June 2009 Issue Number 109

Is a monthly electronic newsletter which links current events and issues to the daily challenges faced by fire and emergency services managers. Current topics in the areas of leadership development, workplace diversity, change management, and conflict resolution will be discussed.

We hope that you find the information here useful and provocative.
Let us know what you think! If you'd like to subscribe to the newsletter, please enter your email address in the box below.

Sign up for our free newsletter,
Consider This...

Lessons from Hubble

I am among many millions of people who were captivated recently by the final space shuttle mission to the Hubble Space Telescope. The telescope, which has been in orbit for nearly 20 years, has provided some of the most dramatic data and photographs from deep space in our history. For many people, Hubble is one of the best things that has ever come from the U.S space program. But it wasn’t always like that.

The Hubble was fraught with problems even before it was first launched. Funded in the 1970s, it was originally set to be launched in 1983, but the Challenger disaster and technical delays repeatedly pushed back the date for activation. Then after it was finally launched in 1990, it was discovered that the main mirror had been ground incorrectly, making images projected from the telescope blurry and of limited use. Hubble became a kind of joke for some– an example of what happens when shoddy workmanship and ineffective leadership and bureaucracy combine forces. Many people wanted NASA to cut its losses and just let Hubble go.

Instead, those who had truly committed themselves to Hubble’s success set about solving the problem. Obvious solutions were impractical or impossible– regrinding the mirror in space, or bringing the telescope back to earth for service. Finally, scientists found a way to compensate for the error with an additional mirror that was manufactured to specifically neutralize the distortion from the first mirror.

The mission to do the initial repairs took place in late 1993, and involved considerable risk. But the results of that and subsequent missions were a complete success and thereafter the Hubble performed at its expected capacity for many years. Currently, it is expected to continue transmitting images well into 2014, well past its predicted life span.

What lessons does Hubble have for those in the fire service or other organizations? Hubble was a bold initiative that involved considerable risk and success was far from guaranteed. Many people wanted to kill Hubble before it was even built because of the cost and time commitments involved. Then when it was finally deployed, it didn’t work properly. The project seemed doomed, and it was only natural that many people wanted to abandon it and start over. But the Hubble was the result of a vision, and that vision lived on despite intermediary problems. A core group of people refused to give up their belief that it was a good program despite the setbacks, and they fought to keep it alive.

It seems to me that such commitment is the exception rather than the rule. In this throw-away society, if something doesn’t work on the first try, you get rid of it and do something else. If people don’t prove themselves in the first six months or a year of employment, you either fire them or relegate them to “dead wood” status– like the flawed Hubble, they would still be around, sort of performing, but really just orbiting uselessly until they finally dropped out of sight.

But what if you decide that person or that program is worth fighting for? What happens in an organization when the larger sense of vision includes even those things and people that don’t work perfectly the first time around, but instead need some support, some investment, and even some risk to rise to their full potential?

The Hubble space telescope is one of our country’s greatest technological achievements in the past 20 years. But it wouldn’t have happened at all if a small group of committed individuals hadn’t stuck with it even through hard times. Imagine what that kind of commitment could do when applied to your most valuable asset– the people around you.

The California Supreme Court has upheld Proposition 8, a referendum that bans gay marriage. The ruling left in place the legality of the approximately 18,000 gay couples who married before Proposition 8 went into effect.

In other news, the U.S. State Department has recently announced that it will be expanding its benefits program to include domestic partners, either heterosexual or same-sex, of U.S. diplomats.

Sources: Associated Press May 26, 2009 and The Washington Post May 25, 2009

 

The Firefighters’ Day in Court

The nomination of Sonia Sotomayor to the U.S. Supreme Court has put the spotlight on a case pending before that court: Ricci v. DeStefano, the so-called reverse discrimination case filed by New Haven firefighters. The lawsuit was filed when a 2003 promotional test was thrown out after it was found to have disparate impact on minority firefighters. White firefighters who were passed over for promotion claimed that they had been discriminated against based on their race, and filed for relief under Title VII. Minority firefighters said that the test had inherent biases and was not a valid measurement of ability. The case went to the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals, which found in favor of the city and against the firefighters. An appeal of that decision allowed the case to make its way to the Supreme Court, where it will be decided this summer. Judge Sotomayor was one of the 2nd Circuit judges who decided in favor of the city in the lower court.

This case will force the high court to consider a number of difficult and divisive questions. Is affirmative action still a viable concept in a country where an African-American man can be elected president? How do you design a test that is truly fair and measures what is important for the job? Does disparate impact always indicate discrimination? How do you transform an organization that has been traditionally white male to one that demographically represents the community?

Arguments in the case were heard before the Supreme Court on April 22, and a decision is expected later this summer. Judge Sotomayor will not be part of that decision making process.

Sources: Hartford Courant 5/27/09 and The Associated Press 4/18/09

 

© Linda F. Willing, 2009