University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Leadership selection within public safety: an evaluation study

(USC Thesis Other)

Leadership selection within public safety: an evaluation study

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content Running head: LEADERSHIP SELECTION WITHIN PUBLIC SAFETY 1
Leadership Selection Within Public Safety: An Evaluation Study
by
Randal A. Collins
A Dissertation Presented to the
FACULTY OF THE USC ROSSIER SCHOOL OF EDUCATION
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
In Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree
DOCTOR OF EDUCATION
(Organizational Change and Leadership (On Line))
May 2020
Copyright 2020 Randal A. Collins
LEADERSHIP SELECTION WITHIN PUBLIC SAFETY 2

DEDICATION
This dissertation is dedicated to the responders in public safety who sacrifice so much for
the welfare of others. May you always have the leadership that you deserve.
LEADERSHIP SELECTION WITHIN PUBLIC SAFETY 3

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I would like to acknowledge my parents who have always supported me and were in disbelief
when the man who, at such an early age, declared that he was going to be content with a high
school diploma, informed them that he was pursuing a doctorate degree. They have been there
through thick and thin. I am proud to be called their son and their legacy.
My dearest Kaylee, I am not sure if you inspire me or if I inspire you. All I know is I
hope to be the example that you can learn from. Pursue your dreams, not your goals, the dreams
are more rewarding.
Dr. Mona Kumar, you have been my lifeline. Advising, consoling, counseling, and
loving. I don’t know how I would have persevered without your influence and presence. Just
because we are not “saying it” doesn’t mean it isn’t real.
This would also not have transpired if it weren’t for the USC Lacrosse team. Playing for
four years between the ages of 44 and 47 was an honor and one of the most unique experiences
of my life. Playing with teammates half my age, I hope they learned as much from me as I did
from them. Fight-on!

LEADERSHIP SELECTION WITHIN PUBLIC SAFETY 4

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Dedication ....................................................................................................................................... 2
Acknowledgements ........................................................................................................................ 3
List of Tables .................................................................................................................................. 8
List of Figures ............................................................................................................................... 10
Abstract ......................................................................................................................................... 11
Chapter One: Introduction ............................................................................................................ 12
Background of the Problem ............................................................................................... 12
Field-Based Context and Mission ...................................................................................... 13
Global Goal ........................................................................................................................ 14
Description of Stakeholder Groups .................................................................................... 14
Stakeholder Group for the Study ....................................................................................... 17
Purpose of the Study and Questions .................................................................................. 18
Methodological Framework ............................................................................................... 19
Definitions .......................................................................................................................... 19
Organization of the Study .................................................................................................. 20
Chapter Two: Review of the Literature ........................................................................................ 21
Introduction ........................................................................................................................ 21
Public Safety Leadership ................................................................................................... 21
Measuring Leadership and Poor Leadership ...................................................................... 23
Influences on the Problem of Practice ............................................................................... 25
Ineffective Selection Processes ............................................................................ 25
Selecting Wrong People for Wrong Positions ...................................................... 28
LEADERSHIP SELECTION WITHIN PUBLIC SAFETY 5

The Impact of Poor Leadership ............................................................................ 29
Good Leadership Versus Poor Leadership ........................................................... 32
Role of the Stakeholder Group of Focus ............................................................................ 34
Clark and Estes’ KMO Influences Framework .................................................................. 34
Stakeholder Knowledge, Motivation and Organizational Influences ................................ 35
Knowledge and Skills ........................................................................................... 35
Motivation ............................................................................................................ 41
Organization ......................................................................................................... 44
Conceptual Framework .................................................................................................... 46
Summary ........................................................................................................................... 50
Chapter Three: Methods ............................................................................................................... 52
Participating Stakeholders ................................................................................................ 52
Interview Sampling Criteria and Rationale .......................................................... 54
Interview Sampling (Recruitment) Strategy and Rationale .................................. 55
Data Collection ................................................................................................................. 55
Interviews ............................................................................................................. 56
Documents ............................................................................................................ 59
Data Analysis ........................................................................................................ 60
Credibility and Trustworthiness ....................................................................................... 61
Ethics ................................................................................................................................ 61
Chapter Four: Results and Findings ............................................................................................. 64
Findings ............................................................................................................................ 64
Knowledge Influences ...................................................................................................... 65
LEADERSHIP SELECTION WITHIN PUBLIC SAFETY 6

Declarative Knowledge ........................................................................................ 67
Procedural Knowledge ......................................................................................... 84
Motivation Influences ....................................................................................................... 88
Utility Value ......................................................................................................... 90
Self-Efficacy ......................................................................................................... 96
Organizational Influences ................................................................................................. 98
Cultural Model ...................................................................................................... 99
Cultural Setting ................................................................................................... 104
Synthesis ......................................................................................................................... 106
Chapter Five: Recommendations ............................................................................................... 109
Recommendations for Practice to Address KMO Influences ......................................... 110
Knowledge Recommendations ........................................................................... 110
Motivation Recommendations ............................................................................ 114
Organization Recommendations ........................................................................ 116
Integrated Implementation and Evaluation Plan ............................................................ 120
Implementation and Evaluation Framework ...................................................... 120
Organizational Purpose, Need, and Expectations Motivation ............................ 121
Level 4: Results and Leading Indicators ............................................................ 121
Level 3: Behaviors .............................................................................................. 123
Level 2: Learning ............................................................................................... 126
Level 1: Reaction ................................................................................................ 129
Evaluation Tools ................................................................................................. 129
Data Analysis and Reporting .............................................................................. 130
LEADERSHIP SELECTION WITHIN PUBLIC SAFETY 7

Summary ......................................................................................................................... 130
Limitations and Delimitations ........................................................................................ 131
Recommendations for Future Research .......................................................................... 132
Conclusion ...................................................................................................................... 133
References .................................................................................................................................. 134
Appendix A: Interview Protocol ................................................................................................ 143
Appendix B: Interview Information Sheet ................................................................................. 147
Appendix C: Document Analysis Protocol ................................................................................ 148
Appendix D: Course Evaluation ................................................................................................. 149
Appendix E: Program Implementation Survey .......................................................................... 150

LEADERSHIP SELECTION WITHIN PUBLIC SAFETY 8

LIST OF TABLES
Table 1. Stakeholder Groups’ Performance Goals ....................................................................... 17
Table 2. Leadership Attributes Empirically Identified ................................................................. 37
Table 3. Knowledge Influences .................................................................................................... 40
Table 4. Motivation Influences ..................................................................................................... 44
Table 5. Organizational Influences ............................................................................................... 46
Table 6. Stakeholder Participants ................................................................................................. 54
Table 7. Determination of Knowledge Influences ........................................................................ 66
Table 8. Required Leadership Attributes Identified by Administrators ....................................... 68
Table 9. Leadership Attributes Identified by Administrators Compared to Empirically Identified
Attributes ...................................................................................................................................... 69
Table 10. Empirical Leadership Attributes Identified by Administrators .................................... 73
Table 11. Required Leadership Attributes Identified by Administrators that are Listed in Job
Descriptions of an Executive Leadership Position Within Their Organization ........................... 74
Table 12. Leadership Attributes Listed in Job Descriptions ........................................................ 78
Table 13. Leadership Attributes Found in the LE3 Job Description ............................................ 80
Table 14. General Hiring Process of Stakeholder Organizations ................................................. 85
Table 15. General Promotional Process of Stakeholder Organizations ........................................ 86
Table 16. Evaluation Methods in Hiring and Promotional Processes .......................................... 87
Table 17. Determination of Motivation Influences ...................................................................... 90
Table 18. Determination of Organizational Influences ................................................................ 99
Table 19. Cultural Concerns Identified Pertaining to Changing Hiring and Promotion
Procedures .................................................................................................................................. 104
LEADERSHIP SELECTION WITHIN PUBLIC SAFETY 9

Table 20. Organizations that Showed Interest in Incorporating New Methods into Hiring and
Promotional Procedures Which Would Require Staff to Be Trained ......................................... 106
Table 21. Knowledge Recommendations ................................................................................... 111
Table 22. Motivation Recommendations ................................................................................... 115
Table 23. Organizational Recommendations ............................................................................. 117
Table 24. Outcomes, Methods, and Metrics ............................................................................... 122
Table 25. Critical Behaviors and Timing ................................................................................... 124
Table 26. Required Drivers to Support Critical Behaviors ........................................................ 125
Table 27. Evaluation of the Components of Learning ............................................................... 128
Table 28. Reaction Measurements ............................................................................................. 129
LEADERSHIP SELECTION WITHIN PUBLIC SAFETY 10

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1. Leadership Selection in Public Safety Conceptual Framework .................................... 49

LEADERSHIP SELECTION WITHIN PUBLIC SAFETY 11

ABSTRACT
Public safety requires leadership to ensure effective operations and service to the
community. It is crucial to evaluate public safety hiring and promotional practices to determine if
the methods are enabling the recruitment of the best and most suitable persons for executive
positions. This research evaluated whether public safety organizations utilize a hiring and
selection process that includes job analysis, psychological assessments, and whether the process
identifies leadership attributes and screens for poor leadership attributes in candidates. This was
a public safety field of practice study and great care was taken to make sure sample populations
covered a wide array of organizations, both large and small. Recommendations from this study
were derived from a study of three disciplines, law enforcement, fire-rescue, and emergency
management organizations.
The recommendations include that personnel be appropriately and impartially evaluated
and selected for jobs requiring leadership attributes reflecting their skill sets. This can be done
utilizing psychological assessments that identify leadership strengths and screen for poor
leadership attributers in candidates. Public safety administrators can also improve executive
leadership selection by conducting a job analysis and ensuring job descriptions reflect the
leadership attributes desired in the vacant position. Improving leadership within public safety
organizations will enable public safety organizations to better fulfill their mission to save lives,
stabilize incidents, protect property, and protect the environment.

LEADERSHIP SELECTION WITHIN PUBLIC SAFETY 12

CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION
Effective leadership within public safety is vital to saving lives, property, and protecting
first responders (Harrington, 2011). This dissertation addressed the problem of leadership
selection within public safety organizations. Public safety organizations respond to emergency
incidents to save lives, stabilize crisis incidents, protect property, and protect the environment
(Federal Emergency Management Agency, 2017). Donahue and Tuohy (2006) identify
leadership issues as a problem in significant disasters occurring between 1994 and 2005. The
evidence highlights that effective leadership is required and is not always present within public
safety organizations (Cwiak et al., 2017; Hadley, Pittinsky, Sommer, & Zhu, 2011; Kapucu &
Van Wart, 2008). This problem is important to address because strong leaders are needed to
improve public safety (Cwiak et al., 2017; Donahue & Tuohy, 2006; Kapucu & Van Wart, 2008;
U.S. House Select Bipartisan Committee to Investigate the Preparation for and Response to
Hurricane Katrina, 2006).
Background of the Problem
It is crucial to evaluate public safety hiring and promotional practices to determine if the
methods are enabling the recruitment of the best and most suitable persons for executive
positions. This will help to ensure public safety organizations are operating efficaciously. The
consequences of not evaluating how public safety selects their leadership means maintaining the
status quo, and thus, providing continued leadership challenges in an emerging world of disaster
complexities (Cwiak et al., 2017). The use of measurement tools and better screening of those to
be placed in crisis leadership roles will lead to an improved response to disasters and crisis
incidents (Hadley et al.,2011). Alkhaldi et al. (2017) state that the current public safety climate
has changed over time and the current risks and hazards are complex, high profile, and
LEADERSHIP SELECTION WITHIN PUBLIC SAFETY 13

increasing in quantity and magnitude. Alkhaldi et al. (2017) further elaborate that potential
incidents can range from cyber incidents to terrorism to public health pandemics to natural
hazards like hurricanes and earthquakes. In their research study, they noted that over the past 20
years, there has been a growing number of disasters and emergencies, and the duration between
such incidents has also shrunk. Crises affect every labor sector and portion of humanity,
incidents can be accidents or intentional, crises will often be multi-jurisdictional, and the manner
in which public safety manages crises has shown inefficiencies, especially when organizational
adaptation is required (Alkhaldi et al., 2017). A gap that needs to be addressed to improve
response to these emerging themes is leadership (Alkhaldi et al., 2017). The realities of today's
crises mean incidents that public safety organizations need to deal with are growing in numbers,
they are becoming more complex, and the need for leadership is growing exponentially. These
challenges support the need to evaluate leadership selection to ensure that proper leaders are
selected to strengthen public safety organizations.
Field-Based Context and Mission
This dissertation focused on the field of practice of public safety. Public safety
organizations consist of emergency workers and first responders. For the purposes of this study,
the term public safety organizations refer to law enforcement organizations, firefighting and
rescue organizations, and emergency management organizations. Other organizations such as
emergency medical service organizations or public health organizations may also be considered
public safety organizations, but this paper will focus on the three disciplines listed above. The
mission of these public safety organizations is to save lives, stabilize crisis incidents, protect
property, and protect the environment (Federal Emergency Management Agency, 2017).

LEADERSHIP SELECTION WITHIN PUBLIC SAFETY 14

Global Goal
By 2025, public safety organizations will implement a screening process for leadership
readiness before public safety leaders are assigned to leadership roles within public safety
organizations. Achievement of this goal will improve leadership within public safety
organizations. The measures for success will include the percentage of public safety
organizations utilizing a leadership readiness screening process and the percentage of qualified
leaders placed in leadership positions within public safety organizations. The consequences of
not screening for leadership readiness would be maintaining the status quo of selecting and
appointing individuals without regard for leadership attributes.
Description of Stakeholder Groups
There are three primary disciplines which this study refers to as public safety
organizations. They are law enforcement, fire-rescue, and emergency management organizations.
Other organizations could be considered public safety organizations such as public health,
national guard, and emergency medical services. For the purposes of narrowing the scope of the
study, the three disciplines accounted for will be law enforcement, fire-rescue, and emergency
management. These were chosen because they represent the traditional aspects of public safety
and are often the first-responder organizations called upon when disasters and emergencies
occur. These organizations also represent the public-facing aspects of public safety for local
communities and often have the highest visibility, the largest local budget, and recognition
within a community.
Law enforcement organizations exist primarily at the state and local levels of
government. These organizations are often the first responders to a criminal or traffic incident
and may often be the first to arrive in other crises. This research study will not study federal law
LEADERSHIP SELECTION WITHIN PUBLIC SAFETY 15

enforcement organizations and will only focus on traditional law enforcement organizations at
local levels.
The second discipline is firefighting and rescue organizations. These organizations are
typically local government organizations. These organizations are called upon to suppress fires,
rescue people in any number of manmade or natural caused incidents and support pre-hospital
treatment and stabilization of patients in need. Some states may have state-level fire-rescue
organizations, especially where wildfire threats are predominant. This study focuses on one state
wildfire organization; the rest are local and county level fire-rescue organizations. Also,
emergency medical service organizations are not a focus of this study, but many fire-rescue
organizations include emergency medical service (ambulance) operations. The research focuses
on the organization rather than the unique variances of organizations that may or may not include
emergency medical services.
The third discipline is emergency management organizations which are in many
municipalities. They are also in most county governments and every state government. These
organizations prepare for, respond to, mitigate, and recover from disasters and large-scale
emergencies. Emergency management organizations are crucial to planning, training, and
exercising jurisdictions for their role in disasters. This study does not research the Federal
Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) or any other federal emergency management type
organizations and only focuses on state, county, and municipal organizations.
This study observed these disciplines in a combined picture to represent them as public
safety organizations. Within the defined public safety disciplines, three stakeholder groups have
been identified. They are administrators, middle management personnel, and entry-level
personnel. The term administrators refer to police chiefs, sheriffs, fire chiefs, and emergency
LEADERSHIP SELECTION WITHIN PUBLIC SAFETY 16

management directors. They are the head of the organizations. Other terms may include
commissioners, marshals, or other official designation. Also considered in this category would
be directors of public safety who may be officials selected to head administrative organizations
that oversee multiple public safety organizations.
A second stakeholder group is middle and upper management personnel within the three
identified public safety disciplines. In law enforcement, this would include, generally speaking,
captains, lieutenants, deputy chiefs, and other high-ranking personnel. In the fire service, it
would consist of battalion chiefs, deputy chiefs, assistant chiefs, and other high-ranking fire
personnel. Emergency management does not typically use a para-military rank structure and
often may not have standardized titles across the field of practice, but some common titles may
include deputy directors, branch directors, senior coordinators, officers, managers, or
supervisors.
The third stakeholder group is the entry-level first responders. Within the law
enforcement discipline, it would include patrol officers and sheriff deputies, front-line
supervisors such as sergeants, and other tactical level personnel. In the fire service, some
examples would be firefighters, engineers, and emergency medical technicians. In the emergency
management field, some front-line titles may include emergency management coordinators,
planners, analysts, or watch officers. Table 1 shows the field of practice mission, goal, and
primary stakeholder goal.

LEADERSHIP SELECTION WITHIN PUBLIC SAFETY 17

Table 1
Mission, Global Goal, and Stakeholder Goal

Stakeholder Group for the Study
Although a complete analysis would involve all stakeholder groups and include several
other disciplines such as public health, emergency medical services, and others, this study, for
practical purposes, focused on the public safety administrator stakeholder group. This research
study observed numerous law enforcement, fire and rescue, and emergency management
organizations that are large, medium, and small. This stakeholder group was chosen because it
has the most influence and the most experience and understanding of the current hiring methods.
The stakeholder goal is to conduct a job analysis and psychological testing of candidates before
selecting personnel to leadership positions by 2023. The goal was determined by listing possible
tasks that each stakeholder could undertake to achieve the organizational goal. The goal is
measurable by conducting a review of an organization’s hiring process to see if they perform a
job analysis and use psychological assessments within that process. The public safety
administrator stakeholder group is the most important for achieving the field of practice
Field of Practice Mission
Public safety organizations exist to save lives, stabilize crisis incidents, protect property, and
protect the environment.
Global Goal
By 2025, public safety personnel will be appropriately evaluated and selected for jobs requiring
leadership skills that reflect their skill sets.
Public Safety Administrators

By 2023, public safety administrators will conduct a job analysis and psychological testing of
personnel before selecting personnel to leadership positions.
LEADERSHIP SELECTION WITHIN PUBLIC SAFETY 18

performance goal because the administrator is the head of the public safety organization. The
public safety administrator is responsible for implementing and maintaining change. If the
stakeholder goal is not achieved, the risk of not achieving the field of practice performance goal
is significant. Public safety organizations are not likely to implement the field of practice
performance goal if the administrator does not support the implementation of the stakeholder
goal.
Purpose of the Study and Questions
The purpose of this project was to evaluate the degree to which organizations are
implementing the best practices of hiring public safety leaders. The analysis focuses on
knowledge, motivation, and organizational (KMO) elements related to achieving the field of
practice performance goal and public safety administrator stakeholder goal. While a complete
performance evaluation would focus on all stakeholders, for practical purposes this analysis
focused on the public safety administrator stakeholder group.
The following questions guided the evaluation study that addressed knowledge and skills,
motivation, and organization elements for the public safety administrator stakeholder group.
1. .. To what extent are public safety administrators requiring their agencies to conduct a job
analysis and psychological assessments of personnel before selecting personnel to
leadership positions?
2. .. What are public safety administrators’ knowledge and motivation related to selecting
personnel with the proper leadership competencies?
3. .. What is the interaction between public safety culture and public safety administrator
knowledge and motivation?
LEADERSHIP SELECTION WITHIN PUBLIC SAFETY 19

4. .. What are the recommendations for public safety organizations in the areas of knowledge,
motivation, and organizational influences as they pertain to hiring leaders for the
organization?
Methodological Framework
This dissertation utilized qualitative data gathering and analysis to evaluate whether
public safety organizations are applying methods that will assist in placing effective leaders in
public safety leadership positions. The field of practice stakeholder group’s current performance
was assessed by using document analysis and qualitative interviews. Research-based solutions
have been recommended and evaluated comprehensively.
Definitions
This section will define key terms that are utilized in this study. The definitions are
germane to this study and the conceptual framework presented in Chapter Two.
Administrator: The head of a public safety organization.
Executive: A person who is typically in senior management of an organization and has more
administrative and strategic responsibilities than tactical or technical responsibilities.
Jurisdictional Authorities: Those elected and appointed officials that oversee public safety
administrators.
Leadership Attributes: Behaviors, competencies, skills, and dispositions needed in leaders for a
particular executive leadership position.
Poor Leadership: Leadership or leaders that display toxic leadership, destructive leadership,
abusive leadership, or any other behaviors that have a deleterious effect upon an organization, its
employees, and its mission.
LEADERSHIP SELECTION WITHIN PUBLIC SAFETY 20

Psychological Assessment: Any assessment that uses the science of psychology to assess
attributes of a person’s behavior, personality, disposition, talents, or leadership abilities. These
tests can also measure for poor leadership attributes.
Public Safety Organization: For this paper, referring to a state, county, or local/municipal law
enforcement, fire-rescue, or emergency management organization.
Organization of the Study
Five chapters were used to organize this study. This chapter provided the reader with the
key concepts and terminology commonly found in a discussion about public safety
organizations, leadership, and psychological assessments. The field of practice mission, goals,
and stakeholders, as well as the review of the evaluation framework, was provided. Chapter Two
provides a review of the current literature surrounding the scope of the study. Topics of
leadership in public safety, executive selection within public safety organizations, and the effects
of poor leadership are addressed. Chapter Three details the knowledge, motivation, and
organizational elements to be examined, as well as methodology for choosing participants, data
collection, and analysis. In Chapter Four, the data and results are described and analyzed.
Chapter Five provides recommendations for practice, based on data and literature, as well as
recommendations for an implementation and evaluation plan.

LEADERSHIP SELECTION WITHIN PUBLIC SAFETY 21

CHAPTER TWO: REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE
Introduction
The increasing complexities of crisis response and the maintenance of public safety
requires leaders adept at dealing with today’s challenges (Alkhaldi et al., 2017; Boin & 't Hart,
2003; Cwiak et al., 2017; Donahue & Tuohy, 2006). Without proper leadership in public safety,
emergency response is compromised and thus a greater risk to life and property (Kapucu & Van
Wart, 2008). This chapter begins with literature related to leadership in public safety, effects of
poor leadership upon organizations, hiring practices in public safety, and leadership, aptitude,
and personality testing. The second part of the chapter covers the concepts of knowledge,
motivation, and organizational influences used in this study. The third section of the chapter
addresses the public safety administrators stakeholder group's KMO influences. The chapter
concludes by presenting a conceptual framework.
This dissertation was influenced by a synthesis of studies, books, and peer reviewed
articles on leadership in emergency and crisis management, hiring practices (especially in public
safety organizations), measuring leadership and personality, and avoiding poor leadership. The
literature reveals the need for good leadership, especially during disasters and crises. The
research also reveals the significant damage or potential damage from poor leadership, especially
during times of disaster and heightened vulnerability.
Public Safety Leadership
Leadership in emergency and crisis management is a vital need for ensuring efficacious
public safety, especially in times of disaster and crisis incidents. Donahue and Tuohy (2006)
describe how poor leadership, among other issues, has been a contributing factor to the lack of
coordination and efficiency of response during disasters. Kapucu and Van Wart (2008) describe
LEADERSHIP SELECTION WITHIN PUBLIC SAFETY 22

how disaster situations become worse when poor leadership is present during disasters. They
documented the need for good leadership in times of disaster. Kapucu and Van Wart (2008) also
describe how strong leadership mitigates disasters, while toxic leadership makes the situation
worse. In their study, they identify key leadership characteristics needed during a crisis and
express the importance of good leadership since the leaders of such acute situations only have a
short amount of time to effect change in a disaster (Kapucu & Van Wart, 2008). After Hurricane
Katrina, the United States House Select Bipartisan Committee (2006) entitled their post-Katrina
report "A Failure of Initiative.". This report attributes the challenges and failures of the response
to Hurricane Katrina to leadership failures. An emergency management leadership study sought
to identify the leadership needs of the future and indicated that the leadership competencies
needed are not the competencies that are commonly present in today's public safety leaders
(Cwiak et al., 2017). Another study even suggests that leadership is so scarce and specialized,
that public safety should adopt a leadership advisor position within common response structures
(Alkhaldi et al., 2017).
At the same time that leadership within public safety is in high demand, other researchers
suggest that hiring practices are lacking in the general workforce and within public safety
organizations. One study determined that public safety organizations should be leery of basing
promotions solely on assessment center scores (Bishopp, 2013). In their seminal work on hiring
techniques, Landy and Shankster (1994) raise a poignant question about interviews: what is
being measured in an interview? A Center for Creative Leadership study observed that personnel
are often selected utilizing primarily resumes, references, and interviews, which are the least
promising in determining a person's readiness for a particular job (Sessa, Kaiser, Taylor, &
Campbell, 1998). Selection processes by organizations are often not looking for the right skill set
LEADERSHIP SELECTION WITHIN PUBLIC SAFETY 23

needed for a particular job and are not utilizing the proper selection techniques for a job,
including the use of industrial or organizational psychologists in the hiring process (Howard,
2001). Hadley et al. (2011) prescribe a crisis leadership assessment for people called upon to
lead during a disaster. They describe leadership characteristics needed during disasters and call
for researchers to identify what good crisis leaders resemble (Hadley et al., 2011). Only when
leadership competencies are determined can you seek improvement in crisis leadership
capabilities and efficiency (Hadley et al., 2011). Although organizations may have flawed hiring
processes, they often may not be implementing procedures or utilizing tools that are available to
them.
Measuring Leadership and Poor Leadership
If public safety organizations are truly looking for leaders with personalities that match
their culture and needs, they have numerous tools available to them. Leadership attributes can be
measured (Arnold, Arad, Rhoades, & Drasgow, 2000; Clark & Clark, 1990; Hadley et al., 2011;
Miller, Watkins, & Webb, 2009; Northouse, 2016; Rath, 2007). Public safety organizations
should also seek the proper leadership attributes for the particular job and culture they are trying
to meet, which could include personality and emotional intelligence (Flynn & Herrington, 2015;
Morrison, 2017; Murphy, 2007; Wilson, Dalton, Scheer, & Grammich, 2010). Besides looking
for strengths and cultural fit, public safety organizations should also be looking for undesirable
qualities individuals may have that they do not want in their organization.
Leadership strengths and personality screening should also be accompanied by poor
leadership filtering. Poor leadership is explored and defined among three primary seminal
authors. Whicker (1996) defines toxic leadership and the need for trustworthy leadership. She
explores characteristics of both toxic and honest leadership and the impacts of such actions upon
LEADERSHIP SELECTION WITHIN PUBLIC SAFETY 24

organizations. Whicker coined the term "toxic leadership.”. Toxic followership is explored by
Lipman-Blumen (2005), who also describes her version of toxic leadership and the impact that
such a wretched style has on organizations and individuals. Most specifically, she explores why
people not only tolerate, but seek such vile leaders (Lipman-Blumen, 2005). Goldman (2009)
asserts that toxicity can fester and plague an organization if unchecked. Toxic leadership can be
brought into an organization that results in low employee morale and inefficiency (Goldman,
2009). Failing to address or improperly dealing with toxic leadership can increase toxicity and
can result in a non-functioning organization or sub-unit of an organization (Goldman, 2009).
It should be acknowledged that even though the authors indicate leadership and poor
leadership can be measured, those measurement tools are acknowledged to be fallible (Clark &
Clark, 1990; Goldman, 2009; Hadley et al., 2011; Northouse, 2016; Sessa et al., 1998). These
authors would con tend that some of the assessments have been found to be unreliable or
controversial. They would also maintain that leadership assessments are simply a forecast of
behavior. This is why they recommend assessments not be administered haphazardly but done
under the supervision of trained assessors such as industrial or organizational psychologists.
What leadership assessments do provide is an opportunity for impartial evaluation of
anticipated strengths and weaknesses of an individual that can be used to match with the desired
attributes of a leadership position (Clark & Clark, 1990; Goldman, 2009; Hadley et al., 2011;
Sessa et al., 1998). This provides an opportunity to eliminate individuals that could be detructive
to the organization (Goldman, 2009). An additional advantage is the incorporation of more
reliable methods of personnel selection that are not subject to specualtion of favoritism or bias
(Clark & Clark, 1990; Sessa et al., 1998).

