In the NIMS Alert from 12/06 (http://www.fema.gov/txt/emergency/nims/plain_lang.txt) the following is stated:
"It is important that responders and incident managers use common terminology. There simply is little or no room for misunderstanding in an emergency situation.
The use of plain language in emergency response is matter of public safety, especially the safety of first responders and those affected by the incident. It is critical that all local responders, as well as those coming into the impacted area from other jurisdictions and other states as well as the federal government, know and utilize commonly established operational structures, terminology, policies and procedures."
So much is placed on "10-codes" in the plain language discussion, however FEMA produces their own 78 page document (FEMA P-524) called the FEMA Acronyms Abbreviations and Terms (FAAT) guide, and they even have an email faat@dhs.gov.
Why is FEMA spending time "promoting plain language" yet at the exact same time documenting and promoting more than 6,200 acronyms - nearly 1 acronym per FEMA employee?
If plain language is a part of the answer, then we need to find a way not to create more acronyms, but to reduce the number we're dealing with. Which ones are really obselete or irrelevant? We're not talking about changing a few entries in FAAT, but really tackling the core issues behind the need to create acronyms to describe items that could be described instead with plain language.
Comments (10)
I have yet to attend a single briefing (or even conversation) with FEMA personnel where the information did not consist of at least 10% acronyms, abbreviations, and jargon.
How many times have you sat through something like this:
The [Acronym] was set up at the [Acronym] to process the [Acronym] and [abbreviation], but due to [citation] we had to [jargon] the [abbreviation].
One fact of life is that every profession has its own language (jargon) and people who have been in the profession long enough to learn their jobs have also learned the jargon to the point where they think it IS "plain language" and FOR THEM the jargon is more undestandable than ordinary English would be.
What a "Plain Language" requirement really means depends greatly on the target audience.
N4aof - Great examples!
Reminds me of a Effective communications class a few years ago. The instructor read a report to the class, and had them interpret the meaning as they understood it. The report was filled with the very acronyms that fill the pages of FEMA P-524.... instead of a simple request for a coffee pot, in the end, Air tankers filled with diesel fuel were dropping their loads on the incident commander of a structure fire in an urban area.
I wish I still had a copy of that to post here...
Yes, I like the way these various examples and methods of locations are broken down.
However, as suggested, common and simple language should be used based on the general public's knowledge at present. This enables more real time efforts by the public who could aid rescuers and or first responders with commonly known GPS locations. Emphasis should be instilled through learning ads, learning institutions and companies that train their employees on the use of GPS, to utilize the methods of using latitude and longitude location languages. This will help to instill a commonality to the public that the use and knowledge will help everyone in the long run and provide a quicker response time in all situations of emergencies.
Also, maps are helpful unless in cases where roads and land masses may have been washed out by flooding or moved or relocated or destroyed by such disasters as fires, earthquakes or explosions. Many stationary landmarks could move under such circumstances. A real yet startling true event could occur.
We must all be on the same page or else we fail to communicate and then people get hurt !!
It is a briefing not a response. You may spell out Federal Emergency Management Agency or raise your hand if you please but FEMA works :-) Thanks...
From my point of view FEMA works! Keeping the communication lines open to the public is important.
When I was doing national level planning, I was absolute death on spelling out acronyms and initialisms at least once when it was first used, and again if used in a different section of the document. Same with a briefing. The briefing has no purpose if information isn’t communicated in a usable format. Too much brevity through the use of acronyms and initialisms often restricts rather than promotes communication. To me it is a matter of the communicator knowing who they are trying to communicate with as much as what they are trying to communicate. Sadly, I find 20% of the time someone may know what action or location is meant by the acronym or initialism, but can’t actually provide the words the letters stand for. So they can't really communicate what they have learned with anyone else.
Raise your hand if you ever sat through a briefing, spending more time deciphering the acronyms spewed, and missing the main points of the meeting...
My favorite entry in the FAAT book is FYI.