What the Model Looks Like in Practice
A follow-up to Why the Fire Service Needs to Shift from Leader-Follower to Leader-Leader
In January, I wrote about why the fire service needs to move from a Leader-Follower culture to a Leader-Leader model — one where thinking, initiative, and ownership aren’t reserved for the person with the most bugles. The concept makes sense, but people wanted to see it in action. So, let’s put it on the fireground.
The Model, In Brief
Leader-Follower is what most of us know, it’s what we grew up in. One person thinks, one person decides, everyone else executes. It feels like control, and for routine operations, it often works well enough. But under dynamic, high-stakes, rapidly evolving conditions? It creates dangerous single points of failure.
Navy Captain David Marquet’s work in Turn the Ship Around! replaces permission culture with intent culture: Leader-Leader. Firefighters don’t ask if they can act. They communicate what they intend to do and why. The officer shifts from gatekeeper to clarity provider by verifying intent, identifying gaps, and building the team’s capacity to think independently.
The difference sounds subtle. On the fireground, it’s the difference between a crew that waits and a crew that works.
Scenario 1: The Rapidly Evolving Structure Fire
Leader-Follower response: Engine 1 arrives to a working room-and-contents fire, second floor, balloon-frame residential. The captain takes a 360, radios Command, and tells crew to hold at the door until he decides on entry tactics. The crew waits. Conditions change. The window for an aggressive interior attack narrows.
Leader-Leader response: The engineer immediately begins water supply. The nozzle firefighter, trained to read building construction and fire behavior, communicates: “I intend to advance a 1¾-inch line to the second floor via interior stairs — fire appears contained to the front bedroom, conditions favorable for interior attack.” The captain verifies the size-up, confirms accountability, and says: “What’s your bailout plan?” The firefighter answers. The line goes.
The crew moves with informed speed. The captain manages the bigger picture rather than directing every step.
Scenario 2: Accountability at a Multi-Company Response
Leader-Follower response: Three companies arrive at a commercial structure fire. Every crew waits for explicit task assignment from Command before moving. The IC is bombarded with radio traffic. One crew sits at the apparatus for four minutes awaiting orders while an exposure property goes unprotected.
Leader-Leader response: The second-due lieutenant arrives and reads the scene: the B-side exposure is unprotected and the IC is clearly managing primary attack operations. Rather than waiting, she radios: “Engine 4 is positioned on the B side, intending to establish a defensive line to protect the exposure — advise if you need us elsewhere.” Command acknowledges. The problem gets solved before it becomes a fire spread.
This isn’t freelancing. This is trained, communicated intent — exactly what a Leader-Leader culture is designed to produce.
Scenario 3: The Mayday
Leader-Follower response: A firefighter becomes disoriented in a residential basement. He waits — trained to announce a Mayday only when absolutely certain. By the time the radio transmission comes, conditions have deteriorated significantly. Command scrambles to react.
Leader-Leader response: The same firefighter has been trained in an environment where communicating intent, including uncertainty, is not just permitted, it’s expected. He transmits early: “Command, Engine 3 crew member, I’ve lost my orientation in the basement and am activating PASS — intending to shelter in place and await RIT.” The early transmission gives Command, RIT, and crews critical time. Early communication of uncertain conditions isn’t weakness. It’s leadership.
Scenario 4: Industrial ERT Pre-Incident Planning
Leader-Follower response: An ERT member notices that a process unit on their quarterly inspection has changed: new piping configuration, different chemical storage, access points relocated. She notes it but doesn’t update the pre-plan — that’s the training officer’s job. The pre-plan stays inaccurate.
Leader-Leader response: The same ERT member radios her captain: “I intend to flag the pre-plan discrepancy with our industrial hygienist and update the site map before next month’s drill — the B-unit access and chemical inventory no longer match our documentation.” The captain asks her to brief the crew at Tuesday’s training. The organization gets smarter because one person took ownership. Pre-incident planning is leadership. It doesn’t wait for an incident to matter.
The Officer’s Role in Making This Work
Shifting to a Leader-Leader culture doesn’t mean stepping back, it means stepping differently. Your job becomes:
- Building the foundation
- Meaningful AARs
- Firefighter-led training
- Scenario-based exercises where crews reason through decisions, not just execute them.
- Tolerating productive friction
When a firefighter says “I intend to…” and the intent is wrong, don’t just correct it — ask them to walk you through their thinking. That’s where learning lives.
Modeling the language
If you want your crew to communicate intent, demonstrate it yourself. Brief your intentions before you act. Narrate your size-up. Show them what it looks like at your level.
Resisting the urge to be the answer
The hardest part of Leader-Leader isn’t the concept. It’s sitting with a question long enough to let your firefighter think through it. The fireground rarely rewards the officer who knew the most. It rewards the crew that thought the clearest.
The scenarios above aren’t hypothetical wishlist items. They’re the product of consistent, deliberate leadership development — the kind that starts long before the tones drop.
If your crew is still waiting for permission, the question isn’t whether they’re ready for more autonomy. The question is whether you’ve built the foundation for them to use it.
Alex Zielinski is a Deputy Chief and Division Chief of Training and the founder of TrainTeachLead.com