Dogma Letter # 8

The Screwtape Letters

In 1942 the English author, CS. Lewis, published a novel in the form of a series of letters, The Screwtape Letters. The letters were from an experienced devil named Screwtape who was giving advice to his young nephew Wormwood. His protégé was attempting to learn the dark ways of corrupting the souls of those people on life’s journey. Lewis masterfully communicated faith and morals by explaining an evil perspective. In this new series, I am attempting to communicate the best practices of effective emergency management using irony and sharing how some legacy emergency managers may be mentoring their own protégés. I will provocatively postulate what I have seen and experienced between old-school methods and next generation emergency management. It is my hope that the letters will engender a spirited debate as I dive into the old world of traditional emergency management and the new world of what I am calling “Adaptive Emergency Management.” I hope you enjoy The Dogma Letters.

?

Dogma Letter # 8

My dear Wormwood,

I am once again astonished by your willingness to entertain the dangerous ideas circulating among those who champion Adaptive Emergency Management. The notion that intelligence—critical information gathering, analysis, and synthesis—should be dispersed across all levels of a response system is as misguided as it is laughable. Intelligence is, and must remain, the prerogative of a centralized bureaucratic structure.

These "adaptive emergency managers" claim that every responder is an "information node," that incident management teams and local EOCs can collect, analyze, synthesize, and act on data independently, producing what they refer to as a "hive mind" of situational awareness that results in a common operating picture. How quaint! They fail to recognize that such a model does not create order; it fosters chaos. Intelligence assets and systems, like all resources, must serve the central authority. To do otherwise is to waste time and risk failure. As bees serve their queen, so must intelligence systems serve the centralized authority. Anything else is an abdication of responsibility.

Consider this: if intelligence supports everyone, then it supports no one. Intelligence resources must be concentrated under the command of those with the expertise and authority to make decisions. Decentralized intelligence risks falling prey to the tunnel vision of on-site incident management teams and local emergency managers, whose limited perspectives are easily misled by incomplete or deceptive information. Only those at the highest levels, with the full picture before them, can effectively wield the power of intelligence.

The proponents of Adaptive Emergency Management often argue for "near real-time intelligence sharing" or claiming it accelerates decision-making. They believe that responders in the field, or local emergency managers in an EOC with direct access to raw data, can make faster, more accurate decisions based on their immediate surroundings. But speed means nothing if the direction is wrong. Incident management teams at incident sites or emergency managers in local EOCs lack the contextual knowledge and strategic understanding necessary to interpret data correctly. It is absurd to suggest that those standing amidst the chaos of a disaster can discern patterns and priorities better than those observing from the calm distance of a state, regional, or Federal multi-agency coordination center.

Intelligence, Wormwood, is power—but only in the hands of those trained to use it. Giving local responders and emergency managers unrestricted access to intelligence resources is like giving a high school student a scientific database and expecting groundbreaking research. Information without analysis and synthesis is useless, and analysis and synthesis without perspective is dangerous. Centralization ensures that intelligence is processed, contextualized, and acted upon by those best equipped to do so, regardless of the delay in action such a process creates.

History supports this truth. After the Second World War, intelligence failures born of decentralization led to the creation of agencies like the CIA, which centralized intelligence to serve national leadership. In the modern era, organizations like FEMA and the Department of Homeland Security were established to eliminate the inefficiencies of disparate, uncoordinated intelligence efforts. These central bodies consolidate information to protect against fragmentation and duplication of efforts.

Even now, adaptive emergency managers argue that centralization stifles flexibility and innovation. They claim that local responders need autonomy to adapt to rapidly changing conditions. But this argument overlooks the fundamental role of command and control (with the emphasis being on control). Decisions flow down the chain of command because those at the top possess the authority and insight required to act. Information flows upward to ensure those decisions are based on the broadest and most accurate understanding possible. This is not stifling—it is efficiency.

Moreover, centralized intelligence promotes accountability. When information is managed at the highest levels, errors and oversights can be traced directly to their source. Decentralization, by contrast, diffuses responsibility, creating opportunities for finger-pointing and blame-shifting in the aftermath of failure. Centralized control not only streamlines operations; it ensures that responsibility remains clear and indivisible.

Let me make this clear, Wormwood: information management is the lifeblood of emergency management, and like all critical functions, it must be controlled by those at the top. Those who advocate for decentralization seek to democratize information at the expense of coherence. Do not be swayed by their rhetoric. Your role is to execute the directives of those who hold the authority and responsibility to act.

Until our next correspondence, remember this: intelligence, like command itself, must be centralized. Do not question it. Accept it. Execute it.

Your devoted uncle, Screwtape

Leader’s Intent Defined by Randy Collins

Randal A. Collins, Ed.D

Website: https://www.leadersintentllc.com/?