Main Features of Criminal Justice Bureaucracy

Main Features of Criminal Justice Bureaucracy

Introduction

All business organizations, whether educational, business, or government, are social systems run by people. The effective functioning of organizations is embedded in how people work. Human reputation is unpredictable, and human resource management possesses a duty of establishing, selecting competent personnel, training the staff, and monitoring them towards higher levels of performance and provide a mechanism to ensure the accrued personnel maintain their affiliation with the organization. The police domain is no exception from these insights. Human resource management is a critical element in the police department since it provided direct services to the public and is mandated to safeguard societal members. Police personnel who are well-trained, qualified, and motivate to their work and who are administered by competent superiors are core contributors to a police service constructed on the threshold of police ethics.

The contemporary killings of the unarmed African Americans have aroused different concerns on social media. Following the regular shootings of the unarmed African Americans, protests, riots, and the advent of the Black Lives Matter movement have ascended to advocate for the integration of ethical and theoretical standpoint on contemporary issues. This study intends to explore the subject of the killing of unarmed African Americans that is linked to police personnel and look into personnel practices to mitigate the state of affairs.

Main Features of Criminal Justice Bureaucracy

Hough et al., (2017) propose the criminal justice system constitutes if criminogenic characteristics and can be disintegrated into three elements. The first element is the legal factors that embed criminal justice operations. Secondly are the law enforcement behavior and thirdly the criminal justice bureaucracy that permits law enforcement to perform its duty and role for group or personal interests. The three factors are interconnected since they cannot exist singularly. A study conducted by Hough et al. (2017) demonstrates that criminal justice bureaucracy, in many cases, is violated by criminal justice system officers to benefit in resolving cases. The prospect of the criminal justice bureaucracy contributes to the disintegration of the criminal justice system.

Operational and Managerial Decisions in Criminal Justice System

Bond & Morreale (2015) argue police organizations perform a vital role in the quality of life led by society members. As a result, the police managers are expected to pursue quick and justified decisions affecting not only the lives and wellbeing of citizens that the protect but also police officers. There are two levels of decision-making in police organizations that fall into the domains of strategic and crisis management.

Strategic decision-making is built around strategic management and change context. In contrast, crisis management decision-making focuses on decisions police officers make in-field context based on an immediate course of action to manage the current situation. Strategic decision-making paves the way for deliberation and reflection, where it is crucial to have in disposal a systematic mechanism of data gathering, discussion analysis, evaluation of different alternatives, and ongoing assessment.

In many scenarios, decisions made are constructs of scanty information, basing decisions on mere personal intuition. Basing decisions on speculations and intuition, especially in the context of streets, has insisted on parsing issues. The killing of African American citizens is constructed on decision-making outcomes that ascend from limited information and intuitions. However, intuition ought not to be underestimated, especially by officers with great job experiences. Further, the integration of intuition into a systematic decision-making process will solidify decision outcomes. The effectiveness of decision outcome lies on the threshold of whether the police officer is making decisions based on previous experiences or gut feelings.

Bond & Morreale (2015) note the area of criminal justice management decision-making is an evergreen subject with little scholarly attention, including the domain of policing. A lot of studies on decision-making have focused on the application of discretion in decision making. Little attention has been paid to decision-making processes by law enforcement administrators and the aspects of efficient decision-making practice. The concept of policing is also the element of the policing industry. The conception of community policing brought forth the Scanning, Analysis, Response, and Assessment (SARA) framework to assists in problem-solving, especially by line-level personnel. Further, the introduction of problem-oriented policing states the fundamental aspects attached to the problem-oriented approach to policing, whereby the police officers rely on the causes of crime as opposed to merely responding to service calls. However, in the context of the contemporary killing of the African American unarmed civilians, a lot of questions are raised, triggering interrogations as to whether the killings are founded racial prejudices or on other unjustifiable decision outcomes.

