Why operations teams get stuck in firefighting mode
- Duncan Maddox
- Mar 6
- 3 min read
Updated: 2 days ago
Operations teams are often highly skilled, experienced and proud of keeping things running under pressure.
Firefighting usually begins with sensible, short-term fixes made by experts trusted to keep the lights on. But over time those same actions mean that constant intervention becomes a requirement. Commitment and operational strength can unintentionally create a system that only functions in crisis mode.
Short-term fixes become the default way of working
Most operations teams do not start in a state of chaos.
Processes are defined, roles are clear and the work is broadly manageable. Problems exist, but they are manageable.
When an incident occurs, experienced people step in and solve the problem in front of them. Service continues. SLAs are maintained. Management are happy.
These actions are necessary. They keep the system functioning in the moment. And the people doing the work are knowledgeable, dependable and acting with the best of intentions.
But learning is not captured. Processes are not rewritten. The system is not updated. Everyone is busy and there are other priorities. There may be a vague intent to come back and fix the problem properly later but that rarely happens because everyone is already busy enough and each individual intervention feels manageable in isolation.
Through this inaction the team have slightly increased their workload. This eats into time available for improvement work. One or two interventions are not a problem. But they become three or four. And then slowly they begin to accumulate. And each intervention absorbs time and attention that could have been used to fix a problem properly.
Eventually constant intervention becomes the default way of working. And the time needed to make improvements has been drastically reduced or completely eroded.
Firefighting becomes identity
In many operations teams, firefighting does not just become normal. It becomes respected.
The people who stay late, jump in and rescue failing situations are often seen as the strongest operators in the team. They are relied on and valued because they keep things moving when others cannot.
This makes sense. Their intervention is valuable in the moment. But over time success is no longer measured by how rarely problems occur. It is measured by who can handle the biggest problems and navigate the complexity of an increasingly fragile system.
Firefighting starts to feel like proof of value.
The people carrying the biggest load are seen as the most important. Teams can begin to take pride in their ability to cope with a situation that should never have become normal in the first place. And firefighting becomes part of their professional identity even while they complain about never having time to do things professionally.
Heroics are not the solution
By this point organisations usually recognise that they have a problem and respond by asking people for another short-term heroic effort.
But that misses the point.
The commitment is already there. The expertise is already there. The willingness to step in is already there.
The problem is that heroics have become part of how the system functions.
When the same people are repeatedly rescuing the work, absorbing pressure and holding things together through personal effort, the system is no longer coping through good design. It is coping through repeated intervention.
Heroics can keep the work moving for a while. But they do not make the operation stronger. They usually delay the moment when the real problem has to be addressed.
Fix the system, not the symptom
The answer is not to stop people intervening when something goes wrong. In the moment, that is often necessary.
But repeated intervention is a signal that something in the system needs attention. That means looking beyond the heroic rescue. Where does the work depend too heavily on memory, manual checks or individual expertise. Which fixes have quietly become standard practice.
It also means reshaping what the team respects. If status comes from rescuing the work, then prevention and simplification will always be neglected.
Strong operations teams do not build their identity around coping with avoidable disruption. They build systems that need less rescue in the first place and place value on prevention, simplification and learning.
If this article reflects what is happening in your organisation, the pattern is unlikely to be isolated. Breakdowns in communication, weak challenge, poor decisions under pressure and slow learning are often connected. They usually point to deeper problems in how work is organised, especially under stress.
At Learn Resilience Now, we help people, teams and leaders understand those patterns and respond more effectively through better decision making, clearer communication and stronger performance under pressure.
This one-day course helps teams build the shared understanding, common language and practical ways of working needed to respond more effectively under pressure, adapt to disruption and maintain performance when conditions become more difficult.
And learn about our other training courses and workshops here...