3.. V - 2. . . haze. . 2‘7] 1x 7| ux . ~. . .- KP. . .vftbl 'Eartsz ~Q’K I 19:1! i. ~22... ' 2.. v Klv. uv .I oufrzr. . 35mg.» . . a. . .. . ; . ,, . . .awwa?§ . 3.. 4:??? $33.71.. . :J. ‘A ., 1‘..- i L'BnAnv Illllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll 'Michlgan State 31293007914710 L University This is to certify that the thesis entitled THE FIRST LINE STJDUQVISOR'S PERSPECTIVE OF COMMUNITY POLICING: A PARTICIPANT OBSERVATION STUDY presented by Andrew James George has been accepted towards fulfillment of the requirements for M080 degreein CoJo I mm Major professor\'// at; , Date m A 5.7 97a J 0-7639 MS U is an Affirmative Action/Equal Opportunity Institution PLACE IN RETURN BOX to remove this checkout from your record. TO AVOID FINES return on or before date due. DATE DUE DATE DUE DATE DUE an" e. m 153‘ 39-2092 33>: lucj ET'Q‘ 3"- _1 Air Elli. k: ; MSU In An Affirmative Action/Equal Opportunity Institution cm FMS-OJ THE FIRST LINE SUPERVISOR’S PERSPECTIVE OF COMMUNITY POLICING: A PARTICIPANT OBSERVATION STUDY BY Andrew James George A THESIS Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE School of Criminal Justice 1992 ABSTRACT THE FIRST LINE SUPERVISOR’S PERSPECTIVE OF COMMUNITY POLICING: A PARTICIPANT OBSERVATION STUDY BY Andrew James George A safe environment is a public concern, and in the last quarter century, the public had little input on how the criminal justice system addressed safety. Police, in particular, realize in today’s society that crime reduction and maintaining order can not be accomplished by any one group. Therefore, many police departments are asking community members for their cooperation and support as they change their policing style from the traditional "reactive" approach to a proactive, community partnership, approach. Strong law enforcement attitudes and lack of patience within police organizations may make this a difficult transition. This study focused on the major responsibilities and leadership changes necessary for successfully implementing community'policing; This twenty month study revealed several new tasks and skills required of a first line community policing supervisory The major finding however, demonstrated that implementing community policing at a three hundred and fifty person police department is a possible and practical undertaking. DEDICATION This thesis is respectfully dedicated to my family. My wife, Pam, sons, Andrew'and.Timothy, and my daughter, Kristyn, have provided the inspiration to complete this project. Over the past two years they have made considerable sacrifices, so as not to impede my educational efforts. Their love, patience, and support have reinforced my realization that success is most gratifying when it is shared with those closest to you. iii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Accomplishment of a project such as this would not have been possible without the assistance from several key people. Two of those people who deserve special recognition are Dr. Robert Trojanowicz and Mark Lanier. Their encouragement, patience, and directions were greatly appreciated. They not only helped me acquire the academic skills to complete this project but, through their friendship have shown how teamwork can assist everyone involved. Their assistance during the past two years helped make this study a positive learning experience. Two other Criminal Justice professors, Dr. David Carter and Dr. Dennis Payne also deserve recognition for sharing their time, knowledge, and friendship with me. Recognition to friends and co-workers of the Community Policing' Unit. at. the Lansing' Police Department is also necessary. As we implemented community policing they served as the catalysts for innovative ideas and field practices, were it not for them this research would not have been possible. iv TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER PAGE INTRODUCTION Prior Policing Management Styles.......... ...... Employment of Qualitative Research Methods...... Outline of Chapters............................. \JUH I. LITERATURE REVIEW Problem Statement............................... 9 Traditional Theory/Transactional Leadership..... 13 Human Relations Theory/Transforming Leadership.. 15 Top Administrators.............................. 17 Participatory Management........................ 19 Formal Definition............................... 21 Middle Managers................................. 22 Developing the Philosophy........... ..... ....... 26 Professionalism................................. 29 Communication..... ......... ..................... 31 Summary......................................... 33 II. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY Purpose......................................... 35 Study Population................................ 35 Research Duration............................... 38 Data Collection................................. 38 Planned Categories.............................. 40 Unexpected Categories........................... 41 Summary............... ..... ..................... 44 III. DATA INTERPRETATION Initially Planned Categories.................... 45 Neighborhood Network Centers........ ..... ....... 59 Unexpected Categories................. ...... .... 65 IV. SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Training............ ........ .. ..... . ............ Skills Training ..... . .............. . ............ Education of Public ......... ......... ........... First Line Supervisor Style/Skills... .......... .' Community Policing’s Future.... ................ . Conclusion ....... ............. .................. Appendices Appendix A Mission Statements.............. Appendix B Community Survey Instrument..... Appendix C Departmental Survey Instrument.. Appendix D Additional Responsibilities..... Appendix E Inter-Agency Agreement.......... Bibliography.. ...... ...................... ...... 85 87 96 99 104 108 INTRODUCTION Prior Policing Management Styles Over the past generation, police work has increasingly focused on finding and adopting efficient means of fighting crime. Approaches to police work have continually been altered.with the utilization of new technologies, recognition of new crime problems, and the continual political focus on Law enforcement. The police approach to addressing its responsibility for fighting crime is drastically changing as police departments across the world begin to explore community policing. This paper will address how implementation of community policing will require police agencies to change their way of thinking about performance and leadership. But more importantly, it will focus on the new styles and ideas about human understanding, which are viewed as necessary requirements for today's successful police supervisor. Middle management and first-line supervisors need to understand the community policing philosophy and its required alternative style of leadership. Community policing requires supervisors to be the "coaches" and "teachers" for the reinforcement and the implementation of problem-solving and community involved 2 efforts (Couper, 1988). These efforts should focus toward results. Historically, the focus of police organizations was on technologies which improved response times for reported crime, and other reactive crime fighting efforts, often failing to involve community members. The police organizations' management philosophy and leadership style generally reflected a rigid centralized structure which encouraged an authoritarian leadership style. With community policing, police officers require continuous, sustained contact with the law-abiding people in the community. The police serve as the catalyst in challenging people to accept their share of the responsibility for solving their own individual problems, as well as, their share of the responsibility for the overall quality of life in the community (Trojanowicz and Bucqueroux, 1990) . In order for police departments to effectively make this change, leadership styles, especially first line supervisors leadership styles, must acknowledge the importance of community support and understand the purpose of organizing community building activities. Police departments' administration must recognize the importance of the first line supervisor and the role these officers play in the successful implementation of community policing. The most likely candidate to facilitate this change and lead officers into the future is the first line 3 supervisor. In part, because they are the managers and leaders which have the most direct contact with the line officers. With proper leadership, personnel should begin to understand why there is a need for change, and how they can best facilitate this alteration in police practices. Employment of Qualitative Research Methods The purpose of this research was to provide information about the first line supervisors' leadership styles, job tasks, and identify the requisite skills. Using a systematic procedure of categorizing actual incidents facing a first line supervisor, this study will present these perceptions, and consider how to "make sense" out of the daily events (Berg, 1989). Being a front line supervisor in a department which was implementing community' policing' provided the unique research opportunity of being able to observe, document, and conceptualize the many roles, tasks, difficulties and rewards of this position. This study presents the results of that experience. Since very few police departments across the nation are creating full time community policing first line supervisory positions, conducting quantitative research on this subject would probably fail to gather enough cases to permit for statistically' significant. :results. Fortunately, the flexibility of a qualitative research approach permits the innovative data-collecting and analytical strategy required 4 for this project (Berg, 1989) . Furthermore, ”(f)ield research offers the advantage of probing the social life in its natural habitat. Although some things can be studied adequately in questionnaires or in the laboratory, others cannot. Direct observation in the field lets you observe subtle communications and other events that.might not be anticipated or measured otherwise" (Babbie, 1989 p.264). Schatzman and Strauss (1973) added, "(t)he researcher must get close to the people whom he studies; he understands that their actions are best comprehended when observed on the spot-~in the natural, ongoing environment where they live and work" (p. 5). This research did not follow the structure of using interviews, or questionnaires, to have people tell what they do, or why they do it. Schatzman and Straus (1973) found that "the field researcher may not come to see social relations as structures that 'perform' a limited number of functions, nor as structures which change from time to time, but as processes which from time to time may be dealt with as structures which will exhibit a multitude of consequences" (p. 6). The field researcher sees any method of inquiry as a system of strategies and operations designed-at anytime-for getting answers to certain questions about events which interest him. The field researcher views the substance or reality of his field in creative emergent terms: it is neither fixed nor finite, nor independent of human conception and subsequent redefinition; therefore, it is not "all there", needing only to be located, measured and then rendered as "findings". He assumes reality to be infinitely complex-certainly more complex than any current rendering of it-and that he as an observer holds the key to an infinitely varied relation with the objects of his 5 inquiry. Therefore, the researcher's developed understanding of this object is not necessarily or merely "true" or "untrue"; rather it is to be evaluated according to its usefulness in furthering ideas about this class of objects and according to whether the understanding is grounded in data (Schatzman and Strauss, 1973 p.7). As an observer of human events, changes in officers' behavior were documented while community policing was being implemented. To capture discoveries of the situation, logical categories of events were developed which were recorded in a manner which would adequately allow representation of the observed events. The number of categorical instruments initially used for this research increased over time because of the multitude of unexpected discoveries. To say the field researcher creates his method as he works may seem unbecoming yet, the method which emerges from operations, strategic decisions, and instrumental actions go on throughout the entire research process (Schatzman and Strauss, 1973). The method for making observations, or in other words the focus of this qualitative field research, was that of a participant observer within a community policing unit. Data collection began in the first of December, 1990 and concluded in the middle of July 1992. Gold (1969) described the participant observer as: (t)he true identity and purpose of the complete participant in field research are not known to those whom he observes. He interacts with them as naturally as possible in whatever areas of their living interest him, and are acceptable to him in situations in which he can play or learn to play requisite day-to-day roles successfully (p.33). 6 The observer in this study was a participant in studying the first line supervisor’ s role in community policing. Acting as the participant, the role that most people saw was that of a participant, not that of a researcher. Being assigned as the sergeant of a newly created community policing unit allowed the researcher to "live the role" of participant- -which, of course, affected the social process studied. The unit began with three officers (subjects) and then grew to ten over the course of the research period. This study not only examined the role and impact which the first line supervisor had on the assigned officers, but also the community policing unit’s affect on the entire three hundred and fifty person police department. Every incident described in this study occurred in the researcher's presence and was subject to those biases described in Chapter III. The recording of interviews, community events, court cases, police command. meetings, neighborhood meetings, and the continual seeking of information about daily activities were captured with "at work" notes. Then at the end of each day this information was entered into a personal computer under the appropriate research categories, allowing the researcher to evaluate, revaluate and re-categorize impressions, attitudes, and behaviors as they related to the first line supervisor's perspective. The qualitative data yielded through the observations for this study are not easily reduced to numbers 7 but instead give a comprehensive perspective (Babbie, 1989). The ethical issue of the researcher being a participant, and.not informing'those.observed, was not done for the purpose of deception, ”(r)ather in the belief that the data would be more valid and reliable, because the subjects would be more natural and honest if they did not know the researcher was using them as a research project" (Babbie, 1989). In this qualitative study the subjects were known to the researcher but during reporting, an active attempt was made to grant all subjects autonomy. Outline of Chapters Chapter One provides a detailed literature review. In this review, an explanation of the traditional, authoritarian style of management and how it is reflective of the transactional leadership approach is presented. Then the review explains the human relations, participatory management styles and how they are reflective of transforming leadership styles. The importance of creating and maintaining the proper leadership styles when implementing community policing is then explained. Chapter Two is an explanation of the research methods used in this study. Since the method used in this study to collect information, was that of a participant observer, to prevent the researcher from being victimized by his own biases, forgetfulness, error, and