The SARA framework is considered as a crucial tool for systematic problem-solving directed towards field police officers. According to Greene (2000) (cited on Bond & Morreale, 2015), the application of the SARA model at the organizational level will motivate improvements in law implementation operations by elevating awareness to challenges, responses, and possible effects. However, the usage of the SARA model will require various approaches to perceiving and analyzing decisions by use of existing information to assess strategy and operation.

Focusing on police-administrator decision-making is fundamental in the sense that the public is demanding more effective and efficient service for their wellbeing. The Americans are continually in need of protection by the police. Therefore it should not turn ironical that the police that are supposed to guard all American races in the country are instead of killing them. The police force ought to continually adapt and adapt to organizational structures that efficiently serve the public interest.

Managerial Functions of Evaluation, Assessment, and Appraisal

Kenney (1999) noted personnel performance evaluation is a critical issue in the police department that is granted minimal attention it deserves. It is common to find personnel dissatisfied with various aspects of how their performances are assessed. In many cases, the prospect of evaluating performance is a representation of administratively acceptable practice that is concluded within an uncertain time. A well-structured managerial system for evaluating, assessing, and appraising police officers is one of the avenues of identifying competency in policing. It is through the process that good service providers are identified and awarded as a basis of motivating them to render services continually.

Based on the challenges embedded in police evaluations, several executive officers contain minimal desire to bring in changes to the applied procedures. This view has allowed some police officers to engage in the killing of unnamed African Americans unnoticed. Whereas few police leaders maintain a belief that change is unnecessary, many ate afraid that the change will be too lengthy, too complicated, and too much resource-demanding. Some leaders are so scared of inadequate skills to induce changes. Due to these factors, police are operating under increasingly diverse settings and conditions; but such considerations should not hamper the prospects in performance assessment.

Historically, performance evaluations served comparatively narrow functions linked to the executives’ view of official duties and responsibilities. A criminal justice system organization’s standard operating mechanisms, in many cases, align officers’ responsibilities based on how they undertake such responsibilities. Consequently, management’s performance expectations are anchored on such procedures.

To manage police officers’ performances, evaluation tools are designed to continually monitor their knowledge, attitudes and skills in line with their duties. As a result, performance evaluations ascend to become the benchmarks by which criminal justice officers struggle to showcase their competency. Mastrofski and Wadman (1991) identify three primary reasons as to why officers’ performances ought to be measured. The first reason is to help managers reach logical conclusions about promotion, demotion, discipline, reward, training needs, termination, retention, and salary, and job assignment. The second reason is to help executive supervisors offer responsive feedback to subordinates and help them in career planning and preparation and indeed, form a basis of motivation. Thirdly, measuring performances helps to justify selection and screening tests and training assessments and to evaluate the efficiency of interventions for improving individual performance. A properly conducted performance assessment is likely to unravel the killings of the unarmed African American in the United States, based on the position if the three roles stated above in identifying the discrepancy between an officer’s competency and duty. A performance evaluation system should assist criminal justice system organizations in measuring competency from diverse perspectives. The system should focus on how well the officers are applying their knowledge, skills, and attitudes, and how prone they are to adopt necessary changes.

After an in-depth evaluation of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, Bernardin and Beatty (1984) suggested performance appraisals should be constructed on the premises of legislative standards on job requirements. Besides, a performance appraisal should focus on particular dimensions of job performance as opposed to general rating. Performance ratings should also be defined by behavioral terms and communicated to the officers. Excellent performance appraisals are the outcomes of multiple rates as opposed to single. Whenever possible, there should be numerous raters; and every evaluator ought to have the validity of his/her ratings evaluated. Extreme scores ought to be well documented and integrate core aspects such as gross misconduct cases and when/when the misconduct happened. Besides, an excellent performance appraisal system ought to constitute a formal appeal process.

However, police performance evaluation, assessment, and appraisal processes are rarely done within the bounds of the above guidelines. Consequently, the police service has remained unmonitored to the detriment of civilians who, in most cases, are the victims of brute and misconducts.

