100% Availability = Success?
Is fire engine availability a reliable and useful measure of a fire and rescue service’s performance?
Availability data disparity
re-enkindle’s mission is to use research and data to support services’ improvements in On-call fire engine availability and their aspirations to become outstandingly effective, efficient, & nurture their extraordinary people.
Optimising our On-call
Inspired to help FRSs improve the overall availability of their fire engines owing to our unique On-call experience and insights we work tirelessly in pursuit on just one goal - supporting the sector to improve On-call availability.
Yet it has been suggested that availability is not a good measure of the actual service being provided, especially if considered according to a Service’s Integrated Risk Management Plan (IRMP) or, for that matter, their Community Risk Management Plan. Bateman et al (2015) in Public Service Operations Management proposed that ‘data for incidence turnouts and availability differs in reporting from service to service.’ If so, how can we account for this disparity?
How can we standardise data from the 42 fire and rescue services which report fire engine availability differently, sometimes based on some degree of connection with their wholetime fire engine availability? Occasionally by incorporating the use of Retained Support Officers, Group Support Teams, Small Indcident Units, or otherwise mobilising ‘skills-to-station’.
How can FRSs standardise both collation and reporting of availability when they use disparate software systems to record then report on fire engine availability, from Excel spreadsheets and Power BI to Rappel, Gartan, and Firewatch/Infographics to the On-call-centric (and IOHO the best) flexible planning software, Fire Service Rota?
However you want to define availability success…
Our insights, research, and smarter uses of data support Services to surmount such challenges
The question also remains: Is it more scrutiny, more data-delving, and more ways to manage and report on availability which is required or in an On-call context in which ‘Culture happens when no-one else is looking’ (Sir Tom Windsor speaking to the Home Affairs Committee in 2023) does, as Peter Drucker was erroneously albeit perhaps accurately quoted as stating: ‘culture eat strategy for breakfast’?
Our research has shown repeatedly how more recognition, more value, and more flexibility are what’s required to improve On-call fire engine availability and retain OCFFs amidst a Meaning Crisis and a Great Resignation in which 20% of the world’s workforce resigned last year, with 20% more are predicted to do so. Perhaps it is both: An On-call culture conducive to well being ad high performance perpetuated by smarter uses of data: ‘when we measure the right things we do the right things’(Joseph Stieglitz)…right?
Is this software the key to unlocking On-call success?
Our research demonstrates its more often than not a lack of ICs and ERDs that reduces availability; this On-call centric software supports smart strategic workforce planning, perpetuates the right vision and culture, and also creates flexibility for OCFFs
Does an availability metric show the true picture?
Bateman et al also asked ‘is availability too narrow a measure for the fire service?’ Unless we can adjust for quality of the service (for example how many firefighters arrive at each incident and what type of incident it was) and align availability data with other quantitative data (such as response times and incident numbers/type) and other qualitative measures (was the outcome favourable, the Service sufficient?) then - as the title of this article asked - is 100% availability = success?
This sentiment of statistical skepticism was echoed by the ONS, which in 2019 suggested that, ‘It must be noted that these statistics are not adjusted for the quality of the services provided […] These statistics should therefore be assessed alongside other key performance indicators and studies […] for a complete picture of efficiency and value for money within the Fire and Rescue Service’(ONS, 2019).
In addition, average total availability figures do not adequately reflect the very particular public need for the fire service at particular times and in particular ways. A service may have figures for availability which overall are comparatively high yet without demonstrating 100% availability may still not have fire engines available at key times when they are required for emergencies. Those most in need of the fire and rescue service are those in high risk locations and buildings, yet availability data rarely recognises risk. Likewise, availability of fire engines and fire crews are most required during times of high demand and projected periods of demand, yet overall availability rarely legislates for this.
The inherent vicissitudes of an emergency: sudden, unexpected circumstances requiring immediate action are those which dictate that emergency services are available as consistently as possible, ideally 100% of the time, yet it is only our data-driven approaches which take account of these factors.
Accordingly, suggestions for Positive Practice, and any conclusions offered for improving availability of fire engines by way of case studies perhaps can’t be offered as indicative of improving the service provided, unless those with On-call insights, understanding of what the data means, and appreciation of what is required to measure success are those which undertake this work.
Research-led, Data-driven impact
It’s the power of triangulating comprehensive contemporary research take-homes, analysing data using expertise and through the prism of experience and insights, and applying software to measure the ‘right’ things not everything, which makes the difference and can create impact.
If you want to create SMART approaches to availability that use software and ground breaking data modelling to account for demand, risk, and skills; which calculates the total contribution to availability of each OCFF in this way then get click here and ask us about OARS: On-call Availability Software and Skills software.
So what do you think? Is fire engine availability a good measure of performance? Should we work towards standardising data acquisition? Should reporting be fairer, and standardised so that more straightforward means by which the public, the HMICFRS, and others can judge the performance?
Let us know what you think via email at re-enkindle@fireserviceresearch.co.uk or tweet us @reenkindle using the icon below.
Thanks for reading!