other threats to his 8 objectivity and accuracy, the instrumental controls used are also described in this chapter. Besides the descriptive methods used to enhance the reliability and validity, of the measures used in this study, Chapter Two also includes a description of the research site and the study population. Chapter Three provides an interpretation of the collected data and Chapter Four summarizes the study. Finally, in the final chapter of this study, the researcher's recommendations about the implementation of community policing is presented, as well as, thoughts about the future. CHAPTER I LITERATURE REVIEW Problem Statement Today's police manager is confronted with the challenge of maintaining organizational effectiveness while dealing with increasing demands for service and stable or often declining budgets (Levine, 1985). The problems of fiscal stress and increased public scrutiny of police organizations can create, or increase, friction between management, line-officers, and the public. This friction may affect the attitudes and standards of behavior of those in the police profession. Therefore, progressive police managers are shifting from the traditional reactive law enforcement managerial style to a more community-oriented, human relations style. This nontraditional human relations style requires managers to be more creative and to develop strategies which provide the most effective service. A community policing organizational philosophy demands changing departments from a tightly controlled, centralized hierarchy into a much flatter, decentralized organization (McElroy, 1992). As the community policing philosophy gains acceptance in progressive police departments, police 10 work and police supervisors will no longer survive under the old belief that numbers will prove quality service and.worth. Specialization and efficient technological advancements for police agencies often failed to address their most effective resource--people. As police organizations began their professionalization movement they generally made attempts at becoming more efficient. IMoore, Trojanowicz and Kelling (1988) stated, (t)he core mission of the police is to control crime. The traditional approach taken by police has focused on reducing crime through the arrests of criminals (Webber, 1991). Lee Brown (1991) also added, "police departments historically have judged their effectiveness in dealing with crime by viewing arrest numbers and are very good at that" (p. 120). As crime increased, the police sought more resources, predicting more resources would produce more arrests. Judging by the numbers, the police often thought they were doing a good job of making the streets safer. After years of operating this way, police departments are beginning to understand that nothing could be farther from the truth. Reactive tactics may have done some good, but police were finding out that they often were only efficiently arresting the same people again and again. "The police became increasingly isolated and police-community relations suffered. To many people, especially racial minorities, the police seemed like an alien occupying army" (Walker, 1983: 13). The 11 police failed to develop the sorts of relation- ships with citizens which would require officers to listen. Officers generally failed to make themselves accessible to the good citizens. Without easy access to the officers, citizens had difficultly explaining minor neighborhood problems and/or providing the officers with information. "A.generation of police officers were raised with the idea that they merely enforced the law“ (Moore and Kelling, 1988, p. 1). Police organizations were driven by calls for service, reacting to incidents (Brown, 1989). Their training was designed for this and their supervisors generally judged them on how many arrests and tickets (and the resultant revenue) each officer produced. This mentality was "production driven" with officers focusing on the criminal element. This enforcement philosophy had.managers focusing on internal controls with an emphasis on allocating and using resources for productivity rather than service (Moore and Stephens, 1991). With the traditional, centralized approach managers apparently had better control of officers as police departments’ structure became a system of rules enforced by close supervision (Kelling and Moore, 1988). "Close supervision would mean; a limited span of control and the flow of instructions and information (communication) downward in the organization, establishment of elaborate record— keeping systems requiring addition layers of middle managers, and coordination of activities between various production 12 units (e.g. , patrol and detectives), which also required middle managers" (Kelling and Moore, 1988, p. 8). Professionalization of the police redefined the role of the citizen. Citizens were asked to place their confidence in the police professionals for managing the publics' physical and social problems. Physicians would care for health problems, dentists for dental problems, teachers for educational problems, social workers for social adjustment problems, and police for crime control services (Kelling and Moore, 1988). The proper role for citizens in crime control was to be relatively passive recipients of professional crime control services. Police organizations attempted to set higher professional standards yet as the use of patrol cars became common their inaccessibility to the community created problems between them and the community (Carter and Sapp, 1989). Simultaneously, similar internal problems were occurring. The emphasis was on hiring college educated, creative, self-motivated police officers to further efforts of establishing’ professionalized police departments. Yet, the police command structure often maintained close supervisory command over the officers, often negating their creativity (Carter and Sapp, 1989). 13 Traditional Theory/Transactional Leadership Traditional management theory centers on the use of power. Management’s role was to structure and exercise authority. With this type of traditional leadership the police organizational structure was manipulated to ensure control over decision-making. Historically, structures were highly centralized, the work tasks were specialized into functional units, and discipline, dogma, and fear were used to ensure the compliance of workers. A rigid, hierarchical chain of command was the norm, and authority and communications emanated from the top. In turn, these inflexible organizations largely reflected a stable, relatively unchanging environment (Perrow 1986, p. 15). As the environment began changing so did most organizations and businesses. The police organizations however, seem to be much slower to change. Perrow (1986) defined the Traditional Management Theory as, ”(a) bureaucratic theory which accepts power differences as an inherent element of organized society and allows us to see how power operates through structural devices such as specialization, formalization, centralization, and hierarchy" (p.230). Police organizations often shared this same view. When problems were identified.police managers normal reaction was to create a new unit of specialized officers who could address the problem. Many times several specialized units existed within police departments and the units began operating as separate entities instead of operating with a team approach. Some other problems which resulted with the l4 establishment of specialized units and routine job tasks were the lack. of innovative change. and coordination. of *work efforts. The police departments’ structure gradually came to resemble a department of rules and procedures enforced by close supervision. Lee Brown (1991) stated, "The command-and-control culture of the police department doesn't treat officers as intelligent, creative, and trustworthy people. It allows very little discretion. Its designed to make sure that the officers don’ t get into trouble, don' t embarrass the department, and don’t get their supervisors into trouble" (p.116). Since the paramilitary model of supervision supposedly limits discretion, communication is simultaneously limited and behavior becomes much more predictable (Kelling, 1988). When ‘things go *wrong, the supervisor can, normally find someone, other than herself/himself, to blame. In this type of model, creativity is stifled, allowing employees to fall into comfort zones of routinization. This model generalizes managers as being transactional leaders, or in other words, leaders who rely on reciprocal favors, benefits, etc. to accomplish broader objectives. With.the traditional organizational philosophy mid-level managers believed emphasis should be on productivity. Therefore, police officers were encouraged to limit their encounters with citizens (Trojanowicz and Bucqueroux, 1991). 15 This was especially true if the call did not involve a crime or an arrest. Traditionally, police officers dealt only with incidents and were encouraged to "clear" from calls for service as soon as possible. Officers who may have spent too long on service calls, were often chastised by other officers for acting like social workers. If supervisors were looking for more production they often used the traditional .transactional approach. This transactional leadership style helped them maintain control over their subordinates (Rainquet, 1992). Human Relations Theory/Transforming Leadership Traditional management theory began to draw criticism for neglecting to consider the role:of the employees and.their human problems. The human relations theory recognizes power in organizations, and is concerned with its application. Perrow (1986) stated, "(t)he role of leadership plays an important function in the formulation of the human relations theory". Perrow (1986) defines the human relations theory as that which: ...at. maximum recognizes the responsibility of master with power and resources to use them wisely and humanely; at minimum it recognizes the cost of not doing so in terms of alienation and withdrawal of effort by subordinates, and it argues that masters will get more returns through humane treatment and involving subordinates, in decisions (p. 230). Managers need to learn that by respecting employees, and treating them as intelligent people, they will be much more 16 inclined to reward the managers with improved work performance. In general the logic is that good leadership will lead to increased productivity on the part of employees. "Good leadership is generally described as democratic rather than authoritarian, employee-centered.rather than production- centered, concerned with human relations rather than with bureaucratic rules" (Perrow, 1986, p.85). Therefore, in this ever changing environment people seem to be changing their view of the qualities in good leaders. Furthermore, the human relations tradition. has viewed managerial or supervisory behavior as consisting primarily of leading workers and not of making good decisions about such nonpersonal, mundane factors as the market, technology, competition, or organizational structure. But the nonpersonal decisions appear to have far more affect on productivity than decisions as how to lead people (Perrow, 1986, p. 88). The emphasis of the human relations theory then is not on decisions which deal with the operations of police departments but on the people within the police departments. The human relations theory then would most likely not be effectively practiced under an authoritarian leadership style. The community policing philosophy requires a leadership change from the transactional leader/traditional theory type manager to the human relations/transforming leader. Burns (1978) stated, (t)ransforming leadership is a better way to lead than the simple transactional relationship. Burns (1978) explained: "(t)ransforming leadership, while more complex than transactional leadership, is more potent. The 17 transforming leader recognizes an existing need or demand of a potential follower. But, beyond that, the transforming leader looks for potential motives in followers, seeks to satisfy higher needs and engages the full person of the follower.....Woodrow Wilson called for leaders 'who, by' boldly interpreting the nation’s conscience, could lift a people out of their everyday selves. That people can be lifted into their better selves is the secret of transforming leadership (p.462).” The problem-oriented community policing philOSOphy asks officers to try solving the underlying cause of problems and requires that their supervisors use a transforming leadership style. Officers looking for what is causing problems and police supervisors who are to trying to ”lift" employees into their better selves is a community policing approach. Both are often viewed.by traditional standards as being'outsidezthe norm of "real" police work. Top Administrators The professional movement has enabled police organizations to become more efficient and now they need to focus their efforts toward effectiveness. Top police managers have been characterized as being: ”unimaginative, short-sighted, and crisis oriented, with little understanding of the need to develop programs which ensure the organization's most costly resources --its personnel-- are properly motivated and utilized in a cost- effective manner" (Pangano and Dintino, 1982, p.27). As competition for public resources increases police departments are the subject of 18 critical scrutiny. The growing gap between demand for service, and scarce resources, has forced many top police managers to rethink their role as well as the role of their departments (Levine, 1985) . The overwhelming danger is that, instead of admitting change and risk-taking are necessary, many top administrators are more comfortable maintaining old patterns of professional efficiency. Kelling (1988) stated, "(a)s comfortable as old tactics might feel, police must continue to experiment with methods that have shown promise in order to improve police effectiveness and efficiency" (p. 3). Levine (1985) added, ”the strategy necessary for change requires: (1) a multi-year time frame, usually three to five years; (2) a significant reallocation and reconfiguration of resources; (3) substantial changes in organizational structure and work force activity; and (4) a comprehensive, as opposed to an ad hoc re-examination of the organization’s problems, mission, and structure” (p.694). The catalyst for this new management philosophy should start at the top. While the idea has merit, and may be inevitable, the manner in which the new dynamic, risk taking administrator implements this new philosophy will influence organizational success or failure (Couper,1983). For organizations to move away from their current autocratic-traditional arrangement, to a style of management which managers and subordinates work together as equals, 19 requires top administration to communicate: (1) why there is a need for change, (2) the importance of every employee's role (sworn and civilian) for successful implementation of that change and (3) most importantly the solicitation of employee suggestions on how to implement change. Participatory Management Human relations theory leads to philosophies that foster a more active involvement from lower level employees in the decision making process. Making, decision making become more decentralized. The premise of participatory management is that productive ideas are equally distributed throughout agencies and recognizing one another’s ideas complements the human.relations theory (Holzer, 1990). "Thus, in order to tap those ideas, the top-down characteristics of bureaucracy must be replaced by an equal relationship that draws as much of its creative energy from the bottom and middle; that makes innovation and risk-taking possible; and that gives labor and middle management a major psychological stake in organizational improvement" (Holzer, 1990, p.171). Under traditional policing officers input was seldom requested by management. Holzer (1990) provided the following explanation of bureaucracy which appears