LEADERSHIP SELECTION WITHIN PUBLIC SAFETY 25

Influences on the Problem of Practice
Leadership in public safety is a necessity to save lives, property, and stabilizing incidents
(Harrington, 2011). Unlike no other time in history, public safety officials are faced with hyper-
volatile, uncertain, complex, and ambiguous situations that require competent leadership to
persevere (Alkhaldi et al., 2017). Public safety officials will be dealing with challenges, crises,
and disasters in greater numbers due to climate change, terrorism, economic swings and financial
instability, public health events, civil unrest and protests, and emerging threats like identity theft,
cyber-attacks and cyber-crimes, and the dark web (Alkhaldi, et al., 2017). Cwiak et al. (2017)
even indicate:
The complexities, interdependencies, and ambiguity that face next-generation emergency
management meta-leaders in an ever-evolving global community heighten the
expectation and need for competencies that far exceed those common in practice today
and necessitate the ability to move seamlessly through the dimensions of meta-leadership
(ie, the person, the situation, and connectivity) while utilizing scientific-based evidence,
information, resources, processes, and tools. (p. 81)
To ensure public safety is ready for these challenges, competent leadership will be
required, but how do public safety organizations ensure that leaders are placed in these vital
positions? Whether it be the challenges of the new millennium or succession due to high attrition
rates in public safety because of retirements, a sound and impartial promotional and hiring
process will be vital in the years to come (Howard, 2001; Topp, 2011).
Ineffective Selection Processes
Current public safety hiring and candidate selection practices may be inadequate and may
not search for the proper competencies needed in public safety executive positions (Dantzker,
LEADERSHIP SELECTION WITHIN PUBLIC SAFETY 26

1996; Kang & Jin, 2015). To start, little research exists to helpunderstand the selection of
executive-level employees in public safety (Topp, 2011). In some cases, the highest echelons of
public safety are appointed with no standard of competency or merit (Dantzker, 1996; Sessa et
al., 1998; Topp, 2011). Other standard practices of hiring, selection, and promotion include
written technical tests, interviews, interview boards, and performance reviews (Bishopp, 2013;
Carr, 2017; Sessa et al., 1998; Topp, 2011). Some organizations utilize tenure or "time-in-
service" as a primary factor for determining promotions and position selection (Beaton, Johnson,
Infield, Ollis, & Bond, 2001; Dantzker, 1996; Rigoni & Nelson, 2015; Sessa et al., 1998; Topp,
2011). Many organizations have turned to assessment centers which have had mixed findings of
credibility (Bishopp, 2013; Carr, 2017; Howard, 2001; Landy & Shankster, 1994; Lowry, 1997;
Sessa et al., 1998; Topp, 2011; Wilson et al., 2010). These promotional and selection processes
may not be the best methods for selecting the leaders that are needed for the emerging challenges
of public safety.
Leadership assessment can be extremely difficult for organizations, especially when
selection and hiring processes are not based on standards and the needs of the position are
ambiguous (Kang & Jin, 2015). The traditional hiring and selection processes listed above
appear to be some of the most unreliable methods in leadership selection. Reference checks can
often be skewed or limited in the revelation of competencies (Howard, 2001; Sessa et al., 1998).
Written technical tests may be sufficient for revealing operational proficiency and knowledge but
would be of limited value for assessing leadership qualities and behaviors (Bishopp, 2013; Carr,
2017; Topp, 2011; Wilson et al., 2010). Written tests can also be overcome by candidates who
take the tests multiple times and therefore become better at taking the tests due to familiarity
(Topp, 2011). Interviews and interview boards are some of the most unreliable methods in
LEADERSHIP SELECTION WITHIN PUBLIC SAFETY 27

ascertaining leadership qualities because candidates can appear more capable in the short time
that the interview lasts and interviews can often be conducted without clearly defined measures
to be collected (Gaines & Lewis, 1982; Goldman, 2009; Hogan & Hogan, 2001; Howard, 2001;
Landy & Shankster, 1994; McFarland, Ryan, & Kriska, 2002; Sessa et al., 1998). In fact, after
an interview, interviewers and interviewees can often feel a strong bond, but this is likely a
dopamine generated phenomena that can result in the discovery of a misaligned employee
several weeks or months later (Sinek, 2017). Performance reviews are also of limited use as
performance reviews can be wrought with errors, bias, and extraneous information (Bishopp,
2013; Clark & Clark, 1990; Howard, 2001).
Public safety organizations have also relied on experience that includes tenure or time-in-
service and time-in-grade as a means to justify the hiring or selection of personnel (Beaton et al.,
2001; Dantzker, 1996; Fiedler, 1995; Rigoni & Nelson, 2015; Sessa et al., 1998; Topp, 2011).
One study shows that the benefits of job experience as a measure of proficiency is relevant up to
five years, but most job descriptions for executives require a minimum of seven to 10 years of
experience (Campbell & Vuong, 2017). This same study recommends keeping the experience as
a method for seeking candidates, but that organizations should also find individuals with an
innate talent that is germane to the job (Campbell & Vuong, 2017). Beaton et al. (2001) showed
some correlation between adequate performance and experience in stressful situations, but also
showed under normal circumstances that experience and leadership performance does not
correlate. Fiedler (1996) found the same results in his research. Gallup (2015) indicated that most
managers in today's workforce are not suited for their managerial roles. These managers were
likely talented in their previous jobs and were promoted to an administrative position based on
good performance in a non-managerial position. It is Gallup’s contention that only 10% of
LEADERSHIP SELECTION WITHIN PUBLIC SAFETY 28

working people have the managerial talent required to be a great manager. The Gallup (2015)
report states, “Experience and skills are important, but people’s talents – the naturally recurring
patterns in the ways they think, feel, and behave – predict where they’ll perform at their best” (p.
12). Carr (2017) indicated that fire departments do not take sufficient care to select people in
leadership positions, and spend more time and effort in developing tactics and standard operating
procedures for emergency response. Howard (2001) claims that, typically, top executives are
selected and assessed by people who have no training in assessment or human resource
evaluation and that 30% to 50% of their selections end in failure. This may be a result of what
Klein (1998) asserted was a problem with hiring managers who may have a problem rocognizing
typicality. Public safety administrators typically have not had a career in human resources or
personnel selection and have not developed an expertise in selecting executive public safety
leaders. Novices are challenged identifying the needs between an applicant and the needs of the
position (Klein, 1998). With an improper ability to select the candidates with the right talents, the
potential exists that, through a flawed, inconsistent, and unreliable hiring process, the wrong
people are hired into public safety executive positions.
Selecting the Wrong People for the Wrong Positions
Gallup found that in an overwhelming 82% of cases, organizations failed to choose
someone with the necessary talents to achieve success (Campbell & Vuong, 2017). Murphy
(2005) indicates that organizations even sabotage themselves from selecting the best candidates
due to measuring theoretical responses that are screened by personnel that do not know the
candidates. Clark and Clark (1990) stated the overwhelming number of individuals selected into
leadership positions was "egregious" and went on to state that it was burdensome for both the
organization and the chosen candidate. Gallup (2015) indicated that the number of wrong
LEADERSHIP SELECTION WITHIN PUBLIC SAFETY 29

individuals in leadership positions costs the U.S. economy $319 billion to $398 billion each year.
This error in leadership selection may be a contributor to the entry of poor leadership into public
safety organizations. Renaud (2012) even indicates this in her research on national public safety
systems, where she states that not every responder has the particular skill sets to manage or lead
during a disaster.
In her seminal book, Toxic Leaders: When Good Organizations Go Bad, Marcia Lynn
Whicker (1996) states that at some point in a career, every worker will have worked in an
organization dominated by a poor leader. One research study indicates that poor leadership is so
prevalent that 13.6% of U.S. workers are affected by it (Tepper, 2007). Another study showed,
depending on the estimation method, 33.5% to 61% of survey respondents stating that they were
affected by poor leadership in the last six months, and the same study had 40% of respondents
indicate they were not affected by poor leadership (Aasland, Skogstad, Notelaers, Nielsen, &
Einarsen, 2010). Mehta and Maheshwari (2014) state that poor leadership exists in every
organization and even call it “ubiquitous.” In these cases, public safety organizations are not
exempt, which is why Kapucu and Van Wart (2008) deduced that a big part of the Hurricane
Katrina failures was a result of poor leadership to the point of ego, inability, and reckless
abandon. The same is true for Donahue and Tuohy (2006) who, after a review of dozens of after-
action reports and the conduct of a qualitative study, concluded that poor leadership was present
in nearly every disaster response by public safety organizations that they reviewed. If poor
leadership exists, it is important to define and identify it.
The Impact of Poor Leadership
Poor leadership has many different names under which it has been researched. Among
them are toxic leadership, abusive leadership, destructive leadership, tyrannical leadership, and
LEADERSHIP SELECTION WITHIN PUBLIC SAFETY 30

bullying to name a few (Aasland et al., 2010; Ashforth, 1994; Namie & Namie, 2000; Tepper,
2007; Whicker, 1996). The first person to coin the phrase toxic leadership is Whicker (1996),
who defined it as, “maladjusted, malcontent, and often malevolent, even malicious. They
succeed by tearing others down. They glory in turf protection, fighting, and controlling rather
than uplifting followers" (p. 11). Another seminal author is Lipman-Blumen (2005), who defined
toxic leadership as actions that include destructive behaviors conducted by people with
dysfunctional personalities. Lipman-Blumen (2005) also requires that such actions result in
significant and long-lasting harm on the followers and the organization. Goldman (2009) defined
toxic leadership as, “Destructive, disturbing, and dysfunctional acts of supervision that spread
among members of the workforce” (p. 139). Destructive leadership was defined by Einarsen,
Aasland, and Skogstand (2007) as the “systematic and repeated behaviour by a leader, supervisor
or manager that violates the legitimate interest of the organization by undermining and/or
sabotaging the organization's goals, tasks, resources, and effectiveness and/or the motivation,
well-being or job satisfaction of his/her subordinates” (pp. 208). Tepper (2007) defined abusive
supervision as a sustained display of hostile, verbal, and non-verbal disclaimers. By synthesizing
these definitions for this study, poor leadership will be generally considered leadership (or
leaders) that display toxic leadership, destructive leadership, abusive leadership, or any other
behaviors that have a deleterious effect upon an organization, its employees, and its mission.
With that definition, poor leadership is now identifiable.
Whicker (1996) classified six types of poor leaders: (a) the absentee leader, (b) the
busybody, (c) the controller, (d) the enforcer, (e ) the street fighter, and (f) the bully. Lipman-
Blumen (2005) indicated that poor leaders leave followers worse off than they found them. She
continued to state that this is a result of undermining employees, the use of intimidation, and
LEADERSHIP SELECTION WITHIN PUBLIC SAFETY 31

marginalizing the employees, to name a few instances. Lipmen-Blumen (2005) further explained
that poor leadership results in a violation of human rights, manipulating followers, and
deliberately misguiding followers. Lipman-Blumen (2005) said these characteristics come from a
lack of integrity, large egos and arrogance, and the inability to determine right from wrong. In
one study, poor leadership included 21 behaviors identified across a multitude of poor leadership
types. A few of the behaviors include demeaning, marginalizing, or degrading; ridiculing
mocking; social exclusion; ostracizing, disenfranchising employees; inciting employees to
chastise others; exhibiting favoritism; harassment (including sexual); and emotional volatility
(Pelletier, 2010). Yet in another study, 767 people indicated their bosses were bad because of
particular behaviors which were then categorized into the following labels: (a) autocratic
behavior, (b) poor communication, (c) unable to effectively deal with subordinates, (d) poor
ethics/integrity, (e ) inability to use technology, (f) inconsistent/erratic behavior, (g) poor
interpersonal behavior, (h) micromanagement, (i) poor personal behavior, (j) excessive political
behavior, and (k) lack of strategic skills (Shaw, Erickson, & Harvey, 2011). If these poor
leadership behaviors exist, then the ramifications on public safety organizations can be dire.
The impact of poor leadership on public safety organizations can be multi-dimensional.
On one dimension, there is the resulting impact to the communities in which public safety
organizations serve. When poor leadership exists, organizations suffer from inefficiency,
mismanagement, internal tension, deception, conflicts, and problems (Whicker, 1996). Poor
leadership is not good for organizations charged with providing life-safety, stabilizing
emergencies, and protecting property and the environment. This work environment can then
produce high employee turnover, employee absenteeism, and poor employee work attitudes.
Another dimension is the impact on the employees, the first-responders, themselves. Public
LEADERSHIP SELECTION WITHIN PUBLIC SAFETY 32

safety organizations with poor leadership can result in psychological issues, emotional distress,
and even physical health issues (Webster, Brough, & Daly, 2014). Poor leadership deteriorates
loyalty, productivity, and employee job satisfaction (Mehta & Maheshwari, 2013). Another
dimension is the hidden costs of poor leadership. Not only does poor leadership affect the
community, the functioning of the organization itself, and the employees of the organization, all
which include financial implications, there is also a hidden element to poor leadership (Tavanti,
2011). The hidden costs can include litigation like wrongful termination, sexual harassment
lawsuits, community reputation and trust issues, and recruitment problems (Mehta &
Maheshwari, 2014; Tavanti, 2011).
Good Leadership Versus Poor Leadership
The comparison between good leadership and poor leadership is significant. On the one
hand, public safety necessitates effective leadership, especially in times of crises and disaster
(Hadley et al., 2011). The other hand shows that poor leadership not only sabotages the day-to-
day operations of an organization, but will make matters worse during crises and disaster
(Harrington, 2011; Kapucu & Van Wart, 2008; Tavanti, 2011). One only has to draw a few
analogies to demonstrate the significance of leadership, good and poor. Using Ulysses S. Grant
in the Civil War can show the positives of effective leadership and its ability to achieve a
mission and save a country, while the ultimate example of poor leadership in Adolf Hitler
demonstrates just how vile poor leadership can result (Burke, 2017).
The recognition of good leadership practices and behaviors for organizations is well
researched and predominant within organizational implementation plans (Mehta & Maheshwari,
2013). Poor leadership is less understood or recognized as an issue that needs to be addressed by
organizations (Mehta & Maheshwari, 2013). Kellerman (2004) provided an analogy to this by
LEADERSHIP SELECTION WITHIN PUBLIC SAFETY 33

stating that ignoring poor leadership within the workplace is like medical schools providing
health education without acknowledging the existence disease. The best recruiting organizations
use talent-based assessments (Campbell & Vuong, 2017). This means that to ensure the best
possible hiring and selection of personnel, public organizations should couple talent assessments
with a screening of poor leadership indicators (Kang & Jin, 2015; Schaubroeck, Walumbwa,
Ganster, & Kepes, 2007).
Fortunately, thanks to research, leadership theorists, and industrial and organizational
psychologists, these assessment tests exist. As indicated, leadership strength assessments are in
common usage. There are leadership aptitude tests, personality tests, and cognitive tests that can
help assess the leadership strengths of a potential candidate (Arnold et al., 2000; Clark & Clark,
1990; Fiedler, 1995; Hadley et al., 2011; Howard, 2001; Kang & Jin, 2015; Landy & Shankster,
1994; Miller et al., 2009; Northouse, 2016; Rath, 2007; Walter, Humphrey, & Cole, 2012).
Goldman (2009) recommends that organizations should have an industrial or organizational
psychologist available for conducting screenings to avoid candidates with poor leadership
tendencies. Several studies have proven that identifying candidates with poor leadership
attributes is, in fact, achievable (Boin & 't Hart, 2003; Clark & Clark, 1990; Hadley et al., 2011;
Hogan & Hogan, 2001; Howard, 2001; Schaubroeck et al., 2007; Shaw et al., 2011). The use of
these assessment tests should be used to help prevent poor leadership from entering public safety
organizations (Frost, 2004; Mehta & Maheshwari, 2013; Schaubroeck et al., 2007). To ensure
leadership that protects the public from emergencies and disasters, especially those that are
emerging and becoming more common and severe, public safety organizations should review
their hiring and selection practices and incorporate a job analysis, leadership screening, and poor
leadership screening into their procedures.
LEADERSHIP SELECTION WITHIN PUBLIC SAFETY 34

Role of Stakeholder Group of Focus
While there is some research that is cited in this study on public safety hiring practices,
especially in the police and fire arena, there is not a significant amount of literature and research
overall. Much of the literature utilized is catered to the workforce in general with best human
resource practices for businesses and employers. Research has shown that public safety
leadership positions are, in many ways, similar to business leadership positions (Light, 2016).
Miller et al., (2009) demonstrated that law enforcement leaders were closely aligned with
business leaders when taking the California Psychological Inventory Test. With many of the job
tasks of public safety leaders and business leaders being similar in terms of budget, management,
supervision, human resource management, and overall organizational management, for the
purposes of this paper, it is assumed that business leadership research and best practices are
applicable to public safety organizations and to the stakeholder group of public safety
administrators.
Clark and Estes’ KMO Influences Framework
This study utilized the change process outlined by Clark and Estes (2008) to identify the
desired objectives and the influencers that will result in a change to achieve the objectives. This
study is focused on change within the discipline of public safety and not within a specific
organization. Therefore, business goals required by Clark and Estes (2008) will be public safety
field of practice goals. The field of practice goals are then supported by conceptual performance
goals for public safety organizations that will enable a performance gap analysis.
The modified gap analysis will enable the discovery of performance gaps which can then be
dissected to reveal solutions in the areas of knowledge and skill, motivation, and organization
(Clark & Estes, 2008). Knowledge and skills identified by the four concepts used by Krathwohl
LEADERSHIP SELECTION WITHIN PUBLIC SAFETY 35

(2002) that include factual, conceptual, procedural, and metacognitive. These are the knowledge
and skill types needed by an organization to achieve the performance goals (Krathwohl, 2002).
The motivation influences are concepts that are used to energize stakeholders to overcome
performance gaps (Clark & Estes, 2008; Rueda 2011). Finally, organizational influences are
issues that have a genesis from organizations that could include topics such as organizational
culture, climate, policies and procedures, and organizational finances (Clark & Estes, 2008).
The steps outlined by Clark and Estes (2008) will be used to identify whether public safety
organizations are using effective procedures to seek positive leaders and filtering out poor
leaders. The KMO influences will be utilized to identify performance goals that are used for
ensuring an efficacious hiring and selection process that will improve positive leadership within
public safety organizations.
Stakeholder KMO Influences
Knowledge and Skills
In the process of this research, literature was reviewed that focused on knowledge-related
influences and is pertinent to the achievement of the field of practice mission and field of
practice global goal. Knowledge of the leadership skills needed in public safety executive
positions is vital to filling such positions with an effective leader. Without key knowledge and
skills, public safety organizations will not be searching for the proper candidate to fill the public
safety executive positions. Public safety organizations will need to have conceptual knowledge
including complex theories and understanding of leadership skills and competencies needed in
specific public safety executive positions. Public safety organizations need the procedural
knowledge to be able to implement the conceptual knowledge by incorporating guidelines to
follow in a procedural knowledge context such as how to evaluate, select, and promote leaders
LEADERSHIP SELECTION WITHIN PUBLIC SAFETY 36

and how to provide constructive feedback to candidates that are passed over. Finally,
organizations would need to be cognizant of the benefits of effective leadership on their
organization and the consequences of poor leadership on their organization. The following
section will categorize applicable knowledge influences into appropriate knowledge types. This
will enable more in-depth analysis resulting in understanding from which procedural knowledge
may be applied (Krathwohl, 2002).
Public safety administrators need to know the leadership attributes necessary for
public safety positions. Public safety organizations need to seek out talent in the same manner
that they seek out experience (Campbell & Vuong, 2017). This cannot be accomplished unless
the organization clearly defines what skills and competencies are needed (Howard, 2001). When
the leadership skills and competencies are unknown, the selection is made by bias and
superstition which reduces the opportunities for improvement (Clark & Clark, 1990). Public
safety organizations must define what their desired staffing need is and then seek the candidates
that fill that void (Wilson et al., 2010). One of the most critical factors in the effective
functioning of any organization is balancing the competencies of a leader and the capability
needed for the position (Jaques & Clement, 1991). This knowledge type is considered declarative
conceptual (Krathwohl, 2002). Below in Table 2 are leadership attributes that were empirically
identified as being needed in executive leaders of public safety organizations during the literature
review.

LEADERSHIP SELECTION WITHIN PUBLIC SAFETY 37

Table 2
Leadership Attributes Empirically Identified

Leadership Attributes Works Cited
1. Achievement of Goals

(Kapucu & Ozerdem, 2013)
2. Challenge the Process (Kouzes & Posner, 2007)
3. Collaboration, Relationship Building,
Participative Decision-Making, Team
Building, Networking and Partnering
(Alkhaldi, et al., 2017; Miller
et al., 2009; Kapucu & Van
Wart, 2008; Daft, 2005;
Arnold et al., 2000; Yuhl,
1998)
4. Communicating, Informing (Virgona, 2013; Kapucu &
Van Wart, 2008; Donahue &
Tuohy, 2006; Arnold et al.,
2000 Yuhl, 1998)
5. Compromise (Virgona, 2013)
6. Control Under Pressure / Levelheaded (Virgona, 2013)
7. Crisis Leader Efficacy

(Hadley et al., 2011)
8. Decisiveness (Hadley et al., 2011; Kapucu
& Van Wart, 2008; Donahue
& Tuohy, 2006; Arnold et al.,
2000; Yuhl, 1998)
9. Divergent-Thinking (Hadley et al., 2011)
10. Empathy, Showing Concern (Daft, 2005; Arnold et al.,
2000)
11. Empowerment (Kouzes & Posner, 2007;
Arnold et al., 2000)
12. Encouragement (Kouzes & Posner, 2007)
13. Experience and Knowledge (Alkhaldi et al., 2017)
14. Flexibility, Adaptive (Alkhaldi et al., 2017; Kapucu
& Van Wart, 2008)
15. Influence/Motivation (Kapucu & Ozerdem, 2013;
Kapucu & Van Wart, 2008;
Yuhl, 1998)
LEADERSHIP SELECTION WITHIN PUBLIC SAFETY 38

16. Inspire Vision (Kapucu & Ozerdem, 2013;
Miller et al., 2009; Kouzes &
Posner, 2007; Daft, 2005)
17. Instill Confidence (Yuhl, 1998)
18. Intelligence (Hadley et al., 2011)
19. Judgement/Decision-Making (Kouzes & Posner, 2007;
Arnold et al., 2000; Yuhl,
1998)
20. Lead by Example

(Hadley et al., 2011)
21. Leadership Efficacy (Hadley et al., 2011)
22. Learning Goal Orientation

(Alkhaldi et al., 2017; Kapucu
& Van Wart, 2008)
23. Managing Innovation and Creativity,
Enable Creativity
(Virgona, 2013)
24. Mediate and Facilitate (Alkhaldi et al., 2017; Kapucu
& Van Wart, 2008)

25. Organization (Virgona, 2013; Miller et al.,
2009)
26. Planning and Organizing Personnel (Kapucu & Van Wart, 2008)
27. Politically Astute / Diplomatic

(Alkhaldi et al., 2017)
28. Problem-Solving (Miller et al., 2009; Kapucu &
Van Wart, 2008)
29. Proven Manager (Alkhaldi et al., 2017)
30. Scanning the Environment (Kapucu & Van Wart, 2008)
31. Self-Management/Intrapersonal
Skills/Mindfulness/Self-Awareness
(Miller et al., 2009)
32. Strategic-Thinking (Alkhaldi et al., 2017; Kapucu
& Van Wart, 2008; Denhardt
& Denhardt, 2006)
33. Transformational Leader, Change Agent

(McEntire, D. A., & Urby Jr,
H. (2015); Drabek, 2013)
34. Unifying

(Daft, 2005)

Public safety administrators need to know the benefits of good leadership and the
consequences of the lack of leadership. Public safety organizations need to know the number
of ways positive leadership benefits their organization and need to understand the severity of
consequences that poor leadership has on their organization so they will be willing to improve
LEADERSHIP SELECTION WITHIN PUBLIC SAFETY 39

their leadership hiring and selection processes. Good leadership has positive effects on an
organization and will help maintain functionality and efficiency within an organization (Tepper,
2007). Poor leadership causes a decline in an organization that results in several negative aspects
including inefficiency, liability, employee satisfaction and turnover, and animosity (Pelletier,
2010; Tepper, 2007). Kapucu and Van Wart (2008) stated, “At the extremes, good leadership
either minimizes catastrophes or prevents them all together, whereas weak leadership makes
matters worse, compounding the damage” (p. 711). Conceptual knowledge is theory-based
complex knowledge (Krathwohl, 2002). Since there are hidden benefits of good leadership and
hidden ramifications of poor leadership, this knowledge is considered conceptual.
Public safety administrators need to know how to evaluate potential leaders for
promotion or job selection related to the necessary leadership skills of the position. Public
safety organizations should have a procedure in place that evaluates the experience, talent,
leadership competency, and filters out poor leaders (Campbell & Vuong, 2017; Hadley et al.,
2011; Howard, 2001; Schaubroeck et al., 2007). This framework should incorporate multiple
leadership theories and be able to assess and rate an individual’s leadership skills, motivations,
emotional intelligence, and knowledge in the leadership environment (Clark & Clark, 1990;
Goldman, 2009; Walter et al., 2012). When organizations assess people using objective criteria
like personality assessment tests and develop procedures to measure talent, the organization’s
efficiency increases (Campbell & Vuong, 2017). Not every individual is competent as a leader
within public safety; therefore, care must be taken to identify and place the right person in those
positions (Renaud, 2012). Leadership abilities can be ascertained using a combination of
assessment tools (Clark & Clark, 1990; Kang & Jin, 2015). Procedural knowledge is knowledge
of how to implement a procedure to meet the desired end state (Krathwohl, 2002). Developing,
LEADERSHIP SELECTION WITHIN PUBLIC SAFETY 40

understanding, and utilizing psychological assessments in conjunction with existing hiring
processes is considered procedural knowledge. Below, Table 3 shows the knowledge influences
and the assessment criteria to be used in this study.
Table 3
Knowledge Influences
Field of Practice Mission
Public safety organizations exist to save lives, stabilize incidents, conserve property, and
protect the environment.

