Decision Making Within and Outside Standard Operating Procedures: Paradoxical Use of Operational Discretion in Firefighters

Abstract

Objective To understand how firefighters’ use of rules (i.e., standard operating procedures [SOPs]) and deliberative decision making (i.e., operational discretion [OD]) interacts with acute stress. Background Current operational guidance for UK firefighters combines the provision of SOPs, for routine incidents, with the use of OD, under prescribed conditions (e.g., when there is a risk to human life). However, our understanding of the use of SOPs and OD is limited. Methods Incident commanders (ICs; n = 43) responded to simulated emergency incidents, which either licensed the use of OD or required use of a SOP. Video footage of IC behavior was used to code their response as involving a SOP or OD, while levels of acute stress were assessed using a blood-based measure and self-report. Results ICs were less likely to use OD selectively in the simulated emergency incident that licensed its use than in the one for which use of an SOP was appropriate; IC command level did not affect this pattern of results; and the incident that licensed OD resulted in more acute stress than the incident that required use of a SOP. Conclusion SOPs and OD were not used in the manner prescribed by current operational guidance in simulated emergency incidents. Application These results suggest that firefighter training in SOPs and OD should be augmented alongside personal resilience training, given the impact of stress on health and wellbeing, but also to improve the deployment of SOPs and OD under stress.

Handbook of Research on the Complexities and Strategies of Occupational Stress

“…These effects were observed in both cross-sectional and longitudinal studies (Galvin and Smith, 2015;Nelson and Smith, 2016). The model appears to be very robust in that it has been supported in studies of general working samples (Nor and Smith, 2018;Omosehin, 2021), working mothers (Smith & James, 2021), office workers Langer, Tailor & Smith, 2019), university staff (Williams, Thomas and Smith, 2017), teachers (Smith and James, 2021), nurses Williams, Pendlebury & Smith, 2021), blue collar workers , transport workers Bowen, Budden & Smith, 2020), the coastguard (Kingdom & Smith, 2011), the police (Nelson, 2017), trainee mental health staff (Galvin, 2016), firefighters (Butler et al, 2021), call center staff (McFarlane, 2022), those working away from home for extended periods (Smith, 2021b), and sports organizations (Neil, McFarlane & Smith, 2016). The model has been used in studies in Italy (Capasso, Zurlo & Smith, 2016Zurlo, Valone & Smith, 2018), China (Zhang & Smith, 2021), the USA (Ahmad et al, 2018a, b), Jamaica (Nelson, 2017), Kuwait (Alheneidi, 2020) and Nigeria (Omosehin, 2021).…”

Neural underpinnings of ethical decisions in life and death dilemmas in naïve and expert firefighters

“…Firefighters face unique challenges requiring decision-making, which often leads to highly conflicting dilemmas because of alternatives that may be largely unfavourable. They often operate in high-stress, time-constraining situations where decisions must be made quickly and accurately to ensure the safety of themselves and others 8 . They receive dedicated training under these conditions and rely on their experience to make decisions.…”