Police administrators continue to face increasing social, financial
and organization pressures to reevaluate the police role in the
community and make a commitment to community policing. Law enforcement
agencies that are seen as social forces interacting and in partnership
with the community stand in stark contrast to law enforcement agencies
that are seen as free standing, isolated enforcers of social order.
Community partnerships are better able to define problems and areas of
need, than are law enforcement agencies working alone and reactively
viewing the community through patrol car windows.
Police administrators, who typically agree with the philosophy of
community policing, continue to reassess organizational roles in terms
of partnership and community based problem solving. The "partnership,"
however, is often easier to see and accept by people at the top of an
organization, than by line-level personnel. Law enforcement executives
often find themselves making a commitment to community policing and a
community partnerships with little buy-in or even active resistance
from other department members.
RESISTANCE FROM WITHIN
Despite the fact that many officers believe in community policing, it
can be a hard sell to line personnel. Administrators often interpret
this resistance as, "officers just fighting change". While this may be
partially accurate, there is another aspect that is often overlooked.
When it comes to solving community problems, law enforcement
executives are quick to admit their organization alone doesn't know
what is best for the community. With this in mind, line personnel are
encouraged to establish a "partnership with the community" by becoming
problem solvers, being less authoritarian and by using more creative,
proactive, innovative and non-traditional methods. At the same time
however, traditional authoritarian-based, paramilitary management
practices are unchanged and remain a deep tradition within many law
enforcement organizations. So deep in fact, many supervisors and
managers don't even realize they are still using them. With this
glaring inconsistency, officers often ask, "If this stuff is so good
for and more effective with the community, why isn't it good for us?"
STARTING INSIDE THE DEPARTMENT
For community policing to become a reality, organizations must adopt a
philosophy and implement management practices that are consistent for
the entire community - both inside and outside of the department.
"Problem solving starts at home" is not just a cliché; it underscores
the importance of community, partnership and collaborative problem
solving inside the department.
If community policing is to become more than a passing buzzword,
police executives must accept the fact that "problem solving starts at
home." Police administrators must initiate changes in how they conduct
business internally, at the same time they are asking their officers
to change the way they conduct business on the street. Within any law
enforcement agency, there are ample opportunities to apply community
policing, partnership and problem solving techniques to internal
issues.
It is not unusual to see line personnel develop a cynical view of
community policing and adopt a "let's wait and see how long this will
last, this time around" attitude. For the law enforcement profession
to change from reactive responders to proactive problem solvers,
administrators must model the desired behaviors and ensure that needed
skills are taught and developed.
Managing law enforcement organizations from a strictly autocratic
chain-of-command perspective will yield exactly what that management
style is designed to produce - a unified, organized and reactive force
that responds to the direction of the rank structure; reacting and
obeying orders as defined by a higher authority. While, to some, this
might sound appealing, this management approach can produce intense
feelings of resistance, victimization and passive sabotage to
organizational change. It also produces rigidity, stifles creativity,
forces decision making upwards, and discourages self-initiated problem
solving - all the things that community policing hopes to change.
THE NEED FOR BALANCE
The nature of police work requires law enforcement professionals to
respond to many tactical situations with military-like accountability
and direction. Situationally, this approach is necessary for the
effective delivery of police services. However, when this is the
prevalent or the only management style, line personnel see themselves
at the lower end of the continuum of authority - a continuum that
denotes the degree of importance within the agency. An expectation of
passive and competent obedience, while a trait valued in military
operations, can be disastrous when trying to solicit input and
involvement from line personnel in collaborative problem solving
efforts. If department members are to see themselves as partners in
the joint venture of community problem solving, they must also see
themselves as stakeholders - social equals in defining and solving
internal department problems - in their own department.
"Situational Leadership" (Blanchard & Hersey) emphasizes the
importance of management flexibility and the use of management styles
that are consistent with the situational demands being addressed.
Police administrators must create an atmosphere where situational
leadership becomes the norm and where "Situational Followership" is
cultivated - that is where employees can understand and distinguish
between situations where strict compliance is required and where team
building, collaborative problem solving skills are appropriate.
Decisions based solely on an authoritarian management system might
yield structured compliance but not creative contributions and
solutions, a trait necessary for community policing to be successful.