Field of Practice Goal
By 2025, first responders will be appropriately evaluated and selected for jobs requiring
leadership skills that reflect their skill sets.

Knowledge Influence Knowledge Type
(i.e., declarative
(factual or
conceptual),
procedural, or
metacognitive)
Knowledge Influence
Assessment
Public safety administrators need
to know the leadership attributes
necessary for public safety
positions.
Declarative -
Conceptual
Assess by qualitative interviews
and document analysis.
Public safety administrators need
to know the benefits of good
leadership and the consequences of
the lack of leadership.
Declarative-
Conceptual
Assess by qualitative interviews.
Public safety administrators need
to know how to evaluate potential
leaders for promotion or job
selection related to the necessary
leadership skills of the position.

Procedural Assess by qualitative interviews
and document analysis.

LEADERSHIP SELECTION WITHIN PUBLIC SAFETY 41

Motivation
This research reviewed literature that focused on motivation related influences and was
pertinent to the achievement of the field of practice mission and field of practice global goal.
Motivation is an intrinsic source of effort that compels an individual to take action toward a
desired goal (Mayer, 2011). While there are likely other motivational theories that may be
applied to this issue, the focus has been on expectancy-value theory, specifically utility value,
cost value, and attainment value. The expectancy-value theory is the theory that an individual (or
in this case, an organization) expects to achieve success. The organization's confidence in its
capability to perform tasks play a prominent role in its motivation to complete those tasks
(Wigfield & Eccles, 1992). In other words, a public safety organization acting on utility value is
motivated to achieve a particular task because the organization sees the utility or a practical
purpose for completing the task (Wigfield, Eccles, Schiefele, Roeser, & Davis-Kean, 2007). An
organization motivated by cost value believes the task completion is worth the cost regarding
time, money, or other sacrifices (Wigfield et al., 2007). Attainment value means that a public
safety organization fulfills its idea of what a public safety leader is based on the internal costs
and culture of the organization (Wigfield et al., 2007).
Public safety administrators need to acknowledge the value of hiring personnel that
matches their skill sets. Public safety organizations must understand the value of hiring the
right people into positions for which that have comparable experience and talent (Campbell &
Vuong, 2017; Gallup, 2015; Howard, 2001; Renaud, 2012; Sessa et al., 1998). This is much like
Collins’ theory on getting the right people on the bus; meaning, get the people that have the right
talents you need for success (Collins, 2001; Gallup, 2015; Sessa et al., 1998). It must be
acknowledged that some people have innate experience and talent that apply to a particular job
LEADERSHIP SELECTION WITHIN PUBLIC SAFETY 42

more so than others (Renaud, 2012). This motivation influence is a utility value within the
expectancy-value theory (Wigfield et al., 2007). Public safety agencies will see the utility of
having leaders with the requisite skills and competencies that are needed in the public safety
environment to achieve the goals of the organization.
Public safety administrators must value a screening process for the selection of
individuals for leadership positions. Public safety organizations need to realize that placing the
wrong people in leadership positions will come as a cost (Gallup, 2015; Goldman, 2009;
Howard, 2001; Schaubroeck et al., 2007; Schyns & Schilling, 2013; Whicker, 1996). Public
safety organizations must be willing to pay for the additional cost of implementing personality
and talent assessments to avoid the costs brought on by misplaced personnel. In addition, such
assessments will come at a great inconvenience to many personnel of public safety organizations.
Many people within a system, expecting to get promoted based on old promotional systems, may
not get promoted. These issues are guaranteed to cause angst and resentment. There will be a
potential cost of loss of institutional knowledge as many may quit or resign due to the changes in
the system. Personality assessments and screening are likely to reduce or eliminate social
constructs and alter the power schema of an organization which will cause significant resistance
to change (Kets de Vries & Miller, 1986). The cost will not only be in human resource issues;
there will, undoubtedly, be a financial cost to psychological testing which includes the costs of
testing and the use of psychologists. The level of change on each organization will be significant,
and the organization will need to be willing to make the sacrifice of the change. This degree of
change is considered expectancy-value theory focused on cost value as the organizations will
need to believe in the need for the changes and find that the changes will result in a better end
LEADERSHIP SELECTION WITHIN PUBLIC SAFETY 43

state for the organization (Wigfield et al., 2007). Public safety organizations need to believe that
the cost of change is better than maintaining the status quo.
Public safety administrators are confident in the use of resources at their disposal to
select individuals for leadership positions. The more confident people are in utilizing
resources, the more apt they are to use those resources (Clark & Estes, 2008). Individuals with
higher self-efficacy will be more motivated to engage in and persist at hard work (Rueda, 2011).
People can learn the behaviors that are necessary for performance (Bandura, 1989). Individuals
who demonstrate a high degree of confidence in their capabilities feel more comfortable taking
on challenges (Bandura, 1989). These principles of self-efficacy demand that public safety
administrators become confident in resources that help them to select executive leaders in an
impartial manner. This will motivate administrators to seek leaders with better decision-making
aids instead of solely relaying on the unreliable methods they have used in the past.
Below, Table 4 shows the motivation influences and the method of assessment that is to
be utilized in this study.

LEADERSHIP SELECTION WITHIN PUBLIC SAFETY 44

Table 4
Motivation Influences, Types, and Assessments
Field of Practice Mission
Public safety organizations exist to save lives, stabilize incidents, conserve property, and protect
the environment.

Field of Practice Goal
By 2025, first responders will be appropriately evaluated and selected for jobs requiring
leadership skills that reflect their skill sets.

Motivational Indicator(s)

Assumed Motivation Influences

Motivational Influence Assessment

Utility Value – Public safety administrators need
to acknowledge value hiring personnel that
matches their skill sets.
Assess by qualitative interviews.
Utility Value – Public safety administrators must
value a screening process for the selection of
individuals for leadership positions.
Assess by qualitative interviews.

Self-Efficacy – Public safety administrators are
confident in the use of resources at their disposal
to select individuals for leadership positions.
Assess by qualitative interviews.

Organization
In the process of this research, literature was reviewed that focused on organizational
culture and barriers that were pertinent to the achievement of the field of practice mission and
global goal. Clark and Estes (2008) indicate another category that should be addressed to make
organizational change occur are organizational gaps. According to Clark and Estes (2008), these
organizational gaps may result from the flawed work process, insufficient material resources, or
that the organizational culture does not support the change within a value system. In this
literature review, organizational influences were identified to determine which organizational
aspects needed to be addressed to support change. Below are two identified influences.
LEADERSHIP SELECTION WITHIN PUBLIC SAFETY 45

Public safety administrators must be willing to transition from traditional
promotional practices or job hiring practices to a new model. There needs to be a general
acceptance of public safety administrators to change the current models of promotion and
evaluation. Organizations should conduct assessments to identify those with toxic leadership
tendencies and eliminate them from consideration of entering the organization or promoting
them within the organization (Goldman, 2009). Bishopp (2013) concluded that police
departments should be cautious of leaning solely on assessment center evaluations for
promotion. A Buzawa (1984) study indicated that job advancement opportunities and selection
for advancement are not conducted in a fair manner. In their research, Gaines and Lewis (1982)
showed that a police interview board was not a valid way to measure the best candidate for a job
and indicated that a valid instrument was needed to assess police officers for promotion better.
Therefore, if interview boards and assessment centers are suspect, then public safety
organizations should adopt and evaluate new procedures for promotion and job position
selection.
Public safety personnel need to be trained in new promotion and evaluation
procedures. If there is a change in the current methods of promotion and hiring, then the public
safety employees need to be trained in the new methods and the reasons for the change must be
explained. This change may affect those in the queue for promotion and personnel trying to be
hired. Public safety employees will need to understand how the change affects their career and
their eligibility for future promotions and should also indicate how to prepare, improve, and
proceed through the process.
Below, Table 5 shows organizational influences and how they will be assessed.

LEADERSHIP SELECTION WITHIN PUBLIC SAFETY 46

Table 5
Organizational Influences
Field of Practice Mission
Public safety organizations exist to save lives, stabilize incidents, conserve property, and
protect the environment.

Field of Practice Goal
By 2025, first responders will be appropriately evaluated and selected for jobs requiring
leadership skills that reflect their skill sets.

Assumed Organizational Influences

Organization Influence Assessment
Public safety organizations must be willing
to transition from traditional promotional
practices or job hiring practices to a new
model.
Assess by qualitative interviews
Public safety personnel need to be trained in
new promotion and evaluation procedures.
Assess by qualitative interviews

Conceptual Framework
The purpose of a conceptual framework is to provide a platform for a researcher to
present a dynamic theory that is built from the researchers understanding of a subject (Maxwell,
2013). While the KMO influences listed above appear as if they are independent, it should be
understood that they are compounding and potentially cascading influences. This conceptual
framework illustrates how the identified influences are related.
In this author’s experience, public safety organizations, more often than not, promote
people from within their organization for leadership positions. These promotions are the result of
a selection process based on loyalty and friendship, and in certain positions, to time-in-service
and technical performance. These position placements may also be a combination thereof.
Generally speaking, screening processes, if any used, focus on technical skills more so than
leadership skills and are assessed through interviews and résumé reviews. Any assessments that
LEADERSHIP SELECTION WITHIN PUBLIC SAFETY 47

are done, focus on strengths and ignore weaknesses (Bishopp, 2013). As a result, people are
promoted and placed in leadership positions without regard to leadership abilities and
competencies (Buzawa, 1984). Furthermore, people are put into leadership positions who have
toxic leadership traits that have adverse effects on those organizations, which also includes
public safety organizations (Goldman, 2009; Lipman-Blueman, 2005; Whicker, 1996). These
issues may be avoided by using a hiring selection and promotion procedure to determine a
person’s fit for an executive position. First, the organization would need to determine what
competencies and skills they want in a position through a job analysis process. Determining
competencies includes defining a particular leadership style and technical talent. Then, it would
be ideal for industrial/organizational psychologists to administer personality tests that predict
behavior, talent, leadership effectiveness, and the potential for poor leadership to identify people
that best appear to meet the defined position needs.
Poor leadership impacts every aspect of an organization to include efficiency, fiscal
soundness, safety, and human resource management (Whicker, 1996). Poor leadership causes
significant and permanent damage to their organizations and followers through destructive
behaviors and dysfunctional personal characteristics (Lipman-Blumen, 2011). If poor leadership
causes such turmoil in organizations, then its presence in public safety organizations puts citizens
lives at risk. Based on the literature, poor leadership traits can be identified (Lipman-Blumen,
2011; Whicker, 1996). If traits can be determined, then public safety organizations should be
able to screen for them (Hadley et al., 2011). If personnel have poor leadership traits that
outweigh their leadership strengths, then they should not be promoted or hired. Understanding
poor leadership and acknowledging that it exists is not enough. In order to make change within
LEADERSHIP SELECTION WITHIN PUBLIC SAFETY 48

public safety, this study will rely on Clark and Estes (2008) model of KMO to determine factors
of change.
Clark and Estes (2008) utilize a KMO model to determine a root cause analysis and
influence change. It is important to determine the procedural knowledge of how and why people
are promoted or selected for leadership positions within public safety organizations. It is
important for organizations (including public safety organizations) to understand the value that
leadership has on an organization and to understand the negative consequences that poor
leadership has on an organization (Goldman, 2009; Lipman-Blumen, 2005; Whicker, 1996). It is
also important to identify the organizational enablers and barriers that public safety culture has
concerning the leadership selection processes.
Poor leadership exists within public safety organizations. Some organizations may be
affected more than others, but at the end of the day, poor leadership is present and jeopardizes
lives, and places our responders in difficult and conflicting positions as they try to protect and
serve. Screening people for leadership strengths and identifying poor traits before a promotional
or job selection process can mitigate poor leadership within public safety organizations
(Pelletier, 2010; Schaubroeck et al., 2007). Below is a visual depiction of this conceptual
framework.

LEADERSHIP SELECTION WITHIN PUBLIC SAFETY 49

Figure 1. Leadership selection in public safety organizations conceptual framework.

The above conceptual framework presents the public safety field of practice beginning in
the upper left corner. The field of practice shows the public safety disciplines represented in this
dissertation, followed by the stakeholder groups, and followed by problems with traditional
hiring processes. The top left corner circle states the field of practice goal. The top right labels
the knowledge aspect of the KMO model being followed. The top right corner circle shows the
knowledge influences. Once an organization and stakeholders learn the knowledge, they should
see the benefits of implementing the goal which will provide for motivation. Motivation is in the
bottom right, and the bottom right corner circle are the motivational influences and their value
LEADERSHIP SELECTION WITHIN PUBLIC SAFETY 50

set. With the motivation to make the changes, that leaves overcoming organizational barriers
listed in the bottom left corner circle. Completing them all should be a good indication as to
where the organization is to meet the field of practice goal shown in the center.
Summary
This literature review examined the key literature needed to understand the issues
pertaining to selecting the proper leaders within public safety organizations. Utilizing the Clark
and Estes (2008) model of KMO, the literature was analyzed and synthesized to determine the
KMO influences that are observed to evaluate leadership selection within public safety
organizations. In this review, the literature on leadership needs in public safety was reviewed.
Alkhaldi et al. (2017) and Cwiak et al. (2017) both demonstrated that leadership needs are
evolving with the complexities of disaster, threats, technology, and society that are also
changing. Boin & 't Hart, (2003) showed the difficulties of leadership during times of crisis.
Kapucu and Van Wart (2008) showed that good leadership was vital in public safety, while poor
leadership could have catastrophic results. Donahue and Tuohy (2006) explained that there had
been ongoing leadership challenges in past disasters and emergencies. Toxic leadership seminal
work by Whicker (1996), Lipman-Blumen (2005), and Goldman (2009) was analyzed, and their
analysis was that poor leadership exists in all workforces including public safety, and that it
comes in many different flavors and results in inefficiency, disorder, and turmoil. Other literature
began to point the way to solve these issues including methods to improve leadership selection
and hiring. Numerous authors provided the best practices of a hiring and candidate selection
including the concepts of job analysis, personality testing, and assessments. Those authors
include Fiedler (1996), Howard (2001), Kang and Jin (2015), Landy and Shankster (1994), and
Sessa et al.(1998). The literature review also included studies that demonstrated methods to
Stakeholder
Knowledge (i.e.,
knowledge types),
Skills, Motivation
(i.e., self-efficacy,
value, etc.)

LEADERSHIP SELECTION WITHIN PUBLIC SAFETY 51

measure both leadership effectiveness and screening for poor leadership. Some of those articles
and books include Clark and Clark (1990), Hadley et al. (2011), Hogan and Hogan (2001),
Miller et al. (2009), Northouse (2016), Rath (2007), and Walter et al. (2012).
With this literature review in mind, research proceeded by evaluating whether public
safety organizations utilize a hiring and selection process that includes job analysis,
psychological assessments, and whether the process screens for poor leadership.

LEADERSHIP SELECTION WITHIN PUBLIC SAFETY 52

CHAPTER THREE: METHODS
The purpose of this evaluation study was to determine whether public safety
organizations utilize methods that help select the best candidates for executive positions and
filter out potentially poor candidates. This study applied a gap analysis model that utilized a
qualitative design consisting of document analysis and ten interviews. This chapter describes the
research and design methodology, data collection, and data analysis. The research questions are:
1. .. To what extent are public safety administrators requiring their agencies to conduct a job
analysis and psychological assessments of personnel before selecting personnel to
leadership positions?
2. .. What are public safety administrators’ knowledge and motivation related to selecting
personnel with the proper leadership competencies?
3. .. What is the interaction between public safety culture and public safety administrator
knowledge and motivation?
4. .. What are the recommendations for public safety organizations in the areas of knowledge,
motivation, and organizational influences as they pertain to hiring leaders for the
organization?
Following is a description of the participating stakeholders, methods used, and sampling
criteria for the qualitative portions of the study.
Participating Stakeholders
This study focused on a primary stakeholder group called public safety administrators.
The study utilized qualitative interviews of administrators from around the country. The term
administrators refer to police chiefs, sheriffs, fire chiefs, and emergency management directors.
LEADERSHIP SELECTION WITHIN PUBLIC SAFETY 53

They are the head of the organizations. Other terms may include commissioners, marshals, or
other official designation. Also considered in this category would be directors of public safety,
who may be officials selected to head administrative organizations that oversee multiple public
safety organizations.
Ten public safety administrators from across the country participated in this research
study. Administrators came from the fire service, law enforcement organizations, and emergency
management organizations. The administrators were classified by size of population including
small jurisdictions of less than 100,000 people, medium sized jurisdictions between 100,000 and
999,999 people, and large jurisdictions of over 1,000,000 people.
One administrator was from a wildland fire service serving a large jurisdiction from the
south-central United States. Three fire chiefs were from multi-role fire departments (structural
firefighting, rescue, and wildland fire fighting). Of those three chiefs, one was from a small
jurisdiction in Alaska, another was from a medium sized jurisdiction in New Mexico, and the
third was from a large jurisdiction in California. Three law enforcement administrators were
interviewed including one from a small jurisdiction in New York, a medium sized jurisdiction in
California, and a large jurisdiction in California. Three emergency management administrators
were interviewed including one from a small jurisdiction in New England, a medium jurisdiction
in Indiana, and a large state emergency management jurisdiction in the Midwest. The
interviewees represent a wide spectrum of public safety organizations from all levels of
government and from across the country. Table 6 identifies the participant’s discipline,
governmental level, jurisdictional size, and area of the country.

LEADERSHIP SELECTION WITHIN PUBLIC SAFETY 54

Table 6
Stakeholder Participants
ID Discipline Government Level Jurisdiction Size* Geographic Size**
WF1 Wildland Fire State Large South-Central U.S.
FS1 Fire-Rescue City Small Alaska
FS2 Fire-Rescue County Medium New Mexico
FS3 Fire-Rescue County Large California
LE1 Law Enforcement City Small New York
LE2 Law Enforcement City Medium California
LE3 Law Enforcement County Large California
EM1 Emergency Management City Small New England
EM2 Emergency Management County Medium Indiana
EM3 Emergency Management State Large Midwest

Interview Sampling Criteria and Rationale
Criterion 1. Participants are from law enforcement, fire-rescue, or emergency
management organization.
Criterion 2. Participants come from either one of the following types of organization
sizes: (a) large organizations (serving a population of over 1,000,000 people),(b) medium
organizations (serving populations from 100,000 to 999,999 people), or(c) small organizations
(serving people from one to 99,999 people). Samples from each of these will account for the
variety of cultures and environments associated with population and organizational size.
LEADERSHIP SELECTION WITHIN PUBLIC SAFETY 55

Criterion 3. Participant is an administrator who can describe the hiring practices and
promotional practices of the organization.
Interview Sampling (Recruitment) Strategy and Rationale
This qualitative portion of the research sought one administrator from each public safety
discipline. Merriam and Tisdell (2016) recommend selecting participants who provide
knowledge and expertise about the issue being researched. Interviews were conducted with one
public safety discipline administrator from each small, medium, and large jurisdiction and one
from a wildland firefighting organization. In total, 10 interviews were completed which provided
a good cross-section from a variety of localities. Interviewees represented organizations from the
northeast, the Midwest, the south-central United States, New Mexico, California, and Alaska.
Recruitment was made through known associates and participation at two national seminars.
Data Collection
Two types of data collection were used, namely document analysis and interviews. Document
analysis was performed by collecting job descriptions and analyzing whether the job descriptions
fit the leadership needs of executive level positions after conducting an interview with the
organization’s administrator. The interviews were conducted to garner qualitative evidence about
public safety leadership, hiring/promotional practices, and recommendations for the future.
These methods provided qualitative comprehension about KMO influences of public safety
organizations leadership selection, hiring, and promotional practices. Document collection was
conducted by obtaining job descriptions from the organization’s human resource department. Job
descriptions were saved, reviewed, and coded using NVivo for thematic issues. Interviews were
conducted in person, recorded, transcribed, and coded using NVivo. Interviews were conducted
between April 16, 2019 and June 12, 2019.
LEADERSHIP SELECTION WITHIN PUBLIC SAFETY 56

Interviews
Ten qualitative interviews were completed with public safety administrators. The number
of interviews was sufficient to gather information to the point of repetitive information
collection, also known as saturation (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Interview participants were
those with knowledge and expertise on the topic (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Each interview
participant was interviewed once. Interviews were formal.
The first interview with FS3 was with a known colleague that I reached out to by email
and subsequently set-up an interview with through his administrative assistant. I have known
FS1 for approximately eight years. We served together on a nonprofit board of directors. I
previously interviewed him for a study I conducted while in my graduate program. I went to his
place of business and conducted the interview in his office.
The second interview was with EM3. I had never met EM3 before but was familiar with
him from being in similar meetings and conferences. We were in an invitation only focus group
funded by FEMA through a contracted nonprofit organization in Portland, OR. In the course of
the three-day focus group, I asked if EM3 would be willing to participate in my research. He
agreed and I interviewed him in his hotel room.
I was invited to attend a day-long session with the New York City Fire Department
(FDNY) Incident Management Team. On that trip, other selected individuals came to observe
from across the country. One of those people was WF1. I have known WF1 for approximately
four years through our mutual membership within the All-Hazards Incident Management Teams
Association, Inc. I also assisted WF1, at his request, in a study after a disaster impacted his state.
At the FDNY training, I had asked WF1 if he would be willing to be a participant in my study. I
interviewed him in his hotel room.
LEADERSHIP SELECTION WITHIN PUBLIC SAFETY 57

Before I had headed to New York City, I reached out to LE1 by phone and email and
asked if he would be willing to be a participant in my study. I first met LE1 when we were both
involved in a response to Hurricane Sandy. LE1 agreed to participate and I coordinated an
interview time at his office with his assistant while I was in New York City.
My next interview was with EM2. I have known EM2 since 2002. We have been
mutually supporting of each other’s careers over the years. I asked EM2 if he would consider
being a part of my study via email. He agreed and we coordinated the meeting time and place
over email and text. I met EM2 at his office in Indiana and conducted the interview in a
conference room down the hall from his office.
I recruited LE2 to be a participant by first asking a mutual colleague who is a police
officer in LE2’s department to make an introduction. The colleague made an advance call to
LE2’s assistant and then introduced me to his assistant via email. I then shared with his assistant
what my study was about and asked if LE2 would be willing to participate. LE2 agreed and then
I coordinated a date, time, and place with his assistant. I met LE2 at his department’s training
facility where they had a meeting room which is where we conducted the interview.
In order to arrange an interview with LE1, I sent a request through LE1’s website and
explained who I was, what my research was about, and asked if LE1 would be willing to be a
part of his research. I received a response who forwarded the website contact information to
LE1’s assistant. LE1 agreed to the interview and I coordinated a date, time, and place with the
assistant. The interview was held in LE1’s office.
The next three interviews were all conducted in Phoenix, AZ. There was a summit of 100
individually selected public safety stakeholders. Upon arrival to the summit, I received an
attendance sheet of people who were invited. I began to scour the roster and looked up
LEADERSHIP SELECTION WITHIN PUBLIC SAFETY 58

individuals on the professional social media website LinkedIn. I looked at their resumes on
LinkedIn and determined if the person was an administrator that fell within my criteria for the
study. I sent a message to them via LinkedIn and explained that I was at the summit with them
and that I was conducting this study. I asked if they would be willing to give me an hour of their
time to conduct an interview. FS1, EM1, and FS2 all agreed, and we scheduled a time to meet
and conduct the interviews through LinkedIn. I arranged a meeting room at the hotel where the
summit was being held and that is where the interviews took place.
When conducting the interviews, I provided each participant with an Interview
Information Sheet, which can be found in Appendix B. I also followed the Interview Protocol,
which can be found in Appendix A. I recorded the interviews using a digital recorder and took
notes in a notebook as the participant answered questions. Open-ended questions were used
because they allow the participant to elaborate and the interviewer to listen and allowed for
probing questions by the interviewer (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Open-ended questions allowed
interviewees to provide additional commentary regarding the existence of particular hiring and
promotion procedures. Questions inquired about KMO influences pertaining to public safety
leadership, job descriptions, executive-level positions within the organization, poor leadership
impacts on the organization, and hiring/promotional processes and procedures. These questions
were used to determine if public safety organizations knew the benefits of leadership, the
consequences of poor leadership, the ability to improve leadership selection, and why or why not
they implemented protocols to improve leader selection within the organization. The interviews
lasted no longer than 60 minutes.

