From Firefighting to High Performance: Lessons from Crisis Response

In business management, the term “putting out fires” is a familiar descriptor for a state of reactive crisis. It signifies a period where an organisation lurches from one urgent problem to another, demanding extraordinary effort from its teams to achieve a critical result. This scenario is common: a pivotal sales opportunity materialises late on a Friday, requiring a weekend of frantic work for a Monday morning presentation.

Typically, this metaphor introduces a dialogue on the importance of proactive strategy and planning. While the value of foresight is undeniable, an exclusive focus on planning can obscure the remarkable organisational dynamics that emerge during the reactive phase. Instead of solely lamenting a lack of planning, we can analyse the crisis response itself to understand the fundamental attributes of high-performing teams.

The Bushfire Analogy: A Case Study in Ad Hoc Organisation

A powerful real-world parallel is the response to the increasing threat of bushfires in Australia. Regardless of the fire's cause, immediate action is required to protect lives and property. In these high-stakes environments, communities mobilise with incredible speed and efficacy, offering profound insights into team dynamics under pressure.

During the 2019-2020 bushfire season, I observed this phenomenon first-hand at an evacuation centre in Picton, NSW. The centre, a collaborative effort by multiple charitable organisations based at a local church, provided food, shelter, and comfort to hundreds of displaced people. Volunteers, many of whom were personally affected, worked with unwavering optimism.

In a similar situation, a relative of mine, a catering executive, received a call at 2:30 p.m. from the Rural Fire Service requesting meals for 500 firefighters by their 5:00 p.m. shift change. His immediate response was one of commitment. He assembled a team of his staff, and by that afternoon, 500 grateful firefighters were fed.

Unpacking the Organisational Dynamics

These anecdotes are not just stories of goodwill; they are practical demonstrations of sophisticated organisational principles. The teams that formed at the evacuation centre and the catering kitchen are examples of what Henry Mintzberg (1983) termed an "adhocracy". This is a highly flexible and non-bureaucratic organisational form that can adapt quickly to novel, complex situations, foregoing traditional hierarchies for mission-focused collaboration.

A closer analysis reveals complex forms of task interdependence, a concept categorised by James D. Thompson (1967). In the food production line, there was sequential interdependence, where one person's output was the next person's input. More broadly, there was reciprocal interdependence, as volunteers from different agencies, faiths, and skill backgrounds coordinated their efforts in a fluid, multi-directional manner to meet the urgent and varied needs of evacuees and emergency personnel.

Furthermore, success in such an unpredictable environment demands high levels of specific psychological traits. The group's ability to tackle unforeseen challenges demonstrates strong collective efficacy, which is a shared belief in the team's joint capabilities to organise and execute the courses of action required to produce given levels of attainment (Bandura, 1997). This was complemented by profound empathy in dealing with vulnerable individuals and significant personal resilience to sustain effort over long periods.

The Core Driver: A Shared Purpose

While the structural and psychological components are essential, the defining characteristic uniting these efforts is a powerful, intrinsic commitment to a shared purpose. In these cases, the goal was clear and compelling: mitigate the threat to the community. This alignment creates what team effectiveness researchers refer to as a shared mental model, where team members have a common understanding of the task, the team, and the situation, enabling them to coordinate implicitly and adapt effectively (Cannon-Bowers & Salas, 2001).

For businesses caught in a cycle of "putting out fires," the lesson is twofold. While developing robust strategies to prevent crises is vital, it is equally important to recognise the inherent strengths that emerge during a crisis. By understanding and fostering the conditions for adhocracy, leveraging interdependence, and nurturing the collective efficacy and shared purpose of their people, leaders can transform a reactive firefight into an opportunity for exceptional team performance.

Want to know more, add these to your library:

• Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. W.H. Freeman.

• Cannon-Bowers, J. A., & Salas, E. (2001). Team effectiveness and shared mental models. In M. A. West, D. Tjosvold, & K. G. Smith (Eds.), International handbook of organizational teamwork and cooperative working (pp. 195–212). John Wiley & Sons.

• Mintzberg, H. (1983). Structures in fives: Designing effective organizations. Prentice-Hall.

• Thompson, J. D. (1967). Organizations in action: Social science bases of administrative theory. McGraw-Hill.