Jump to content

Talk:Incident Command System

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 49.137.32.104 (talk) at 12:42, 30 March 2011 (IC CHIP: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
WikiProject iconFirefighting Start‑class High‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Firefighting, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to firefighting on Wikipedia! If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
StartThis article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
HighThis article has been rated as High-importance on the importance scale.
WikiProject iconMedicine: Emergency Start‑class Low‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Medicine, which recommends that medicine-related articles follow the Manual of Style for medicine-related articles and that biomedical information in any article use high-quality medical sources. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine.
StartThis article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
LowThis article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the Emergency medicine and EMS task force (assessed as Mid-importance).

Condolidation of ICS into NIMS Page

Posted in National Incident Management System talkpage: Consideration to consolidate the Incident Command System (ICS) page into this one since ICS is in actuality replaced by the NIMS. What do you think? Paradiver (talk) 22:30, 1 June 2008 (UTC) Paradiver (talk) 22:32, 1 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

NIMS mandates the use of the ICS, it is not a replacement for it. NIMS and the ICS are very different things.--Bg10117 (talk) 17:21, 10 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. NIMS mandates the use of ICS and describes how it is to be implemented. If they were the same thing, they wouldn't have different names. I certainly won't dispute that the core of NIMS is the ICS. --Shaggorama (talk) 18:43, 27 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Overhaul

  • First, archived the talk page.
  • Second, made notes on current talk page.
  • Third, completely overhauled the Incident Command System page. It still needs some work, but is far better. Removed some factual inaccuracies, some POV, and reorganized. Ultimately, I used a lot of the original text and did major copyedit.
    • References are total rather than inline. The article is from the reseources under the "References" heading. This is different from the usual article. Admittedly, I did a good deal from memory.

VigilancePrime 21:22, 24 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Role playing

This piece of text seems to have been deleted from the article:

The Incident Command System (ICS) is a management system used to organize emergency response. ICS offers a scalable response to an emergency (incident) of any magnitude, and provides a common framework within which people can work together. These people (resources) may be drawn from multiple agencies that do not routinely work together. The system is designed to grow and shrink along with the incident, allowing more resources to be smoothly added into the system when needed and released when no longer needed. This is achieved because, in essence, ICS is a special case of role-playing. Authorities and responsibilities are inherent in roles (positions); individuals are assigned more or less temporarily to those roles, and can be reassigned, replaced, or released as needed. This key aspect of ICS helps to reduce or eliminate the "who's in charge" problem.

This text does not quite say what I think is intended, but something like it needs to be put back in the article. The key point is that during an incident people are assigned to roles temporarily, more or less regardless of their normal roles. At least, in some user communities it works this way, and it is very flexible and effective. In other user communities, the roles may be quite fixed from one incident to the next. This too can be effective, but it is not flexible. --Una Smith 03:48, 20 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

While I understand, I think, what you're getting at, I think that referring to ICS in any way as role-playing is a terrible way to put it. The layperson won't understand what is meant and associate it to something like Dungeons & Dragons (I know that may sound ridiculous, but you'd be surprised!) or the silly training that nobody takes seriously in a retail sales environment.
The way I see it, the article does get into the points about how positions in ICS are assigned (or should be) to the most qualified regardless of day-to-day "rank", although in reality this is not always the case (my favorite FEMA ICS video has a police sergeant roll up and say "based on what you've told me, I'm taking over as incident commander" and then puts his little green bubble-light on his toasty-warm car. It's awful)!
This article does need a lot more work and nobody seems to have visibility on it at all. Since overhauling it a while back, there have been virtually no significant edits to it. Even as I read through it I see a lot more work is needed. I would appreciate any help so long as we keep to the NIMS-compliant ICS series training. The theory is more important in an article like this, I believe. I'd like to know yours (and others') thoughts on the matter.
VigilancePrime 04:57, 20 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, it might help to strike "Personnel" and use instead "Jobs" or "Roles" (without reference to role-playing). Jobs are filled from a pool of available persons who are qualified to fill that job. Note that above you wrote "positions in ICS are assigned (or should be) to the most qualified". Do you see the problem? It is backward. ICS assigns persons to positions, not positions to persons. Positions to persons encourages the idea that the person then somehow owns the position. Also, re NIMS-compliant, please remember that this is not "USA Wikipedia". The article needs clear writing, explaining ICS accurately yet from a lay-person's perspective; if the goal is to copy NIMS ICS, let's just point to the source. By the way, I really dislike the current reference style; I want to know which of N references contains the relevant information. --Una Smith 04:59, 22 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Best of all, a layperson should be able to understand NIMS-compliant discussion because it is NIMS-compliant, i.e. clear text. Isn't that awesome! Anyway, how about "positions in ICS are filled (or should be) by the most qualified ... person when the Incident Commander deems necessary to activate a position or organizational segment..." or similar. Does that make any sense? Overall, the entire article needs far more overhaul than I was able to initially complete. (As for referencing, it's all throughout the four ICS modules as well as on FEMA's Emergency Management Institute's website and courses, available for anyone to take, read, learn, and become certified, also in hard-copy materials and courses.) VigilancePrime 05:08, 22 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"positions in ICS are filled (or should be) by the most qualified" sounds like the result of a dog fight among the persons who consider themselves qualified. People are assigned to positions as needed by positions higher in the organizational structure. I think this article would be of most use to the world if it did less rehashing of NIMS ICS and more comparing and contrasting its use in different communities (geographic, functional). --Una Smith 05:40, 22 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wildland Firefighting Box

What's the deal with the wildland firefighting box? The ICS is much more globally applicable than this, bigger than the fire service even. I'm all for increasing the visibility of this article, but I feel like there must be a more appropriate box we can attach to it. I feel that this box makes the article's scope appear narrower than it is. --Shaggorama (talk) 18:52, 27 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No one has argued this point, so I have taken the initiative and removed the box. Any smoke jumpers who disagree please speak up on my talk page as well as this forum. --Shaggorama (talk) 21:17, 28 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Wildland firefighting originated ICS, because of the interagency nature of the effort. Jclemens (talk) 04:10, 16 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

IC CHIP

                Integrated circuits were made possible by experimental discoveries which showed that semiconductor devices could perform the functions of vacuum tubes and by mid-20th-century technology advancements in semiconductor device fabrication. The integration of large numbers of tiny transistors into a small chip was an enormous improvement over the manual assembly of circuits using electronic components. The integrated circuits mass production capability, reliability, and building-block approach to circuit design ensured the rapid adoption of standardized ICs in place of designs using discrete transistors.
                There are two main advantages of ICs over discrete circuits: cost and performance. Cost is low because the chips, with all their components, are printed as a unit by photolithography rather than being constructed one transistor at a time. Furthermore, much less material is used to construct a packaged IC die than a discrete circuit. Performance is high since the components switch quickly and consume little power (compared to their discrete counterparts) because the components are small and positioned close together. As of 2006, chip areas range from a few square millimeters to around 350 mm2, with up to 1 million transistors per mm2

..........................................NET PAGE COPY ............................................