to be synonymous of the police bureaucracy. He stated, "(t)o often bureaucracy is characterized by an overemphasis on formality, rules and regulations, and security. It is epitomized by the 20 sufficiency of mediocrity, the adage ”don’t rock the boat," a stifling loss of independence, a misdirection of energies to solving personal problems, or to abusing and discrediting fellow employees" (p.172). The leadership ability of the top police administrator is the single most important ingredient in a good police agency (Couper, 1983). Change can only occur if the leader is up to the challenge, if not, then change is virtually impossible. Proactive people often have visions and the top police administrator can be no exception. Their vision must be properly communicated to employees and the public with a mission statement which no longer exclusively includes crime control (Barker and Carter, 1991). It is important for crime prevention, fear reduction, community involvement, political concerns, and participatory management, to become part of today's police departments' mission. Barker and Carter (1991) noted, "a mission statement clearly indicates managerial philosophy, as well as expectations of employees” (p.34). Appendix A includes Mission Statements from Lansing, Michigan and Madison, Wisconsin police departments. Each department has implemented community policing. Those department's mission statements indicate.a drastic change of the traditional internal and law enforcement focus. It is a new way for police to see themselves and understand their role in society. "The task facing the police Chief is to change the fundamental culture of the organization" 21 (Sparrow, 1988, p. 2). This change is especially difficult in police organizations because of the influence of the police culture. Troj anowicz suggests the police department no longer function in a vacuum; its effectiveness depends on broad-based support inside and outside the department. Success in the new philosophy of community policing depends on the involvement and interaction of the so-called Big Five—-the police, the citizens (individuals and groups), political leaders, the communities’ public and.private social agencies, and.the media (Trojanowicz, personal communication, September 21, 1992). The formal definition of community policing A philosophy and not a specific tactic, Community Policing is a proactive, decentralized approach designed to reduce crime, disorder, and, by extension, fear of crime, by intensely involving the same officer in the same community on a long-term basis, so that residents will develop the trust to cooperate with police by providing information and assistance to achieve those three crucial goals. Community Policing employs a variety of tactics, ranging from park-and-walk to foot patrol, to immerse the officer in the community, to encourage a two-way information flow, so that the residents become the officers’s eyes and ears on the streets, helping to set departmental priorities and policies...improved police/community relations is a welcome by-product of this approach, not its primary goal (Trojanowicz and Bucqueroux, 1990). Top administrators must set an example of the values and behavior in this philosophy and (s)he must communicate it not only internally but to those people who make up the ”Big 5". Prior to implementing this philosophy at the line-level, it 22 becomes important to train middle management so they can teach, coach, and train line officers the philosophy. Failure to do so may create problems because the community policing philosophy includes a new style of supervision and leadership. Often times when community policing is implemented at the line-level, without proper training of middle management, the first line and middle managers think they are losing control of their officers. The middle managers also need to understand that officers’ will no longer be focusing their efforts on reactive policing and producing numbers. Instead, efforts will be directed toward community residents’ concerns, making themselves accessible, and working to solve underlying problems that often lead to crime. As police officers spend free patrol time outside of their patrol vehicles their sergeant’s responsibilities include, but are not limited to, providing the officers guidance and direction so they use their free patrol time as effectively as possible. Middle Managers Politicians claimed 1965 as a "New Era for Criminal Justice" as President Johnson formally launched the establishment of the President’s Commission of Law Enforcement and Administration (LEAA) . Recommendations for the actions by the President’s Crime Commission to better shape and direct the Criminal Justice System were very similar to what Community Policing is doing today. Those recommendations 23 included: (1) Crime Prevention, (2) Identifying individual offenders, (3) Eliminate injustices, (4) Attract better qualified people, (5) Continued research, (6) Increase budgets, and (7) More community involvement (Bromley, Halsted & Territo, 1989). A. movement toward. attracting' better qualified people and crime prevention started slow, but the movement toward the other recommendations seem to have taken nearly a generation of law enforcement officers to occur. The majority of today’s police middle managers were most likely hired as new officers in the late 60’s and early 70’s. They worked hard to obtain their supervisory position and power, and generally have been trained to supervise as they were supervised (Couper, 1988). Most of those supervisors were probably never taught the human relations theory. Without understanding the principles of management by objectives (HBO), and the transforming leadership style, most supervisors’ would fail to move away from the authoritarian/transactional style of leadership. Transactional supervision seemed self defeating for hiring creative, motivated and.highly educated employees because the police philosophy often stayed.militaristic and authoritarian (Barker and Carter, 1991). The crisis of no longer being capable of maintaining "status quo" in policing has top administrators beginning to change departmental philosophies and their major resisters are not line level employees, but more often middle management (Sparrow, 1988). 24 Progressive middle management is the key to re- enforcing the organization’s new philosophy. However, prior to obtaining this the Chief must get middle management on his/her team. In order for middle managers to become effective change agents they must first view change as a friend and look at it as a challenge (Hitt, 1988). To assist in fostering their behavior 'the ‘top administrators need. to communicate the significant aspects of the change process and this begins with a participatory management philosophy. Problems may arise if attempts to alter one element of the department are made without considering the full effects of change on the entire department. True community policing will somehow affect the entire organization so administrators are cautioned about attempting implementation without participatory management and department-wide communication. Establishing a climate for change has the change agents starting with themselves. "As they learn how to focus on ’people problems’ they need to be taught how to deal with both the logical and psychological aspects of change" (Hitt, 1988, p.24). By being open-minded and enthusiastic, managers will have the ability to let go of old ideas and facilitate change in others. A priority for middle managers is that they have a complete understanding of the human relations management theory and transforming leadership style. Middle managers also should be reminded that they have meaningful input for both those above and those below them on the hierarchial 25 ladder. If they are not. provided feedback as to the importance of their role they often become roadblocks for effective departmental operations. Sparrow (1988) stated, " (m) iddle-ranking officers can continue to be a barrier to the dissemination of the new values unless they too are made to live by them. Middle- managers will have to learn that they are no longer just one more level of supervision” (p. 4). Barker and Carter (1991) stated, "the adoption of values will provide a basis for making officers more conscientious employees as well as serve as a basis for letting the community know the organization’s fundamental beliefs in carrying out its responsibilities" (p.36). Formal training of middle-management and their involvement in departmental decision making will assist them with understanding the public’s values, the agency’s fiscal stress, and how they must change with the constantly changing environment. Training will also teach them today’s professionalism is a true commitment to people and how they are treated - employees as consumers - and the belief that their leadership can and does make a difference (Couper, 1988). Even though department-wide training of employees is necessary to effectively implement the new philosophy a strong emphasis should be made to start with middle management. Through proper training and a concentrated effort to involve middle management an opportunity for input in policy making they should learn how to structure the department’s 26 new philosophy. The possibility for this new philosophy to become a reality depends greatly on middle management’s ability to allow line-officers greater independence. Empowering officers demands that managers treat their subordinates as responsible, professional individuals (Spelman & Eck, 1987). As personnel become empowered, they will become more creative, motivated and responsible, enhancing their performance (Trojanowicz and Bucqueroux, 1992). Hopefully, by implementing change in this manner, internal conflicts will be minimized resulting in a more effective public service agency. Developing the Philosophy Getting involved with the community and becoming part of the solution may make a difference in the way officers think, and more importantly, in the way they act. Vaughn (1991) stated, "(c)ommunity policing is value-led; a foundation for what the department does, why, and how it does it. Furthermore, values must be internalized and reflected in the delivery of police service by members of the department" (p. 39). Developing an effective philosophy for department personnel requires a consistent set of values (Vonder Embse, 1987, p. 66). Police leaders must begin to emphasize ideals, ethics, and values, that underlie the new image of policing, as opposed to the correctness of procedures. According to 27 Rainquest (1992): (i)f values truly prescribe the attitudes, beliefs and behaviors of an organization’s members, then it seems that the leader of any organization is given a mandate to be an associate - perhaps a partner - in creating, shaping and instilling the important values that comprise the organization and evidence themselves in the workplace. It is these values that will provide credibility, stability and direction. Indeed, no matter how fast the economic and social landscape shifts, or how rapidly the newest technology is unleashed, the basic and important values remain constant (p.18). Employees need to understand the importance of values because values help shape attitudes. 'They also affect actions in various ways including how a supervisor makes decisions and deals with people. Consistent ethical values are the foundation fromehich.police organizations seek their desired image (Barker and Carter, 1991). A key management responsibility is to practice and encourage open communication of these values, since. they are the anchor from.*which decisions are based. Moore and Stephens (1991) stated, "the quality of policing generally depends on the initiative, values and discretion of officers rather than on the completeness of the policies and procedures and the closeness which they are supervised" (p.35). Vonder Embse (1987) stated: ”(v)alues affect behavior and organizations influence and reinforcing certain values greatest impact is made when they are used in a personal system of thinking--a philosophy" (p. 71). This philosophy is how one thinks, and the way one thinks is how one acts (Trojanowicz and Bucqueroux, 1990). 28 As organizations change, their professional image and professional standards must be communicated as well. Myron (1992) revealed a disturbing trend in law enforcement. He observed the trend to be an increasing willingness of law enforcement personnel (not just the police) to abandon traditional ethical values in the pursuit.of success, comfort, and personal gain. The abandoning of ethical values for any reason is unacceptable and this must be communicated as the new philosophy is being taught. The Chief and middle management set the tone and must follow through with exemplary behavior. Ethical behavior must be seen as a primary goal of the administration and the department. If we expect officers to behave ethically we must treat them--as well as the citizens they serve--ethically (Braunstein and Tyre, 1992 p. 30). This behavior is the foundation of community policing. Initially, traditional type supervisors may have difficultly treating officers ethically, especially in highly tempting situations. Supervisors will however, begin to treat subordinates as professionals who can be trusted, as soon as they realize its to their benefit. High ethical standards for police departments are not new, but explicitly addressing them certainly may be. The reality is that the police, like all public institutions, must remain accountable both to citizens and to the law (MOore and Stephens, 1991) . While communicating a new departmental philosophy what better opportunity to review the department’s 29 code of ethics and remind officers that accountability to the public is morally and legally required. Professionalism Skolnick (1975) stated, ”that being a professional means being sensitive and committed to extra-departmental, universalistic values" (p.75). Instead most officers’ roles were defined only in terms of departmental divisions of labor and they were not encouraged to get involved with other agencies and communities activities. An unusual characteristic which distinguishes police organizations from almost all other public institutions is the para-military structure and climate of the police environment. This structure encourages an authoritarian approach to leadership and would appear to be counter- productive to any movement toward a more participative model (Burns and Shuman, 1988, p. 145). Most commonly, under this structure, management’s job is to get subordinates to behave in acceptable ways according to their department’s established policies and procedures. This philosophy of professionalism conflicted.with the philosophy which newly hired educated and creative individuals possessed. As police supervisors begin to understand and accept the reality that their subordinates are professionals who put a high priority on their individual ability to perform, they then will stop suppressing innovative behavior and start 30 directing it into team/participatory efforts. First however, supervisors need to review their own performance recognizing the credibility and legitimacy which they are establishing. When supervisors lead by example and the organization’s philosophy leads to greater functional autonomy for line officers, the line officers will most likely work harder and experience greater job satisfaction. As departments begin to change more into a participatory and team approach the relationship of "them versus us" between the supervisors and the non-supervisors can lead to greater productivity within the department. The community policing philosophy requires the same type of behavior from the Chief as it requires from the line officers. Professionalism may also be accomplished through leading by example, ongoing training on values, and articulation of expectations both formally and informally (Barker and Carter, 1991). Moving that same professionalism outside the department will require the police to consider community needs and eliminate the "them versus us" way of thinking between the police and the public. Agencies implementing community policing understand that this philosophy has as much to do with "competence" of the employees as with ”compassion” of the employees to each other and the public (Trojanowicz and Bucqueroux, 1992). For police agencies to be effective in promoting and 31 maintaining professional employees they need to integrate ethics, responsibility, fairness, due process, and empathy for long term success (Barker and Carter, 1991) . "In the context of law enforcement, ’professional’ means not only technically competent, but also disciplined and fair in the way that laws are enforced" (Moore and Stephens, 1991 p.24). The thought that a professionalized police department would increase fairness and effectiveness seems to have failed, so organizations are beginning to view community policing as the next most likely approach to policing. Community policing requires police managers to begin supervising through values rather than policies and procedures. Communication An invaluable skill for police officers is their ability to communicate effectively. Martin Burber (1955) stated; The fundamental fact of human existence is neither the individual as such nor the aggregate as such. What is peculiarly characteristic of the human world is above all that something takes place between one being and.another the like of which can be found nowhere in nature (p.123). One-way communication was the most generally used format in traditional policing. Orders came from the top in such organizations. This organizational model is accused of discouraging upward communication and risk taking by patrol officers, while at the same time encouraging the development of authoritarianism in such officers (Sandler and Mintz, 1974). 