The Frustration Of Firefighting Words: Corey AdamsI find it fascinating what happens when an owner or executive leader walks into a struggling project.Morale picks up. Production improves. People communicate better. Meetings get sharper. Problems that have been sitting around for two weeks suddenly get solved before lunch. Everyone seems to participate a little more, care a little more, and move with a little more purpose.The strange part is that most of the time, the owner is not doing anything magical.We are not suddenly smarter than everyone else in the room. We are not introducing some revolutionary process. We might ask a few questions, challenge a few assumptions, and make a couple of decisions, but most of the people already knew what needed to be done before we showed up.So why did it take us walking through the door?That question has bothered me for a while.Is it confidence? Maybe the superintendent or PM knew the answer but needed someone above them to confirm it.Is it a lack of talent? Maybe they can manage a project when everything is going right, but struggle when pressure starts stacking up.Is it effort? Maybe everyone knows what needs to be done, but urgency changes when the owner is standing there watching.It could be all three. It could be none of them. Every project and every person is different. The problem is not figuring out which excuse sounds best. The problem is that an executive or owner should not have to be involved in the day-to-day operation of a project for that project to run correctly.If the job improves every time the boss shows up, that should tell us something.Your superintendent has authority without you. Your PM has authority without you. Your managers have titles, responsibilities, and expectations that do not disappear because you are sitting in another office. If the organization only performs when senior leadership steps in, then something between the top and the field is broken.Maybe it is the SOPs. Maybe expectations are not nearly as clear as we think they are. We love to say, “They know what to do,” but do they? Is there an actual process for dealing with schedule slippage, manpower issues, delayed submittals, weak subcontractors, or poor production? Or is the real process still, “Call the owner when it gets bad enough”?Maybe it is middle management. A good organizational structure cannot have accountability skipping three levels every time something gets uncomfortable. If a superintendent is not performing, their manager should be addressing it. If a PM is allowing a project to drift, someone should be correcting it before the problem shows up on an executive report.When everything eventually lands on the owner’s desk, that is not necessarily proof that the owner is a great problem solver. Sometimes it is proof that the organization has learned how to pass problems uphill.That becomes especially dangerous for leaders who came up through the ranks.If you were a superintendent before becoming an executive, you know how to run the job. If you were a PM, you know how to deal with the client. If you were an estimator, you know how to tear apart the scope. It is incredibly tempting to step back into the position you already know how to perform.And it feels good.You walk into the mess, make a few calls, reorganize the schedule, get the team moving, and suddenly the project looks better. Everyone is relieved. You feel useful. The fire is out.Then you leave.Two weeks later, there is another fire.At some point, you have to ask whether you are actually solving problems or simply becoming really good at putting out the same fires.That is the trap.When all hell breaks loose, leaders run toward the fire. We should. There are moments when the business needs senior leadership involved. Major client issues, serious financial exposure, safety events, or a project that is truly off the rails may require it. I am not suggesting leaders sit in an office while the building burns.But once the fire is out, there should be another conversation.Who should have seen this sooner?Who had the authority to deal with it?Why did they not?What training, process, or accountability was missing?If we never ask those questions, we are not fixing the organization. We are just resetting the clock until the next emergency.Maybe the better goal is not to become better firefighters. Maybe the goal is to teach the people closest to the fire how to use the extinguisher.That means giving supers and PMs more than responsibility. It means giving them confidence, authority, training, and accountability. They need to know what decisions they own and which ones need to be elevated. They need to understand that bringing every problem upward is not leadership. Sometimes leadership is making the decision, owning the result, and learning from it.That also means executives have to be willing to let people struggle a little.This might be the hardest part.When you know the answer, it is painful to watch someone else work through the problem. You can solve it in five minutes. They might need an hour. You can make the phone call. They might stumble through it. You can walk onto the project and immediately see what needs to be changed.But if you always do it for them, when exactly are they supposed to learn?There is a difference between allowing someone to fail and allowing someone to develop. Good leaders have to know where that line is.The goal should be an organization that performs whether the owner is standing on the project or sitting 500 miles away. The standard should not rise when leadership walks through the door. It should already be there.That requires strong systems. It requires real middle management. It requires training people before the emergency, not during it. Most importantly, it requires senior leaders to stop measuring their value by how many problems they personally solve.Our job should not be to make the project better every time we arrive.Our job should be to build people and systems that do not need us there in the first place.Put out the fire when you have to. Then train the people who started it, found it, or watched it grow how to extinguish the next one without you.About: Building More
