Читать книгу Emergency Incident Management Systems - Mark Warnick S., Louis N. Molino Sr - Страница 23

Integration of multiple agencies from a myriad of local, state, and federal government entities often led to turf wars, or at the very least serious difficulties. This held especially true while in the response mode. Often, it could be attributed to the previously mentioned Type A personality. As more agencies would arrive on scene, the incoming agencies would often try to assert their authority, but at the same time wanted no part of command responsibility or liability. Not only would these individuals not take responsibility, but if something they suggested went wrong, they would often deny any responsibility because they were not “officially” in charge. This often led to distrust of, and among, other agencies.

In the aftermath of some incidents that went terribly wrong, there would sometimes be finger‐pointing and the blaming of another agency. The person or agency responsible for making a bad decision would rarely be identified and/or held accountable. This led to more distrust of incoming mutual aid help, and sometimes lead to the attitude by the initial agency that it was “My way or the highway.” This was not conducive when a collaborative effort was needed in an emergency.