32 ”Though it is asserted that the military model encourages, or at least is associated with, poor intra- organizational communications, lack of trust, and a consequent demoralization of police officers, little ’ hard’ data is cited to substantiate these charges (Franz and Jones, 1987, p.154). Studies of other organizations however, have suggested that greater amounts of hierarchy are often associated with decreased communications effectiveness (Katz and Kahn, 1978) . Better communications seem to encourage higher levels of trust within an organization (Golembieski and McConkie, 1975, and Gaines, 1980) , and greater amounts of trust encourage more effective problem solving. More open organization systems, with their higher degrees of participation, are often associated with higher degrees of employee satisfaction (Marrett, Hage, and Aileen, 1975). Communication, especially two-way communication, may be the back bone of effective community policing. Authentic dialogue serves as the hub for effective interpersonal communication (Hitt, 1988). Therefore, police employees should receive training and/or be reminded how important good communication is. Open and authentic dialogue develops trust and trust is necessary for successful working relationships. Community policing encourages officers to communicate with one another as well as with people from other social agencies, media personalities, politicians and neighborhood residents. Skills in sensitivity, body language, interviews, and public speaking 33 often times are not addressed in any detail by' police trainers. Supervisors should emphasize the need to communicate with people as being a priority in their regular daily duties“ The range of people that police speak with in a single day may include other officers, prosecutors, judges, politicians, business owners and neighborhood people. If citizens perceive their police as accessible they are more likely to communicate with one another. Better communication seems to encourage higher levels of trust. Trust strengthens communication and the exchange of information. Information is the main ingredient for solving crime. Summary Police managers are becoming aware of the fact that just maintaining the status quo and operating their departments similar to the last generation of managers is no longer an appropriate style for addressing today’s problems. Police managers responsibilities must expand outside the controlling, autocratic style of management. It must include supervisory skills which allow them to become leaders and facilitators, who have the ability to provide guidance and direction, by using new management styles and leadership examples, rather than only using the power of their position for accomplishing departmental tasks. Perhaps the most critical component for changing police organizations leadership style is the first 34 line supervisor. Implementing the community policing philosophy is dependent on practicing participatory management and human relations theory styles of managements The first line supervisor’s involvement in departmental decision making can be enhanced by two-way communication. Since first line supervisors are the managers who have the most contact with line level employees they become the critical link for effective two-way departmental communication. They are also the most visible managers. Therefore, leading by example and practicing the transforming leadership style will most likely enhance the initiatives, values, and discretion of the officers they supervise. The results of this supervision style hopefully will lead to effective, quality policing. CHAPTER II RESEARCH METHODOLOGY Purpose The purpose of this study is to examine the importance of a first-line (sergeant) supervisor’s leadership, the involvement s/he has, and the techniques used by them when a police organization implements community'policing; Knowledge in this area hopefully will enhance police administrators decisions when they begin to implement community policing. This research was a participant observation style study which determined the duties of a first line supervisor and the implications of these duties (commitment) to the successful implementation of community policing. It also examined how a human relations/transforming supervision. style compliments the community policing supervisor’s job function. Study Population The study occurred at a municipal police organization of approximately two hundred sixty five sworn personnel and an additional ninety five civilian employees. Population of the city is approximately 128,000 and the police jurisdiction covers thirty three square miles. 35 36 The department, like most police departments, was continually receiving a larger number of calls for service each year, "crack” cocaine was creating a tremendous increase in reported violent crime, and several neighborhoods were being "controlled" by the street-level drug dealers. Residents of the high crime, high calls for service neighborhoods were apparently living in fear, becoming accustomed to the sound of gunfire, and thoroughly frustrated with the police. The result was little community support and officers beginning to feel like they were caught in the middle of a "no win" situation; they could arrest more people but had few long term programs to deal with this situation. The organization had a patrol officer develop criteria for the selection of neighborhoods in which to place community policing officers. In January of 1990, two officers were placed in neighborhoods. In August of 1990, three more officers were assigned to the unit and on the first of November 1990, a sergeant was selected to supervise the police department’s first community policing unit. When this research project was completed there were nine officers assigned to the community policing unit. At approximately the same time the study began, the department’s administration changed its mission statement to reflect their commitment to neighborhood partnerships. Community' policing' relies. on. officers to form 37 partnerships with communities and the effective empowerment of communities necessitates the use and application of that partnership concept. ‘With community policing the officers in the field become personally acquainted with the residents and they develop trusting relationships. Then through their leadership they organize the communities by addressing the individual communities’ interests. Often times during this process multi-agency cooperation becomes a reality and not only does the community policing officer facilitate a partnership among the police and community but individuals within the community begin to believe that they, as individuals working together, have the ability to implement change. The traditional approach to policing seriously overlooked, and/or undervalued, the nature of communities interests and the extent of their abilities to assist the police. In addition to this qualitative research about the first line supervisor’s perspective a quantitative research survey was simultaneously taking place. A community survey (Appendix B) of several neighborhoods was administered and an analysis of those results ‘was completed. by' Mark. Lanier, Eastern Michigan University Criminal Justice faculty member. Appendix C is the survey which was administered by the researcher to the studied department’s employees after the initial year of community policing. Today’s first line supervisor should recognize the importance of continually seeking feedback and 38 input from the community and the officers they serve. These surveys had little to do with this research but a mentioned because they are another method of obtaining community and departmental information. Understanding how to administer and interpret surveys by future first line supervisors could prove beneficial for implementing change. Research Duration This research was designed to capture the first line supervisor’ s role as community policing is implemented in police organizations and communities. Initially, the researcher was unsure of the time required for the full implementation of community policing at the studied department. After twenty months however, many of the research categories became repetitive. Also, community policing at the studied department not only became implemented, but the philosophy and number of full time community policing officers continues to grow. Therefore, this study commenced on December 15, 1990 and ended on July 22, 1992. Data Collection This field research study occurred in the natural setting of the police organization as the researcher was a direct participant in what is being observed. "Being there" as a direct observer and participant allowed for the gaining of insights into the role of first line supervision for community 39 policing officers. The constant feedback-interaction with people’s physical, social, and personal reservations over a long period of time is a practical requirement to understand community policing as its members do (Manning, 1987). In this study the researcher was a full participant in ongoing activities as he performed the job as the community policing unit’s first line supervisor. Those working with, for, and around the researcher were unaware of the sergeant’s role as a researcher. For this reason, those subjects involved with the situations mentioned during research will remain anonymous. To improve my ability to become an effective researcher in this role required quality listening skills. Interestingly enough a constant self reminder to listen intently, and completely, prior to applying my own ideas often proved just as beneficial in my role of first line supervisor. A short time after accepting the assignment of becoming the community policing unit’s first sergeant, my research role began. Initially, for organized data collection purposes, eight specific categories were identified as important responsibilities of the first line supervisor. These categories were established to contribute to the building of a theory. Planned categories were: 1. Receiving direction and support from top administration. 4O 2. Interaction with the patrol division. 3. Team development of the community policing unit. 4. Building rapport with other units within the police department. 5. Individualized support with each of the community policing officers. (Being very conscious of not over- supervising.) 6. Training of officers and sergeants about community policing. 7. Dealing with other neighborhood service agencies. 8. Dealing with local politicians. Babbie (1989) stated, "(t)he field journal is the backbone of field research" (p. 289). .A field journal of daily' events was :maintainedm The daily' notes included information about each. days events“ Recording all the positive and negatives for each day proved to be beneficial for determining success or failure. The purpose of this note taking was to provide stimulation for recall when the information was entered into a personal computer at the end of each day. The ordering of vast amounts of data quickly became a special problem. Therefore, as information from the daily journal was entered into the computer it was placed into the major research categories and dated. These final notes were prepared with enough detail and context to help recreate the observed situation and the thoughts of the day. In the three hundred seventy seven work days of research over one hundred 41 and forty five, single spaced, pages of data were collected. The logged computer information journal was reviewed every three months by the research supervisor. As journal data continued to accumulate eight secondary research categories of importance were added to the first eight major categories and for purposes of this research are labeled "Unexpected Categories". As the researcher’s role continued to grow so did the categorized job tasks. Ten other supervisory responsibilities and activities were also categorized. Those "additional" responsibilities dealt more with the researchers administrative, paperwork, and meeting attendance responsibilities. The additional responsibilities are listed with a brief explanation of each in Appendix D. Unexpected Categories were: 1. Grant oversite responsibilities. 2. Questioning of appropriate role for community policing officer. 3. Dealing with the media. 4. Organizing neighborhoods and dealing with "turf" battles of volunteer leaders. (Mediating these disputes.) 5. The importance of the first line supervisor performing law enforcement duties (real police work). 6. Risk of officers being overly involved in the neighborhood. 7. Assisting other departments nation-wide with the implementation of community policing. 8. Handling community policing officers frustrations, burnout and personal problems. 42 Detailed illustrations of actual situations will be provided as examples of the comprehensive measurements used by the researcher in the research analysis chapter. These measurements are included to assist the readers with understanding what was going on during the study. This information provides the basis for the conclusions drawn from this study. The descriptive explanation about first line supervision in this project and the strength of its validity, will hopefully provide a basis for further qualitative and quantitative research in this area. A potential problem with field research is reliability. To strengthen reliability for this project the researcher had weekly discussions with a top police administrator and the research committee chairperson. They assisted with characterizing the data and keeping the researchers’ biases from failing to view the events with an open mind. The potential bias problems with reliability in this field research study are evident. For readers to better understand these reliability concerns the next paragraph explains the researcher’s background. As a researcher and the first sergeant assigned to the department’s community policing unit it became important, for both personal, and career reasons, that the community policing unit and philosophy become successful. The challenges of bringing those already assigned to the community policing unit 43 together, creating a proper direction for unit success, and changing the negative attitudes toward the community policing unit (which were shared by the majority of the department personnel), presented the researcher with a difficult task. As a white male with twelve years of police experience, the researcher transferred to the new assignment. Prior to being transferred I was assigned to first line supervision in patrol, on the night shift. This experience created an awareness of the skepticism about community policing and the negative attitudes toward the officers currently assigned to the community’ policing"unitu The skepticism. about the philosophy and the criticism about the community policing officers was openly expressed by the majority of the officers. With a single year of supervisory experience the researcher may have approached this challenge with more energy and optimism than the average sergeant, even though he also harbored some skepticism. One advantage afforded to the researcher, was that of being the department’s defensive tactics instructor. This is considered an advantage for a couple of reasons. One reason is because it allowed for informal discussions and educational training about community policing during in-service defensive tactics training sessions. The second reason is that the researcher believes many officers view the image of a defensive tactics trainer as that of a ”real" police officer. 