Leadership & Planning - mitigating the potential disaster of Gustav
September 3rd, 2008Hurricane Gustav has moved on, losing its category 3 punch along the way. It was still a very bad storm. And it is worth remembering that Katrina was a cat 3 when it hit New Orleans. But this time it was a far lesser event, certainly not the huge disaster the media was predicting. (Actually, they were left scrambling for disastrous news to report, resulting in some amusing over-dramatizations.)
What made this one different? Well, there are certainly differences in the storm itself, but that’s not my expertise or my concern here. I will leave that to scientists and meteorologists.
From my perspective, the difference here is primarily due to planning, before the disaster, and then following the plan. So simple! And yet so unlike the response to Katrina from all concerned. Most of the blame after Katrina was heaped on the Federal Government, particularly FEMA and President Bush. However, one should not forget the State and Local authorities, which careful analysis done after the event suggests were far more culpable.
Regardless of the level of blame, President Bush was certainly determined to do a better job in future emergencies. The efforts at the Federal level certainly showed. FEMA has new leadership and new plans. Along with new leadership and new attitudes from old leadership at State and Local levels, as well as excellent coordination and cooperation, the real potential disaster simply didn’t happen.
There is a great article in the Wall Street Journal today on just this topic. It offers kudos to new FEMA Chief R. David Paulison. He earns them with his cool head in a crisis, leadership, and excellent planning efforts. I recommend the article to my readers. You will find it here:
There are great lessons to be learned here, for businesses as well as governments. With good leadership and planning, you may not be able to avoid disasters, but you can mitigate the negative effects!