Leadership Within Police Organizations

Leadership Within Police Organizations

Abstract

Research concerning police leadership has gained significant interest in the recent years as researchers strive to come up with evidence-based practices that would transform law enforcement agencies into efficient organizations. High prevalence of organized crimes and cyber-related offences make policing an ever-more complex practice. With these challenges, there is a need for a shared form of leadership that involves the community in resolving complex problems. Mediocre leadership within police agencies contributes to a wide range of undesirable behaviors. Some of these outcomes are increased corruption, absenteeism, attrition, stress, and dissatisfaction. Besides, a high turnover of junior staff in police organizations is associated with inadequate leadership. However, there is little evidence on the correlation between the rate of turnover among chief police officers and the productivity of leadership within police departments. Police leaders should embrace transformational and shared forms of leadership because it can promote commitment and the level of trust. Moreover, it enhances collaboration among the subordinates and also shapes the perceptions about police leaders. The two evidence-based approaches to leadership improve the productivity of police officers, thus place them in a better position to respond to policing challenges in today’s ever-more-complex environment.

Leadership Within Police Organizations

Contemporary police organizations operate in complex and ever-changing environments, especially with the rise of cyber-related crimes and terrorist groups. The need for leaders capable of managing teams and establishing networks has been imperative for police organizations to fit and respond to such challenges (Herrington & Colvin, 2016). Over the past few years, according to Herrington and Colvin (2016), the US, the UK, and Australia have reviewed leadership structures of their police agencies because of an increasing concern that there is a rapid change in policing techniques and leadership requirements. Also, there is a shared recognition that police leadership should play a key mobilizing role in connecting the community and law enforcement agencies (Herrington & Colvin, 2016). In this regard, the need for a leadership that can connect the community and police organizations emanate from a belief that policing is ever-more complex; therefore, police ought to involve the community in solving problems.

The need for increased accountability and also rapid changes in American societies that arise from new patterns of immigration drive the need for effective leadership within police organizations. Moreover, the general public has been critical with demands for professionalism in the service, implying that evidence-based leadership within police agencies is needed (Martin & Mazerolle, 2016). This research paper critically evaluates information in the literature to determine the characteristics of effective leadership within police organizations, and how it impacts service delivery, level of employee satisfaction and employee turnover. Also, the paper focuses on how ranks affect leadership development within police agencies. Although police organizations face challenges that arise from terrorism, new patterns of immigration, and cyber-related crimes, the crisis can be addressed through effective leadership because quality leadership contributes to stable police departments, improved productivity, and reduced turnover.

Police Leadership and Employee Turnover

Leaders within police organizations are responsible for establishing policies, influencing philosophies, and overseeing critical operations in the agency. Actions of these people have a significant impact not only on how services are provided but also on how resources are allocated within police units. The Police Executive Research Forum (PERF) and various scholars in the field of criminology have a joint position that competent and productive police leaders are the ones that works closely with all ranks of officers to make a difference (Li & Brown, 2019). More importantly, such leaders should have the capacity to organize and coordinate the work of the police officers to keep citizens safe. According to Li and Brown (2019), quality leadership within a police organization can potentially promote a stable and a productive police unit. Conversely, inadequate, and ineffective leadership may contribute to a wide range of undesirable outcomes from stress, dissatisfaction, corruption, and attrition to absenteeism (Li & Brown, 2019).

Mediocre leadership increase the rate of employee turnover because junior officers that perform arduous work can easily give up if they do not get proper guidance. This way, police leaders should motivate officers, especially junior ones, who may find it challenging to handle uncooperative and hostile individuals while adhering to the constitutional rights of the citizenry. Often, managing an array of policing activities can be physically, psychologically, and emotionally challenging. These phenomenon, notably, can make officers quit their jobs if there is inadequate leadership in police units. Leaders should know how to handle critical organizational features of the occupation, which may contribute to high turnover. More specifically, these elements are limited potential for career advancement, modest income, and rotating shifts.

Li and Brown (2019) said that employee turnover in the police units is a significant issue in the United States, and it has attracted the attention of public policymakers and criminal justice executives. The authors found that a high rate of turnover associated with inadequate leadership has adverse effects as it leads to increased workload on extant officers, inadequate staffing, and a decline in employee morale (Li & Brown, 2019).

Another problem associated with poor or mediocre leadership within police departments is the limited productivity of inexperienced and newly hired personnel. Li and Brown (2019) used data of newly-appointed police leaders in Texas to determine the effect of leadership performance on the rate of officer turnover. The authors found that there was a general lack of discipline, including police drinking while on duty, where there was inadequate leadership (Li & Brown, 2019).  Other aspects associated with poor leadership in a police units are stress, attitudes of alternative career options, and difficulties dealing with corrupt police (Li & Brown, 2019). It is, therefore, apparent from this study that leadership within police departments determines the efficiency, quality of service, and the level of satisfaction in law enforcement organizations.