44 Summary This study was designed to assist first line supervisors as their departments implement community policing. The research is based on a sergeant’ 8 leadership role as it relates to organizational implementation of community policing. To effectively study the first line supervisor’s responsibilities sixteen job function categories were developed. With the support from top administration a first- line supervisor, practicing a transforming, human relations type leadership style can become a successful change agent for police organizations’ movement away from the traditional ”efficient" style of policing to a more non-traditional ”effective" community policing style. CHAPTER III DATA INTERPRETATION The purpose of this chapter is tijresent the reader’with the researcher’s observations and findings. As the major categories are presented the researcher will "let the data speak for itself” as much as is possible. A re-statement of each research category will be followed with descriptive data. Hopefully, the data will provide the reader with some insight on what the supervisor’s responsibilities were as the implementation of community policing evolved. Initially Planned Categories 1. ;- - v7 . -'_e t'o .nq -u-oor frOu to- --u' " at 0! Top administration was very supportive during the entire research time. Initially, when the researcher was having difficulty with the city finance department, top administration handled the problem. When the problem was presented to top administration they replied "They’re sticking their noses where they don’t belong-I’ll handle it.” Also, when one community policing officer was having difficulties with the volunteer leaders in his community top administration advised the researcher that they would be willing to reassign 45 46 that officer to another neighborhood if the various neighborhood groups didn’t begin to compromise. Believing in the officer and backing it up by making that statement greatly assisted the first line supervisor as he dealt with the officer’s frustrations. An incident where a community policing officer needed personnel support from the School District the Chief was asked to contact the School Superintendent. Contact was made and a partnership was formed between a school district employee and a community policing officer. An additional show of support was when the Captain or the Assistant Chief attended the units team meetings. At those team meetings they often praised the officers for their efforts and expressed their pleasure with the officers accomplishments. Many similar situations were experienced and the researcher’s conclusion is that top administration support is essential. 2. e c 'o ' t a ' ' ' . Many patrol officers viewed the community policing unit as another fad which failed to benefit them. Therefore, extra efforts were initiated to see that each community policing officer and sergeant continually interacted with patrol, improving communication and philosophy education. As previously mentioned the police department had changed its mission statement and this resulted in some of the patrol 47 "shifts" asking their officers to develop some problem solving ideas for their assigned districts. One such problem solving idea read: To take care of the problems in my district I need a 0.8. air strike with only one "cruise missile" at a cost of only 1.2 million dollars. I think the city can afford this price since we haven’t had a contract for 8 months. Although the community policing officers may have used up all the available funds for planting flowers and having "kool-aid" parties with their neighborhood friends. This officer was honest in stating he thought community policing was of no value. Fourteen months later however crime and return calls for service in his district continued to be a problem and he asked when he would get a community policing officer; (November 7, 1992 funding was received for placement of a community policing officer in this area.) Another comment overheard was, "the community policing unit was the ’reject’ unit." It is unclear why the unit was called the reject unit. Officers assigned to the unit included.a black.male, a Hispanic, a Cuban, an Indian and five caucasians. The gender 'was two females, and seven males. None of the officers had been labeled "problem" officers by management and the officers seniority ranged from two years to twenty years. One of the researchers first tasks was to begin to get the patrol officers to see more of the community policing officers. Initially, community policing officers worked whatever hours they wanted and failed to attend shift briefings prior to starting their work day. Flexibility 48 continued but they were to start their work day with the rest of the patrol division by attending briefings. Community policing officers were allowed to work which ever shift was most appropriate for them but the guidelines were, their shift should coincide with patrols, the majority of the time. When the community policing officers started attending shift briefings the researcher also attended. When the community policing Sergeant showed up at night shifts briefing they seemed surprised. The community policing sergeant used this opportunity to communicate to the patrol division what was occurring in the unit and asked.them if there was anything the unit could assist them with. One response was: The community policing officers are always asking us to provide them with information about what is going on in their district but they never return any information. Another officer replied, "No information or assistance received, none given!" Efforts to interact with patrol and develop cooperation from them included; requiring the community policing officers to have weekly contact with each of the three district drivers in their area (one per shift), and also post on the patrol district bulletin board what action was being taken by the community policing officer in regards to contacting landlords, seeking warrants on problem people, etc. . The community policing sergeant also assisted by filling in for patrol sergeants when they were short handed, or when major accidents/incidents occurred. These efforts may be the reason that patrol officers and 49 the community policing officers work together so well now. Several officers openly commented how they enjoyed seeing the community policing officers positive results. Journal notes indicate almost one year after implementation of community policing in neighborhoods, the Lieutenant on night shift advised the researcher that: He and his people were pleased with the results of the community policing program. He said the officers mentioned to him how they almost never have to make calls in the community policing areas and when they do the people are very helpful and respectful to the officers. Another example of the changing attitudes is shown in those who desire to transfer into the community policing unit. , Initially, no one wanted to become a community policing officer, so an officer was drafted. By the end of the research period thirteen officers had volunteered.and several others verbally advised the researcher that they too would like to be selected as community policing officers, if a position became available. 3. Team development of the community policing unit, When the first line supervisor was transferred to the community policing unit the three officers there never communicated with one another. One illustration of this is when the researcher discovered two community policing officers sitting alone, separately at the same restaurant. Sharing of information and resources within the unit failed to exist. 50 Inner feelings expressed were how one officer seemed to get all the press and positive publicity when in reality the other officers were working just as hard with just as much success (envy and jealousy). Team development is a never ending focus for a first line supervisor. By spending time riding and walking with each officer they began to explain how they really felt about the other officers and why they felt that way. Most of the bad feelings they had for each other were the result of misconceptions and misunderstandings. Bi-weekly team meetings where administrative issues, neighborhood issues, and officer problems were discussed in an open forum seemed to help start bringing the officers together as a team. After some meetings, which were held at the end of the day, the researcher would encourage the officers to get together socially for a little while. During these social meetings everyone began to loosen up and began to enjoy each others company. A unit Christmas party and joint projects also assisted with team development. Examples of joint projects which involved all of the officers participating as a unit are: athletic functions, picnics, fund raisers, and an over night camping trip. The officers also began having the neighborhood organizations cooperate with one another on "paint blitzes” and neighborhood "clean-up efforts". After a week long joint effort with other police 51 department units, in August of 1991, was when the community policing unit’s team cohesiveness solidified. The unit’s sergeant observed community policing officers meeting, exchanging ideas and information about problem residents, and working with one another on special projects almost daily, after August of 1991. Even the officers who initially did.not care for each other seemed to have placed those feelings behind them. .A community policing officer cannot possibly do everything. For that reason the researcher attempted to get other department units to assist the community policing officers with their efforts. Initially the drug team had their own agenda and many times when the community policing officers provided them with information that information would get placed on their "things to do" pile. As a first line supervisor the researcher contacted the first line supervisor of other units, such as the drug team, and suggested the units work together more closely. Over a month went by and this failed to happen. The community policing officers however, continued asking their supervisor for more assistance from those units. Administration support again assisted because after advising the patrol Captain of this problem, the Captain of 52 the Drug unit placed each of the community policing neighborhoods on his unit’s top priority list. Drug problem information exchange increased and the results were positive. A.Sergeant in the drug unit initially was very critical of the community'policing’efforts He stated: "When we get done with this, you guys can go back to planting flowers”. Then approximately a year after the community policing unit and the drug enforcement unit’s joint efforts he stated: "I now can see what we’re doing is not the answer and if we(police) are ever going to reduce the crime and.drug problem we’ll have to do more community policing... but we still will need a drug unit". Some community policing officers voiced frustrations with the slowness of the Detective bureau in following up on complaints in their neighborhoods. As their first line supervisor contact was made with the Detective bureau and an arrangement was made to have them assign all property crime cases to the community policing officer if the victim and the suspect lived in, or near, the community policing officer’s area. The detectives thought this was great because it relieved their case load but some of the community policing officers wondered if they were now going to receive detectives pay. One community policing officer stated: "I don’t think this will work because we won’t have the time to do this, and we will become a ’Dumping Ground’ for cases the detective bureau does not want to handle" . Realizing the sergeant made 53 a traditional style mistake, a compromise was agreed to by the community policing officers. The sergeant assured them the cases would be monitored and after 30 days they could advise if they wanted to continue being assigned cases in their areas. The trial period went well and by the end of this research over fifty cases were handled by the community policing officers. Many times the officers initiated investigations on their own and only used detectives as a resource. (This was especially true when neighborhood juveniles were the accused in crimes.) To provide positive re-enforcement for the other units efforts, the researcher wrote several letters of appreciation to appropriate units and encouraged the detective unit sergeant to do the same (which he did on several occasions). By this time community policing officers were receiving a great deal of recognition from media and neighborhoods so it was important to :remind other 'units that the community policing officers did not fail to remember their assistance. 5. ,11. 7qu. __-- = ..o .' e. , .7 t - OHH-! 9- ' .