LEADERSHIP SELECTION WITHIN PUBLIC SAFETY 59

Documents
Documents are part of the research setting and can illustrate the current status of an issue
(Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). In this study, a document analysis of public safety leadership job
descriptions was conducted. Public records include agency records and documents (Merriam &
Tisdell, 2016). In this study of public safety organizations, all organizations being studied are
governmental, so job descriptions are public record. Many job descriptions are available on
public safety organizational websites and were easily obtainable.
I used several methods to collect the job description documents. The job desciptions for
participants FS3, LE3, LE2, and FS2 were available online at their agency or jurisdictional
websites. I specifically looked for positions the participants referred to in their interview. I had to
request job descriptions via email from EM3, WF1, LE1, EM1, FS1, and EM2. They were asked
to send me a job descripton of a position that reported directly to them or that they considered an
executive leadership position within their organization. I did not get a response from FS1 so I
called FS1’s human resource department and specifically requested a job description that FS1
had referred to in his interview. The human resource department promptly provided me with the
document.
In total, 10 job descriptions of public safety administrators or upper-level management
positions were collected. One job description was obtained from each organization. Once
collected, the public documents were uploaded and coded in NVivo. The research assessed if
leadership attributes were listed in detail within the job descriptions, especially those
competencies that identified as essential by the participants of the interviews.

LEADERSHIP SELECTION WITHIN PUBLIC SAFETY 60

Data Analysis
Data analysis is an exercise in discovering the significance of the collected data (Merriam &
Tisdell, 2016). This study utilized qualitative methods. The 10 job descriptions were coded in
NVivo and themes of data were analyzed. Those themes included knowledge, skills, and abilities
for each job. Within those catagories, there were often tactical level details and tasks expected of
the individual. The absence of information was also analyzed, especially the absence of
information that was shown as pertinent to the interviews. The absence of detailed leadership
attributes was specifically noted. This information is presented in a narrative format,tables, and
charts as deemed appropriate.
The second part of the qualitative research was analyzed last. These were the 10
interviews with public safety administrators. The data was analyzed after the collection process.
Questions, comparisons, and deductions of the data and then interpreting its meaning utilizing
Corbin and Strauss’ (2008) analytic methodology was continuous. Following every interview, a
review of the recording was conducted and followed by the completion of an analytic
memorandum. The researcher documented themes, significant points, concerns, and initial
conclusions about the conceptual framework. These concepts were then analyzed against the job
descriptions. The interviews were transcribed and loaded into NVivo for open coding and
documenting themes. In accordance with Creswell (2014) to conduct member checking, the
researcher shared transcripts of the interview with each participant to confirm the results
matched the participant's perspectives. While coding in NVivo, the researcher sought empirical
codes and applied a priori codes extrapolated from the conceptual framework as they related to
the KMO influences. Another phase of analysis that merges the empirical and a priori codes into
analytic/axial codes was conducted. Then, a final phase of analysis which highlights pattern
LEADERSHIP SELECTION WITHIN PUBLIC SAFETY 61

codes and repetitive themes about the conceptual framework and the research questions was
completed.
Credibility and Trustworthiness

A concerted effort was made to ensure this project was done with the best practices of
qualitative credibility and trustworthiness. To the extent possible, the study, the data analysis,
and the data interpretation were quantified as accurate and dependable (Miles, Huberman, &
Saldaña, 2014). Data was triangulated between the literature review, document analysis, and the
qualitative interviews. The number of interviews resulted in saturation, and repetitive themes
were highlighted. Saturation requires answers from interview participants to be repetitive and
redundant such that no new information is forthcoming (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Member
checking with interview participants was also conducted to ensure the captured essence of the
interview was in agreement with the participant's perspectives (Creswell, 2014). Finally,
reflexivity was employed as a means to confirm the qualitative data. Merriam and Tisdell (2016)
define this as the researcher reflecting on their participation in the research process and
acknowledging the effect the researcher played in the process. Analysis memorandums were
completed after each interview. This reflective process enabled capturing thoughts, ideas,
concerns, and revelations about the process to maintain an unbiased and pure impact on the
research process.
Ethics
In this qualitative method research study, the goal is to evaluate whether public safety
organizations are utilizing a hiring and selection process for public safety leaders that includes a
job analysis, psychological, personality, and leadership assessments. The strength of a research
study is found in its legitimacy and its trustworthiness which is dependent on the integrity of the
LEADERSHIP SELECTION WITHIN PUBLIC SAFETY 62

ethics (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). A researcher has an ethical responsibility to protect research
participants from harm and have an expectation of privacy (Glesne, 2011; Rubin & Rubin,
2012). This research was conducted in a manner that mitigated harm to the research participants
and protected confidentiality by giving the participants pseudonyms and avoiding any reference
to which their identity could be established. Research subjects were apprised of voluntary
participation, any situation that could affect their status by the research process, and that they
could choose to stop their participation in the research process at any time (Glesne, 2011; Rubin
& Rubin, 2012). The test subjects and interview subjects received an information sheet. The
information sheet clearly indicated that participation in the study was voluntary. The information
sheet for the interviews is affixed in Appendix B.
Generally, a significant concern of research participants is privacy issues (Glesne, 2011).
Confidentiality, anonymity, and privacy are hallmarks of the safety and protection of the tests
and questionnaire portion of this research study. While overt physical or psychological harm is
not anticipated in any way, there could be social or professional harm by divulging the thoughts
and beliefs of the superiors and subordinates of the test subjects. In short, people's honest
opinions of their co-workers could damage relationships and the work environment. Therefore,
this research study ensured that responses to interviews were not revealed to other subjects and
that results were shared in a manner that did not reveal the responses of their co-workers to each
other.
Privacy is also contingent on the security and storage of the data. The security and
storage of the interview data was password protected and only available to researcher. Any
printing of the data was locked in a filing cabinet when not in use. If any electronic transmission
was required to professors, advisors, or mentors, it was placed in a password protected file.
LEADERSHIP SELECTION WITHIN PUBLIC SAFETY 63

Research study recruitment began with known organizations in Indiana, New York,
Texas, and California. This researcher was not a member or employee of any organization in
which research was conducted. Other study recruitment was sought through the researcher’s
LinkedIn network and the All-Hazards Incident Management Teams Association.
For the interviews, participants were from law enforcement, firefighting, and emergency
management organizations. The specific participants recruited were from one of the following
types of organization sizes: (a) large organizations (serving a population of over 1,000,000
people), (b) medium organizations (serving populations from 100,000 to 999,999 people), or (c)
small organizations (serving people from one to 99,999 people). Interviews from each of these
groupings provided for a variety of cultures and environments corresponding to size. The
participants and their associated organizations were random and represented a national audience.
They were not from a single locality, state, or region.
The interviewees were clearly informed that participation was voluntary and that the
results of their tests would not be shared with their supervisor or their organization. Since
research was conducted with organizations not affiliated with the researcher, bias was reduced.
According to Merriam & Tisdell (2016), a researcher who collects data is subject to the potential
of succumbing to their own bias and filters. Caution must be taken to safeguard against the
impact of personal bias on analysis of qualitative data.

LEADERSHIP SELECTION WITHIN PUBLIC SAFETY 64

CHAPTER FOUR: RESULTS AND FINDINGS

The purpose of this research study was to evaluate the degree to which organizations are
implementing the best practices in hiring public safety leaders within public safety organizations.
The study utilized a gap analysis framework and combined the use of qualitative interviews of
public safety administrators with data collection of public safety job descriptions within the same
organizations. This chapter outlines the following elements of the research study: (a) interview
results, (b) data analysis results, (c) findings, and (d) synthesis. The questions guiding the study
were:
1. .. To what extent are public safety administrators requiring their agencies to conduct a job
analysis and psychological assessments of personnel before selecting personnel to
leadership positions?
2. .. What are public safety administrators’ knowledge and motivation related to selecting
personnel with the proper leadership competencies?
3. .. What is the interaction between public safety culture and public safety administrator
knowledge and motivation?
4. .. What are the recommendations for public safety organizations in the areas of KMO
influences as they pertain to hiring leaders for the organization?
Findings

The data presented is organized by KMO influences. Within each influence, findings are
categorized by influence type per the conceptual framework. In analyzing the data, influences
were considered gap validated if seven or more of the participants demonstrated the assumed
influence gap and the document analysis, if relevant, confirmed the gap. A validated gap
represents an area for improvement which is further discussed in the recommendations in
LEADERSHIP SELECTION WITHIN PUBLIC SAFETY 65

Chapter 5. An influence is determined as a gap not validated if three or fewer of the participants
demonstrates the assumed influence gap and the document analysis, if relevant, confirms the lack
of validation. Non-validated gaps do not always mean improvement is not necessary; however,
the urgency and necessity to address non-validated gaps is not as critical as validated gaps. An
influence is considered undetermined if four to six demonstrate the influence gap, and, if
relevant, the document analysis conflicts with the participants’ views. In this situation, further
research may be necessary to validate or not validate the assumed influence.
Knowledge Influences

Interview questions were used to determine knowledge influences affecting stakeholders’
comprehension and understanding of their organizations’ hiring practices. In many cases, the
interview subjects also had knowledge of other organizations’ or previous employers’ processes
which they also referred to in their responses. The findings indicate that every participant knew
and understood the hiring processes and appeared to know the general hiring and promotional
practices of the industry. Interviewees described their hiring processes as utilizing the following
methods: (a) application and resume review, (b) board/panel interview, (c) hiring manager
interview, (d) background check, and (e) technical testing.
Participants were asked to state the leadership attributes required for executive leadership
positions in public safety organizations. The participants provided a wide range of answers but
there were some consistent themes such as empathy, decisiveness, people skills, integrity, and
strategic thinking. The stakeholders consistently indicated that the leadership attributes they
identified were necessary and applicable across disciplines and across geographical
environments. Every stakeholder stated that the benefit of a hiring process that seeks to
determine if an executive leader has the necessary leadership attributes would ensure a better-
LEADERSHIP SELECTION WITHIN PUBLIC SAFETY 66

quality candidate filling the vacancy. Eight of the administrators indicated they could institute
any type of hiring process so long as it did not violate legal issues in hiring. With the same
question, most interviewees stated that some difficulties in hiring processes might be funding,
the need to fill a position quickly, or difficulty finding the right person with the right leadership
attributes. A few participants indicated that these reasons would not necessarily be considered
good reasons. Not a single organization, however, was utilizing any form of psychological
assessment to ascertain whether candidates had the desired leadership attributes, nor was anyone
looking for indicators of poor leadership behaviors. Table 7 identifies the assumed knowledge
influences and whether they were validated as a gap or not.
Table 7
Determination of Knowledge Influences

Assumed Knowledge Influence Gap Validated, Invalidated, or
Undetermined
Public safety administrators need to know the
leadership skills and competencies necessary
for public safety positions.

Gap Validated. Administrators provided
minimal answers to required leadership
attributes and minimal attributes were listed
within executive job descriptions.
Public safety administrators need to know the
benefits of good leadership and the
consequences of the lack of leadership.
Gap Not Validated. Every administrator
stated that leadership in public safety
executive positions are important and that a
lack of leadership has significant negative
consequences.
Public safety administrators need to have a
procedure in place to evaluate potential
leaders for promotion or job selection related
to the necessary leadership skills of the
position.

Gap Validated. Organizations did not have a
method to evaluate leadership skills,
competencies, and dispositions.

LEADERSHIP SELECTION WITHIN PUBLIC SAFETY 67

Declarative Knowledge
Public safety administrators need to know the leadership skills and competencies
necessary for public safety positions. Administrators were asked in their interviews to state the
leadership competencies required for executive leadership positions in public safety
organizations. Public safety administraitors need to know what leadership attributes are needed
in executive leadership positions, otherwise they will not be able to appropriately search for
candidates to place in those positions. Administrators must also determine the particular
attributes for executive positions versus tactical level or front line positions. For example, a
tactical level position may require more technical knowledge and proficiency while an executive
leader may require more vision and change management skills. When asked in the interviews
what competencies were required for executives, one leadership concept emerged above others,
namely interpersonal or empathy skills. FS3 described one aspect that is necessary for public
safety executives when he stated, “…you got to care about your people.” LE2 stated caring for
people using a different phrase:
Listening is the biggest portion of communication. The way you deal with conflict. The
way you interact with your employees. Being able to say please and thank you. Those are
very simple things that a lot of people forget about. Asking people how they're doing.
Knowing their strengths and weaknesses. Knowing who their family members are and
what's important to them. Those are all very, very important.
The concept of people skills and empathy was also mentioned by FS2 when he stated,
“I'm going to be looking for somebody who has some people skills.” Table 8 indicates the most
common leadership attributes identified by the administrators.

LEADERSHIP SELECTION WITHIN PUBLIC SAFETY 68

Table 8

Required Leadership Attributes Identified by Administrators

Leadership Attributes Administrator
Authentic* FS3, LE1, WF1, LE3
Collaboration FS1, EM1, LE1
Communication FS1, FS2, WF1
Control Under Pressure / Levelheaded LE3
Decisiveness LE1, LE3
Divergent-Thinking EM1
Empowerment FS1
Experience and Knowledge FS2, EM2
Fairness* LE3
Financially Astute* LE1
Humility* FS3
Influence/Motivation EM3
Integrity* LE2, LE3
Empathy, Showing Concern

FS3, LE2, EM1, LE1, FS2, WF1, LE3
Self-Management/Intrapersonal
Skills/Mindfulness/Self-Awareness
FS3, LE2, LE3
Judgment / Decision-Making FS3, LE3
Organization FS2
Politically Astute / Diplomatic EM3, EM1
Proven Manager EM2
LEADERSHIP SELECTION WITHIN PUBLIC SAFETY 69

Service-Oriented* LE2
Situational Leadership* EM2
Tact* WF1
Transformational / Change Agent EM3
Understand Culture* EM3
Vision EM3, WF1
*Leadership attributes that were not listed in empirical data
The table above demonstrates the leadership attributes identified by the administrators
needed in public safety executive positions. This begins to show the gap of administrators not
knowing the attributes necessary for executive positions in public safety. To further analyze the
issue, their answers were compared to the empirical list of attributes identified in Table 2. Below,
Table 9 compares the administrators answers with the 34 attributes empirically identified in
Chapter 2.
Table 9

Leadership Attributes Identified by Administrators Compared to Empirically Identified Attributes

Leadership Attributes Administrator
Identified
Example Statement by
Administrator
1. Achievement of Goals

Not Identified
2. Challenge the Process Not Identified
3. Collaboration, Relationship
Building, Participative Decision-
Making; Team Building;
Networking and Partnering
FS1, EM1, LE1 (EM1) I think the ability to
collaborate is probably the
number one.

4. Communicating, Informing FS1, FS2, WF1 (FS1) They share information,
share what's happening.
5. Compromise

Not Identified
LEADERSHIP SELECTION WITHIN PUBLIC SAFETY 70

6. Control Under Pressure /
Levelheaded
LE3 (LE3) By that I mean you have
to be level-headed and to be
able to evaluate the
circumstance you're dealing
with, focused on what's best for
the organization and the
employee.
7. Crisis Leader Efficacy

Not Identified
8. Decisiveness LE1, LE3 (LE3) The one thing that we
look at, one aspect that I almost
demand of people, is
decisiveness in leadership.
9. Divergent-Thinking EM1 (EM1) When you're in a
leadership position, certainly
it's nice if you're a self-
proclaimed expert within some
specific sector in your field, but
I think the leader needs to
really have a kind of an
understanding about a little bit
of everything, even some things
that are outside of the scope of
their work.

10. Empathy, Showing Concern FS3, LE2, EM1,
LE1, FS2, WF1,
LE3
(LE2) Then interpersonal skills,
which is more the ability to
[…] communicate with people
is absolutely paramount.
Listening is the biggest portion
of communication. The way
you deal with conflict. The way
you interact with your
employees. Being able to say
please and thank you. Those are
very simple things that a lot of
people forget about. Asking
people how they're doing.
Knowing their strengths and
weaknesses. Knowing who
their family members are and
what's important to them.

11. Empowerment FS1 (FS1) With the type of
individuals who are getting into
the fire service today, the ones
LEADERSHIP SELECTION WITHIN PUBLIC SAFETY 71

who can empower the people
who work for them to
accomplish the goals.
12. Encouragement Not Identified
13. Experience and Knowledge FS2, EM2 (FS2) In my opinion, basic
qualifications include level of
education, a certain level of
experience, and basic abilities.
14. Flexibility, Adaptive Not Identified
15. Influence/Motivation EM3 (EM3) Quite frankly, if, if
you're, you're, you're looking
for a job at this level, so you
know, vision, culture,
leadership qualities, the ability
to motivate people.

16. Inspire Vision EM3, WF1 (EM3) Secondly, and maybe as
important to have to have
vision.

17. Instill Confidence Not Identified
18. Intelligence Not Identified
19. Judgement/Decision-Making FS3, LE3 (LE3) Decision-making, life
skills, challenges that people
may have faced during their
lifetime. When I say decision-
making that's could be drug use
or, obviously, not using
narcotics.
20.

Lead by Example Not Identified
21. Leadership Efficacy Not Identified
22.

Learning Goal Orientation Not Identified
23. Managing Innovation and
Creativity; Enable Creativity
Not Identified
24. Mediate and Facilitate Not Identified
25. Organization FS2 (FS2) In my opinion, basic
qualifications include level of
education, a certain level of
experience, and basic abilities:
communication skills,
organizational skills.
LEADERSHIP SELECTION WITHIN PUBLIC SAFETY 72

26. Planning and Organizing
Personnel
Not Identified
27. Politically Astute / Diplomatic

EM3, EM1 (EM1) The person should be,
hopefully, effective at
performing the required job
responsibilities as a leader
within that public safety
agency. If you know that
they're able to meet those
competencies, if they've got
experience and familiarity with
working with stakeholders and
political officials and citizens,
you should have confidence
that they're able to actually
perform when necessary.
28. Problem-Solving Not Identified
29. Proven Manager EM2 (EM2) I think for us, when
we've done recent searches in
looking at some of those things,
do they really have […]do they
really have experience within
management roles, and can they
give us examples of those,

30. Scanning the Environment Not Identified
31. Self-Management/Intrapersonal
Skills/Mindfulness/Self-
Awareness
FS3, LE2, LE3 FS3 [Our Agency] would prefer
somebody that's authentic and
caring and mindful […]
32. Strategic-Thinking Not Identified
33.

Transformational Leader, Change
Agent
EM3 EM3 […] having vision, ability
to motivate people, be change
agents, understanding the
culture.
34. Unifying

Not Identified

To consider the assumed knowledge influence of public safety administrators needing to know
the leadership attributes necessary for executive public safety positions as undetermined or
invalid, more than half of the administrators would have identified greater than 15% of the
LEADERSHIP SELECTION WITHIN PUBLIC SAFETY 73

empirical leadership attributes. The results, however, show that none of the administrators
identified more than 15% of the empirical leadership attributes, with only one coming close to
15% by identifying five of the empirical leadership attributes. In Table 10, the number of
empirical leadership attributes identified by administrators is listed.
Table 10
Empirical Leadership Attributes Identified by Administrators

Administrator Number of Leadership Attributes Identified
EM1 4
EM2 2
EM3 4
FS1 3
FS2 4
FS3 3
LE1 3
LE2 2
LE3 5
WF1 3

It should be noted that nine administrators identified nine leadership attributes that were
not in the empirical data. This is not to suggest that those attributes are not necessary or are not
important. It merely indicates that those attributes did not show up in the literature reviewed.
LEADERSHIP SELECTION WITHIN PUBLIC SAFETY 74

Even if those attributes were added into the attributes identified, it would not have significantly
changed the results of the validated gap.
The leadership attributes identified as necessary for executive leaders would be expected
to be listed in the job descriptions of leaders within their organizations. This, however, was not
shown to be the case, confirming a gap exists between known leadership attributes and actual
competencies required for public safety leadership positions. It would have been expected that
either the attributes specifically identified by the administrators, or the empirical attributes,
would have been documented as necessary to the job description. The document analysis
indicates that neither the administrator identified attributes nor attributes discovered in the
literature review are reflected in the job descriptions of positions within the 10 studied
organizations of the administrators interviewed. In Table 11, the required leadership attributes
identified as necessary to be a public safety executive by participants are listed.
Table 11

Required Leadership Attributes Identified by Administrators that are Listed in Job Descriptions
of an Executive Leadership Position Within Their Organization
Leadership Attributes Attribute in Job Description Example Statement
from Job Description
Authentic* None Listed
Collaboration EM2, LE3, FS1, FS2 (EM2) Collaborates
with local government
agencies, community
organization, and
businesses/industries in
reviewing, updating,
and preparing plans.
Communication FS1 (FS1) Meets and
communicates with the
general public and with
members of civic,
community, and
LEADERSHIP SELECTION WITHIN PUBLIC SAFETY 75

business groups
regarding the
Department’s activities.
Control Under Pressure /
Levelheaded
LE3 (LE3) Possess the
ability to remain calm
and appropriately
focused in rapidly
changing and difficult
situations involving
conflict, civil unrest,
complex issues,
controversy and diverse
stakeholder groups and
interests; possess the
ability to deal calmly
and effectively with
emotional interactions.
Decisiveness LE3, FS3 (FS3) Coordinating and
initiating actions,
implementing decisions
and recommendations
Divergent-Thinking None Listed
Empowerment None Listed
Experience and Knowledge All (WF1) Thorough
knowledge of
firefighting methods
and the [state] fire
service. 10 or more
years active experience
[…]
Fairness* None Listed
Financially Astute* FS3 (FS3) Evaluating the
adequacy of procedures,
budgets, staffing
requirements, and
programs
Humility* None Listed
Influence/Motivation FS3 (FS3) Planning,
organizing, directing,
and coordinating
operations of the [fire
agency], and motivating
LEADERSHIP SELECTION WITHIN PUBLIC SAFETY 76

personnel to meet [fire
agency] objectives
Integrity* FS1 (FS1) Exhibit high
standards of integrity
and ethics, a neutral and
businesslike demeanor,
and a strong leadership
ability.
Empathy, Showing Concern

EM1, EM2, LE2, FS3 (EM2) Ability to
competently serve the
public with diplomacy
and respect, including
occasional encounters
with irate/hostile
persons.
Self-Management/Intrapersonal
Skills/Mindfulness/Self-
Awareness
None Listed
Judgment / Decision-Making LE3 (LE3) Commanders
provide overall
administration and
strategic oversight of an
Area Command and
make independent high-
level decisions.
Organization LE3, EM1, FS3 (FS3) Assists the Fire
Chief in planning,
organizing,
implementing, and
directing all phases of
the operations of the
[fire agency].
Politically Astute / Diplomatic LE3 (LE3) May interact
extensively with all
levels within the
organization, outside
agencies and
department heads,
County Executive
Officers, elected
officials, executive
boards, community
stakeholders, or the
public.
Proven Manager None Listed
LEADERSHIP SELECTION WITHIN PUBLIC SAFETY 77

Service-Oriented* None Listed
Situational Leadership* FS3 (FS1) Dealing tactfully
and persuasively with
others in controversial
situations.
Tact* FS3 (FS3) Dealing tactfully
and persuasively with
others in controversial
situations.
Transformational / Change
Agent
None Listed
Understand Culture* None Listed
Vision None Listed
*Leadership attributes that were not listed in empirical data
As is demonstrated by the above table, the leadership attributes cited by the administrators or the
attributes cited in the literature review are not comprehensively reflected in the job descriptions
that were reviewed. Interestingly, the minimal amount of leadership attributes documented
across the spectrum of all 10 reviewed job descriptions was observed. The position within FS3’s
organization was the one job description that specifically mentioned the need for leadership. The
very first knowledge requirement was, “Contemporary leadership principles and practices
applicable to a modern, service-oriented organization.” Aside from that, few leadership attributes
were specified. Perhaps even more interesting is that many job descriptions did not even indicate
that the position was a leadership position or required leadership abilities within the entire
document. Table 12 shows the leadership attributes that were identified in the reviewed
document. In most cases, the attribute was simply a part of a task and not listed as a specific and
inherent leadership capability that the candidate should possess. Organizations are listed by the
public safety administrator in charge of the organization.
LEADERSHIP SELECTION WITHIN PUBLIC SAFETY 78

Table 12
Leadership Attributes Listed in Job Descriptions

Leadership Attributes Public Safety
Administrator/Organization
Job Description Example
Interpersonal Skills/
People Skills /
Empathy/Caring
EM1, EM2, LE2, LE3, FS3 (LE3) Establish and
maintain effective working
relationships with members
of the Sheriff-Coroner
Department, other
agencies, County
management and the
public; develop and
maintain effective
communication with
subordinates and superiors;
establish and maintain
effective relationships with
others, especially sensitive
relationships with
representatives of other
agencies or governmental
units and citizen groups;
and deal tactfully and
persuasively with others in
controversial situations.
Collaboration EM2, FS2 (EM2) Collaborates with
local government
agencies, community
organization, and
businesses/industries in
reviewing, updating, and
preparing plans.
Decisiveness LE3, FS3 (LE3) Commanders
provide overall
administration and
strategic oversight of an
Area Command and make
independent high-level
decisions.
Communication EM1, EM2, FS1, LE3 (FS1) Meets and
communicates with the
general public and with
LEADERSHIP SELECTION WITHIN PUBLIC SAFETY 79

members of civic,
community, and business
groups regarding the
Department’s activities.
Generally promotes
positive public relations.
Attends meetings of
community organizations
and prepare verbal and
written presentations
before public groups
related to all Fire
Department operations.
Influence / Persuasiveness FS3, LE3 (FS3) Dealing tactfully
and persuasively with
others in controversial
situations.
Integrity FS1 (FS1) Exhibit high
standards of integrity and
ethics, a neutral and
businesslike demeanor,
and a strong leadership
ability.
Judgment LE3 (LE3) Exercise
appropriate judgment in
answering questions and
releasing information; and
analyze and project
consequences of decisions
and/or recommendations.
Tact EM2, FS3, LE3 (FS3) Dealing tactfully
and persuasively with
others in controversial
situations.
...........
As Table 12 indicates, one attribute was listed in job descriptions by 50% of the
positions. Most did not list leadership attributes at all, thereby making it difficult to conduct an
effective recruiting and hiring or promotional process that is linked to desired leadership
attributes. The position reviewed for LE3 had the most attributes listed. To provide an example
LEADERSHIP SELECTION WITHIN PUBLIC SAFETY 80

of how these attributes appeared, Table 13 provides examples of how these attributes were listed
in the LE3 position.
Table 13
Leadership Attributes Found in the LE3 Job Description

Section of Job Description Language
Class Characteristics The class of Commander is the first-level of executive
management… [Position} provide[s] overall administration
and strategic oversight of an Area Command and make
independent high-level decisions…[Position is responsible
for] critical decisions are required; for providing a high-level
link between other commands and other agencies; for
strategic planning with departmental and county resources;
for auditing policies and procedures, training, equipment and
overall performance of line staff; and for reviewing critical
incidents and assisting in the development of Department
policies, standards and long-range direction.
Examples of Duties Provides leadership for an Area Command comprised of
multiple divisions and specialized professional functions;
develops and implements effective succession planning to
promote growth in the Department; maintains the necessary
situational awareness to anticipate organizational needs and
work with subordinates to develop programs which improve
delivery of services; and is responsible for the planning and
development of Department-wide programs and initiatives to
mitigate organizational risk and improve the working
conditions of our employees.
Examples of Duties Plans, delegates, directs and oversees the work of subordinate
Captains, Division Directors and other management personnel
(both sworn and non-sworn) within their Area Command;
provides guidance and direction in the interpretation,
development and implementation of operating policies and
procedures; may direct the coordination of operations of
his/her divisions with responsible officials in other divisions
of the Sheriff-Coroner Department, with other County
agencies/departments and with other law enforcement
agencies or governmental entities.
Minimum Qualifications:
Ability To
Plan, coordinate, direct, and supervise the work of an Area
Command and its divisions of the Sheriff-Coroner
Department; devise methods, policies and procedures and
LEADERSHIP SELECTION WITHIN PUBLIC SAFETY 81

evaluate their effectiveness; analyze and interpret crime
statistics and reports; speak effectively before a large group.
Minimum Qualifications:
Ability To
Exercise appropriate judgment in answering questions and
releasing information; and analyze and project consequences
of decisions and/or recommendations.
Minimum Qualifications:
Ability To
Establish and maintain effective working relationships with
members of the Sheriff-Coroner Department, other agencies,
County management and the public; develop and maintain
effective communication with subordinates and superiors;
establish and maintain effective relationships with others,
especially sensitive relationships with representatives of other
agencies or governmental units and citizen groups; and deal
tactfully and persuasively with others in controversial
situations.

