For some time, I have been thinking about writing a column about crisis leadership. The fiery Armageddon that L.A. has faced over the past several days motivated me to finally discuss the topic.  I was a partner in a large accounting firm for many years. In my later years, when I was a senior partner with considerable gray hair, I was occasionally inserted into troubled situations where I either advised the client service team or replaced the team leader. In some situations, there was a smoldering problem. More frequently, there was a problem that had reached crisis proportions and required an immediate response and solution.  I learned two things from those experiences.  The first lesson is that you are usually not faced with a good solution. In such situations, solutions are difficult because every course of action has some negative consequences. Choosing the optimal solution often involves pursuing what I call the “least-worst” alternative. When you do so, you make a decision that has at least some negative aspects. Inevitably, someone will criticize you for making a bad choice.  I learned that dealing with such criticism goes with the territory of being a leader. The challenges are having thick enough skin to deal with the criticism and making sure that the criticism does not interfere with resolving the problem.  The second message is not to assign blame for the problem while you are still in crisis resolution mode. Typically, multiple players are involved, some of whom were emmeshed in the situation before it became a crisis. While it’s easy to blame them for the problem, doing so is counter-productive for several reasons.  While those who assign blame often seek to make themselves look better by comparison, doing so distracts everyone from a collaborative solution. It also puts the person or party being blamed in a defensive mode, causing them to withdraw from participating in the solution. Furthermore, that person or party is typically an essential member of the team who may play an integral role in implementing the solution.  The time for determining the responsible parties and how the problem could have been avoided is typically after the crisis has passed. That is the time when assessing why something happened can be done more objectively. Moreover, the desire to fault someone for the problem frequently disappears after the problem’s resolution.  Looking at this in the context of our current fire situation, I have lived in the greater L.A. area for 72 years. During that period, I have seen numerous Santa Ana wind conditions that have driven terrible fires. I remember the Bel Air/Brentwood fire of the early 1960s. In the fall of 1970, there was a fire that started in Granda Hills and burned to Malibu.  But last November, those Santa Ana winds seemed much more intense than usual. I remember the wind knocking me off balance during my daily walk through the Valencia Summit neighborhood. A few hours later my brother, who lives in Camarillo, asked if he could stay with us because he was ordered to evacuate. The winds blew burning embers several miles into his neighborhood and many homes were lost.  When the Santa Anas returned in early January, they were among the most powerful in my lifetime. Clearly, for a variety of reasons, we were unprepared for what was to come.  In the fires’ first days, the devastation was incredible. Problems abounded. The winds were so strong that aerial firefighting equipment could not be deployed. The amount of water needed to fight the fires exceeded the water system’s delivery capacity.  As time progressed, the resources to fight the fire were marshaled. I am amazed at the advanced firefighting technology and tactics that have been deployed. The fire is terrible, but if it happened 20 years ago, it would have been worse.  Despite this, media and media personalities have criticized our leaders for not being prepared for an unprecedented event. We need to ensure that their criticism does not interfere with putting the fires out. Furthermore, we need to ensure that all the parties having a role in extinguishing the fires are engaged. We need every one of them.  After the fire is behind us, we can objectively assess what went wrong and what steps should be taken to minimize the chances of having to deal with another apocalyptic fire. We also need to ensure that the fire victims are treated fairly by insurance companies, and contractors who will rebuild the affected communities. The needs of those displaced must be alleviated.  Jim de Bree is a Valencia resident. The post Jim de Bree | Lessons in Leadership During Crisis appeared first on Santa Clarita Valley Signal.