- officers; (Being very conscious of not over supervising.) Individualized supervision directly correlates with the Human Relations Theory of being employee concerned and having the first line supervisor make a true commitment to how people are treated. The researcher first became acquainted with each of his officers. Prior to being assigned to this unit the 54 first line supervisor knew very little about each individual community policing officer. Extensive communication with each officer allowed the first line supervisor a personal understanding of their character. This understanding became useful when the researcher provided the officers with guidance, direction, and at times discipline. While talking to one officer about her performance she responded by stating: I have brought the neighborhood together and given them pride and identity. At the same time I feel like I have become part of this community. Now I’m having difficulty separating my feelings for the community and those of the department. Another officer had a pessimistic attitude about his neighborhood when the researcher began: This officer said his neighborhood people wanted him to take a low profile approach. He said he places a lot of ”heat” on the bad guys in his area and the residents want it that way. He viewed his job as another attempt by the Chief to show he’s doing something about the drug dealers and prostitutes. When this officer’s first line supervisor made suggestions about having the officer begin to perform more community building activities the officer responded with reasons why it wouldn’t work and/or he said he had already tried it and it didn’t work. A third officer thought he should be handling all of the neighborhood’s complaints and doing as much for them as possible. One situation was where this officer was re-writing and typing the neighborhood newsletter. My 55 suggestion to the officer was that his efforts \/I should be focused on other activities because by re-writing and typing the neighborhood newsletter some feelings of people on the newsletter committee would be hurt. The officer replied, ”I can’t let this be passed out to the neighbors, see how terrible it looks." Each officer presented individualized supervision efforts. For the first example, the researcher advised the officer that she did.not.have to separate her feelings between the community residents and the police department but instead should view it as a positive, and attempt to explain the good things about the community people to other police officers. The researcher explained that just as much effort had to be made toward work relationships as the efforts she made toward her relationship with the community. This continued to be a problem for the officer throughout the research period and several more discussions about it occurred. with little improvement. The second situation where the officer showed signs of defeat before making a true effort was handled entirely differently. The first line supervisor placed more pressure on this officer to perform some community "trust-building" activities and for direction he was provided with a work outline. Then the third time this officer suggested he go back to patrol, if his sergeant was not happy with him, his sergeant became very forceful (authoritarian style). The supervisor advised.his suggestion would be honored if he ever made that statement again. He was advised it would be more 56 beneficial for him to remain in the assignment but if he didn’t get the chip off his shoulder, and begin to make a concentrated effort toward community policing then leaving wouldn’t be his choice. After this approach the officer apologized for his actions. He stated those actions were a reflection of how he felt about his previous supervisor. Never again during the research period was there any problems with this officer. He became so involved in his community policing area that the residents named their organization after him and nominated him for police officer of the year. The third situation is a good example of allowing the officer the opportunity to fail. He was severely chastised by the neighborhood organization for changing the newsletter. Further discussions to relieve some of the stress which this officer was placing on himself resulted in his supervisor explaining' how’ he needed to begin. placing' some of the residents problems back on them. Empowering them to solve some of their own problems. 5, . , ,. . . ,- g ;_ ._ :-_.-., ; ...y._ ..LL, .. ,. This is one area which the researcher failed to get administration’s support. Administration understood the need but training in this area had to wait. The understandable reasons for not implementing any formal training was largely do to lack of time, funds, and prior training commitments. (The shooting of a Hispanic male by police officers during the 57 research period placed additional burdens on the administration to implement training on cultural diversity.) The lack of formal training did not however, eliminate efforts to educate the rest of the department about community policing. Instead other methods to begin communicating the community policing philosophy department-wide began. One way was when administration required officers and supervisors participating in the promotional process to read a community policing book. (One Sergeant approached the researcher and stated: I always thought community policing was foot patrol, like the beat cops, but now I understand what community policing is.) The majority of philosophy training occurred at the beginning of shifts during patrol briefings. During those times the researcher often took five minutes to communicate what was occurring and the purpose of community building events. Another opportunity afforded to the community policing sergeant was when his work day consisted of providing other members of the department with in-service defensive tactic training. More training however, was afforded to the community policing officers. They received two types of formal training. The first was philosophy training and an awareness type training by the local University. The second type of training they received was skills training developed by a local non-profit organization and the sergeant. This being a new approach to policing often meant that those involved 58 received the majority of their training on the job. 7. Qeeiing nigh gene; neighnerneed eezxiee egeneiee. During the first few months the sergeant had difficultly making useful contacts with other service providers. The sergeant continued to be persistent in this endeavor because the officers continually asked for more direction in this area. Then in February of 1991 the community policing first line supervisor began attending“ monthly ”First Contact" meetings. At these meetings as many as thirty people from social agencies and programs presented case problems which they were involved with. Then they solicited ideas about resources of how to deal with each case. Each agency had become so specialized that none of them could handle multiple family problems. Often times it required three different agencies to work with one family. Personal contacts were made with the service providers and then they were referred to the community policing officers. Comnunity policing officers were making many of their own contacts as well. In January of 1991 one officer was able to get into a problem house in his area because the renter’s permit had expired. The officer joined the city’s code compliance officer on an inspection of the house and problem renters were evicted while the house was condemned. The building department was the initial agency which provided community policing officers with the most assistance. One code compliance officer in October of 1991 59 explained how he felt the officers were creating more stress for him. The code compliance officer enjoyed working with the officers but. his supervisor ‘wanted him. to do ‘more inspections. (The extra time he spent with the community policing officer meant the less time he had to perform duties which created revenue. His supervisor was unwilling to be patient.) The researcher made contact with the head of the Building Department and a compromise was made dealing with the requirements being placed on the code compliance officer. Eventually, as community policing became more successful other service agencies began contacting the unit. By the end of the research period a Neighborhood Network Center had been established and twelve different service agencies had placed employees inside the center. Neighborhood Network Centers As each community officer became trusted and. more acquainted with people they began to feel responsible to do more. Officers began assisting people get child care, jobs, substance abuse treatment, and transportation. Contacts with service agencies were often a point of frustration because of the specialized, centralized services provided. This frustration was recognized by local service agency heads and an ”Inter-Agency Agreement” was signed by the Director of Social Services, the Chairperson of the County Health Department, the County Clerk, the Health Officer, the 60 Superintendent of public schools, and the Chief Judge of the Probate Court. A sample of this inter-agency agreement is listed in Appendix E. In an effort initiated by the community policing sergeant, one of the community policing officers, and a social agency contact person, a Neighborhood Network Center was established. (The time seemed appropriate because of the interest generated by the Inter-Agency Agreement.) The first line supervisor assisted in developing and organizing the goals and objectives of'thelcenter. .After researching several alternative approaches a ”Problem Solving Team" approach was decided upon. A common criticism of community policing was the idea that it just moved problems and failed to address them. The problem solving idea was designed to identify individuals and families who needed agency support. Then agencies would approach problems instead of receiving them. This problem solving team initially consisted of the community policing officer assigned to the neighborhood, the district patrol officers from each shift which were assigned to the neighborhood, the code compliance officer assigned to the neighborhood, a school psychologist assigned to the neighborhood, and the community policing first line supervisor. Through weekly meetings problems and potential problems were identified, a plan to address them was decided upon, then each of the participants were assigned a task to 61 complete the following week. The Network Center "core-team" meetings began in September of 1991. With the support from top administration a partnership with the local school district was formed to assist in this joint effort. Without grant assistance (but with the assistance of a kind landlord and an anonymous donor) a facility inside the community policing neighborhood was obtained for office space. After the office space was secured several other agencies contacted the researcher and offered to join the team. Decisions on which agency would decentralize into the neighborhood was made by the community policing officer and the researcher as to what service the agency would be providing to the neighborhood. The core-team remained small for confidentiality reasons but many other service agency employees began networking and working out of the center. Examples of services accessible to the neighborhood include; a learning specialist, a trainer for parenting skills, a full service-department of social services employee, a legal aid employee, youth job source program, student nurses, drug prevention workers, and others. Constant evaluation of the center was reviewed by the community policing officer and his supervisor. Concerns include cautions of creating another bureaucracy, having the center turn into a "Resource Center” instead of a "Service” facility, and the establishment of some permanency. As of this writing it is operating well. The positive feed back 62 from the employees assigned there and the community residents, have police officials thinking about establishing other decentralized centers. Additional centers would most likely be established within other communities which demand a variety of agency service needs. The city’s Human Resources Department also had written a grant which included funding for a community policing officer. By the end of this research period the community policing sergeant was spending a considerable amount of time each week attending to the needs of the Network Center. 8. Qeaiing with iocal neliticiene, Within the first week of being assigned to the community policing unit the researcher came to the realization that a great amount of time would be spent dealing with local politicians. Over 20 entries under this category were logged during the research time. When the sergeant was told about being selected as the first community policing supervisor he was advised he would be attending a conference in.Chicago*with the Mayor’s assistant. This was the genesis for an excellent long term working relationship with the Mayor’s office. The city has a strong Mayoral form of Government, four City Council persons from different parts of the city and four ”at large" Council persons. The Police Chief and other Department "Heads” report to the Mayor. Prior to accepting any grant monies for additional police officer positions the police 63 department had to receive the necessary approval from each branch of government. Another major concern when dealing with neighborhood groups was alerting the Mayor’s office and the City Council when anything of a political nature surfaced. Each month the city government officials were furnished with a list of community policing neighborhood meetings and special events. The community policing officers worked hard to develop close relationships with residents of their neighborhoods. As their first line supervisor however, special attention was given. to assure residents did not use the officers to strengthen their stand when it conflicted with the political leaders’ position. Two officers had a difficult time with this issue within the first six months of this research. One officer told the residents that he would favor the use of barricades to block neighborhood streets from drug dealers and "Johns" picking up prostitutes. The neighborhood City Counsel person picked-up on this and made an issue out of it during a City Counsel meeting. The Mayor was against the use of the barricades and he did not appreciate the fact that the neighborhood police officer failed to support his decision. The neighborhood received their barricades and the community policing sergeant received a message from the Mayor’s office that they would hope a similar situation would not happen in the future. The other officer was in the same City Council person’s 64 ward and when the issue of barricades came up that officer wanted to get involved. The researcher cautioned the officer because of past experience. This officer had difficulty staying neutral on the issue. His first line supervisor strengthened the caution of him staying neutral to a direct order, when he requested to attend the City Counsel meeting that planned on addressing the issue. Several other political issues surfaced during the research period such as the placement of a Community Corrections House inside a community policing neighborhood. Strong and frequent reminders from their sergeant reached the community policing officers. Those reminders were to stay neutral on issues and allow the neighborhood and the City Government to work out a compromise. During election time the community policing officers had local politicians attending their neighborhood.meetings, fund raisers, and community events. One officer had a candidate ask if he could ’walk the beat’ with the community policing officer. This was somewhat unavoidable but very limited as a suggestion was made to the officer that he find some other activity to become conveniently involved with. Another candidate asked two community policing officers if they would have their picture taken with him. The candidate assured the officers that it would not appear in the campaign literature. One officer refused.and the other officer agreed. ‘The officer that agreed had his photograph appear in the candidates 65 campaign literature! Unexpected Categories 1- WW When this research began the researcher was the first line supervisor for four community policing officers (one officer had been called to active military duty). Funding for two of them was provided by a State Grant. As the unit grew to ten employees, nine officers and a sergeant, the number of grants grew as well. By the end of the research period five different funding sources were being handled. This task began to absorb a tremendous amount of the community policing sergeant’s time because of the necessary, contracts, quarterly reports, monthly financial statements, etc.. Two additional grants, which included three more community police officer positions, were being written at the close of this study. The logic behind the grants was to use other funding sources while they existed and have a plan in place for when they ended. When grant sources become depleted our goal is to have neighborhood residents empowered and other officers practicing community policing. 