If public safety administrators knew the leadership attributes necessary for executive
public safety positions, those attributes should be listed clearly as leadership attributes required
for the position within the job description. The table shows that attributes are not clearly stated.
The absence of leadership attributes can have many different implications of which none have
been validated. It could imply that administrators are not as involved with the hiring process or
the writing of the job descriptions as they should be. It could also imply that the type of
leadership candidates that are being sought are not applying or that candidate section committees
are not looking for the proper attributes. This revelation simply demonstrates that administrators
should consider implementing a process to ensure the proper leadership attributes are being
implemented within job descriptions and hiring processes should seek those qualities.
The research process has suggested that administrators may not know the desired
leadership attributes they want in an executive position within their organization. The research
also suggests that perhaps the administrator has a good idea of the leadership attributes they
would like in a position, but that has not been documented in job descriptions. Administrators
might consider additional contemplation of leadership attributes they want in executive positions
LEADERSHIP SELECTION WITHIN PUBLIC SAFETY 82

and ensure those attributes are sufficiently documented within the documents from which
candidate searches will begin.
Public safety administrators need to know the benefits of good leadership and the
consequences of the lack of leadership. Despite the validated gap of a process that links hiring
and promoting to required leadership attributes, there was no dispute about the need for good
leadership in public safety and the negative consequences of poor leadership in public safety. All
administrators agreed that good leadership is critical to public safety organizations. FS1
indicated such concern when he commented:
I think public safety organizations should be putting people in leadership roles with the
idea that we have a bigger scope of responsibilities as far as our jobs, as far as reaching
out. You know, we're out there touching the public in different ways and situations that in
a lot of cases are very vulnerable, so we have to have people in leadership positions who
can make good decisions in that. So, we should be taking every opportunity to pick the
best candidates for those positions.
In a similar response, EM3 stated, “If you don't have a leader who can go out and recruit
people and agencies and bring stakeholders in to help you, you've picked yourself someone that
is not going to move that agency forward.” LE3 agreed about the need for leadership in public
safety by stating:
But at the end of the day, leadership's leadership. It doesn't matter where you are. You
can't plug and play it. You either have it or you don't. You're a leader or you're not.
There's no sliding scale. I think that that's an important aspect of what we do in public
safety.
Nearly all stakeholders agreed that leadership in public safety can be a life or death issue
LEADERSHIP SELECTION WITHIN PUBLIC SAFETY 83

for both their responders and the public. The stakeholders recognized the need for good
leadership and simultaneously acknowledged the detriments of poor leadership.
Each of the stakeholders spoke extensively about the damage that could result from poor
leadership within public safety organizations, making the need for proper selection of executive
leaders even more critical. FS3 raised some rhetorical questions about the issue. He questioned:
[…] a bad selection can cost you more, and how long does it take for you to figure out
you made the wrong selection? Maybe it's real [sic] quick, maybe it's a year, maybe it's
longer, how much damage has been done in that amount of time?
FS1 elaborated on the significance by stating:
If given direction on [an emergency] scene, the directive might not be carried out because
they don't respect that individual's decision-making process. Which could lead to folks
freelancing and folks doing things that aren't best for the whole. That's problematic for
not only the safety of the people that they are trying to rescue, but it's also, a safety issue
for those responders and those working with that group who, because of the poor
leadership styles and decisions that are being made, either by the identified leader and/or
by somebody else in that group, the ripple effect outward to the other parties on that
scene could be problematic.
LE1 explained the impact of poor leadership on an organization in a different way by
saying:
It's a really delicate balance because they [poor leaders] could destroy the whole
organization… if the public sees you have an ineffective leader and they start talking
about it, it denigrates the entire department, and that's a very, very hard thing to make up
for because public confidence is so, so important to us.
LEADERSHIP SELECTION WITHIN PUBLIC SAFETY 84

EM1 indicated the damage of poor leadership could even appear at the absolute worse
time, during a time of crisis by opining:
[…]You would hope that that one person wouldn't be able to derail an entire department,
whether it be operationally or during a specific incident, but depending on the skills and
abilities of the rest of the department, it certainly could be a life or death situation, not
just for the employees, but for the community as well.
Procedural Knowledge
Public safety administrators need to have a procedure in place to evaluate potential
leaders for promotion or job selection related to the necessary leadership skills of the
position. In addition to knowing required leadership attributes for public safety executives,
administrators were asked to describe their hiring processes to determine if and how those
processes incorporate assessing how a hiring or promoting organization ties leadership attributes
of a candidate to the needs of an executive leadership position. Administrators, generally
speaking, indicated that their hiring process was based on application and resume reviews, board
interviews, background checks, technical testing, knowing the individual and reputation,
reference checks, and in some cases, a review and update of the job decription before
recruitment. FS3 summarized their executive leadership hiring process in the following
statement:
We just got everything in terms of multiple stepped interviews, resume scrubs,
backgrounds, just about everything you can do to narrow down [the candidates] with the
exception of, and maybe there are some other agencies using this, personality profiles or
instruments of some sort.
LEADERSHIP SELECTION WITHIN PUBLIC SAFETY 85

The following table summarizes the general practices of a hiring process as described by the
participants.
Table 14
General Hiring Process of Stakeholder Organizations

Step Process Responsible Party
Step 1 Recruitment and Application Human Resources
Step 2 Application and Resume Review Human Resources
Step 3 Phone Interview/Screening Human Resources
Step 4 Panel Interview Panel
Step 5 Hiring Manager Interview Hiring Manager
Step 6 Selection/Conditional Offer Hiring Manager
Step 7 Background Investigation Human Resources
Step 8 Begin Work Candidate

Not all participants utilized all of these steps and a few steps may have been rearranged.
Some background investigations included polygraphs; others did not. A few included technical
tests, but most did not. Table 14 represents the general hiring process with the common steps
followed by most of the organizations as presented by the participants.
In addition to hiring, the research study evaluated promotional practices. The following
table indicates the common steps in a promotional process as described by the participants.

LEADERSHIP SELECTION WITHIN PUBLIC SAFETY 86

Table 15
General Promotional Process of Stakeholder Organizations

Step Process Responsible Party
Step 1 Recruitment and Application Promotional Selection
Committee
Step 2 Application and Resume Review Promotional Selection
Committee
Step 3 Technical Testing Promotional Selection
Committee
Step 4 Panel Interview Selected Panel
Step 5 Hiring Manager Interview Hiring Manager
Step 6 Selection Hiring Manager
Step 8 Begin Work Candidate

Not all participants utilized all of these steps and a few steps may have been rearranged.
Technical testing depended on the rank or position being filled and the higher the position, the
less the technical testing was utilized. The above table represents the general promotional
process with the common steps followed by most of the organizations as presented by the
participants.
Table 16 identifies the methods used in hiring processes. The following organizations
indicated utilizing the following methods for evaluating candidates.

LEADERSHIP SELECTION WITHIN PUBLIC SAFETY 87

Table 16
Evaluation Methods in Hiring/Promotional Processes

Method Organization
Application/Resume Review All
Board/Panel Interviews FS1, FS3, EM3, EM1, FS2, WF1, EM2, LE3
Individual Interviews LE1, LE3, FS1
Hiring Manager/Administrator Interview FS3, LE1, EM2, LE3
Written Technical Exam FS3, EM3, EM2, LE3
Physical Fitness Exam FS3
Performance Evaluation LE1, LE2, LE3
Job Description Review & Update FS2, EM2, WF1, FS1
Job Task Test EM2
Background Check All
Psychological and/or Personality Assessment
Tests
None

Administrators were asked how they go about selecting candidates and ensuring those
candidates possess the necessary leadership attributes for the position. In all cases, administrators
acknowledged the weakness of their processes seeking to match leadership attributes. At some
point in each interview, the stakeholders indicated that they had hired a person with the wrong
leadership attributes. FS1 stated:
[…] I don't know if you take into or weight as much as you should, especially in larger
organizations, [leadership] abilities or traits because you're going through assessment
LEADERSHIP SELECTION WITHIN PUBLIC SAFETY 88

centers, you're going through interview panels, you're going through a process that may
or may not grade or evaluate [leadership attributes].
FS3 had a similar viewpoint of their process explaining, “I don't think we do very well
because again I think in the end it comes out to [the hiring manager’s] gut, how [the candidate]
did in the process and neither of those is perfect.” Other administrators were clear about the
credibility of the hiring process. LE3 stated, “I'd like to think that we've made the right
selections, though I know that's not always the case.” FS3 was even more frank when he defined
the reliability of the hiring or promotional process stating, “It’s a crapshoot.”
In summary, this research has shown that administrators should consider in-depth
contemplation about the leadership attributes they want in an executive position. The
identification of leadership attributes should be deliberate and recorded within the particular job
descriptions. This is important because the administrators clearly acknowledged that leadership
is crucial to an effective organization and poor leadership is extremely detrimental to an
organization. Once the identified leadership attributes are acknowledged, then a procedure to
identify candidates with those attributes can be developed and implemented.
Motivation Influences
Administrators were asked multiple questions designed to assess influences affecting
stakeholders’ perceived utility value and administrators’ self-efficacy of a selection process that
matches a candidate for hire or promotion with the leadership attributes required for the position.
Administrators must also take into consideration the financial burden when a person is placed
into a position for which they do not have the required leadership attributes.
Administrators were asked what they thought their employees believed occurs when an
individual is selected that is not well suited for an executive position which aligns with
LEADERSHIP SELECTION WITHIN PUBLIC SAFETY 89

motivation and utility value because it speaks to the credibility of their decisions and support of
their employees. In other words, what do the employees believe happens when somebody who
does not have the right leadership attributes but gets the job anyway. Most administrators
indicated they thought the employees might perceive that it is political or that the selected
individual is favored due to friendship. The managers also suggested that this belief fosters
distrust within the organization and speaks to the motivation for avoiding such perceptions. The
administrators were asked if they thought similarly and most indicated they did not, now that
they are in the top position. Many, however, indicated that when they were coming up within the
ranks, they also had that perception. Similarly, the administrators were asked what they thought
the consequences were of having someone who lacks the proper leadership competencies placed
in an executive position. Administrators responded with a bleak outlook for the individual, the
position, the credibility of the individuals selecting the candidate, and the organization. The
administrators were then asked to quantify their response by being asked if there were costs
related to placing personnel into positions for which they do not have the requisite leadership
attributes. While there were no consistent answers, all alluded to negative impacts upon the
organization including reduced morale, financial cost, diminished efficiency of the organization,
which again are negative consequences administrators should be motivated to avoid.
Administrators were asked if they saw a benefit to matching hiring (or promoting)
processes with the requisite leadership attributes. Unanimously, all agreed that a process that
helps to identify if a candidate has the necessary leadership attributes would be a worthy
endeavor that would have benefits and rewards for their organizations, thus motivating them to
implement such a process. By contrast, administrators were also asked if there were reasons for
not taking all possible precautions to fill executive positions with requisite candidates who have
LEADERSHIP SELECTION WITHIN PUBLIC SAFETY 90

the necessary leadership attributes. Administrator FS3 responded, “There are not any good
reasons.” This set the stage for others who indicated possible bureaucratic reasons, but the
majority of administrators indicated every possible step to identify the best candidate for a
position should be taken.
With regard to self-efficacy, administrators were asked how confident they felt in their
abilities to use resources that assist in matching candidates with the requisite leadership attributes
of a position. This was followed by an inquiry of what contributed to their confidence and what
would strengthen their confidence. Below in Table 17, the assumed motivational influence gaps
are listed along with the results of the gap analysis.
Table 17
Determination of Motivational Influences

Assumed Motivational Influence Gap Validated, Invalidated, or
Undetermined
Utility Value – Public safety administrators
need to acknowledge the value of hiring
personnel that matches their skill sets.
Gap Not Validated. All administrators agreed
that there is significant value in hiring
personnel that matches their skill sets.
Utility Value – Public safety administrators
must value a screening process for the
selection of individuals for leadership
positions.
Gap Validated. None of the organizations had
a process that selected candidates based on
leadership attributes.
Self-Efficacy – Public safety administrators
are confident in the use of resources at their
disposal to select individuals for leadership
positions.
Gap Not Validated. Administrators stated
they were confident but also stated that they
have made errors and could also benefit from
additional resources.

Utility Value
Public safety administrators need to acknowledge the value of hiring personnel that
matches their skill sets. The evidence suggests that public safety administrators know that they
need the right people with the right leadership attributes in their organizations’ executive
LEADERSHIP SELECTION WITHIN PUBLIC SAFETY 91

leadership positions and desire to hire or promote such people. All 10 administrators indicated
that they needed leaders, or their organizations would suffer. LE2 stated, “If I've got an executive
command level person who is mistreating our employees, that's unacceptable. I can't ask you to
go out and treat the public right if your boss is not treating you right.” Hiring the right people
was also supported emphatically by EM3, who stated:
If you didn't match the candidate to the position, someone's responsible for a misfit. And
quite frankly, at my level, I'm a firm believer in that. Yeah. If it's a mismatch, you'll find
out about it very quickly and then the political process either take a toll and you will
struggle through a period there will be some improvement or there will be a degradation
of service in that agency and you'll have to [terminate them] that's the reason why they
have probationary periods. But I do think it's a reflection on the system that I looked at
the candidate.
EM1 described the benefits of hiring someone with the right leadership attributes with the
following:
[…] if we're matching the hiring process to the necessary competencies that are required
as an emergency management leader, that person should be able to navigate the many
challenges and issues that are going to come their way over their career. It leads to,
hopefully, a more effective employee, a more effective emergency manager and better
service for the community that hired the person.
All 10 administrators acknowledged a better organization when a person that has the right
leadership attributes is hired for the position, which gives administrators the motivation to select
proper executive leaders so that their organizations are efficacious and morale remains high.
LEADERSHIP SELECTION WITHIN PUBLIC SAFETY 92

When each administrator was asked what they believe their employees think happens when
someone ill-suited for a position is hired or promoted, which aligns with motivation and utility
value because it speaks to the credibility of their decisions and support of their employees, they
stated that their employees are likely to think it did not have anything to do with leadership
attributes, but rather social status, favoritism, or underhandedness. This was described by EM2,
when he shared an experience he had with a large emergency management organization:
I know that when I started at [large emergency management organization], the person that
was selected as a response director, there was a lot of question of the executive director
behind the scenes, of saying why in the world did they hire this person, they don't talk to
anybody, they're horrible to deal with, they're not easy on the staff at all, and it really
made everybody just question what are you thinking. Why would you do this to the
organization. This is not ... You went from [former response director] to this person, this
is complete opposite, why would you even do that. [The newly selected individual] had a
military background, and so did the executive director. Then that was just thought of [by
colleagues] as, ‘we just want the military way and that's it.’ That really was really
upsetting to a lot of people.
The administrators unanimously agreed that a good leader in a position is an asset, but a poor
leader comes with negative consequences to the organization and community at-large. FS3
stated:
[…] a bad selection can cost you […]and how long does it take for you to figure out you
made the wrong selection? Maybe it's real[ly] quick. Maybe it's a year. Maybe it's longer.
How much damage has been done in that amount of time?
LEADERSHIP SELECTION WITHIN PUBLIC SAFETY 93

LE2 highlighted a potential consequence when a poor leader is hired by stating, “You can
actually get people who want to leave the organization because they don't want to tolerate the
leader. Then you have a recruiting and hiring challenge.” FS1 described the actions, time, and
effort you may need to put into dealing with someone you hire that does not have the requisite
leadership attributes. He explained:
If you hire somebody to the point that […] they've hit their Peter Principle, they've gotten
to the point that they are one step beyond their capability, then you're dealing with the
issues and the outcomes of that. Sometimes there's not a way of [developing the person
you hired that was lacking the leadership attributes] and that person has to be removed
from that position […]
EM1 had a particularly strong opinion on the issue of hiring someone without the necessary
leadership attributes. EM1 shared the following opinion and story to emphasize this perspective:
Certainly, there's the possibility of failure during a critical incident. I think that that
probably is the primary [issue] on the emergency management side, but certainly could
be translated in law enforcement or fire as well. I think morale is probably the other big
piece that […] There's a great example of this, that I was able to see. In the City of [small
city], [Northeastern State], their fire department, it's a perfect case study for somebody
who was put into the fire chief's job as a really sort of a political appointee, and the rank
and file did not agree or support that position. There was a fatal fire, killed three
firefighters and that was the end of that guy's career. It was really a hit on the morale of
that department, and the blame really went back to the chief's role in the management of
that department, but also his responsibilities during that incident.
LEADERSHIP SELECTION WITHIN PUBLIC SAFETY 94

The value of selecting a leader with the right leadership attributes demonstrated during a critical
incident is not only a fire service issue. LE1 explained:
[Hiring someone not qualified] Demoralizes them [other emergency responders within
the organization] immediately. We had a guy here I used to call Lieutenant Nit Wit.
There were officers pinned down by a shotgun. It was a domestic incident, and they went
to the scene, and the subjects started shooting at them. They sought cover, but they
couldn't retreat or advance without taking a chance of getting shot. They radioed in that
they were under fire and to send help. It took the Lieutenant on the desk 20 minutes to
make a decision, 20 minutes with cops under fire!
It is clear by their answers that all administrators believe that strong positive leaders with the
right leadership attributes bring value to their organizations and that people who are hired or
promoted who lack those leadership attributes come with a cost to the organization. The value
can be found in employee morale, productivity, and dedication. These values suffer when
leadership suffers, and the values improve with good leadership.
Public safety administrators must value a screening process for the selection of
individuals for leadership positions. The administrators agreed that there is a need to have a
screening process that selects individuals for a position which matches their leadership attributes
with those required for the position. That said, all of the administrators described a process that
utilized methods that have been demonstrated to be non-credible and did not specifically
measure for the leadership attributes which the position required. Given this fact, while the
administrators appear to know and agree to the benefit of a screening process that selects
candidates based on needed attributes, their actions do not indicate they value it by maintaining a
process that fails to implement such a process. All administrators not only acknowledged the
LEADERSHIP SELECTION WITHIN PUBLIC SAFETY 95

potential of hiring or promoting a poor candidate, each of them acknowledged actually having
done so in the past.
To emphasize the faultiness in a selection process that matches the leadership attributes of an
individual to the needs of the position, FS3 indicated, “I don't think we do very well, because
again I think in the end it comes down to gut, how they did in the process and neither of those is
perfect.” LE2 shared his concern with the screening process:
[…] sometimes you score huge and sometimes you bring people aboard that you thought
they were who they were and they say the right things, but in this job it is very stressful,
it's like being on a rollercoaster ride and sometimes you're going to go down and we're
going to see who holds on. There's an old saying that people show their true colors when
things start getting pretty shaky and you really find out who people are.
EM1 also questioned his organization’s hiring process and its ability to measure
candidates with the necessary leadership attributes when he replied, “I guess my concern is, are
we doing enough to ensure that we're connecting those skills with the things that are required for
the position?” EM1 went on to explain:
We've also been burned. I mean, we've brought people on that I thought were going to be
the right fit for the job and they were not. I think that's why I sort of question is, was it
just because we hired somebody and they happened to be a great person, a great fit and
we just wasted their time and ours going through this process of the interview and the
questions and everything, or did we actually follow a process that enabled us to fit the
right person to the right position?
FS2 shared his observation about the credibility of the hiring system, “It doesn't always
work out as you hope it does. The hoped benefit in that is that you get the person with the
LEADERSHIP SELECTION WITHIN PUBLIC SAFETY 96

characteristics, the integrity, the management style that you're looking for.” The confidence in
the screening system was also questioned by FS1, who elaborated:
[…] if you're promoting up for a leadership role in your department, whether that's a
company officer, or battalion chief, assistant chief, all the way up to fire chief, fire chief
[…] departments have a promotional process. And I don't know if you take into or weight
as much as you should, especially in larger organizations, those abilities or traits because
you're going through assessment centers, you're going through interview panels, you're
going through a process that may or may not grade or evaluate that […] when you hire
for the executive level, I think that one of the biggest challenges is actually knowing […]
are you hiring somebody with known qualities, somebody you know personally, and you
have the background history with as opposed to hiring somebody who is not a known
quality[…]Is your assessment tool a good tool? Have you assessed him properly? Are
your tests valid? You know, are your tests effective in... are you doing it just by an
interview panel? Are you running them through other types of tests?
It was evident that the administrators all agreed that an effective screening process should be
utilized and that such a screening process would yield a more suitable candidate with a higher
probability of success in the position, but that such a screening process was not being utilized by
these departments.
Self-Efficacy
Public safety administrators are confident in their ability to select individuals for
leadership positions. This gap was not validated because eight of the administrators believed
themselves to be confident in selecting the best candidates for executive positions, despite
indicating they had made wrong decisions in the past. When LE2 was asked how confident he
LEADERSHIP SELECTION WITHIN PUBLIC SAFETY 97

was in his (and his department’s) ability to select the right leaders who were needed for his
department, he replied, “Very confident. […] I'm very happy with the way we're doing things
now.” He also stated he gets positive feedback from the City Manager’s Office, indicating he is
selecting the right people for the job:
EM1 also shared very clearly his confidence level in his hiring process. He stated:
I feel confident in the interview questions that we ask people. We try to take examples,
both from human resources, we look for resources online to try and sculpt them around
the necessary things that we're looking for in the positions. So yeah, I think, with what we
have, I do feel confident.
The fire service appeared no different in self-efficacy either. FS2 shared his feelings about the
selection process in his organization:
I'm very confident in it. At the end of that process, the person that rises to the top, who
has made it through everything from those minimum qualifications all the way to the top,
I am very confident that they will meet those competencies that we're looking for.
When LE1 was asked why he felt confident of his ability to select personnel for executive
positions, he stated it was because of his success rate. He went on to say, “[…] when we go
through a process that the majority of the time, we get the right individuals who are helping us
lead this organization.” In similar fashion, LE3 declared confidence in his ability to select the
right people. He commented:
I'm not sure that we do select anybody who doesn't have the core competencies. I could
tell you that [...] I'm not going to pick somebody because they're the least worst of the
pool. They're either going to have it or they're not. I will run or restructure the department
at the executive level before I'll put somebody in a position that they're not equipped for.
LEADERSHIP SELECTION WITHIN PUBLIC SAFETY 98

Some administrators felt their past choices had predominantly been good choices and trusted
their opinions and instincts derived from interviews and general observations. EM2 shared that
he was confident in his abilities to select good leaders. He stated:
I think we've done a pretty good job with changing the way that things were done in the
past, which was just one person doing an interview and simply asking standard questions.
I do think that, if we were on the fence or we weren't as comfortable with our
conversations, if we weren't as comfortable with that person that we were, I think we
would've moved onto that next phase of using [a testing method], to be able to test that
person […] basic competencies.
EM2 went on to explain why he is confident in his selection abilities:
There's a lot to be said for intuition. I think that we were pretty confident in [a
candidates] personality. Then also, the knowledge and skills and knowledge base that
they [the person], had. They did a pretty good job at answering and expanding upon the
questions, and then, it was some of the things that other candidates simply didn't have.
It was evident from the interviews that the administrators felt confident in their abilities to assess
candidates and their capabilities despite acknowledging failures in the past.
Organizational Influences
Administrators were asked multiple questions designed to assess organizational influences that
affect leadership selection processes within their organizations. Administrators were asked what
their biggest challenges are in selecting leaders for their organization. In an attempt to
understand if there were any inhibitors to the administrators, they were asked if anything was
preventing them from making changes in the hiring or promotional processes. Both of these
questions sought to understand the organization from a cultural model perspective.
LEADERSHIP SELECTION WITHIN PUBLIC SAFETY 99

From a cultural setting perspective, administrators were asked how their staff or agency aligned
organization cultural values with selecting executives with proper leadership attributes and how
the staff or employees showed a commitment to that organizational value. Administrators were
additionally asked how their organization aligns in terms of thoughts and values in regard to
leadership. The administrators were further probed about their ability to make changes to the
leadership selection process within the organization, and specifically how difficult it would be to
make changes. Administrators were asked what resources helped them implement a process that
identifies and matches leadership attributes and ties them to specific jobs. Finally, they were
asked what resources are helpful to them in making leadership selections and what resources
would be helpful that they do not have. In Table 18, the organizational influences are listed and
the determination of whether the influences were validated as a gap.

