Reference no: EM131379067

Reply to at least two of you classmates' posts by asking a probing question/s and provide reasoning/justification behind your question/s. Being respectful in your reply is critical. Each response post should be a minimum of 75 words. While only a minimum of two replies are required, students are encouraged to carry on the conversation beyond just one initial post and two response post. Historically, students who participate in the discussion board more than others, maximize their learning experience. A good example of "carrying on the conversation" is by responding to students who have asked probing questions of your own initial post.

Melissa

In response to the containment of a chemical spill, the first incident commander should have done a better job at appointing roles to others. An incident commander is trained to manage an emergency situation by delegating tasks as well as delegating the authority to requisition the resources needed to accomplish them (Fallon, Begun, Riley, 2013). With no authority, then failure will occur. They are in charge because they are first at the scene and proper planning should be taken into action. Any necessary resources should be listed as well as each member being assigned to certain activities. Communication is the key to getting the job done and trust must be built in order to succeed.

Furthermore, the dismissal should have not been made without having to complete an after-action report because it is very essential. After-action reports enable organizations to review the effectiveness of their preparedness (Fallon, Begun, Riley, 2013). Filling out an after-action report allows improvement in problem areas that we might have missed. On top of that, it is also used to determine what task has been finished. Without the report, it could cause serious problems due to the chemical spill that we are unaware of. Completing this form is like a progress check and allows us to be on top of things. Also, it advises us on the environmental exposures and risk that can occur. The after-action report should have never been neglected because serious consequences will be made.

Raul

If put in Valerie's position I would address the situation a bit differently. Yes, we have an understanding that the incident manager is supposed to be trained enough to manage an emergency situation by properly delegating tasks and authority to requisition needed resources (Fallon, Begun, & Riley, 2014). This we know. But did we forget that as we encounter an emergency, whether its natural or human caused, we need to unite and work as one to overcome obstacles? The purpose of preparedness planning is to involve ourselves in training activities that will help us prepare for the unforeseen disasters. In this case, learning the dangers about chemical spills would've assisted the staff in taking all possible precautions to avoid dangers. Instead you had Valerie and Anton wiping possible hazardous substance on their pants. Staff members who are well-trained and highly motivated are essential for success (Fallon, Begun, & Riley, 2014).

It is unfortunate that the incident manager disregarded an essential step to the evaluation process. As stated by both coworkers, the incident commander did not complete an after-action report. This report is imperative due to the fact that it enables organizations to identify and improve their deficiencies (Fallon, Begun, & Riley, 2014). There's obviously room for improvement in the oil spill incident. Instead of pointing fingers, it would be best that either Valerie or Anton speak up to their organization leaders and address the issues at stake. By being honest, organizations are able to critically evaluate and improve poor performance areas (Fallon, Begun, & Riley, 2014).