Characteristics of Effective Police Leaders

The English literature, according to Pearson-Goff and Herrington (2017), identifies four critical features of effective and competent police leaders. The first attribute is being ethical, which refers to exhibiting a sense of honesty and integrity. Within any police entity, effective leaders should be able to bring about a sense of trustworthiness, especially from junior officers. Equally important is the ability to create a sense of trust operationally between the community and the law enforcement agency and within the police organization itself.

Secondly, such leaders understand their responsibility of being ‘role models.’ This defining feature suggests that police leaders should not only be emulating the behaviors expected from subordinates but also ought to be leading by example. Thirdly, effective police leaders should have excellent communication skills. Pearson-Goff and Herrington (2017) noted that published studies had conceptualized communication as the ability to communicate with the subordinates and within the police organization. Besides, such people play leading roles in stakeholder and government policy development. The literature, in this regard, perceives the effective police leaders as competent decision-makers that have the potential to make decisions that facilitate the achievement of goals (Pearson-Goff & Herrington, 2017).

Fourthly, competent police leaders have legitimacy in the eyes of the subordinates. Since they are in senior roles in law enforcement institutions, they ought to have passed through ranks. Going through ranks, according to Pearson-Goff and Herrington (2017), is necessary to gain legitimacy among the officers as it demonstrates an in-depth understanding and the mastery of the responsibilities of personnel in lower levels (Pearson-Goff & Herrington, 2017).

Leadership and Ranks

Ranks in police organizations shape beliefs about effective leadership (Pearson-Goff & Herrington, 2017).  Leadership, nonetheless, looks at different levels and hierarchies in law enforcement institutions. The topmost ranks comprises of individuals that provide vision, including a sense of mission to law enforcement agencies and police units. Personnel in the highest level of police organizations should have problem-solving, strategic planning, and decision-making skills (Pearson-Goff & Herrington, 2017). They are committed to fostering collaboration within police units besides emphasizing the essence of the delegation of work.

Middle managers in police institutions are often in charge of logistical operations. Their work is to provide administrative support to their organizations. More importantly, these leaders engage in empowering officers and building teams. They also plan, mentor, and coordinate the work of subordinate officers. Below the middle-level leaders are front line supervisors who engage in evaluating performance, training, and supervising teams (Pearson-Goff & Herrington, 2017). Often, front line supervisors apply operational skills since they are in charge of organizing routine activities in their police departments (Pearson-Goff & Herrington, 2017).

There is a distinction between strategic and tactical leadership in policing. Strategic leadership, in most instances, is the responsibility of senior level leaders, such as superintendents. Tactical leadership, on the other hand, is the responsibility of chief inspectors, inspectors, and sergeants. Pearson-Goff and Herrington (2017) said that sergeants and constables are less concerned with creating a shared vision in police organizations. These officers often prefer to do tasks at hand by applying an instrumental leadership approach. While these people play vital roles in the leadership of the police institutions, they are more interested in taking instructions and accomplishing tasks assigned by their seniors. Pearson-Goff and Herrington (2017) further noted that sergeants and constables are less concerned with driving and managing change as a leadership activity. However, there is evidence that self-interests are writ large in lower-level leadership than middle and senior-level ranks (Pearson-Goff & Herrington, 2017).

Top police leaders perform critical functions that have direct impacts on the productivity of the subordinates and even the quality of services that police organizations offer. One of the most essential tasks among senior-level leaders is creating a shared vision. This function relates to creating a sense of purpose for followers, developing, setting, and sharing the vision of police organizations (Pearson-Goff & Herrington, 2017). Besides creating shared value, police leadership focuses on engendering organizational commitment. Individuals in various leadership positions accomplish this task by fostering collaboration, providing feedback to subordinates. Other activities that leaders in police organizations undertake are mentoring and coaching staff.

Nonetheless, the leadership structure of most police organizations diminishes the occupational status of junior officers (Martin, & Mazerolle, 2016). The hierarchical paramilitary structure, in particular, hinder everyday work activities because it creates a huge gap between line-level officers and personnel in leadership. With this structure of administration, it suggests that the decisions of most police organizations are made without the input of subordinates. Favoritism, at other times, may pervade management issues if a law enforcement agency uses the hierarchical paramilitary structure of administration.