Table 18

Determination of Organizational Influences

Assumed Organizational Influence Gap Validated, Not Validated, or
Undetermined
Public safety organizations must be willing to
transition from traditional promotional
practices or job hiring practices to a new
model.

Gap Validated. While reasons varied, the
result was the same, public safety
organizations resist adopting new practices
into their hiring or promotional practices.
Public safety personnel need to be trained in
new promotion and evaluation procedures.
Undetermined. Only a few administrators
seemed receptive to being trained in new
promotion and evaluation procedures.

Cultural Model
Public safety organizations must be willing to transition from traditional
promotional practices or job hiring practices to a new model. This influence was determined
LEADERSHIP SELECTION WITHIN PUBLIC SAFETY 100

to be a validated gap. Although the reasons seemed to vary, the end result was that the
participant’s perception is that public safety organizations are not incorporating changes into
their hiring and promotional processes. Some administrators felt their past choices had
predominantly been good choices and trusted their opinions and instincts derived from
interviews and general observations and therefore did not perceive a need to change hiring
practices or promotional practices. There were administrators that acknowledged never even
considering new hiring practices and being uninformed of the possible options available to them.
Others knew of psychological testing, and even used them in team building exercises, but never
considered incorporating them into hiring or promotional practices. Some administrators even
acknowledged they would only hire people they knew personally as the culture of public safety
can often embrace a large sense of distrust of strangers since life-saving issues are at stake. A
few administrators acknowledged they had no impediments to changing the hiring and
promotional practices from the larger organizational level while others indicated inhibitors could
be placed upon them from a human resource department to which they are required to
procedurally follow. Unions were listed as another inhibitor which some administrators had to
consider. Others indicated various organizational reasons for not hiring outside their
organization. It was evident that a gap exists but that the reasons varied from organization to
organization based on cultural issues.
Some administrators indicated their culture relied heavily on trust. Executive leadership positions
were not to be offered to candidates they did not know and therefore could not trust.
Administrators would only be willing to hire someone they knew or someone that they had a
previous relationship with and knew from personal observation of the individual’s personality
and work ethic. WF1 was asked directly if he would only hire someone he knew and was
LEADERSHIP SELECTION WITHIN PUBLIC SAFETY 101

comfortable with. WF1 confirmed that for an executive leadership position, he would likely only
hire a known colleague. LE3 indicated a similar philosophy when he stated, “We have yet to
promote a sergeant who I don't personally know.” LE2 opined that the cultural issue of hiring
someone based on relationships can be contributed to by unions. He said:
At the same time, if the union's coming at me and saying we really want this person, in
the back of my head I'm asking why? Why is it that they want this person? Is it because
they're a good person that has a good reputation or is it a person who always rolls over,
gives people whatever they want and is it [sic]about that popularity contest?
Failure to adopt a new model of hiring and promotions also manifested itself in another subject,
that of hiring from outside the organization. Many organizations, especially the large ones, stated
that hiring from outside was not ideal because it reduces the opportunities for career
advancement from within. The larger organizations indicated that hiring from outside conveys
that people with the attributes they are looking for do not exist within the organization. They
indicated the first responders and their unions would take issue to such a practice. This also
aligns with the previous issue of hiring without knowing someone because hiring from outside
the organization increases the likelihood that the external hire is not known to people within the
organization. LE1 emphasized this concept within the culture of his organization when he
summarized:
Universally, [we hire] inside because those that aspire to become the police
commissioner, or the executive really poison the well with that concept of hiring from
outside. ‘They're killing our opportunity to advance. We'll never see another local police
commissioner.’ I don't know if this is specific to [small jurisdiction] because I was born
and raised here, and we make a joke that if you haven't lived here 25 years, you're not
LEADERSHIP SELECTION WITHIN PUBLIC SAFETY 102

allowed to vote… That kind of mentality transcends even to the police department, that
you're not from here…I'll let you go downstairs and ask any cop here. I'll have to do
damage control because they'll say, ‘are we getting an outsider?’ That's the message
they'll hear from you. If you said to them, how would you feel if they brought in a chief
from [Large Jurisdiction] or somewhere else? That would spread through the PD like
wildfire. ‘[The Police Commissioner] is leaving. They're looking for an outsider.’ That's
how the mindset is, so strict to no outsiders.
LE3 explained why he does not seek talent from outside his organization, “I rarely go
outside the organization to hire. I haven't needed to. We've been able to cultivate and develop our
team to meet the needs of the organization.”
FS3 is an administrator who, despite being hired externally, hires emergency responder
executives only from within the organization. He elaborated on the issue stating:
I think it's culture. It was like that with [other large organization FS3 was Administrator
of before current organization] too. It was like that [hiring from outside] was a kiss of
death. Because I'm sure there's plenty of great people here […] But it's a culture thing.
[Responders from other large organization said] ‘is like man we never hire from the
outside even for fire chief.’ Especially with the union influence and everything else here
[…] So then they leave and the union here nobody wanted any [...] Nobody from
internally wanted to put in for the job. And the union and the workforce didn't want
anybody from internal. Big organizations they wanted somebody from the outside. That's
bad. Generally, that is seen as man there are some issues there. If they don't [...] If you
don't have anybody from 1500 people and you don't have anybody you want from the
inside, what's that saying? [...] I think for me the external person, I think he'd be met with
LEADERSHIP SELECTION WITHIN PUBLIC SAFETY 103

pretty big suspicion. I think [with] the personality trait [assessment] thing, maybe not as
much. But man, if I considered bringing somebody in from the outside or even advertised
it, man, it would be hugely insulting to the department because I'm basically saying that,
there may not be anybody from within that's qualified already for it. Maybe they would
just go nuts. They would not be well received.
EM1 also weighed in on the issue of hiring from outside the organization by saying:
So, if you are looking to try and bring somebody in from outside, you may run into
additional challenges when trying to bring them on as an external hire. Those folks that
you're going to be relying on as boots on the ground may not be as in support of that
leader or that executive.
In addition to not changing hiring and promotional practices because of relational connections or
inhibitors that fear external hires, other issues include fear and ignorance of human resource laws
and standards for some organizations. EM1 explained:
I think public safety administrators would need to have confidence that the process that
they're using to [hire somebody] is not going to […] get them in trouble for not following
fair hiring practices or any other internal requirements that are necessary within their
organization.
FS1 also indicated this as a reason:
I don't know what's stopping us. You know, are there tools available that we can adopt?
You know, we talked about the [psychological testing]. Is there a tool out there available
for me to use today to be able to incorporate that into my process? So maybe it's lack of
knowledge. Maybe there is something out there and I don't know about it. You know, if
LEADERSHIP SELECTION WITHIN PUBLIC SAFETY 104

there is, great. I'd like to use it. If there's not, let's develop it. I think that would be the
biggest stopping point.
Below, Table 19 identifies concerns that were identified by participants pertaining to the
possibility of changing hiring and promotional procedures.
Table 19

Cultural Concerns Identified Pertaining to Changing Hiring and Promotion Procedures

Concern Organization
Confidence in current procedures LE1, LE2, LE3, EM2, WF1
Lack of authority to change EM3, FS2, WF1
Lack of confidence in the credibility of
psychological assessments
FS1, LE2
Resistance to external hiring EM1, EM2, FS3, LE1, LE3, WF1
Desire to have a first-hand relationship with
the candidate
EM1, EM3, LE1, LE2, LE3, WF1
Need more information EM1, EM2, FS1, FS2, FS3

As Table 19 demonstrates, administrators cited many different reasons that may contribute to
maintaining the status quo of hiring and promotional practices. While the differences vary widely
and there may be multiple reasons, the result is that a gap exists when it comes to the
organization being willing to overcome organizational barriers to accept new methods within
hiring and promotional procedures.
Cultural Setting
Public safety personnel need to be trained in new promotion and evaluation
procedures. This influence was found to be undetermined due to only a few administrators that
appeared receptive to being trained in new promotion and evaluation procedures. Most appeared
LEADERSHIP SELECTION WITHIN PUBLIC SAFETY 105

reluctant to change the process and found no need to be trained in new promotion and evaluation
procedures. FS1 appeared to be open to new ideas and learning about new tools that could be
used in making hiring or promotional selections when he commented:
I think that if we had the tools out there that were valid, that we could take actionable
items on that were tailored to the fire service or public safety and not just a general
personality test that is broad scope for everybody in the world but more tailored to public
safety. Do you have the right traits to be a firefighter, EMS responder, or police officer?
And could I look at that and make, you know, use that as a tool in making decisions?
EM2 shared what he felt he could do to improve a hiring process explaining:
I think that doing your due diligence, checking references, talking to people, doing some
of those things like competency tests, as far as the leadership, doing the personality tests,
and even just identifying what kind of personality are you looking for, I think those are
key things to be able to understand. It's easy to say that we want somebody with
experience with emergency management, but what are we really looking for when it
comes to things like their personality?
Table 20 shows the participants who demonstrated interest in incorporating new methods of
evaluation into hiring and promotional procedures which would require staff to be trained in the
new methods.

LEADERSHIP SELECTION WITHIN PUBLIC SAFETY 106

Table 20

Organizations that Showed Interest in Incorporating New Methods into Hiring and Promotional
Procedures Which Would Require Staff to be Trained

Area for Potential Change Organization
Incorporating psychological assessments EM1, EM2, FS1, FS2, FS3
Adding a second interview to the process FS2
Adding other testing measures EM1, EM2
Following industry standards and best
practices
LE2

As demonstrated in Table 20, several administrators were open to changing hiring or
promotional methods of their organization, or indicated they were looking into some changes.
Few, however, indicated that public safety personnel need to be trained in new promotion and
evaluation procedures. Ultimately, not enough administrators commented directly on the need to
train public safety personnel in new hiring and promotional procedures to determine if the gap
exists and more research is required in this area to determine such needs.
Synthesis
This research study assumed eight influences which may affect a public safety organization’s
ability to achieve the goal of having first responders appropriately evaluated and selected for jobs
requiring leadership attributes that reflect their talents and abilities. This study identified and
validated two knowledge influence gaps, one declarative and one procedural. Additionally, this
study identified and validated one utility value-based motivation influence gap. Finally, the study
validated one cultural model organizational influence gap.
LEADERSHIP SELECTION WITHIN PUBLIC SAFETY 107

The findings are clear that particular leadership attributes are needed within public safety
organizations. The findings show that the organizations studied did not have an empirical method
to evaluate leadership attributes during a hiring or promotional process despite every
administrator acknowledging that leadership in public safety executive positions is important.
The administrators also agreed that a lack of leadership has significant negative consequences
that impact the organization and community served. The research study also showed that job
descriptions failed to list the desired leadership attributes of the executive positions, nor were
consistent attributes identified across disciplines and organizations.
The research study showed that the public safety administrators all agreed that there is significant
value in hiring personnel that matches the leadership skill sets desired within an executive
leadership position. The administrators also agreed that a screening process should attempt to
match a candidate with the right leadership attributes because that would lead to a better
qualified candidate and ultimately a more efficient organization, but no organization appeared to
have such a process in place. The administrators felt confident in their process of selection, but
simultaneously all indicated that they had, on previous occasions, made poor selections in
executive leader candidates. Administrators also unanimously agreed that having good leaders is
critical to good operations and that there are no compelling reasons for not taking every
precaution to make a good choice when selecting executive leaders.
Organizationally, it was determined that public safety organizations resist change in hiring and
promotional processes and that it could be a result of the culture of the organization’s that
contributes to that resistance. This research study confirmed that good leadership is important to
public safety organizations, and that at times, it could even be a matter of life and death. Public
safety administrators believe that it is their duty to select candidates for executive positions that
LEADERSHIP SELECTION WITHIN PUBLIC SAFETY 108

align with the leadership attributes necessary for the position, but the research showed that job
descriptions fail to identify those attributes and that the hiring or promotional process utilizes
archaic and unreliable methods to identify personnel and their leadership attributes. The research
study also showed that for a number of reasons, there is resistance to change those processes.

LEADERSHIP SELECTION WITHIN PUBLIC SAFETY 109

CHAPTER FIVE: RECOMMENDATIONS

The research conducted has revealed several recommendations in the areas of knowledge,
motivation, and organization. Knowledge recommendations indicate that the primary
stakeholders need to know the leadership attributes required for public safety executive positions
and that administrators should consider reviewing and updating procedures to ensure leadership
attributes are evaluated effectively when selecting candidates for executive positions.
Motivationally, it is recommended that administrators need to consider if they truly value hiring
personnel with jobs that match their skill sets and whether their hiring or promotional procedures
reflect that value. Organizationally, public safety administrators must be willing to transition
from traditional hiring and promotional practices to a new model that includes assessing for the
required leadership attributes for a particular executive position. Culturally speaking, public
safety agencies need to demonstrate they value leadership by providing as much credence to
leadership attributes as they do other job knowledge, skills, and abilities.
A public safety organization should consider implementing these recommendations in a change
management process to ensure improvements are made, supported, institutionalized, and the
desired outcomes and outputs are obtained. This implementation program should seek to achieve
the above stated recommendations. It is acknowledged that every public safety organization is
unique and that the various sizes and complexities of an organization may require a customized
change management process. The following steps are intended to be a general framework that
public safety organizations may follow to implement the recommendations of this research
study. Public safety administrators should consider conducting an executive position evaluation
workshop that will allow key executives of the organization to determine the leadership
attributes needed in each position and have those attributes written into position descriptions.
LEADERSHIP SELECTION WITHIN PUBLIC SAFETY 110

The workshop should also identify characteristics that they do not want in a person filling the
position and have those written into the job description. The organization should also consider
providing a training course to hiring executives and the public safety administrator to teach them
about the different types of psychological assessments that are available and how to interpret the
results of those assessments, which would then determine how best to utilize these assessments
in a hiring or promotional process. The organization should contemplate retaining the services of
an industrial or organizational psychologist to administer psychological assessments, as
necessary, in the selection process of executive leaders.
Once the program is implemented, evaluation tools should be considered to determine the
level of learning and behavioral changes that have resulted from plan implementation.
Evaluation will monitor short term, mid-term, and long-term results. Finally, results of outcomes
and outputs should be evaluated and reported on to all stakeholders and constituents within the
organization with an evaluation tool that monitors all four levels of the Kirkpatrick and
Kirkpatrick (2016) New World model including results, behaviors, learning, and reactions.
Recommendations for Practice to Address KMO Influences
Knowledge Recommendations
This study has identified three assumed knowledge influences for public safety
administrators. The first is that public safety administrators need to know the leadership skills,
competencies, and dispositions required for public safety executive positions within their
organizations. Second, there needs to be a procedure to ensure leadership attributes are evaluated
when selecting candidates for executive positions. The declarative knowledge of the leadership
attributes is the priority, because without this knowledge, the procedural knowledge cannot be
developed. The application of fundamental knowledge will lead to successful utilization and
LEADERSHIP SELECTION WITHIN PUBLIC SAFETY 111

implementation of the knowledge (Schraw & McCrudden, 2006). Table 21 shows the knowledge
recommendations including the assumed influence, whether it was validated in the study as a
gap, and the specific recommendation for public safety organizations to consider.
Table 21
Knowledge Recommendations
Assumed Knowledge
Influence
Principle and Citation Context-Specific
Recommendation
Public safety
administrators need to
know the leadership
attributes required for
public safety executive
positions. (Declarative)
Ensure that knowledge
and skills learned in
training and education
transfer to the job (Clark
& Estes, 2008)

Public safety
administrators should
conduct workshops to
determine required
leadership attributes for
every executive position
within the organizations.
Public safety
administrators need to
have a procedure in place
to evaluate potential
leaders for promotion or
job selection related to the
necessary leadership
attributes of the position.
(Procedural)
How individuals
organize knowledge
influences how they
learn and apply what
they know (Schraw &
McCrudden, 2006).

Consider implementing a
procedure that utilizes
psychological assessments
to match attributes required
for the position with
attributes of the candidate.

Public safety administrators should conduct workshops to determine required leadership
attributes for every executive position within the organizations. The findings of the
qualitative interviews and document analysis suggest that public safety administrators believe
there are essential leadership attributes for executive leadership positions and that by matching
candidates attributes with those required in a position will strengthen the organization. The
leadership attributes required of public safety executive personnel should be known declarative
information. Clark and Estes (2008) state that ensuring knowledge and skills learned in training
LEADERSHIP SELECTION WITHIN PUBLIC SAFETY 112

and education transfer to the job is critical to addressing gaps in knowledge. Therefore, public
safety administrators should consider conducting a workshop with stakeholders to determine
what leadership attributes are required in each executive position and update position
descriptions with the attributes to ensure leadership attributes can be applied to the positions. For
example, if leadership attributes are evaluated and placed into job descriptions before the
recruitment process begins, then a hiring process can include a search for a person that possesses
the named leadership attributes by human resource personnel.
Current public safety hiring and candidate selection practices may be inadequate and may
not identify the proper leadership attributes needed in public safety executive positions
(Dantzker, 1996; Kang & Jin, 2015). Identifying the necessary leadership attributes could be key
to developing a process for selecting leaders in accordance with the next recommendation.
Consider implementing a procedure that utilizes psychological assessments to match
attributes required for the position with attributes of the candidate. The public safety
administrators in this study have appeared to rely on methods that have proven to be unreliable
when assessing potential candidates for an executive leadership position. In some cases, the
highest echelons of public safety are appointed with no standard of competency or merit
(Dantzker, 1996; Sessa et al., 1998; Topp, 2011). Other standard practices of hiring, selection,
and promotion include written technical tests, interviews, interview boards, and performance
reviews (Bishopp, 2013; Carr, 2017; Sessa et al., 1998; Topp, 2011). Some organizations utilize
tenure or "time-in-service" as a primary factor for determining promotions and position selection
(Beaton et al., 2001; Dantzker, 1996; Rigoni & Nelson, 2015; Sessa et al., 1998; Topp, 2011).
Many organizations have turned to assessment centers which has had mixed findings of
credibility (Bishopp, 2013; Carr, 2017; Howard, 2001; Landy & Shankster, 1994; Lowry, 1997;
LEADERSHIP SELECTION WITHIN PUBLIC SAFETY 113

Sessa et al., 1998; Topp, 2011; Wilson et al., 2010). These promotional and selection processes
may not be the best methods for selecting the leaders that are needed for the emerging challenges
of public safety.
Utilizing psychological assessments may mitigate the subjectivity of the selection process
and match identified strengths that can then be compared to the needs of the position. This may
also diminish bias and favoritism within the process and increase the credibility of the process.
As administrators indicated that poor leaders who get placed in leadership positions believe the
selection was based less on merit and ability and more on loyalty and favoritism, the introduction
of psychological assessments provides a opportunity to decrease this belief.
As with many positive actions, there are also drawbacks that may occur with
psychological assessments. Employees are going to need to be educated about assessments and
the purpose and intention. In some cases, there may be fear or lack of trust in the assessment
process or the assessments themselves. Union’s or employees may balk at the use of such
assessments as they are not completely reliable or conclusive, they are only a forecast of
anticipated behavior which could be inaccurate. This is why assessments should be done under
the supervision of industrial or organizational psychologists or someone practiced and
experienced in conducting such assessments.
Procedural knowledge will allow public safety administrators to utilize a system of
resources that will implement measurement and evaluation practices. Schraw and McCrudden
(2006) indicate that the manner in which individuals organize knowledge influences how they
learn and apply what they know. Public safety administrators should know how to implement
hiring procedures that utilize evaluative tools that measure leadership attributes (Hadley et al.,
2011). Public safety administrators should ensure hiring managers know that the organization is
LEADERSHIP SELECTION WITHIN PUBLIC SAFETY 114

seeking competent or effective leaders and does not want to hire those that could potentially be
poor leaders (Goldman, 2009). For instance, a hiring manager should know the required
leadership attributes for the executive position and then follow a process that tests candidates
against psychological assessments to ensure the candidate is likely to have the requisite attributes
(Goldman, 2009).
If public safety organizations are truly looking for leaders with personalities and
behavioral patterns that match their culture and needs, they have numerous tools available to
them. Leadership competencies and strengths can be measured (Arnold et al., 2000; Clark &
Clark, 1990; Hadley et al., 2011; Miller et al., 2009; Northouse, 2016; Rath, 2007). Public safety
organizations should consider the proper personalities for the particular job and culture they are
trying to meet, which could include personality and emotional intelligence, in addition to
leadership characteristics (Flynn & Herrington, 2015; Morrison, 2017; Murphy, 2007; Wilson et
al., 2010). Besides looking for strengths and cultural fit, public safety organizations should also
be looking for undesirable attributes’ individuals may have that they do not want in their
organizations.
Motivation Recommendations
This study identified three assumed motivational influences for public safety
administrators. The first is the need to consider the value of assessing leadership attributes in
their hiring decisions and the need to believe the benefits of hiring or promoting properly
assessed candidates will outweigh the costs to their organization. Second, public safety
administrators must consider the value a screening process for the selection of individuals for
leadership positions. Finally, public safety administrators should explore their ability to utilize
leadership attributes in their hiring and promotion decisions. Utility value and self-efficacy are
LEADERSHIP SELECTION WITHIN PUBLIC SAFETY 115

key motivational theories that should be addressed when encouraging stakeholders to implement
opportunities for change. Eccles and Wigfield (2000) states that higher expectations for success
can positively influence motivations. Likewise, Pajares (2006) indicates that high self-efficacy
can positively influence motivation. Table 16 below shows motivation recommendations
including the assumed influence, whether it was validated in the study as a gap, and the specific
recommendation for public safety organizations to consider.
Table 22

Motivation Recommendations

Assumed Motivation
Influence
Principle and Citation Context-Specific Recommendation
Public safety
administrators must
value a screening
process for the selection
of individuals for
leadership positions.
Suggest reasons and
values for
performance goals
(Clark & Estes,
2008).

Public safety administrators should
consider psychological assessments
to be included into executive
leadership position selection
methodology.

Public safety administrators should consider psychological assessments to be
included into executive leadership position selection methodology. Organizations have
demonstrated the lack of valuing leadership. In fact, Gallup found that, in an overwhelming 82%
of cases, organizations failed to choose someone with the necessary talents to achieve success
(Campbell & Vuong, 2017). Murphy (2005) indicates that organizations sabotage themselves
when selecting candidates because they use interviewers that do not know the candidates and
therefore cannot effectively measure a candidate’s theoretical response. Clark and Clark (1990)
stated the overwhelming number of unqualified individuals selected into leadership positions
LEADERSHIP SELECTION WITHIN PUBLIC SAFETY 116

was "egregious" and went on to state that it was burdensome for both the organization and the
chosen candidate. It is clear from Campbell and Vuong (2017), Murphy (2005), and Clark and
Clark (1990) that organizations fail to value leadership as they continue to put people not suited
for positions into leadership roles which can have serious consequences. Gallup (2015) indicated
that the number of ill-suited individuals in leadership positions costs the U.S. economy $319
billion to $398 billion each year. This error in leadership selection may be a contributor to the
entry of poor leadership into public safety organizations. Renaud’s (2012) research on national
public safety states that not every responder has the particular skill sets to manage or lead during
a disaster. This reinforces the recommendation that public safety administrators should explore
the use of psychological assessments in hiring and promotional practices. If these assessments
are implemented, public safety administrators should communicate to their employees how such
practices improve efficiency and employee satisfaction and mitigate financial and intangible
costs.
Organization Recommendations
The research suggested the assumed organization influence that public safety organizations
should be willing to transition from traditional promotional practices or job hiring practices to a
new model. Public safety administrators indicated organizations need to value those components
in the hiring and promotion process. The proposed need to train public safety personnel was
undetermined as the qualitative interviews revealed that administrators felt confident with
current selection methodology. Even though the influence was undetermined, a recommendation
is still provided because if an organization changes its hiring methodology, it is believed that
training on new methods of candidate selection might be required. These organizational
influences are derived from the KMO theories of Clark and Estes (2008). Recommendations
LEADERSHIP SELECTION WITHIN PUBLIC SAFETY 117

have been provided based upon theoretical principles from the literature review. Table 23 below
presents the influences, citation, and recommendations.
Table 23

Organization Recommendations

Assumed Organization
Influence
..............
Principle and Citation

Context-Specific
Recommendation
Public safety
organizations must be
willing to transition
from traditional
promotional practices
or job hiring practices
to a new model.
(Cultural Model)
Removing barriers that
impede change include
providing tools and
resources within the
organization that support
change (Kotter, 2012).
Public safety administrators
should educate employees
about the subjectivity of
current hiring procedures
and the strengths of
assessments.
Public safety
personnel need to be
trained in new
promotion and
evaluation procedures.
(Cultural Setting)
Align the structures and
processes of the
organization with goals
(Clark & Estes, 2008).
Jurisdictional authorities
should consider rewarding
impartial leadership
selection processes and
discouraging processes that
are subjective.