66 The feelings of many other officers were that there should be some balance of the community policing officers duties. This workload balance should be between ”Community Building" activities and "Traditional" policing activities. The best way to describe the approach to this issue is to generally have each community and each community officer determine how the officer will balance their activity. The initial efforts of each officer were to make a strong visible impact by traditional methods. Then, wasting little time, try developing a "community" with community building activities. As a first line supervisor, some guidance and boundaries were placed on the approach taken by the officers. Most generally however, the officers set their own goals, understanding that traditional efforts could enhance community building efforts and visa versa. The flexibility afforded to each officer allowed them to: play ball, coach soccer, pick-up trash, paint houses, picnic, go camping, locate jobs, and establish service centers or buy drugs, arrest prostitutes, arrest Johns, write speeding tickets, attend court hearings and answer calls. The first line supervisor’s role is to monitor, make suggestions, and assist locating resources for the officers. Depending on what stage the neighborhood was in, and what type of criminal activities were occurring, the community policing sergeant has to continue to supervise on an individualized 67 basis. 3. E 1' '!1 ll H 1' Community policing officers and supervisors frequently interact with the media. The community policing sergeant has to have confidence in each of the community policing officers as they deal with the media. Often times the media is not interested in talking to the supervisor, they want to interview the officer who is out in the neighborhood. During the beginning of the research period the researcher notified local media about community policing events to promote the positive approach being undertaken by the police department. However, by the end of the research period a great deal of time was spent dealing with the media. The local newspaper and television reporters began calling the unit to find out what community building events were scheduled. Local television shows and local radio talk.shows had.several of the community policing officers and their supervisor on their programs. The community policing officers used this opportunity to capitalize on educating the community about community policing. One community policing officer was featured in Time magazine and several others appeared on the CBS’ National News, "Eye on America" show. Some disadvantages noted about media personalities are that they often need.a story immediately; This meant changing schedules so they can get some film footage or asking a busy 68 officer to spend.the first hour of their shift.with.the:media. Another disadvantage was when the story ‘which officers interviewed for failed to be written in the manner the officer intended. This often occurred as a result of the reporter using officers’ statements out of context. It also frequently seemed like the reporters were more interested in reporting bad news than good news. 4, . ..,°j',. ,-°.,,._,...; 1,. .-t ',. " , - u .. -. of e de (Mediating these disputes.) In five of the neighborhoods which community policing officers were assigned, conflicts developed.between volunteer neighborhood leaders. The police department was often placed in the middle. As officers became more popular, and the communities began to rally around them, some of the self appointed neighborhood leaders apparently felt threatened. As soon as they felt their power or ”clout" in the neighborhood was questioned, they would begin spreading negative comments about the community policing Officer and the police department. One Neighborhood Watch Captain told everyone she was responsible for the community involvement and the community officer shouldn’t get the credit. To prevent friction, this Neighborhood Watch Captain was given an award for her work in the neighborhood. This tactic still failed to get her to join the neighborhood organization. 69 Another incident occurred when four different special interest groups in one neighborhood all claimed they were the neighborhood’s voice. As their community policing officer tried to form a partnership with the community they each told him how strange the other groups were. Finally, after being "torn apart" by each group leader and being accused of siding with the "other" groups, the officer’s sergeant attended each groups meeting and advised them they needed to work out a comprise with one another, so one partnership between the community and the police department could be formed. They were told that the police department was not trying to form its own neighborhood organization but instead trying to unite the existing organizations. 5, - 'u.. 1, - . ,- , ,- u.-,_ _. . .- ..u l o " " A transforming leader attempts to lead by example. The manner in which the first line supervisor performs his/her job duties directly reflects on them and how followers view them. When law enforcement activities were performed by the first line supervisor a common response was ”I thought a sergeant didn’t do real police work any longer, especially a community policing sergeant". While working with the officers the opportunity to enforce the law commonly occurred, so the sergeant, in most situations, took on the role of assisting the officers and not "taking over". (The only situations 70 which required the sergeant to take over "control of” were most often those of a serious nature, involving several officers who would benefit from someone to directing and coordinating their efforts.) The important reason for the community policing supervisor to perform law enforcement duties was to communicate to the followers that every officer is a full service officer. 6. MAW neighberheedl One of the community policing officers furnished the residents of his neighborhood with his home telephone number. This over-involvement created a situation where he was always working. He would receive calls in the middle of the night and respond from his home instead of telling the complainant to call the police. This officer felt so accountable to residents that whenever anything happened he thought it was his responsibility to respond. This created problems for the officer’s personal life. Another situation which occurred was when a community policing officer became so upset about a Criminal Sexual Contact complaint that he began interviewing anyone remotely involved. This may have been fine, but a detective was assigned the case, had been investigating it, and had much more expertise in handling it. As a result of the community policing officers ill-advised actions any further 71 investigation by the detective ended because the suspect was tipped off. Community policing officers spend so much time with the people they serve they develop a strong sense of responsibility to those people. Many of the officers also spend some of their time-off coaching the youth from their community policing neighborhood or taking some of them camping. This is positive and should be encouraged. However, it may become too much. The first line supervisor should be aware of this and insure the officer takes quality time off, away from work, to prevent officer ’burnout’. 7. Assisting other departments napion-wide with the inpienentetion of cemmunity poiieing, When police departments across the United States notified the department and either expressed an interest in visiting our department to view the community policing activities or asked. us to send information it was considered a true compliment. This may sound like a small task but as other departments requested information it turned into creating another job responsibility for the first line supervisor. At the conclusion of this research six packages containing an explanation of our efforts had been mailed, and twenty eight officers from sixteen different police agencies had been provided with tours. 72 8. 7.7. ' . c-uu ni 90 i ° - -.f5 -_; _g_# r.t_- s. b-_i-- d son b ems. The use of good communication skills and practicing a transforming supervision style created solid trusting friendships between the community policing sergeant and his subordinates. This mutual trusting relationship allowed for the open exchange of personal problems and frustrations. When a first line supervisor has knowledge that an officer has a sick child or is going through a divorce then their behavior can be better understood. While collecting research for this project, a close relationship developed between the officers assigned to the unit and myself. The majority of the time when officers were experiencing difficult times their sergeant provided a patient listening ear and few words of advice. By living the Human Relations Theory and practicing the Transforming leadership style a truly solid relationship was developed within the community policing work group. CHAPTER IV SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS This chapter presents additional ideas, suggestions and recommendations for the first line supervisor. As a result of this study’s findings, additional categories of job functions, other than the sixteen mentioned, were recognized. Several of those additional categories are listed in this final chapter along with the authors ideas regarding the future of policing. Training As an organization implements the community policing/problem solving philosophy initial training should first address the philosophy. Secondly, training for the development of skills which enhance officer performance and re-enforce the philosophy is beneficial. Skills Training Training skills such as public speaking, acting as a community facilitator, understanding the benefits of community organizations, and community conflict mediation may prove helpful for community policing officers. Often much of this 73 74 training can be performed during in-service training. If in- service training is not possible, neighborhood training institutes, community colleges and conflict mediation agencies may be willing to assist (Williams and Sloan, 1990). Officers often feel comfortable when they are riding in their patrol car and when they’re in control of a tense situation, but, speaking in front of the public may be more difficult. Good people often verbally attack officers during community meetings and understanding various alternatives for handling that type of conversation would be helpful. Learning and understanding proper protocol for public meetings is another skill never addressed in contemporary police training. As officers form partnerships with the community it becomes increasingly important for them to become neighborhood facilitators. Their role as a facilitator may take a variety of different approaches and their first line supervisor should be prepared to provide them with proper direction. Officers understand when they should encourage, the community people, when they should take a step back allowing for a cooling off period, and/ or when just planting an idea is most appropriate. Officers are well trained to deal with conflict mediation when they respond to a call for service. Oftentimes however, a community policing officer may see, or indirectly hear about, conflicts between neighborhood leaders and many times they are not confident enough to intervene and work towards a compromise. Training which addresses perceived 75 neighborhood leader power struggles is an entirely new issue for police officers to deal with. Education of the Public As supervisors begin to understand the leadership role which the community policing philosophy requires them to perform they then need to begin educating the public. According to Trojanowicz (personal communication, September 21, 1992) the police have to ask the public three critical questions; (1) Are you willing to do more for yourself? (2) Are you willing to be patient when police response time increases for non-priority calls? and (3) Are you willing to make more of a personal commitment and volunteer your own time to improve your neighborhood? After the police inform the public what is required of them, then they can begin to explain how officers’ efforts will no longer focus strictly on reactive crime fighting. Through attendance of community meetings, social functions and the use of the media, the police department can begin to communicate community policing philosophy to the public they serve. An often used technique which was successful was to have the community policing officers first—line supervisor attend the neighborhood meetings and explain to the residents the officers responsibilities, emphasizing the necessary partnership with the community. Oftentimes a Lieutenant, Captain and/or Chief showed their support by also attending. 76 When the residents understood that the police were no longer going to accept the responsibility of all the social ills causing crime problems they most often became willing to work with the police. First Line Supervisor Style/Skills Implementing the community policing philosophy requires a decentralizing of authority which will affect all levels of the hierarchy. Those most affected by this change are the officials who are now placed with a dual burden--the sergeants. They must provide leadership, encourage creative analysis, evaluate officers’ responses and make tough operational decisions (Eck.and Spelman, 1987). The first line supervisors are the members of the department who know the most about each of the officers. So, a first-line supervisor under this philosophy might come to resemble the editor of a newspaper, or a business manager, more than an army sergeant (Eck and Spelman, 1987). As a result, agencies should be providing much more extensive leadership and guidance training to their sergeants. First-line supervisors (sergeants), from a management’s perspective, are concerned with performance but as the new emphasis is on "getting closer to the community" they must also develop new ways to measure performance. If a sergeant is the supervisor of specialized community policing officers or traditional patrol officers they both can become 77 successful supervisors by using similar tactics. Their focus should be on the officers total performance which includes, but is not limited to, how calls for service were handled, how well reports were written, how well investigations were completed, and the type and/or number of activities officers performed during free patrol time. The first activity the sergeant should perform is explaining to his/her officers what is expected of them, and how these expectations compliment the organizations goals. If performance expectations are communicated to the officers then the officers have an understanding of what is expected of them. In the past, these expectations may have only been quantitative data gathering activities, but now they should include both quantitative and qualitative evaluations. Emphasis on quality policing, requires quality management. First line supervisors should understand how to make performance evaluations reflect and reward officers for being creative and resourceful. Sergeants should have their subordinates develop short term (perhaps monthly) goals so as they perform their duties they have a goal to work for. Accomplishing these goals may require officers to contact other service agencies, other department units, change their work hours, and/ or attend special meetings. The first line supervisor can act as an assistant to the officer in gaining resources within the department or with contacts outside of the department. They 78 also can provide officers, who are willing to take a chance, with the support and the opportunity to be flexible in work assignments. Working together like this often improves communication and sergeant/officer relationships. As a sergeant provides direction to the line officers, personal trust, confidence in one another, and friendships may develop. These relationship allow for two-way communication to be a daily occurrence. Therefore, if internal or external problems begin affecting officer performance the supervisor is immediately advised and they will understand how to evaluate the individual. (Problems affecting officers performance could range from a sick child, to a nagging neighbor.) Communication continues to be of utmost importance for addressing performance evaluations of officers. Daily contact and working with the officers allows first-line supervisors to interact with the public, as well as with the officers. Sergeants need to remind themselves that their people are more important than their