歪歪漫画

I shared this idea with our members during a training event without providing additional context. Initially, the room was silent as they tried to figure out what I was referring to.

However, the group didn't take long to offer examples both for and against the notion that 鈥済ood enough is good enough.鈥� Is good enough really good enough? This month鈥檚 column is quite different from my previous articles. I hope to not only inform you but also to provoke thought and encourage feedback.

The belief behind "good enough is good enough" has surfaced in several ways across different fields. It aligns with the "sufficing" principle in decision-making 鈥� introduced by Herbert Simon 鈥� which suggests that sometimes seeking perfection is unnecessary when a "good enough" solution is sufficient.

This 鈥済ood enough鈥� concept can be applied to several real-world situations where decision-makers operate under constraints:

• Business leaders making good enough decisions instead of trying to find the perfect solution when considering the time, budget and information available.
• A family buying a car may not compare every model available; instead, they choose one that meets their budget and basic needs.
• Elected officials implement a new health care policy that may not provide the perfect solution, yet one that improves access and affordability to the end user.
• An emergency room doctor may need to make a fast, 鈥済ood enough鈥� decision rather than wait for the perfect solution.

The definition of "good enough" may vary based on the situation, however, accepting "good enough" can be dangerous when it concerns someone who frequently makes decisions involving risk. When it comes to emergency services, when is "good enough" truly enough? I invite you to think about it.

Should we refuse to settle for mediocrity when our community's and firefighters' safety are at stake? Or should this organization implement strategies to challenge the "good enough" mindset? We must carefully examine the challenges we face, identify areas for improvement and implement meaningful changes to strengthen our department.

Below are some key areas we hope to focus on in 2025.

In Minnesota, fire departments are experiencing a growing recruitment and retention crisis. With 97% of the state鈥檚 firefighters serving as volunteers, these shortages present serious challenges. Until 2023, we faced similar issues within our organization. Our recruitment efforts were outdated, irrelevant and inadequate.

For too long, we relied on the approach of "this is how we鈥檝e always done it," expecting different results while using the same tired strategies. We realized we needed to shift our focus from merely meeting the minimum qualifications to recruiting goal-oriented, determined and eager individuals. Since implementing this change, we have noticed an improvement in our organization.

A shift that was not merely about filling positions, but about creating a stronger and more capable department. Our members understand that the mission is too important to settle for good enough, but we are not done yet!

Do you believe in setting higher standards, challenging outdated traditions, and striving for more than just "good enough"?

Do you support our efforts to build a fire department that is stronger, more capable, and better prepared to serve the community?

In Minnesota, licensed firefighters must complete a minimum of 72 hours of training over a three-year period 鈥� just 24 hours per year. By that standard, a firefighter could meet the requirement with fewer than two hours of training per month.

Over the past three years, our members have accumulated 20,117.5 hours of training, far exceeding the state鈥檚 minimum. This equates to 266.83 hours per year for our full-time firefighters and 100.83 hours per year for our paid-on-call members.

We believe that training is not a requirement to fulfill; rather, it is a critical factor aiding us in fulfilling our mission. The key question is not just about meeting the minimum standards but about whether those standards are good enough.

Are the minimum standards good enough to make a meaningful impact?

Do you support our approach of not training to a minimum standard, but to what is needed?

National Fire Protection Association 1500 and 1710 recommend a minimum staffing level of four firefighters per fire engine. Additionally, OSHA 1910.134 mandates that when two firefighters enter a hazardous (IDLH) environment for interior structural firefighting, two must remain outside as a standby team.

Despite these standards, our department鈥檚 staffing model has remained unchanged since 2004 鈥� even as our community has grown significantly and emergency response calls have surged. Since 2020 alone, our call volume has increased by nearly 45%.

I continue the advocacy efforts first initiated by former Fire Chief David Hoefer. The primary motivation for this effort is safety. While national standards recommend a minimum of four firefighters per response, we can guarantee only one career staff member daily on the primary response engine.

This is subject to scheduling conflicts such as time-off requests and dorm staffing. With the implementation of our paid-on-call duty crew program, we occasionally have two personnel available at certain times. However, the need for additional career staffing remains my primary concern.

For the past four years, I have been challenged by this. Some may say that this situation rarely occurs or is too expensive to implement. But the reality is that it happens far more often than the public realizes.

Recently, two firefighters responded to a structure fire with reports of people trapped on the second floor. One firefighter entered the building to conduct a primary search while the other prepared the engine for suppression. For eight minutes, they operated alone until the next suppression unit arrived.

I agree that considerable financial investment is required to meet the minimum standards, but I must ask:

1. What price is this community willing to pay to ensure a minimum level of safety?
2. What risks are the community willing to accept to reduce costs?
3. Is operating below the minimum standard good enough?

As I conclude, I want to clarify that this is not about being disrespectful, insubordinate or ungrateful 鈥� it is about curiosity and desire to improve. It is about asking the tough questions: When is "good enough" truly enough? And when does it fall short?

Our goal is not to criticize, but to explore how we can do better, ensuring our firefighters have the staffing, resources and support they need to perform their jobs safely and effectively.

I hope this message sparks thought, conversation and support in our shared commitment to keeping our community safe.

Justin Sherwood is the fire chief at the Bemidji Fire Department. He can be reached at (218) 751-8001 or firechief@ci.bemidji.mn.us.