But given the rarity of disasters, particularly catastrophes, government cannot justify expending significant effort on the preparation phase, except in environments where disaster-scale events occur with reasonable frequency, such as hurricanes in Florida.
As a result, emergency managers are usually isolated with no real authority to direct significant funding for preparedness projects; have no real role in coordinating response; don't manage global aspects of community recovery; and have a limited ability to secure funding for large-scale mitigation projects.
Instead, emergency managers typically have a reactive stance, keeping an organization or government compliant with the endless cycle of imposed requirements, such as pandemic planning or the National Incident Management System (NIMS), both of which frankly are a significant waste of time.
I suggest we radically revise the definition of what emergency managers do and limit it to three clear concepts:
- being the everyday problem solvers for leadership;
- being community focused and not individual focused; and
- during a crisis, their primary and exclusive goals should be opening businesses and schools.
Emergency managers need to be the everyday fixers for local mayors and county managers for three reasons: Experience solving simple community problems will make them better at solving complex ones; solving problems will help develop relationships with peers; and being seen as the problem-solver for government leadership will give emergency managers more status with others, which in turn will make it easier for their voices to be heard.
Unless emergency managers are the people who leadership turns to naturally -- instead of public safety -- they will never be taken seriously; what leadership does every day is what it will do in a crisis.
Emergency managers need to explicitly say that they are community focused, not individual focused. Public safety works with individuals; EM works with the community. This is a critical distinction because many emergency management agencies are still responsible for dealing with "people issues," such as setting up shelters, distributing food and coordinating medical care. In many communities, other organizations can do this on their own without government assistance, and emergency managers need to abandon this role.
The primary and exclusive goal should be opening businesses as soon as possible after a disruption. Opening business is critical because government is hopelessly inefficient at providing for people's daily needs. In addition, and just as important, it's a social equality issue: If a McDonald's is out of business, its employees have no jobs, they don't get paid, and their families are forced to rely on the government. This becomes a vicious cycle as more people in shelters means more focus on shelters and less on opening businesses.
The second goal should be opening schools as quickly as possible after a disruption. Education is the government service that touches the most taxpayers, and schools are a vital symbol of normalcy for a community. Schools are a safe haven for kids where they can be fed, bathe and be given access to health services.
Emergency management could become a relevant and necessary part of government -- rather than the grant-funded, powerless position that it typically is today -- with clearly redefined roles of problem solving; serving as the interface between schools, businesses and government; and a focus on the metrics of minimizing "business days lost" and "school days lost."