Contemporary Standards for Education and Training in Criminal Justice Agencies

Based on societal changes, the diverse and complex scope of criminal justice services requires citizens’ integration in policy formulation for strengthening the policing services. Besides, the accommodation of different expectations from officers demands that we start rethinking how performance evaluation systems are structured and applied in multiple agencies. The question is, what are the contemporary standards for education and training in criminal justice agencies?

Meyers (1993) offers advice and formulate a useful system on how an agency ought to operate. First, the scholar proposed that an individual’s competency should be optimally developed through further training. All personnel constitutes the ability to learn along their career pathways, and therefore performance evaluations should stimulate lifelong and continuous learning. An ongoing lifelong process will lead to the accommodation of new changes occurring in our societal structures.

In the jurisdiction of criminal justice systems, just like in any organization, employees are presumed to learn at different paces. The learning pace varies from one employee to the other. In one’s career, he/she should be permitted to progress at a rate that coincides with their ability and willingness to learn. A one-size-fits-all learning approach is not applicable based on the different learning rates and different levels of needs and understanding.

Further, performance criteria should vary with aspects of competency, assignment, and tenure. The process of applying standard measures to assess behavioral performances weakens one’s career. After an employee has demonstrated in-depth mastery of intended skills, a new criterion should be provided that extends their competence and value for the agency. This will expand the ability for more understanding of one’s new potentials in his/her line of duty, and form the basis of learning or de-learning certain concepts for the self-development and progress of the agency.

Lastly, distinct assessment strategies should be harnessed to evaluate performance. Suppose the nature of work fluctuates, and the strategic criterion for monitoring behavior changes, it solely makes sense to consider applying excellent strategies under disposal to evaluate performance. Besides, assessment strategies ought to be flexible enough just as the nature of duties an officer is required to pursue. A good number of police performance evaluation strategies are not integrated with the above precepts, culminating in failures that are attached to reckless killings, prejudiced treatments, and skewed arrests.

Managerial Functions in Financial, Time, Equipment and Facility Allocation and Management

Pal & Bansal (2011) recognize a disagreement amongst management writers concerning the classification of administrative roles. Henri Fayol (Cited on Pal & Bansal, 2011) identifies five managerial functions, including planning, commanding, organizing, coordinating, and controlling. Further, Luther Gulick identifies seven; planning, staffing, organizing, coordinating, directing, budgeting, and reporting. Joseph Massie and Warren Haynes present managerial function as a construct of decision-making, staffing, organization, communicating, planning, directing, and controlling. For the essence of this study, a critical overview is given to the managerial functions in financial, time, equipment, and facility allocation and management in the Criminal Justice System agencies.

Pal & Bansal (2011) suggested managers’ roles can be divided into interpersonal roles, informational roles, and decisional roles. Interpersonal roles not only require managers to perform duties that are ceremonial such as touring dignitaries but also other roles as a leader (encouraging and motivating) and liaison (cultivating contacts and gathering information essential to the company). Informational roles demand managers monitor the organizational environment to obtain necessary information. Besides, the manager is deemed as a disseminator of information to various subordinates; and act as a spokesman satisfying different groups that can impact the organization. Therefore, the manager, in his capacity as a leader, advises shareholders concerning financial performances and assures the public that the agency is meeting her social duties and mandate.

Mandated with decisional roles, the manager is the resource allocator. In this capacity, the manager divides work and executes authority over his/her subordinates. This capacity requires an in-depth understanding of the aides to establish who will get what. The managers also assign duties to assistants, and provide a working framework within which results should be noticed, provided necessary resources and equipment are provided. The managers, therefore, are the drivers of the agency’s agendas and ought to be competent enough.

The Role of Effective Communication Strategies in Criminal Justice Agencies

The cases of unarmed African Americans being killed by the police are well documented on social media. The threat of physical harm on the African American is a regular occurrence. Exploring the impediments on the path to efficient communication can equally be cumbersome, mainly when the criminal justice system professional ate ill-prepared. Through the periodic killings of unarmed African Americans by the police, the law enforcement profession has been linked with traces of racism and a lack of profound communication skills. The need for the criminal justice system to execute proper communication skills is one of the ways of sanctifying police glory and trust.