Public safety administrators should educate employees about the subjectivity of current
hiring procedures and the strengths of assessments. It appears that none of the public safety
organizations studied match requisite competencies to job candidates during the hiring process.
Public safety administrators need to explore new models for hiring executives that ensure they
have the requisite competencies. This cultural model theory is an example of the difficulty of
change within organizations. Planned change occurs when there is a lack of recognition, group
biases, groupthink, and lack of consensus which requires triggering attention, critical thinking,
and consensus building to overcome (Van de Ven & Sun, 2011). Public safety administrators
may need to be prepared to manage change as employees and career public safety personnel will
LEADERSHIP SELECTION WITHIN PUBLIC SAFETY 118

not be accustomed to implementing a new and nontraditional hiring process. Public safety
administrators should consider educating hiring managers and human resource employees about
the subjectivity of current hiring procedures and the strengths of assessments. As an example,
administrators could manage change by utilizing a recruiting pamphlet for open job positions
that describe the new process, the reason and purpose of the new process, and conclude with the
desired leadership attributes that the organization is seeking. This will result in a better
understanding of the process and the purpose of the new hiring procedures.
Leadership within public safety is in high demand. Several authors
suggest that hiring practices are lacking in the general workforce and within public safety
organizations. One study determined that public safety organizations should be leery of basing
promotions solely on assessment center scores (Bishopp, 2013). In their seminal work on hiring
techniques, Landy and Shankster (1994) raise the question of what is being measured in an
interview. A Center for Creative Leadership study observed that personnel are often selected
utilizing primarily resumes, references, and interviews which are the least promising in
determining a person's readiness for a particular job (Sessa et al., 1998). Selection processes by
organizations are often not looking for the right skill set needed for a particular job and are not
utilizing the proper selection techniques such as utilizing industrial or organizational
psychologists in the hiring process to match strengths of an individual’s character to job
requirements (Howard, 2001). Hadley et al., (2011) prescribe a crisis leadership assessment for
people called upon to lead during a disaster. They describe leadership characteristics needed
during disasters and call for researchers to identify what good crisis leaders resemble (Hadley et
al., 2011). Only when leadership competencies are determined can you seek improvement in
crisis leadership capabilities and efficiency (Hadley et al., 2011). In addition to flawed hiring
LEADERSHIP SELECTION WITHIN PUBLIC SAFETY 119

processes, organizations may not be implementing procedures or utilizing tools that are available
to them. This is the reason why public safety administrators should educate the hiring managers
and human resource employees about the weaknesses of current hiring practices and the
strengths of utilizing leadership attributes.
Jurisdictional authorities should consider rewarding impartial leadership selection
processes and discouraging processes that are subjective. While all public safety
administrators stated they valued leadership, only two participants interviewed took actions that
demonstrated a commitment to valuing leadership attributes in hiring and promotion decisions.
Clark and Estes (2008) state that changing an organization requires aligning structures and the
processes of the organization within the goals. Jurisdictional authorities need to value utilizing
leadership attributes in their hiring and promotion decisions. Dialectic change can be caused by
destructive conflict and power imbalance, but can be solved utilizing conflict management,
negotiation skills, and political savvy (Van de Ven & Sun, 2011). Jurisdictional authorities will
likely experience public safety administrators or lower level hiring managers who would rather
hire based on politics, friendships, and performance in previous jobs. The recommendation is
that public safety administrators need to consider hiring based on the evaluation of leadership
attributes. Hiring and promotional processes and procedures may favor psychological
assessments over other less credible hiring and promotional processes and procedures found at
play through the qualitative interviews. As an example, instead of determining advancement
based on opinions from interviews and past performance, hiring processes should ensure that
psychological assessment scores based on the identified needed attributes are a major part of the
candidate selection process.
LEADERSHIP SELECTION WITHIN PUBLIC SAFETY 120

Current public safety hiring and candidate selection practices may be inadequate and may not
identify the proper attributes needed in public safety executive positions (Dantzker, 1996; Kang
& Jin, 2015). Little research exists to help us understand the selection of executive-level
employees in public safety (Topp, 2011). In some cases, the highest echelons of public safety are
appointed with no standard of competency or merit (Dantzker, 1996; Sessa et al., 1998; Topp,
2011). Other standard practices of hiring, selection, and promotion include written technical
tests, interviews, interview boards, and performance reviews (Bishopp, 2013; Carr, 2017; Sessa
et al., 1998; Topp, 2011). Some organizations utilize tenure or time-in-service as a primary factor
for determining promotions and position selection (Beaton et al.,; Dantzker, 1996; Rigoni &
Nelson, 2015; Sessa et al., 1998; Topp, 2011). Many organizations have turned to assessment
centers which has had mixed findings of credibility (Bishopp, 2013; Carr, 2017; Howard, 2001;
Landy & Shankster, 1994; Lowry, 1997; Sessa et al., 1998; Topp, 2011; Wilson et al., 2010).
These promotional and selection processes may not be the best methods for selecting the leaders
that are needed for the emerging challenges of public safety. To effect change, jurisdictional
authorities need to consider structure and processes within the organization by rewarding
administrators for hiring and promotional processes that are impartial and discouraging processes
that are subjective.
Integrated Implementation and Evaluation Plan
Implementation and Evaluation Framework
The New World Model occurs in four phases (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). The first
phase is reaction. The second is learning. In the third phase, behavior, is monitored and adjusted.
The final phase concludes with results (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). In the first phase,
reaction is determined by the measurement of engagement, relevance, and customer satisfaction
LEADERSHIP SELECTION WITHIN PUBLIC SAFETY 121

(Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). The second phase, learning, is assessed through knowledge,
skill, confidence, and commitment (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). Behavior is then
monitored and adjusted utilizing incentives and learning techniques (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick,
2016). Finally, in level four, results are assessed by evaluating leading indicators and desired
outcomes (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016).
Organizational Purpose, Need, and Expectations
The global field of practice goal is that by 2025, public safety organizations will
implement a screening process for leadership readiness before public safety leaders are assigned
to leadership roles within public safety organizations. The primary stakeholders, public safety
administrators, should support that goal by utilizing leadership attributes in their hiring and
promotional decisions. Achievement of this goal will improve leadership within public safety
organizations and the effectiveness of organizations that save lives, stabilize incidents, and
protect property and the environment. The measures for success will include the percentage of
public safety organizations utilizing a leadership readiness screening process and the percentage
of candidates who have been screened and demonstrated to be aligned with the skills,
competencies, and dispositions required for the position that are placed in executive leadership
positions within public safety organizations. Not screening for leadership readiness would result
in continued selection and appointment of individuals without regard to leadership skills,
competencies, and dispositions.
Level 4: Results and Leading Indicators
Short-term observations and measurements would be indicated by observing external
candidates being hired utilizing an impartial process that includes psychological assessments.
Another observation is that the general public perceives that the public safety hiring practices
LEADERSHIP SELECTION WITHIN PUBLIC SAFETY 122

have improved. An additional results outcome would be that there are improved collaboration at
large events that include external stakeholders. Internal outcomes include the use of
psychological assessments in promotion processes, employee satisfaction is improved, the
leaders hired drive innovation and change, and that employees are empowered.
Table 24 reflects the outcomes, metrics, and methods discussed.
Table 24

Outcomes, Metrics, and Methods

Outcome Metric(s) Method(s)
External Outcomes
Impact of emergencies
and disasters on the
community are
diminished due to good
leadership.
Time that is taken to stabilize
incidents are decreased.
Post incident analysis.
Public perception of
public safety
organization’s hiring
practices is improved.
Percentage of constituents that
rate trust in public safety
organization based upon first-
responder performance in the
jurisdiction.
Annual survey
Positive leadership is
demonstrated within the
community being served,
especially at incidents and
during disasters.
Percentage of mutual
stakeholders that acknowledge
displayed leadership at incidents
and disasters.
After action reports and surveys
of partner public safety
organizations.
Internal Outcomes
Personnel are hired and
promoted into executive
positions using an
impartial process that
includes psychological
assessments.
Number of executive positions
that are hired through this
process.
Human Resources provides an
annual statistic of number of
candidates hired or promoted
this way.
Employee satisfaction is
improved.
Percentage of employees that
approve of leader’s
performance.
Annual employee survey.
Innovation and change
occur within the
organization.
Percentage of new employees
that contribute to positive
changes within organization.
Annual employee survey.
LEADERSHIP SELECTION WITHIN PUBLIC SAFETY 123

Employees are
empowered.
Percentage of employees that
feel empowered to make
decisions.
Annual employee survey.

Level 3: Behavior

Critical behaviors. In order for the above outcomes to be achieved, public safety
administrators will need to consider implementing changes into the way their organization
conducts hiring and promotion of executives. First, the hiring organization should review and
update job descriptions each time the vacant position is being filled. The update should include
leadership attributes required for the success of the position. Then, during the recruitment and
hiring or promotional process, psychological assessments that identify a candidate’s strengths in
leadership attributes compared to the job requirements should be utilized. The assessments
should also consider inhibiting the promotion of people who show weaknesses in the leadership
attributes required for the positions. Success of the change can be determined by the number of
executive positions that are hired or promoted with the aid of industrial or organizational
psychologists and can be evaluated every six months.
Table 25 shows the critical behaviors, metrics, methods, and timing as planned within the
program for the critical behaviors to occur.

LEADERSHIP SELECTION WITHIN PUBLIC SAFETY 124

Table 25

Critical Behaviors and Timing

Critical Behavior Metric(s)
Method(s)
Timing
Change the human
resource recruitment
and selection process.
Number of executive
positions that are
hired through this
process.
Industrial psychologist
or organizational
psychologist administers
assessments to
candidates.
Six months
Change the human
resource promotional
process.
Number of executive
positions that are
promoted through the
process
Industrial psychologist
or organizational
psychologist administers
assessments to
candidates.
Six months

Required drivers. When public safety administrators recognize the value of assessing leadership
attributes in their hiring and promotion decisions and believe the benefits of hiring or promoting
properly assessed candidates will outweigh the costs to their organization, they can begin to
change the organization. Public safety administrators need to be confident in their ability to
utilize leadership attributes in their hiring and promotion decisions and need to explore breaking
away from current cultural models and hiring practices to implement new models that will hire
executives with the requisite leadership attributes. If public safety organizations value utilizing
leadership attributes in their hiring and promotion decisions and provide resources in utilizing
leadership attributes in their hiring and promotion decisions, then the organization will begin to
hire and promote the right people for the right leadership positions and the organization will then
begin to change from within.
Table 26 indicates the required drivers to influence the change and the methods and
timing upon the critical behaviors.
LEADERSHIP SELECTION WITHIN PUBLIC SAFETY 125

Table 26
Required Drivers to Support Critical Behaviors

Method(s) Timing
Critical Behaviors Supported
1, 2, 3 Etc.
Reinforcing
Provide public safety
administrators information on
the leadership attributes to be
included in the job
descriptions related to
executive public safety
positions.
Three months Critical Behavior 1 and 2
Provide public safety
administrators a job aid that
defines the steps to measure
leadership attributes required
for the position.
Three months Critical Behavior 1 and 2
Ensure hiring managers know
that the organization is
seeking good leaders and does
not want to hire those that
could potentially be poor
leaders.
Three months Critical Behavior 1 and 2
Encouraging
To motivate employees to
want to use psychological
assessments in hiring and
promotional practices, public
safety administrators should
communicate to their
employees how such practices
improve efficiency, employee
satisfaction, and mitigate
financial and intangible costs.
Three months Critical Behavior 1 and 2
Provide public safety
administrators models to
teach, guide, practice, and
offer immediate feedback on
applying the tools for
differing types of
psychological assessments.

Three months Critical Behavior 1 and 2
LEADERSHIP SELECTION WITHIN PUBLIC SAFETY 126

Rewarding
Provide public recognition to
public safety administrators
who recruit candidates that
score over 80% on the
assessment.
Every 90 days over the course
of two years
Critical Behavior 1
Public recognition is provided
to public safety administrators
that promote individuals with
a score above 80% on
assessments.
Every 90 days over the course
of two years
Critical Behavior 2
Monitoring
Ensure new directives
mandating the use of
psychological assessments are
followed in hiring processes.
During each hiring and
recruitment opportunity
Critical Behavior 1
Ensure new directives
mandating the use of
psychological assessments are
followed in promotional
processes.
During each promotional
process
Critical Behavior 2

Organizational support. Jurisdictional authorities will need to consider utilizing and
enlisting industrial or organizational psychologists to perform psychological assessments during
hiring and promotional processes. These psychologists can advise public safety administrators of
the proper tests to measure the particular leadership attributes that are needed according to the
updated job descriptions. The psychologists may also identify particular tests to screen for
behaviors that are to be avoided in the executive leadership positions.
Level 2: Learning
Learning goals. Before, during, and after the completion of the recommended solution,
stakeholders will be able to:
1. .. Acknowledge that public safety executives need to be leaders that will use leadership
attributes to improve the organization.
2. .. Understand the leadership attributes that are needed in every executive position.
LEADERSHIP SELECTION WITHIN PUBLIC SAFETY 127

3. .. Create a job aid that assists the administrator to analyze and understand the leadership
attributes that are necessary in public safety executive positions.
4. .. Create a job aid that informs hiring managers of the strengths the organization is seeking
and the weaknesses the organization is avoiding.
5. .. Understand the various types of psychological assessments that could be used to measure
leadership attributes.
6. .. Apply the appropriate types of psychological assessments to the particular executive
positions and their particular and necessary leadership attributes.
7. .. Evaluate the effectiveness of applying psychological assessments to hiring and
promotional processes.

Program. Each organization should consider a program that will seek to achieve the
above stated learning goals. Public safety administrators should consider institutionalizing
impartial leadership hiring processes. Public safety administrators should explore conducting an
executive position evaluation workshop that will allow key executives of the organization to
determine the leadership attributes needed in each position. At the conclusion of the workshop, a
job aid can be created that outlines the attributes recommended for each position. For senior level
executives involved in hiring, another job aid should be considered that identifies the strengths
the organization is looking for and the weaknesses they want to avoid. The organization will
consider providing a training course to hiring executives and the public safety administrator to
teach them about the different types of psychological assessments that are available and what
those tests assess, which will determine how best to utilize these assessments in a hiring or
promotional process. Each quarter for two years after hiring or promotion utilizing psychological
assessments, public safety administrators should consider conducting evaluations on the
LEADERSHIP SELECTION WITHIN PUBLIC SAFETY 128

employee and their fit and effectiveness within the position. Finally, human resource personnel
should consider communicating clearly and often that the use of psychological assessments will
be used and will also explain the purpose of this recruitment and promotional process.
Evaluation of the components of learning. Below are the evaluation components of
learning for the program and the timeframe of which each method or activity should be
implemented to produce the best potential for a successful implementation and desired outcome.
Table 27
Evaluation of the Components of Learning

Method(s) or Activity(ies) Timing
Declarative Knowledge “I know it.”
Public Safety administrators communicate the
need for leaders within executive positions.
Throughout the process.
Job descriptions are re-written with
recommended leadership attributes.
Immediately after workshop.
Public safety administrator's check hiring
managers knowledge in one-on-one meetings.
After workshops.
Public safety administrators can explain the
different tests to subordinates in one-on-one
discussions.
After workshops.
Procedural Skills “I can do it right now.”
Public safety administrators utilize
psychological assessments in hiring and
promotion processes.
After workshops.
Public safety administrators and hiring
managers refer to job-aids to help select the
proper assessments.
After creation of job aids.
Attitude “I believe this is worthwhile.”
Public safety administrators see the changes
that properly selected executives bring to the
organization.
After hiring utilizing the process with
psychological assessments.
Effectiveness is monitored positively utilizing
quarterly evaluations
After evaluations.
Confidence “I think I can do it on the job.”
Public safety administrators invest more
credence into the psychological assessment
After evaluations have proven to be effective.
LEADERSHIP SELECTION WITHIN PUBLIC SAFETY 129

process than they do in interviews or reference
checks.
Commitment “I will do it on the job.”
Public safety administrators formally adopt the
new hiring and promotional processes into
long term procedures.
After evaluations have proven to be effective.

Level 1: Reaction
The table below depicts the methods and tools that can be measured to evaluate the degree to
which public safety administrators find the training favorable, engaging, and relevant to their
agencies.
Table 28
Reaction Measurements

Method(s) or Tool(s) Timing
Engagement
Observation by instructors/facilitators During the course
Course attendance throughout Immediately after the course
Daily feedback session At the beginning of the morning of each class
Course evaluation Immediately after the course
Relevance
End of unit quizzes After each unit
End of course evaluation Immediately after the course
Customer Satisfaction
Post course follow-up survey 2 weeks after course
Course evaluation Immediately after the course

Evaluation Tools

Immediately following the program implementation. The immediate evaluation plan
will measure stakeholder engagement during the course and evaluate conceptual feedback at the
beginning of class each morning. Engagement will also be measured by attendance records. The
evaluation will measure relevant reactions to the program with end of unit quizzes and an end of
LEADERSHIP SELECTION WITHIN PUBLIC SAFETY 130

course evaluation. Employee satisfaction will be evaluated by a post course follow-up survey
two weeks after the course conclusion and also with a course evaluation after the course. The
immediate evaluation plan can be found in Appendix D.
Delayed for a period after the program implementation. After the program has been
implemented, a survey instrument will be utilized to measure the level of implementation and the
success of the organizational change. This survey will be completed by the primary stakeholders
and will assess metrics from Levels one, two, three, and four. This survey, or an updated version
of it, may also be used annually to continue to measure progress of the change and success of the
change. The survey data points can be found in Appendix E.
Data Analysis and Reporting
After implementing the program, surveys will be used to capture employee satisfaction,
citizen trust and confidence, and perceived efficiency of the organization. An annual report will
be presented to the elected officials of each jurisdiction that describes the leadership climate of
the organization that will include a compilation of data from citizen satisfaction surveys,
efficiency in public safety operations, employee satisfaction, number of employees hired or
promoted through this process, and the number of human resource complaints filed. This
analysis and reporting assessment will be called LeadStat and will be used to gauge the
leadership climate of the organization.
Summary
The above recommendations and suggested plan for implementation utilizing the Clark
and Estes (2008) KMO influence gap analysis and the New World Model from Kirkpatrick and
Kirkpatrick (2016) for implementation should be used when attempting to achieve the primary
stakeholder goal of using leadership attributes in their hiring and promotion decisions.
LEADERSHIP SELECTION WITHIN PUBLIC SAFETY 131

Ultimately, this goal furthers the pursuit of having personnel appropriately evaluated and
selected for jobs requiring leadership attributes reflecting their leadership strengths. This will
enable public safety organizations to better fulfill their mission to save lives, stabilize incidents,
protect property, and protect the environment.
Limitations and Delimitations
Research results were limited to public safety personnel who volunteered to participate.
While this was a field of practice study and great care was taken to make sure sample
populations covered a wide array of organizations, both large and small, the study did not
include organizations of every background, and hence some findings may not be germane to all
public safety organizations. Recommendations from this study were derived from a study of
three disciplines. Other disciplines have an impact on public safety such as health departments,
private sector emergency medical services, the National Guard, and federal organizations.
Delimitations involve potential sampling error since the entire population was not
interviewed. Public safety is very diverse with different concepts and applications, especially in
the emergency management field. This is especially true where public safety administrators are
elected officials such as sheriffs. In this case an election selects the administrator, not a hiring
process. This research study is not germane to all public safety organizations. Solutions that
work well in one environment may not be conducive in another. As an example, emergency
management in a western state like California is very different, especially at the municipal level,
from emergency management in an eastern state like Indiana. In California, every municipality
has an assigned emergency manager, but it can often be a collateral duty of a person within a
police or fire department. In Indiana, emergency managers are often not found within
municipalities, but are typically stand-alone departments at the county level. Any solutions
LEADERSHIP SELECTION WITHIN PUBLIC SAFETY 132

offered here are hopefully applicable to a variety of organizations, perhaps even those not in
public safety. Another factor that may affect applicability of data is the number of questions
asked. In the interest of brevity, the interview was limited to 20 questions.
Recommendations for Future Research
During this study, several recommendations for future research were identified. The first was
whether public safety organizations should always look both inside and outside for executive
leaders. Some literature indicated hiring outside the organization means a greater pool of
candidates that could meet necessary leadership attributes. The drawbacks to public safety
organizations are that it diminishes promotional opportunities. Another recommendation for
further research is defining discipline specific leadership attributes for executive leaders.
Additionally, in some public safety environments, qualifying or being certified in a particular
position within the Incident Command System is necessary to assure competency in the position.
Adding psychological assessments to the qualification process could be the next step in assuring
efficiency in incident response. Another area for potential research would be the addition of
other public safety organizations into this study.
Organizations like emergency medical services, public health, and public works could
benefit from a similar study. This study focused on public safety organizations, another study
should focus on nonprofit sector and private sector emergency response organizations and
executive leadership positions. Finally, this study focused on administrators, a different
perspective about executive leaders may be held among middle management and entry level
emergency response personnel. A study of these groups and their perceptions of executive
leadership would help to understand how to better select leaders.
LEADERSHIP SELECTION WITHIN PUBLIC SAFETY 133

An additional area of research would be in the possibility for succession planning, early
leadership identification of talented leaders, and incorporation of executive training programs.
This dissertation suggests that some people have stronger executive leadership talents like vision,
empathy, and creativity. Other people may have stronger tactical talents such as detective skills
in law enforcement, fire behavioral analysis skills in firefighting, or an emergency manager may
have talents in technology integration within emergency management. If public safety
organizations can identify employees early in their careers who have executive leadership
talents, those individuals might be able to be placed on a career track for executive development
through training therefore strengthening retention, succession and executive leadership.
Conclusion
Government exists for one primary reason: to protect and serve the citizens. There may be no
other sector where efficiency in leadership is as vital and necessary as in public safety. Selecting
leaders that will ensure the public trust, develop innovative solutions to complex public safety
issues, and effectively managing emergency incidents is an activity that, if improved, will
ultimately save lives. The potential damage of a poor leader being selected for an executive
leadership position can result in liability issues, low morale, inefficiency, and even the loss of
life. Public safety organizations can improve their leadership selection processes by
incorporating psychological science in the candidate assessment process. Administrators can
identify leadership strengths in candidates that match job needs and can eliminate candidates
who appear to show poor leadership attributes. If poor leadership can be avoided and if strong
leadership can be identified, governmental administrators should do everything they can to select
the right leaders in pursuit of improving public safety.

LEADERSHIP SELECTION WITHIN PUBLIC SAFETY 134

References
Aasland, M. S., Skogstad, A., Notelaers, G., Nielsen, M. B., & Einarsen, S. (2010). The
prevalence of destructive leadership behaviour. British Journal of Management, 21, 438-
452.
Alkhaldi, K. H., Austin, M. L., Cura, B. A., Dantzler, D., Holland, L., Maples, D. L., . . . Marcus,
L. J. (2017). Are you ready? Crisis leadership in a hyper-VUCA environment. Journal of
Emergency Management, 15(2), 117-132.
Arnold, J. A., Arad, S., Rhoades, J. A., & Drasgow, F. (2000). The empowering leadership
questionnaire: The construction and validation of a new scale for measuring leader
behaviors. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 21(3), 249-269.
Ashforth, B. (1994). Petty tyranny in organizations. Human Relations, 47(7), 755-778.
Bandura, A. (1989). Social cognative theory. In R. Vasta (Ed.), Annnals of child development
(Vol. 6). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
Beaton, R., Johnson, L. C., Infield, S., Ollis, T., & Bond, G. (2001). Outcomes for a leadership
intervention for a metropolitan fire department. Psychological Reports, 88, 1049-1066.
Bishopp, S. A. (2013). An evaluation of the promotional processes in a large Texas metropolitan
police department. Policing: An International Journal of Police Strategies &
Management, 36(1), 56-59.
Boin, A., & 't Hart, P. (2003). Public leadership in times of crisis: Mission impossible? Public
Administration Review, 63(5), 544-553.
Burke, W. W. (2017). Transformational leadership. In Organizational change: Theory and
P\practice (pp. 295-320). Los Angeles: Sage.
LEADERSHIP SELECTION WITHIN PUBLIC SAFETY 135

Buzawa, E. S. (1984). Determining patrol officer job satisfaction: The role of selected
demographic and job-specific attitudes. Criminology, 22(1), 61-81.
Campbell, K., & Vuong, E. (2017). Disrupting the hiring process. Washington, DC: Gallup.
Carr, B. (2017, March 20). Examination of the promotional process within the fire service.
Emmitsburg, MD: National Fire Academy.
Clark, K. E., & Clark, M. B. (Eds.). (1990). Measures oflLeadership. Greensboro, NC:
Leadership Library of America, Inc.
Clark, R. E., & Estes, F. (2008). Turning research into results: A guide to selecting the right
performance solutions. Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing, Inc. .
Collins, J. (2001). Good to great: Why some companies make the leap and others don't. New
York: Harper Business.
Corbin, J., & Strauss, A. (2008). Strategies for qualitative data analysis. Techniques and
procedures for developing grounded theory (3rd ed.). Los Angeles: Sage.
Creswell, J. (2014). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches.
Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
Cwiak, C. L., Campbell, R., Cassavechia, M. G., Haynes, C., Lloyd, L. A., Brockway, N., . . .
Senger, M. (2017). Emergency management leadership in 2030: Shaping the next
generation meta-leader. Journal of Emergency Management, 15(2), 81-97.
Daft, R. L. (2005). The leadership experience (3rd ed.). Mason, OH: Thomson South-Western.
Dantzker, M. L. (1996). The position of municipal police chief: An examination of selection
criteria and requisite skills. Police Studies, 19(1), 1-17.
Denhardt, J. V., & Denhardt, R. B. (2006). Public administration: An action orientation.
Belmont, CA: Thomson Wadsworth.
LEADERSHIP SELECTION WITHIN PUBLIC SAFETY 136

