1. There were several conceptual blocks experienced by the smokejumpers. The first conceptual block occurred when Dodge saw that the fire had crossed the gulch ahead of the crew and he redirected them to start ascending up the hill. The smokejumpers could not understand why Dodge would instruct them to go this route when it seemed much safer and more feasible to keep trekking toward the river. This is an example of compression. The smokejumpers were not seeking to find much needed information or clues to help aid them in the process of controlling the fire.
The smokejumpers were to set on following orders instead of being observant, if they had been they to would have seen that the fire had crossed the gulch just as Dodge did. They were more focused on the quisitive notion of trekking through the bunch grass instead of filtering out this irrelevant information. The next incident that blew the smokejumpers minds was when Dodge lit the fire in their only fathomable escape route and instructed them to lie down in the area the he had previously set on fire. They each looked at him puzzled and proceeded to do the complete opposite.
The smokejumpers could not see the reasoning behind Dodge telling them to lay in the ashes. They did not realize it at the time but the instructions that he gave them could have potentially saved their lives, instead the allowed panic to set in and acted on impulse. Here the conceptual block would be complacency. There was simply no thinking involved. The smokejumpers did not stop to think that ashes would not burn, thus protecting them from the blaze. Another critical mistake is that none of them stopped to ask Dodge his reasoning behind telling them to lie in the ashes.
Conceptual constancy was another conceptual block presented in this passage. The smokejumpers simply assumed that the fire would be under control by 10:00 the next morning. Many of them had a military background versus on in firefighting so their assumptions could not have been deemed a reliable source of judgment in this particular situation. Instead they only looked at it from a strategic or military perspective instead of a perspective of someone who has experience fighting fires. In the end the smokejumpers failed to realize that fires were not predictable as they initially fathomed.
In the instant that the radio was lost and the parachute did not open, that they had to jump from higher than normal due to turbulence, and the foreman eating dinner and taking pictures something should have gone off in their head to trigger the thought that valid predictions could not be made as a result of the previously mentions incidents. Nothing, especially fires of this magnitude are predictable. They were going off of past situations which would be a conceptual block of commitment. This fire was seen only as a variation of previously similar fires. Each smokejumper had the inclination to follow the directives given as a first measure, but when you had panic to the equations nothing seems to make perfect sense.
2. The second step of the analytical problem solving process, generating alternative solutions, was short circuited because the initial plan never left room to discuss any possible alternatives that could present themselves during the firefighting process or strategy. Dodge instructing the men to follow his directives, was the only procedure in place.
As a result there was no compliance stemming from the conceptual blocks impeding the men’s thought processes. It only seemed feasible that if the foreman had time to stop and take pictures and eat dinner that they would surely have enough time to come up with immediate and long term alternatives to different scenarios that could have potentially presented themselves. The fourth step in the analytical problem solving process, implementing and follow up on the solution, were short circuited as a result of not having any alternate solutions to pick from to reevaluate, or follow up on.
There was no means or basis of providing feedback without other alternatives. There was no measure to benchmark because they had not voiced their personal concerns, they just trusted and listened to the foreman’s directives. Being fully equipped with the knowledge and training necessary to be part of the smokejumper crew, they should have thought about other scenarios as a precautionary measure.
3. Problem-solving and decision-making processes change a vast amount during crisis situations and times of pressure. Many fail to stop and take the time to ponder about how certain situations should be handled in those types stresses. The initial thought process involves acting with the first impulse that comes to mind and not think of the possible outcomes after the fact. As a result panic in either situation stems from iradic thought processes that limit comprehension or ample time to collect thoughts. Outcomes are irrelevant during that particular moment and the basis of action comes from the initial reaction.
4. One suggestion for helping in future situations would be to incorporate a video during their training. Also it would be insightful to ad Dodge’s quick witted thinking by creating another fire to help smoke out the fire that was raging toward them and be an example for future smokejumpers as a means to limit casualties. One other aspect that was critically overlooked was the importance of coming up with alternatives and encouraging all crew members to offer insight to their possible solutions.
Never be afraid to ask a question because that may be the very question to change the entire outcome. Back up equipment should always be readily available and accessible to help prevent the situation involving the radio. One conceptual blockbuster that could have been useful for the smokejumpers was to eliminate the assumption that the fire would be under control by 10:00 the next morning. There should have been some further investigation to make that determination. Getting each member involved in the decision making process could have been another conceptual blockbuster.
Dodge could have taken the liberty to explain his reasoning behind lighting the fire and how it would spare their lives, and as a result of their understanding convinced them that this was a proven method. Some general rules of thumb in these types of situations would be to remain calm and never rule out any options to solve the problem.
5. From this case it is evident that you must never undermine your competition. Think of any potential problems that may present themselves ahead of time and come up with several viable solutions. Always put yourself in the other person’s shoes and think of how you would handle the situation in a more efficient manner. The practical hints we derived from this classic case of analytical problem solving gone awry was the scene where the smokejumpers landed at Mann Gulch. They expected to find a 10:00 fire and the spotters on the aircraft figured they would have it under control. The solution in this situation is to never assume anything at any time for any reason.
