dinosaurs in the fire service. Dinosaurs were

considered to be old, set in their ways, unwilling to change, and/or compromise,

autocratic, and generally miserable to work for. It was important to recognize that the

researcher was starting to grow the first “humps” towards becoming a dinosaur and the

COS instrument was responsible for making this apparent.

DISCUSSION

The results of the COS instrument that showed areas in need of improvement

could be directly attributed factors that were identified in the literature review. Further

evidence of the direct correlation was provided by the comments, ideas and suggestions

that resulted from the interviews conducted during the focus group sessions.

41

The COS survey showed that there was a need to improve specific areas of the

organizational culture of the UPFD. Without improvement, the literature showed that the

overall effectiveness of the department would suffer. Ketter and Heskett (1992) found

that organizations that had a strong culture, were adaptable and open to change were far

more effective than organizations with weak cultures. Their studies also found that even

those organizations with relatively strong cultures would be less effective if they were

unwilling or unable to adapt to change. Emphasis was placed on the significant

roadblocks to initiating change. Dennison (1990, p. 5) agreed saying “Effectiveness (or

the lack of it) is a function of the values and beliefs held by the members of an

organization”.

Bruegman (1997) related that unless an organization is able and willing to change,

that the entire organization could be in peril. “Fortunately, for us as individuals and

organizations as a whole, when necessary, habits can be changed. Changing habits may

not be easy or fun, but if the rewards are sufficiently great, the effort will be worth the

change” (Fairfield-Sonn, 2001, p.35). In order to affect positive change, Kelman (2000,

October, p. 88) said “Research shows that the best path to attitude change often starts

with behavioral change. Getting people to change their behavior often sets in motion a

process of further behavioral and attitudinal change”. The author could not agree more. I

think this point was made clear by the fact that the chief, after returning from the ED

class, made a conscious effort to meet with the shifts on a regular basis in order to

enhance communications. The focus group comments supported Kelman’s thoughts

because they recognized a “change in the chief”, who was more approachable, and who

had exhibited a more positive attitude.

42

The focus groups expressed the need for information and good communications.

Their comments helped to focus just how much attention is paid to the leadership of the

organization, and the employee group sometimes perceives that often what is perceived

by the leadership differently. Howes (1999) stated:

Fire departments tend to focus on external customer service more than internal

customer service. Similar emphasis needs to be placed on internal customer

service. Employee morale and productivity seem to go hand in hand. Better

internal customer service would strengthen our organization and would be a first

step in unifying our cultures. (p. 28)

The literature review consistently recognized the need for positive change and the needs

of employees to be kept informed. The results of this research shows that even small

efforts in the areas of communication and leadership can have a positive effect on the

employee groups. Key to making these changes are: the need to recognize that change is

needed, providing motivation to the organization to make the necessary changes, and

finally to realized that this can be accomplished through good leadership using effective

communication. Hersey and Blanchard (1993, p. 6) emphasized this point. “Motivating

plays a large part in determining the level of performance of employees, which, in turn,

influences how effectively the organizational goals will be met”. Carter and Rausch

(1994, p. 8) pointed out that “It is the manager’s job to see that a favorable environment

is developed, if it does not already exist, that allows people to find higher levels of

motivation”.

Hersey and Blanchard (1993) stressed the need for an open dialogue and good

communication.

43

To be effective in the long run, we feel that organizations need an open dialogue

in which there is a certain amount of conflict, confrontation, and differing points

of view to encourage new ideas and patterns of behavior so that the organization

will not lose its ability to adjust to external competition. (p. 176)

This speaks to the need for the leadership to be open to dialogue that may not necessarily

be what the leadership wants to hear. This in effect, will show the employees willingness

on the part of the leadership to become a “follower” in some regards as well as show the

ability to adapt and consider other sides of an issue. Finally, the researcher feels that

Gordon (1993) reinforced many of the ideas that were presented during the focus groups

in order to improve the organization:

The team needs to share a sense of purpose and have common goals, the team is

interested in its own processes (apparent because the employees felt that the

process of reviewing the COS instrument was valuable in moving the

organization forward), differences of opinions are encouraged and they are freely

expressed (expressed during the focus group interviews), a willingness to surface

conflict and work towards a solution, the ability to focus on the solutions to

problems rather than on the problems themselves, and a commitment to the

evaluation of the teams performance. (p. 176)

Finally on the issue of pay and benefits the researcher has a strong sense that

compensation and benefits must be further studied. It is apparent from the focus group

discussions that the employees feel very strongly that they are underpaid. The study

needs to identify whether this is merely a perception on the part of the employees or if, in

fact, there is some concrete evidence of the disparity. This problem presents some

44

difficult roadblocks in that the employees are covered by a collective bargaining

agreement. The researcher feels that many bad feelings could be avoided if the

bargaining group and village administration would work harder at identifying the real

facts rather than allowing an arbitrator to settle the issue. Herzberg’s theory of hygiene-

motivation speaks to the fact that unless the hygiene factors are addressed (pay, benefits,

working conditions, etc.), then employees may have a hard time changing other behaviors

in a positive manner.

The researchers opinion of the study results was overall very positive. Initially

the researcher took the results on a personal level, which left a feeling of disappointment,

dismay and despair. However, as the project progressed, and with the input of the focus

groups, the researcher felt that the organization was on a path to improve the

organization. It was the researchers hope that by being able to accept constructive

criticism and show a willingness to change, that the employee groups would show this

same willingness. This fact will be left to be seen in the coming months and years of the

organization.

The research clearly showed that the direction that the UPFD was heading would

certainly lead to a loss of productivity and thereby its overall effectiveness would decline.

The resulting discussions showed that there are steps that can be taken immediately to

improve the conditions. These steps must be monitored for effectiveness and another

evaluation of the culture should be performed in a year to provide a benchmark for

progress. The bottom line is that the researcher has been enlightened to the feelings of

the employee group’s feelings and general state of mind. The employee group valued

45

this process and showed a willingness to make suggestions on how conditions could be

improved. The employees showed real interest in being part of the process.

RECOMMENDATIONS

There are several recommendations that should be discussed as a close to the

research project process. Some of these recommendations were readily apparent to both

the researcher and the focus groups, while others were a result of the focus groups

comments, while still others are apparent to the researcher because of the literature

review.

Pay and Benefits Audit

A survey of fire departments in the geographic region of the UPFD should be

conducted in order to identify if in fact, salaries and benefits of the employee

group is lacking. This information would serve to either eliminate the perception

on the part of the employees of being under-paid or it would serve as a basis to

work towards increasing the compensation. Herzberg identified the importance of

this recommendation as related by Carter (1994):

Hygiene relates to an individual’s dissatisfaction in the workplace.

Hygiene factors include working conditions, pay and benefits. If the

hygiene needs are met, then this will have little effect on an employee’s

satisfaction. However, if not met, it will contribute significantly to the

feelings of dissatisfaction. (p. 172)

46

This is important to understand because these issues, unless addressed, may prohibit any

long-term improvement in the rest of the organizational areas that were rated as needing

improvement.

Shift Meetings

The administration of the department (chief, deputy chief, etc.) needs to meet on a

regular basis with each shift in order to provide ongoing information about issues

affecting the department and the village as a whole. These meetings will go a long way

towards stamping our rumors, and enhancing a feeling of teamwork within the

organization.

Evaluations

The annual evaluations need to be evaluated to make sure that they are relevant to

the job that each employee is doing. The employee should have input on how the

evaluations are conducted. Each employee will have an opportunity to evaluate their

supervisor up to, and including the chief officers.

Training

Additional training needs to be conducted for the officers of the department in the

areas of leadership and communication. It was recognized that some or many of the

officers had not received any formal training in these areas. For those that had,

continuing education should be designed as a way of staying current.