Donahue, A. K., & Tuohy, R. V. (2006). Lessons we don't learn a study of the lessons of
disasters, why we repeat them, and how we can learn them. Homeland Securty Affairs,
2(2).
Drabek, T. E. (2013). The human side of disaster (2nd ed.). Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.
Eccles, J. S., & Wigfield, A. (2000). Expectancy–value theory of achievement motivation.
Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25, 68-81.
Einarsen, S., Aasland, M. S., & Skogstand, A. (2007). Destructive leadership behaviour: A
definition and conceptual model. The Leadership Quarterly, 18, 207-216.
Federal Emergency Management Agency. (2017). National incident management system (3rd
ed.). Washington, DC: Federal Emergency Management Agency.
Fiedler, F. E. (1995). Cognitive resources and leadership performance. Applied Psychology: An
International Review, 11(1), 5-28.
Fiedler, F. E. (1996). Research on leadership selection and training: One view of the future.
Administrative Science Quarterly, 41(2), 241-250.
Flynn, E. A., & Herrington, V. (2015). Toward a profession of police leadership. New
Perspectives in Policing, 1-18.
Frost, P. J. (2004). Handling toxic emotions: New challenges for leaders and their organization.
Organizational Dynamics, 33(2), 111-127.
Gaines, L. K., & Lewis, B. R. (1982). Reliability and validity of the oral interview board in
police promotions: A research note. Journal of Criminal Justice, 10, 403-419.
Gallup. (2015). State of the American manager: Analytics and advice for leaders. Washington,
DC: Gallup.
Glesne, C. (2011). Becoming qualitative researchers: An introduction (4th ed.). Boston: Pearson.
LEADERSHIP SELECTION WITHIN PUBLIC SAFETY 137

Goldman, A. (2009). Transforming toxic leaders. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
Hadley, C. N., Pittinsky, T. L., Sommer, S. A., & Zhu, W. (2011). Measuring the efficacy of
leaders to assess information and make decisions in a crisis: The C-LEAD scale. The
Leadership Qurterly, 22, 633-648.
Harrington, I. (2011). Improving public safety emergency response efficiency amid uncertainty
through crisis leadership training. Ann Arbor, MI: UMI Dissertation Publishing.
Hogan, R., & Hogan, J. (2001). Assessing leadership: A view from the dark side. International
Journal of Assessment and Selection, 9(1/2), 40-59.
Howard, A. (2001). Identifying, assessing, and selecting senior leaders. In S. J. Zaccaro & R. J.
Klimoski (Eds.), The nature of organizational leadership (pp. 305-346). San Francisco,
CA: Jossey-Bass.
Jaques, E., & Clement, S. D. (1991). Executive leadership: A practical guide to managing
complexity. Arlington, VA: Carson Hall & Co. Publishers Ltd.
Kang, S. K., & Jin, S. (2015). What are the best practices to assess leadership effectiveness?
Cornell University, ILR School.
Kapucu, N., & Ozerdem, A. (2013). Managing emergencies and crises. Burlington, MA: Jones
& Bartlett Learning.
Kapucu, N., & Van Wart, M. (2008). Making matters worse: An anatomy of leadership failures
in managing catastrophic events. Administration & Society, 40(7), 711-740.
Kellerman, B. (2004). Bad leadership: What it is, how it happens, why it matters. Boston:
Harvard Business School Publishing.
Kets de Vries, M. F., & Miller, D. (1986). Personality, culture, and organization. The Academy of
Management Review, 11(2), 266-279.
LEADERSHIP SELECTION WITHIN PUBLIC SAFETY 138

Kirkpatrick, J. D., & Kirkpatrick, W. K. (2016). Four levels of training evaluation. Alexandria,
VA: ATD Press.
Klein, G. (1998). Sources of power: How people make decisions. Cambridge, MA: The MIT
Press.
Kotter, J. P. (2012). Leading change. Boston, MA: Harvard Business Review Press.
Kouzes, J. M., & Posner, B. Z. (2007). The leadership challenge (4th ed.). San Francisco, CA:
John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Krathwohl, D. R. (2002). A revision of Bloom's taxonomy: An overview. Theory Into Practice,
41(4), 212-218.
Landy, F. J., & Shankster, L. J. (1994). Personnel selection and placement. Annual Review of
Psychology, 45, 261-296.
Light, A. M. (2016). An examination of the acension to and experiences in the metropolitan chief
fire officer position: Implications for leadership policy and practice. Bowling Green, OH:
Bowling Green State University .
Lipman-Blumen, J. (2005). The allure of toxic leaders: Why we follow destructive bosses and
corrupt politicians and how we can survice them. Oxford, New York: Oxford University
Press.
Lowry, P. E. (1997). The assessment center process: New directions. Journal of Social Behavior
and Personality, 12(5), 53-62.
Maxwell, J. A. (2013). Qualitative research design. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Mayer, R. E. (2011). Applying the science of learning. Boston, MA: Pearson Education, Inc.
LEADERSHIP SELECTION WITHIN PUBLIC SAFETY 139

McEntire, D. A., & Urby Jr, H. (2015). Emergency Managers as Change Agents: Recognizing
the Value of Management, Leadership, and Strategic Management in the Disaster
Profesion. Journal of Emergency Management, 13(1).
McFarland, L. A., Ryan, A. M., & Kriska, S. D. (2002). Field study investigation of applicant
use of influence tactics in a selection interview. The Journal of Psychology, 136(4), 383-
398.
Mehta, S., & Maheshwari, G. (2013). Consequence of toxic leadership on employee job
satisfaction and organizational commitment. The Journal of Contemporary Management
Research, 8(2), 1-23.
Mehta, S., & Maheshwari, G. (2014). Toxic leadership: Tracing the destructive trail.
International Journal of Management, 5(10), 18-24.
Merriam, S. B., & Tisdell, T. J. (2016). Qualitative research: A guide to design and
implementation (4th ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Miles, M. B., Huberman, A. M., & Saldaña, J. (2014). Qualitative data analysis: A methods
sourcebook (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Miller, H. A., Watkins, R. J., & Webb, D. (2009). The use of psychological testing to evaluate
law enforcement leadership competencies and development. Police Practice and
Research: An International Journal, 10(1), 49-60.
Morrison, K. P. (2017). Hiring for the 21st century law enforcement officer: Challenges,
opportunities, and strategies for success. Washington DC: Office of Community
Oriented Policing Services.
Murphy, S. A. (2005). Executive development and succession planning: Qualitative evidence.
International Journal of Police Science & Management, 8(4), 253-265.
LEADERSHIP SELECTION WITHIN PUBLIC SAFETY 140

Murphy, S. A. (2007). The role of emotions and transformational leadership on police culture:
An autoethnographic account. International Journal of Police Science & Management,
10(2), 165-178.
Namie, G., & Namie, R. (2000). The bully at work: What you can do to stop the hurt and reclaim
your dignity on the job (2nd ed.). Naperville, IL: Sourcebooks.
Northouse, P. G. (2016). Leadership: Theory and practice (7th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE
Publications, Inc.
Pajares, F. (2006). Chapter 15: Self efficacy. In F. Pajares & T. Urdan (Eds.), Self efficacy beliefs
of adolescents (pp. 339-367). Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing.
Pelletier, K. (2010). Leader toxicity: An emperical investigation of toxic behavior and rhetoric.
Leadership, 6(4), 373-389.
Rath, T. (2007). StrengthsFinder 2.0. New York: Simon & Schuster.
Renaud, C. (2012). The missing piece of NIMS: Teaching incident commanders how to function
in the edge of chaos. Homeland Security Affairs, 8(8), 1-19.
Rigoni, B., & Nelson, B. (2015). Leadership mistake: Promoting based on tenure. New York:
Gallup.
Rubin, H. J., & Rubin, I. S. (2012). Chapter 6: Conversational partnerships. In Qualitative
Interviewing: The art of hearing data (3rd ed.) (pp. 85-92). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
Rueda, R. (2011). The 3 dimensions of improving student performance. New York: Teachers
College Press.
Schaubroeck, J., Walumbwa, F. O., Ganster, D. C., & Kepes, S. (2007). Destructive leader traits
and the neutralizing influence of an “enriched” job. The Leadership Quarterly, 18, 236-
251.
LEADERSHIP SELECTION WITHIN PUBLIC SAFETY 141

Schraw, G., & McCrudden, M. T. (2007). Relevance and goal-focusing in text processing.
Educational Psychology Review, 113-139.
Schyns, B., & Schilling, J. (2013). How bad are the effects of bad leaders? A meta-analysis of
destructive leadership and its outcomes. The Leadership Quarterly, 138-158.
Sessa, V. I., Kaiser, R., Taylor, J. K., & Campbell, R. J. (1998). Executive selection: A research
report on what works And what doesn't. Greensboro, NC: Center for Creative Leadership.
Shaw, J. B., Erickson, A., & Harvey, M. (2011). A method for measuring destructive leadership
and identifying types of destructive leaders in organizations. The Leadership Quarterly,
22, 575-590.
Sinek, S. (2017). Leaders eat last. New York: Penguin Group.
Tavanti, M. (2011). Managing toxic leaders: Dysfunctional patterns in organizational leadership
and how to deal with them. Human Resource Management, 127-136.
Tepper, B. J. (2007). Abusive supervision in work organizations: Review synthesis, and research
agenda. Journal of Management, 33, 261-289.
Topp, B. W. (2011). An exploratory study of two decades of promotional testing in a
metropolitan police department. Journal of Police and Criminal Psychology, 26(2), 143-
151.
U.S. House Select Bipartisan Committee to Investigate the Preparation for and Response to
Hurricane Katrina. (2006). A failure of initiative. Washington, DC: U.S. House of
Representatives.
Urby Jr, H., & McEntire, D. A. (2015). Emergency managers as change agents: Recognizing the
value of management, leadership, and strategic management in the disaster profession.
Journal of Emergency Management, 13(1), 37-51.
LEADERSHIP SELECTION WITHIN PUBLIC SAFETY 142

Van de Ven, A. H., & Sun, K. (2011). Breakdowns in implementing models of organizational
change. Academy of Management Prespectives, 25(3), 50-74.
Virgona, T. (2013). Emergency Management Planning and Leadership; Lessons Learned from
Katrina. Proceedings of the Northeast Business & Economics Association.
Walter, F., Humphrey, R. H., & Cole, M. S. (2012). Unleashing leadership potential: Toward an
evidence-based management of emotional intelligence. Organizational Dynamics, 41,
212-219.
Webster, V., Brough, P., & Daly, K. (2014). Flight, fight, or freeze: Common responses for
follower coping with toxic leadership. Wiley Online Library, 346-354.
Whicker, M. (1996). Toxic leaders: When organizations go bad. Westport, CT: Quorum Books.
Wigfield, A., & Eccles, J. S. (1992). The development of achievement task values: A theoretical
analysis. Developmental Review, 12, 265-310.
Wigfield, A., Eccles, J. S., Schiefele, U., Roeser, R. W., & Davis-Kean, P. (2007). Development
of achievement motivation. In Handbook of child psychology (pp. 933-1001). New York:
John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Wilson, J. M., Dalton, E., Scheer, C., & Grammich, C. A. (2010). Police recruitment and
retention for the new millennium: The state of knowledge. Santa Monica, CA: The RAND
Corporation.
Yuhl, G. (1998). Leadership in organizations (5th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

LEADERSHIP SELECTION WITHIN PUBLIC SAFETY 143

APPENDIX A
Interview Protocol
Good morning / afternoon / evening. Thank you for taking the time to speak with me
about selecting leaders in public safety organizations. Specifically, I am benchmarking public
safety organizations to see what they are doing, or not doing, when selecting candidates for
leadership positions. The purpose of this study is to determine if public safety agencies are
utilizing an effective selection process when hiring or selecting a person for a leadership
position. The study will attempt to identify leadership positions from technical positions. The
study will also seek to understand if the selection processes measure candidates effectively for
leadership competencies. Your participation in this interview will provide vital information
towards achieving that goal.
Thank-you for your willingness to share your perspectives with me and for agreeing to be
a part of my study. With your permission, this interview will be audio recorded so that I can
document your responses accurately. This is an anonymous interview and no one but myself, and
possibly my faculty advisor, will have access to today’s recording. You do not have to answer
any question that you do not want to. At any time and for any reason, you may choose to
withdraw from the study. All you need to do is tell me that you chose to withdraw. Your identity
will be kept confidential. I will not use your name or organization when I include your responses
in my paper. Transcripts will be provided to you for you to review in order to ensure I have
correctly represented your responses. Do you have any questions before we begin?

LEADERSHIP SELECTION WITHIN PUBLIC SAFETY 144

Interview Questions

(Bolded text is provided for the purpose of relating the question to the assumed influence)

1. What leadership competencies do you feel are required for executive leadership
positions in public safety organizations? (Knowledge Declarative-Conceptual)
a. Can you tell me why? (Knowledge Declarative-Conceptual)
2. What is the process for hiring based on competencies? (Knowledge Declarative-
Conceptual)
3. Can you walk me through a recent hire and tell me more about how you go about
matching competencies with the potential new hire? (Knowledge Declarative
Procedural)
4. How do you believe these skills, competencies, or dispositions differ across
different public service agencies?
a. What about by region or by state? (Knowledge Declarative-
Procedural)
5. What do you see as the benefit of matching hiring with these skills,
competencies, and dispositions? (Knowledge Declarative-Conceptual)
6. What are the challenges associated with hiring public safety executives?
(Knowledge Declarative-Conceptual)
7. What do you believe others within the organization believe happens when an
individual is selected that is not well suited for an executive position?
a. Do you feel similarly? (Motivational – Utility Value)
LEADERSHIP SELECTION WITHIN PUBLIC SAFETY 145

8. Do you or your organization utilize any psychological, personality, or leadership
testing to assess leadership competencies and match those competencies to
those needed in the job?
a. How so? (Knowledge Declarative-Procedural)
9. What do you see as the benefit of matching hiring with these skills,
competencies, and dispositions? (Motivational – Utility Value)
10. What would be the consequences of having someone that lacks the proper
leadership competencies placed in an executive position? (Motivational –
Utility Value)
11. What are related costs to placing personnel into positions that do not have the
requisite competencies? (Motivational – Utility Value)
12. What reasons might there be for not taking all possible precautions to fill
executive positions with requisite competencies? (Motivational – Utility Value)
13. How confident are you in your abilities to use resources that assist you in
matching candidates with the requisite competencies of a position?
(Motivational – Self Efficacy)
a. What contributed to that confidence for you? (Motivational – Self
Efficacy)
b. What would help you feel more confident? (Motivational – Self Efficacy)
14. What resources would be necessary to challenge public safety administrators to
select executives so that they mitigate financial implications of having people
with the wrong competencies in executive positions? (Organizational –
Cultural Model)
LEADERSHIP SELECTION WITHIN PUBLIC SAFETY 146

15. What are the biggest challenges to public safety administrators when it comes to
selecting executives with the proper competencies for executive positions?
(Organizational – Cultural Model)
16. What is stopping public safety administrators from changing executive selection
processes? (Organizational – Cultural Model)
17. How do you feel your own supervisors or agency value identifying and matching
leadership skills, competencies, and dispositions with job positional needs?
(Organizational – Cultural Setting)
a. How do you feel they convey that value? (Organizational – Cultural
Setting)
b. How do you feel you and your organization align in terms of your
thoughts and values on this issue? (Organizational – Cultural Setting)
18. How difficult would it be to change this process within the organization?
a. Why? (Organizational – Cultural Setting)
19. What resources help you in implementing a process that identifies and matches
leadership skills, competencies, and dispositions with job positional needs?
(Organizational – Cultural Setting)
a. What resources would be helpful to implement such a process?
(Organizational – Cultural Setting)

LEADERSHIP SELECTION WITHIN PUBLIC SAFETY 147

APPENDIX B

Interview Information Sheet

University of Southern California
Rossier School of Education
Waite Phillips Hall
3470 Trousdale Parkway
Los Angeles, CA 90069

INFORMATION SHEET FOR RESEARCH - INTERVIEWS

Leadership Selection Within Public Safety: An Evaluation Study

You are invited to participate in a research study conducted by Randal Collins under the
supervision of Dr. Kimberly Hirabayashi at the University of Southern California because you are
a public safety administrator. Research studies include only people who voluntarily choose to take
part. This document explains information about this study. You should ask questions about
anything that is unclear to you.

PURPOSE OF THE STUDY
The purpose of this study is to determine if public safety agencies are utilizing an effective
selection process when hiring or selecting a person for a leadership position. Knowledge gained
from this study may help to recommend selection, hiring, and/or promotional practices within
public safety.

PARTICIPANT INVOLVEMENT
If you agree to take part in this study, you will be asked to participate in a 60 minute digitally
recorded interview. You do not have to answer any questions you do not want to; if you participate
in the interview and do not want to be recorded, handwritten notes will be taken.

PAYMENT/COMPENSATION FOR PARTICIPATION
No compensation will be provided for participation.

ALTERNATIVES TO PARTICIPATION
Your alternative is to not participate. Your relationship with your employer will not be affected
whether you participate or not in this study.

CONFIDENTIALITY
Any identifiable information obtained in connection with this study will remain confidential, will
only be used to set up the interview, will not be linked to your responses,

LEADERSHIP SELECTION WITHIN PUBLIC SAFETY 148

APPENDIX C

Document Analysis Protocol

Documents to be used for the document analysis portion were primarily gathered from
open-source Internet sources. Others were obtained by request to the interviewee. One was
obtained by request to a human resource department. I collected one executive leadership level
job description from each of the organizations collected of the administrators I interviewed.
These descriptions were sufficient to determine how effectively leadership attribuitres were
listed within the job descriptions and to determine if the necessary attributes identified by the
administrator were listed within the job description. Once the documents were obtained the data
was analyzed using NVivo and was coded to determine themes and common tasks.
In Table 11, the required leadership attributes identified by administrators that are also
listed in the reviewed job descriptions are listed. In Table 12, any leadership attributes listed in
the job descriptions are identified.

LEADERSHIP SELECTION WITHIN PUBLIC SAFETY 149

APPENDIX D

The purpose of this end of course evaluation is to determine the effectiveness of the training
utilized to educate public safety administrators and their stakeholder employees involved in
hiring and promotions.

Each question will be answered with a Likert Scale consisting of Strongly Agree, Agree, Neutral,
Disagree, Strongly Disagree, and not applicable.

1. Printed: Material was well organized.

2. Printed: Material was complete and readable.

3. Audio/visual: Materials were related to the course.

4. Audio/visual: Materials were good quality.

5. Audio/visual: Materials were in appropriate number.

6. Instruction: Materials related to class needs.

7. Instruction: Subject was thoroughly covered.

8. Instruction: Participation was encouraged.

9. Instruction: Course expectations, requirements, and objectives were made clear.

10. Instruction: Differences of opinion were tolerated.

11. Classroom: Was comfortable.

12. Classroom: Included a manageable number of students.

13. Classroom: Was appropriate for this course.

14. Course: Used a variety of instructional methods.

15. Course: Was a reasonable length.

16. Course: Is worth recommending to others.

17. Course: Contributed to my knowledge and skills.

18. Course: Prepared me to hire executive leaders.

19. Knowledge of Subject: Is extensive after completing this course.
LEADERSHIP SELECTION WITHIN PUBLIC SAFETY 150

APPENDIX E

Program Implementation Survey

The following survey will be conducted approximately six months after the implementation of
utilizing psychological assessments in the hiring and promotional process. The purpose of the
survey is to determine the level of success and the degree to which the program has been
implemented.

The survey

1. External candidates are selected through an impartial process that includes
psychological assessments. (Strongly Agree, Agree, Neutral, Disagree, Strongly
Disagree)

2. Public perception of the public safety organization’s hiring practices has improved.
(Strongly Agree, Agree, Neutral, Disagree, Strongly Disagree)

3. Positive leadership is demonstrated within the community especially at incidents and
during disasters. (Strongly Agree, Agree, Neutral, Disagree, Strongly Disagree)

4. Personnel are promoted into executive positions using an impartial process that
includes psychological assessments. (Strongly Agree, Agree, Neutral, Disagree, Strongly
Disagree)

5. Employee satisfaction has improved. (Strongly Agree, Agree, Neutral, Disagree, Strongly
Disagree)

6. Innovation and change is occurring within the organization. (Strongly Agree, Agree,
Neutral, Disagree, Strongly Disagree)

7. Employees feel empowered. (Strongly Agree, Agree, Neutral, Disagree, Strongly
Disagree)

8. Recruitment of candidates has included information about the required leadership
attributes. (Strongly Agree, Agree, Neutral, Disagree, Strongly Disagree)

9. Internal candidates for promotion understand the leadership attributes which are
required of the position for which they are seeking. (Strongly Agree, Agree, Neutral,
Disagree, Strongly Disagree)

10. Job descriptions have been evaluated and updated with the required leadership
attributes needed for the job. (Strongly Agree, Agree, Neutral, Disagree, Strongly
Disagree)
LEADERSHIP SELECTION WITHIN PUBLIC SAFETY 151

11. Public safety administrators have received a job-aid that defines the steps to measure
leadership skills. (Strongly Agree, Agree, Neutral, Disagree, Strongly Disagree)

12. The desire to hire and/or promote positive leaders has been communicated throughout
the organization. (Strongly Agree, Agree, Neutral, Disagree, Strongly Disagree)

13. The organization has communicated its desire to eliminate poor leadership within the
organization. (Strongly Agree, Agree, Neutral, Disagree, Strongly Disagree)

14. Employees have been educated in the benefits of utilizing psychological assessments to
include the benefits of improved efficiency, employee satisfaction, and financial
implications. (Strongly Agree, Agree, Neutral, Disagree, Strongly Disagree)

15. Public safety administrators have been provided models that serve to improve
comprehension of various types of psychological assessments. (Strongly Agree, Agree,
Neutral, Disagree, Strongly Disagree)

16. Public safety administrators have mandated psychological assessments be included in
hiring processes. (Strongly Agree, Agree, Neutral, Disagree, Strongly Disagree)

17. Public safety administrators have mandated psychological assessments be included in
promotional processes. (Strongly Agree, Agree, Neutral, Disagree, Strongly Disagree)

18. Public safety administrators evaluate employee’s knowledge of executive leadership
selection methods in one-on-one meetings. (Strongly Agree, Agree, Neutral, Disagree,
Strongly Disagree)
19. Public safety administrators know the right test to use to evaluate for the right
leadership attributes they are seeking. (Strongly Agree, Agree, Neutral, Disagree,
Strongly Disagree)

20. Public safety administrators are observing a positive change within their organization
due to the hiring of leaders that are matched with job leadership attributes. (Strongly
Agree, Agree, Neutral, Disagree, Strongly Disagree)

21. The public safety organization appears to be more efficient that before the
implementation of the program. (Strongly Agree, Agree, Neutral, Disagree, Strongly
Disagree)

22. Public safety administrators would rather see the psychological assessments than
conduct an interview or conduct reference checks. (Strongly Agree, Agree, Neutral,
Disagree, Strongly Disagree)

Abstract (if available)

Abstract Public safety requires leadership to ensure effective operations and service to the community. It is crucial to evaluate public safety hiring and promotional practices to determine if the methods are enabling the recruitment of the best and most suitable persons for executive positions. This research evaluated whether public safety organizations utilize a hiring and selection process that includes job analysis, psychological assessments, and whether the process identifies leadership attributes and screens for poor leadership attributes in candidates. This was a public safety field of practice study and great care was taken to make sure sample populations covered a wide array of organizations, both large and small. Recommendations from this study were derived from a study of three disciplines, law enforcement, fire-rescue, and emergency management organizations. ❧ The recommendations include that personnel be appropriately and impartially evaluated and selected for jobs requiring leadership attributes reflecting their skill sets. This can be done utilizing psychological assessments that identify leadership strengths and screen for poor leadership attributers in candidates. Public safety administrators can also improve executive leadership selection by conducting a job analysis and ensuring job descriptions reflect the leadership attributes desired in the vacant position. Improving leadership within public safety organizations will enable public safety organizations to better fulfill their mission to save lives, stabilize incidents, protect property, and protect the environment.

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

Impressions of diversity: frontline fundraiser hiring in higher education

PDF

Leadership in an age of technology disruption: an evaluation study

PDF

Human error risk reduction in aviation: an evaluation study

PDF

Fundraising in small health and human service nonprofit organizations: an evaluation study

PDF

An evaluation of employee perceptions of onboarding experiences: an evaluation study

PDF

Promising practices for building leadership capital in educational organizations

PDF

Officer performance appraisal program management: an evaluative case study

PDF

Deckplate leadership: a promising practice study of chief petty officer development

PDF

Aligned leadership attributes and organizational innovation: an evaluation study

PDF

African American college completion at Hillside College: an evaluation study

PDF

Promoting well-being amid a global pandemic: evaluating the impact on nonprofit employees

PDF

Effective engagement of minority alumni: an innovation study

PDF

Customer satisfaction with information technology service quality in higher education: an evaluation study

PDF

Leadership psychological safety: exploring its development and relationship with leader-member exchange theory

PDF

Implementing proactive safety strategies in place of reactive safety strategies at a manufacturing organization: an evaluation study

PDF

Recruiting and hiring female police officers: an evaluative study

PDF

Growth of intrapreneurialship in mature knowledge-centric firms

PDF

Women of color senior leaders: pathways to increasing representation in higher education

PDF

Leadership readiness: evaluating the effectiveness for developing managers as coaches

PDF

Developing rates of psychological safety in Army Officer Candidates

Asset Metadata

Creator Collins, Randal A. (author)

Core Title Leadership selection within public safety: an evaluation study

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Organizational Change and Leadership (On Line)

Publication Date 01/17/2020

Defense Date 11/12/2019

Publisher University of Southern California (original), University of Southern California. Libraries (digital)

Tag assessment,attributes,characteristics,Crisis,disaster,emergency,emergency management,emergency medical service,EMS,fire service,hiring,human resources,incident management,industrial psychology,Law enforcement,leadership,leadership characteristics,leadership measurement,OAI-PMH Harvest,organizational psychology,Personality,Police,promotion,psychological,Psychology,Public Safety,rescue,sheriff

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor Hirabayashi, Kimberly (committee chair), Combs, Wayne (committee member), Malloy, Courtney Lynn (committee member)

Creator Email Racollin@usc.edu,randal.collins@att.net

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c89-261365

Unique identifier UC11673349

Identifier etd-CollinsRan-8113.pdf (filename),usctheses-c89-261365 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier etd-CollinsRan-8113.pdf

Dmrecord 261365

Document Type Dissertation

Rights Collins, Randal A.

Type texts

Source University of Southern California (contributing entity), University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses (collection)

Access Conditions The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the a...

Repository Name University of Southern California Digital Library

Repository Location USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus MC 2810, 3434 South Grand Avenue, 2nd Floor, Los Angeles, California 90089-2810, USA