Leadership Development Within Police Organizations

Supervisory styles that leaders in today’s police organizations embrace go beyond the traditional autocratic approach. Research on leadership styles among personnel in different hierarchies of police leadership indicates that subordinates support a preference for two approaches, namely participatory and supportive methods (Masal, 2015). The leadership structure of police organizations, nonetheless, has weaknesses that adversely impact planning, coordination, and supervision of work. Subordinate staff, for instance, have limited direct contact with personnel in top hierarchies, especially with supervisors among other individuals in formal positions of leadership. The traditional criminal justice leadership structure, notably, promoted the command and obeyed relationships between subordinates and supervisors. While this top-down authority structure support top leaders in issuing instructions, it does not provide opportunities that develop subordinate officers as future leaders. In other words, the structure does not allow individuals to showcase their leadership potentials.

The transformational leadership, according to Masal (2015), has revolutionized the leadership of the present-day police organizations. This type of leadership style is evident in United States police organizations such as the Marshall Services and the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA). Transformational leadership, in the context of the administration of police organizations, is based on the philosophy that leaders have the potential to change beliefs and the behaviors of their followers. Notably, transformational leadership in police is vertical because of the existence of hierarchies between the subordinates and the top leadership. Research shows that a transformational or vertical style of leadership improves the effectiveness of managing people and also shaping behaviors among junior officers (Masal, 2015).

Masal (2015) said that there are two possible explanations for the existence of transformational leadership in police organizations and why followers or subordinate officers have a preference for this style of leadership. First, police in many jurisdictions, including the US, is much more about community and social work policing. This situation suggests that law enforcement agencies require more supportive forms of leadership to achieve their goals. The authoritarian and quasi-military styles of leadership, notably, do not fit into today’s social work and community policing, because their model, from the context of police organizations, rests on the crime fighter image Masal (2015). Secondly, the system of reinforcement for law enforcement agencies is deeply rooted in their organizational structures. This way, police organizations do not need to mobilize their followers to provide contingent reinforcement actively. From the evidence supporting the essence of vertical or transformational style of leadership on police organizations, it is justifiable to say that it facilitates shared leadership. The reason is that followers or subordinates in police institutions tend to embrace leadership behaviors that they observe among the senior personnel.

The rise of terrorism and organized crimes, in the United States, according to Masal (2015), has led to a dramatic shift from approaches of vertical leadership towards shared forms The latter suits police organizations, especially in this era of increased crimes, because it recognizes that the effectiveness of teams entirely depends on the interactive influence of their members instead of vertical leaders. Masal (2015) noted that shared leadership is fundamentally useful in situations where tasks are not only interdependent but also complicated.

Shared form of leadership is of great importance to police organizations, which have been struggling to respond to organized crimes and other issues in today’s ever-changing environment. Research shows that shared leadership in the perspective of police leadership facilitates trust and commitment (Masal, 2015). Also, it creates a strong bond among officers, especially at lower levels of the hierarchy (Masal, 2015). This form of leadership leads to several positive outcomes if adopted in law enforcement agencies. Some of these benefits are enhanced commitment and improvement of employee perceptions about their leaders and even work conditions.  Besides, police organizations can achieve goals about community-oriented policing through shared leadership. However, there is little evidence in the literature on how shared leadership should be facilitated within police organizations (Masal, 2015).

Conclusion

Police organizations face multiple challenges that require rapid changes in leadership requirements and policing methods. Productive leadership is needed, especially in this era where there is an increase in organized crimes, and terrorism. Inadequate leadership has far-reaching implications in police organizations as it leads to a rise in the rate of employee turnover. Also, it contributes to poor service delivery, since subordinates tend to engage in general indiscipline where there is mediocre leadership. Shared leadership has the potential to transform law enforcement agencies because it motivates junior officers. Also, it provides subordinates with opportunities to develop their leadership skills. Good police leaders are ethical, trustworthy, and act as role models to junior officers. Leaders should focus on building teams within different ranks of police leadership as a strategy to prepare officers to respond to crises in policing.

References

Herrington, V., & Colvin, A. (2016). Police   Leadership for Complex Times. Policing: A Journal

            of Policy and Practice, 10(1), 7-16. doi:10.1093/police/pav047

Li, Y., & Brown, B. (2019). Police Chief Turnover in Texas: An Exploratory Analysis of Peer-

Evaluation Survey Data Pertinent to Police Performance and Turnover. Police Quarterly, 22(4), 391-415. doi: 10.1177/1098611119845664

Martin, P., & Mazerolle, L. (2016). Police Leadership in Fostering Evidence-Based Agency

Reform. Policing: A Journal of Policy and Practice, 10(1), 34-43. doi:10.1093/police/pav031

Masal, D. (2015). Shared and Transformational Leadership in the Police. Policing: An

International Journal of Police Strategies & Management, 38(1), 40-55. Doi: 10.1108/pijpsm-07-2014-0081

Pearson-Goff, M., & Herrington, V. (2017). Police Leadership: A Systematic Review of the

Literature. Policing: A Journal of Policy and Practice, 8(1), 14-26. doi:10.1093/police/pat027