Additional Research

Additional research should be conducted in the area of values, and value

statements in order to provide focus to all groups of employees within the organization.

47

The research identified much discussion on the use of value statements in providing

additional direction to employees in their everyday activities.

Commitment

Maintain the commitment to improving the organizational culture in the areas

identified in the COS instrument. This will be achieved through continuing dialogue

between the employee groups during shift meetings mentioned above. An emphasis must

also be placed on at least maintaining those areas that were rated as satisfactory during

the process of change.

Recommendation for Future Readers

The researcher cannot stress enough the importance of maintaining a good

organizational culture in the fire service. I would encourage all readers to undertake the

COS instrument. The resulting dialogue that was begun as a result of the focus group

discussions has had a drastic improvement in the morale of the UPFD. This was evident

in the attitudes of the employees during and immediately after this applied research

project. The key in all of this is to learn something. This researcher was energized by the

project, which resulted in a commitment to improve the organization. The research

shows that an effective leader does have a significant impact on an organization and that

employees will become good followers if the right conditions exist.

48

REFERENCES

Bruegman, R. (1997, April). Navigating organizational change. Fire Chief, 41,

pp. 86-93.

Carter, H. and Rausch, E. (1994). Management in the fire service (2nd ed.).

Quincy, MA: National Fire Protection Association.

Coleman, R. (1981, February). Organizational carcinogens: Germs that damage

the effectiveness of fire departments. The International Fire Chief, 47, pp. 10-12.

Colins, J. and Porras, J. (1994). Built to last: Successful habits of visionary

companies. New York: Harper Business.

Compton, D. (1999, January). Assessing your anchors: Connecting the

organization. Speaking of Fire, 7, p. 24.

Cook, J. (1990, August). Changing your department’s organizational culture. Fire

Engineering, 151, pp. 85-92.

Cook, J. (1998, September). Changing the organizational culture. Fire

Engineering, 151, pp. 87-98.

Dennison, D. (1990). Corporate culture and organizational effectiveness.

New York: John Wiley & Sons.

Fairfield-Sonn, J. (2001). Corporate culture and quality organization. Westport,

Connecticut: Quorum Books.

Federal Emergency Management Agency (1998, December). Student manual:

Executive development. United State Fire Administration: National Fire Academy.

49

Grant, N. and Hoover, D. (1994). Fire Service Administration. Quincy, MA:

National Fire Protection Association.

Gordon, J. (1993). A diagnostic approach to organizational behavior (4th ed.).

Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.

Halas, J. (1993, February). Improving organizational effectiveness. The Voice,

pp. 227-228.

Hersey, P. and Blanchard, K. (1993). Management of organizational behavior:

Utilizing human resources. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Howes, C. (1999, December). Organizational culture: Managing more than one

in the same organization. Emmitsburg, Maryland: United States Fire Administration,

National Fire Academy.

Jaques, E. (1951). The changing culture of the factory. New York: Dresden Press.

Jensen, R. (2000, January). Assessing the organizational climate of the Iowa City

fire department. Emmitsburg, Maryland: United States Fire Administration, National Fire

Academy.

Kelman, S. (2000, October). Sowing seeds of change. Government Executive, 12,

pp. 97-99.

Kirkham, D. (1997, April). Management is like a body of water. Fire

Engineering, pp. 118-122.

Kuczmarski, S. and Kuczmarski, T. (1995). Values-based leadership. Englewood

Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

LaBorde, G. (1983). Influencing with Integrity. Palo Alto, CA: Science and

Behavior Books.

50

Margerison, C. (1982). How to assess your management style. New York:

Amacom.

Sanford, F. (1950). Authoritarianism and leadership. Philadelphia, PA: Institute

for Research in Human Relations.

Umiker, W. (1999, June). Organizational culture: The role of management and

supervisors. The Health Care Supervisor, pp. 22-27.