During confrontations between crime suspects and police officers, the exhibition of empathy amidst communication contributes towards a common understanding. The persuading communication styles that involve information sharing and acceptance techniques are essential. Interrogating and interviewing suspects demand the criminal justice personnel to harness the persuasive communication style to mitigate unnecessary resistance from the suspects.

Crisis negotiation constitutes another context where persuasion communication type is essential and useful. The final goal is to have a suspected criminal surrender without causing injuries to the suspects or hostages. Criminal justice personnel harnessing such a communication skill will trigger the suspect to come to terms that resolving the situation at hand does not necessarily require violence. A communication style that blames in such contexts may only end up fueling the case or make suspects more resolute in executing the intended tragedies and harms.

Communication, both in its verbal and nonverbal forms, is good mastering as a criminal justice officer. It is through the two arts of communication that a common understanding is derived amongst crime suspects witness and the public. Additionally, the capacity to harness speaking skills that are elemental and easy to understand helps to help in drawing the line between stereotypical police officer and efficient law enforcement officer. The integration of legal phrases into general conversation with the witness, suspect, or the general public may be ill-advised. The legalistic terms may be a source of confusion clouding peoples’ understanding of the officer’s message during arrest circumstances.

Ethical Issues in Criminal Justice System Procedural Justice

Procedural justice is symbolized and actualized by fair, respectful treatment, transparent, equitable, following the correct procedure, non-discriminate interactions with criminal justice officers. According to Hirschman (1970), individuals tend to emphasize voice during interactions. Besides, people tend to focus on police neutrality respectful and dignified treatment in all criminal justice case proceedings. A treatment by the police that is deemed decent, fair, and respectful inspires people to bestow trust upon the police.

The Work of Legitimacy

According to Tyler (2011), police officers depend on the legitimacy they control to operate effectively. If the precepts of procedural justice theory are right that legitimacy is most importantly applied in a fair process, then the constant need to formulate and reproduce legitimacy serves a crucial check on police authority. In most cases, the police power may be unlimited in the sense that they are charged with addressing threats to integrity and order. The police should use their discretional power to the enhancement of peace and should not behave in a manner likely to challenge their legitimacy. As a result, the police simply do what they want to do, based on the premise they have authority bestowed upon them. Instead, the law will take its course the right time when the police have contravened the law.

Personnel Issues

The prospects of personnel issues underscore contemporary issues revolving many agencies. One of the significant personnel issues revolves around the extrinsic motivation of individuals and agencies. Extrinsic motivators refer to punishments and enticements geared to encourage or discourage specific behavior. Risk and reward frameworks of human behavior are dominant in human resource departments and are crucial in forming the basis for employees’ motivation. Rewards such as performance pays and punishments, such as fixed limits, are commonly harnessed to motivate staff members. Extrinsic motivation is built on the need to modulate or realign employees’ behavior. Tyler (2011) distinguished external motivation from intrinsic motivation, with the latter stemming from moral and personal values. Police officers are subject to acting and refraining from acting for fear of sanctions or penalties. However, the best motivation towards doing that which is good should ascend from one’s will to find a reason and purpose of doing good deeds. Extrinsic motivators are short-lived and transitory. People tend to shift back into their old ways, especially when rewards and threats lose resilience. As a result, employees should be motivated intrinsically rather than externally based on the perspective intrinsic motivation has a lifelong mark on the performance.

Conclusion

This critical review concludes the killing of the unarmed African Americans by the police ascends from failures to incorporate reforms in human resource practices. Highly trained police personnel and official in the criminal justice system will elevate the public image of police in various duties. As discussed above, well-implemented human resource management practices lead to a stable police force, with capacities to meaningfully engage not only with the crime suspects but also the general public, thus inculcating trust. Criminal justice system officials also require constant training to equip them with the necessary skills, knowledge, and attitude relevant to their profession. The prospect of employee motivation is also crucial in orienting the employees towards the expected code of conduct. The mastery of work ethics and ethical issues will inspire a sense of direction and responsibility on the part of employees in the police force.