Protocol
Give one person the incident command
Ten experts without coordination can create eleven incident plans.
When it fits
- Many capable responders are acting at once and nobody has the whole operational picture.
When to avoid it
- Small incidents can combine roles; avoid bureaucracy that costs more than the coordination problem it solves.
Why it matters
Name one Incident Commander who holds the high-level state, delegates work, resolves coordination conflicts and makes sure missing roles are owned. The commander does not need to be the person typing the fix; keeping the response coherent is the job.
Steps
- Name the current Incident Commander explicitly.
- Give technical work, communication and planning owners where the incident size warrants it.
- Route major priority changes and conflicting actions through the commander.
- Make any command handoff explicit to the whole response group.
An example
A senior developer may remain Operations Lead while another responder coordinates priorities, dependencies and escalation.
Check your result
Every responder can name who currently owns cross-incident coordination.
Keep this limit in mind
- Small incidents can combine roles; avoid bureaucracy that costs more than the coordination problem it solves.
Connected ideas
Useful withSeparate fixing from explaining during an incident
Evidence and sources
Supports
Google SRE defines an Incident Commander role that maintains high-level state and coordinates the response by assigning responsibilities.
Small incidents may combine roles; the useful property is clear ownership, not a ceremonial title.
Managing Incidents · Incident Command