The belief that , "the brass wants us to listen to the community and
see what their problems are, yet they won't listen to what our
problems at the department are," is not just grumbling from a few
isolated malcontents, it is the reality for many officers. For police
administrators, the task of making department members stakeholders is
predicated on the belief that all members of the department have a
contribution to make to department problem solving and service
delivery, beyond just respectful compliance to orders and directives.
THE NEED FOR CHANGE
Can police administrators initiate significant changes in law
enforcement/community interaction without precipitating major
malcontentism or invalidating a very necessary chain-of-command
protocol? The answer is yes . . . if police administrators are willing
to reevaluate and redefine their management practices and executive
roles as they relate to the department decision making and input
processes.
For officers to believe they are stakeholders in their department and
for community policing to become a reality, police managers will more
likely have to make greater changes than will line personnel. In an
authority-driven organization, problem definition and proposed
solutions are usually judged by whom make the recommendations, rather
than the accuracy of the definition or the effectiveness of the
solutions.
Situations where there are high demands and low control cause major
emotional distress for those involved. Law enforcement personnel who
have a heavy emotional investment in the job and little or no control
over factors affecting that job will become the most distressed. They
often express their distress with passive resistance and sabotage,
knowing that open dissention can bring sanctions for insubordination.
To create an atmosphere of cooperation and reduce the sense of
victimization, people either have to reduce their level of emotional
investment in the organization or believe they have a meaningful
degree of control or input into their job roles. Talk about empowering
department members, partnerships and collaborative problem solving
usually occurs in the context of working with the community outside
the department. However, these concepts are often mere "buzzwords" or
are simply ignored when they are applied to the community inside the
department. Line personnel are quick to see the discrepancy and
realize that, despite what is being said, they have very little power
in terms of their role in department problem solving.
Collaborative problem solving and teamwork does not require police
managers to relinquish their power or status. Unfortunately, internal
collaborative problem solving, partnership and empowerment are often
seen as a threat to management's authority, status and position.
Police managers have real power and authority within the organization.
Creating internal partnerships requires managers to accept the fact
that, collaborative, department stakeholders can better define and
solve internal problems. Managers must learn to situationally give up
some of their authority-based decision making. Participative decision
making has to and can effectively co-exist in a police agency with
chain-of -command decision making.
Being a stakeholder means having a real say and an investment in the
process. For community policing to become a reality, law enforcement
executives must create an internal atmosphere of "problem solving
begins at home." Better interpersonal, problem solving and group
dynamic skills (including, team building, conflict and anger
management, mediation techniques and communication skills) must become
a requirement for all law enforcement personnel, regardless of rank.
Until police administrators are willing to create an atmosphere of
internal partnership, community policing will remain just a trendy
buzzword.
While tactical decisions require tactical compliance, organizational
input on less exigent matters must be solicited and valued.
Partnerships based only on rank and status will yield at best
compliance, not genuine buy-in or creative investment. Group processes
that value input and permit open, candid discussion can exist
side-by-side with the traditional paramilitary command structure
without compromising organizational functioning or discipline. This
does, however, require higher-ranking personnel to redefine the manner
in which they manage and interact with their employees. Rigid, rank-
or status-driven decisions produce reactivity. Open, respectful group
processes can enhance the quality of police service and increase the
sense of ownership by line personnel in the mission.
MAKING IT WORK
Commanders, who are comfortable with and benefit most (in the
short-term) from rank-driven, reactive compliance, may see this change
as a threat to their authority. In the long-term, however, these
changes and a real sense of internal partnership will result in an
overall improvement in department effectiveness and will make an
administrator's tasks easier to complete.
A workforce committed to the organization's long-term goals is far
superior to a workforce of enthusiastic obedience by newer members,
passive compliance by mid-career personnel and open cynical negativity
by veterans who gave up years ago on the idea of being stakeholders or
that their input would be valued.
Teaching police managers to interact with non-managers in group
discussions on a equal level and without personalizing criticism can
be a difficult task. Creating cross-functional teams that run parallel
to the command structure is an important challenge for police
executives who really want community policing to be an integral part
of the department. A commitment to "problem solving starts at home"
has to become a reality before community policing can become a
meaningful part of a department's culture.
Law enforcement executives who make "Community Policing . . .Starting
Inside the Department" a management reality can expect to see positive
internal and external changes. On the other hand, law enforcement
executives who continue with business as usual inside the department
while espousing the value of community policing outside the
department, can look forward to continued internal resistance and
misunderstanding and will not realize the full benefits of community
policing.