paperwork. Managing by a means of working with the officers, allows sergeants to make more contact with the public, and provides them with a better understanding of neighborhood and officer concerns. This type of management will also enhance the first line supervisor’s ability to provide continued direction and encouraging support to the officers. If these supervisory tactics are used then small 79 problems will be addressed before they grow into larger, perhaps unmanageable ones. Therefore, when a formal evaluation is required a narrative summary of the officers strengths and weaknesses should be reviewed with them. During evaluation reviews nothing should surprise the officer, because of the constant feedback their supervisor has provided them. Numerical and box type evaluations should be avoided as they often fail to reflect qualitative measures of performance. As sergeants develop the transactional leadership style their job enrichment may improve along with that of the officers. When police officers are given the mandate to diagnose community problems and be creative in the development of solutions to those problems, in the addition to law enforcement responsibilities, sergeants often serve as the officers’ facilitator, educator, and referral resource. Just as the officer provides those services to the community. The sergeant must understand that making arrests is only one approach to problems. Challenging officers to develop alternative ways of solving problems should be common practice. When addressing problems with the officers behavior, supervisors need to distinguish between the well intended mistakes and poor performance problems. Supervisors have to focus on the act and.not the employee. If the officers’ well- intended initiatives back-fire, the sergeant must treat those 80 incidents with supporting advice. When problems with certain officers continue, sergeants should again explain what is expected of them and provide them with support and direction for improving their behavior. A time table for improved performance prevents problems from dragging on. Avoid sending conflicting messages. For example, don’t say one thing and do another, or don’t expect your employees to perform a task which you couldn’t do. Lead by example. When selecting officers for special tasks supervisors enjoy choosing highly qualified officers because it normally makes their job as supervisors much easier. However, union contracts and civil service may prevent special selection from occurring. If a sergeant gets a motivated employee they can enjoy teaching the officer skills required to perform the job. (Motivation is the key characteristic that was found to be of true value to the researcher.) This opportunity allows for greater growth among sergeants and is an excellent way of developing their people. Community Policing’s Future Top administrators who are willing to implement the community policing philosophy may never experience its full potential. With administrators and politicians often failing to have extended job security (Brown, 1986) they may not have the privilege of seeing the philosophy work. Often they will just review the quantitative data, failing to allow adequate 81 time for a proper total measurement. This is especially relevant since the full impact of the community policing effort may not be realized until youth from community policing neighborhoods grow into adults. For the community policing philosophy to be successful it cannot stop with the patrol officer and the community residents. Police departments and other professional agencies leadership styles should reflect this same philosophy. Cooperative networking and joint efforts among agencies, businesses, organizations and the public are imperative for optimal success of this philosophy. The community policing philosophy for patrol officers suggests they form a partnership with the public and empower them to becoming proactive in fighting crime. Often times its not the community which the patrol officers have problems with, instead its with their supervisors. Police supervisors should learn to be better listeners and whenever possible provide encouragement for officers input in decison making. However, prior to accomplishing this, an atmosphere where officers do not have to worry about the implications of expressing their ideas needs to be established. Tully (1986) stated, "(s)upervisors challenge is to create a management atmosphere which fosters the growth of people and offers them the freedom to fully apply their mental talents to the problems at hand. Police supervisors should change from the traditional style of supervising employees to empowering them 82 and managing their creativity" (cited in Tofoya, 1989). Toffler (1989) stated, "when the involvement of the average citizen in policing becomes the norm the burden carried by law enforcement, will be relieved, possibly for the first time since the emergence of the professional model of policing" (p.126). An avenue for bringing about this positive change for police is through integration with the social network. To fully address the underlying issues leading ‘to the ‘problems facing’ police, they' must begin networking with social service professionals. For example, police often have become frustrated with the inaccessibility of the "eight to five” social worker. Police today, have the option of maintaining the status quo or becoming the facilitator in moving the centralized social workers into decentralized offices at the community level. As social workers and other service providers become accessible to the public, and begin to network with one another, a proactive approach to addressing the underlying community problems can start being effectively dealt with. Conclusion Results of this study indicate community policing is not a "quick f ix" to long term problems and neighborhood perceptions. Many positive activities and programs were initiated during the twenty month study period. Creation of the‘Network.Center is an example of the readiness for agencies 83 to begin coordinating their services. The development of the Network Center also indicates the need for first line supervisors to remain flexible and open to ideas. The belief was formed.that if there is any hope of creating opportunities for relieving law enforcement demands, as well as social pressures, agencies networking and directing their efforts toward underlying problems is necessary. The expansion of networking, and increasing service provider decentralization, is believed to be the direction necessary' for’ the future. Agencies ‘which. are likely candidates for’ networking ‘with. the jpolice are, juvenile justice, youth bureaus, mental health, sanitation, public works, parole and probation, traffic, transportation, code enforcement, public housing, social services, the council on aging, schools, libraries, recreation and parks, community mediation, fire and rescue, prosecutor’s office, substance abuse prevention and treatment agencies. As police officers and social agency workers become an integral part of the neighborhood they will seldom have to react to problems which are nearly out of control but instead they can address situations proactively, resulting in the need to expend less resources. Hopefully, that which has happened in medicine will happen in criminology. Toffler (1989) stated, ”(r)egardless of what lies ahead, we can best be prepared to deal with the future if we anticipate tomorrow 84 in an imaginative, analytical, and prescriptive manner" (p. 246). APPENDICES APPENDIX A Madison, Wisconsin Mission Statement Madison, Wisconsin Police Department Values Statement We have developed a mission statement that attempts to capture the values that "drive" and direct our organization: WE BELIEVE IN THE DIGNITY AND WORTH OF ALL PEOPLE. WE ARE COMMITTED TO: Providing high-quality, community-oriented police services. Protecting Constitutional rights. Problem solving. Team work. Openness. Planning for the future. Providing leadership to the profession. We are proud of the diversity of our work force which permits us to grow and which respects each of us as individuals and we strive for a healthful workplace (Barker and Carter, 1991,35). 85 86 Lansing Michigan Mission Statement Lansing, Michigan Police Department’s Vision/Mission Statement Police and Community Partnerships for Progress and Excellence The Lansing Police Department’s mission is to maintain ORDER, preserve the public SAFETY, and to foster a better QUALITY OF LIFE. It is our intent to make our city a better place to live, work and visit. To accomplish this mission we must: As a Law Enforcement Agency ACKNOWLEDGE the citizens as the source of police authority. Administer the law WITHOUT BIAS. Recognize the DIGNITY and WORTH of all people. Solicit COOPERATION and SUPPORT at the neighborhood level, as well as, the greater community. Provide services in a SENSITIVE AND EFFECTIVE manner. Seek to gain the respect of all people. As an Employer Provide a work environment which stresses TEAMWORK recognizes the value of DIVERSITY, and encourages professional DEVELOPMENT. Employ progressive management techniques which emphasize ETHICAL BEHAVIOR,promotes LEADERSHIP by example, and strive for a standard of EXCELLENCE. Appendix B Community Survey Thank you for participating in this survey. We are concerned with your safety and neighborhood. Therefore, your opinion is very important to us. Please take a few minutes and complete this questionnaire. To answer questions on the survey, use a number 2 pencil and fill in the circle that has the letter which most closely matches your answer. If you need help, call the telephone number provided in the packet. NO ONE WILL KNOW WHO YOU ARE, OR HOW YOU ANSWERED 1. During the day, how often do you walk/run/bike in your neighborhood? A. Every day B. Once or twice a week C. A few times a month D. A few times a year E. Never 2. After sunset, how often do you walk/run/ride a bike in your neighborhood? A. Every day B. Once or twice a week C. A few times a month D. A few times a year E. Never 3 . How often do you participate in neighborhood group (Church, athletic, neighborhood. association, social) activities? ' A. Every day B. Once or twice a week C. A few times a month D. A few times a year E. Never 87 88 How often. do 'you do ‘things outside (in. the 'yard, playground, sidewalk) to take care of, or improve, the place you live? A. Every day B. Once or twice a week C. A few times a month D. A few times a year E. Never How often do you have friendly talks with your neighbors? A. Every day B. Once or twice a week C. A few times a month D. A few times a year E. Never How often do you do something to keep your house and/or neighborhood looking nice? A. Every day B. Once or twice a week C. A few times a month D. A few times a year E. Never How many of your neighbors do you know by name? A. Less than 25% B. Between 25% and half C. Between 1/2 and 75% D. Almost all your neighbors E. None How safe is your neighborhood at night? A. Very safe B. Safe C. Not safe D. Very dangerous How important is it for neighbors to think you always obey the law. A. Very important B. Important C. Somewhat important D. Not important 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 89 As long as no one gets hurt, it is O.K. to break some laws. A. Yes B. No C. Unsure The laws are to protect you. A. Yes B. No C. Unsure Public support of the police is important for keeping law and order. A. Yes B. No C. Unsure Do the local police have a good understanding of what people in the neighborhood consider acceptable behavior? A. Yes B. No C. Unsure Do the local police treat people fairly? A. Yes B. NO C. Unsure Does the local foot patrol officer treat people fairly? A. Yes B. No C. Unsure How often do you talk to police officers? A. Every day B. Once or twice a week C. A few times a month D. A few times a year E. Never How often do you see police officers in your neighborhood? A. Every day B. Once or twice a week C. A few times a month D. A few times a year E. Never Where are most of your friends from? A. Work B. Your neighborhood C. Both D. Neither 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 90 How is the level of safety in your neighborhood changing? A. Not at all B. Becoming safer C. Becoming more dangerous D. Don’t know Have you been the victim of a violent crime (like a fight, rape or attack) in the last 3 years? A. Yes B. NO Have you been the victim of a non-violent crime (like a vandalism or theft) in the last 3 years? A. Yes B. No Have you called the police to report a problem (other than to report a crime) in your neighborhood since last summer? A. Yes B. No C. Unsure Have you called the police to report a violent crime (fight, rape, assault) in your neighborhood since last summer? A. Yes B. No C. Unsure Have you called the police to report a non-violent crime (vandalism, theft, etc.) in your neighborhood since last summer? A. Yes B. No C. Unsure Would you like to see police officers walking through your neighborhood? A. Yes B. No C. Unsure _: Did you know that police foot-patrol and/or community policing program operates in your neighborhood? A. Yes B. No C. Unsure 91 27. How much has local police services improved‘in the last year? A. A lot B. A little C. None D. It has become worse E. Don’t know In your neighborhood, tell us if you agree or disagree that the following thins are problems. r- 28. Prostitution 29. Drug Use « A. Strongly agree A. Strongly agree B. Agree B. Agree C. Disagree C. Disagree D. Strongly disagree D. Strongly disagree E. Don’t know E. Don’t know 30. Theft, robbery 31. Fighting, violence A. Strongly agree A. Strongly agree B. Agree B. Agree C. Disagree C. Disagree D. Strongly disagree D. Strongly disagree E. Don’t know E. Don’t know 32. Fear of crime 33. Unsupervised juveniles A. Strongly agree A. Strongly agree B. Agree B. Agree C. Disagree C. Disagree D. Strongly disagree D. Strongly disagree E. Don’t know E. Don’t know 34. Excessive drinking 35. Inadequate schools A. Strongly agree A. Strongly agree B. Agree B. Agree C. Disagree C. Disagree D. Strongly disagree D. Strongly disagree E. Don’t know E. Don’t know 36. Loud parties 37. Sexual assaults A. Strongly agree A. Strongly agree B. Agree B. Agree C. Disagree C. Disagree D. Strongly disagree D. Strongly disagree E. Don’t know E. Don’t know 38. Abandoned buildings 40. 42. 44. 46. you 47. A. Strongly agree B . Agree C. Disagree D. Strongly disagree E. Don’t know Unemployment A. Strongly agree B. Agree C. Disagree D. Strongly disagree E. Don’t know Short term renters A. Strongly agree B . Agree C. Disagree D. Strongly disagree E. Don’t know Most neighbors don’t talk to each other. A. Strongly agree 3. Agree C. Disagree D. Strongly disagree E. Don’t know 92 39. Gang activity A. Strongly agree B. Agree C. Disagree D. Strongly disagree E. Don’t know 4 1 . General appearance 43. 45. A. Strongly agree B. Agree C. Disagree D. Strongly disagree E. Don’t know Homeless people A. Strongly agree B. Agree C. Disagree D. Strongly disagree E. Don’t know Most neighbors don’t care about this neighborhood. A. Strongly agree B. Agree C. Disagree D. Strongly disagree E. Don’t know Is crime serious enough here that you would move, if could? A. Strongly agree B. Agree C. Disagree D. Strongly disagree E. Don’t know Do you think your chances of being the victim of a violent crime are great in your neighborhood? A. Strongly agree B. Agree C. Disagree D. Strongly disagree E. Don’t know 93 48. Do you think that your chances of being the victim of a robbery or theft are great in this neighborhood? A. Strongly agree B. Agree C. Disagree D. Strongly disagree E. Don’t know 49. Can the local police protect you from crime? A. Strongly agree B. Agree C. Disagree D. Strongly disagree E. Don’t know 50. Do you feel that you are more likely to be a crime victim than most other people? A. Strongly agree B . Agree C. Disagree D. Strongly disagree E. Don’t know 51. How safe do you feel out alone in your neighborhood at night? A. Very safe B. Safe C. Not Safe D. Very Unsafe E. Unsure 52. How safe do you feel out alone in your neighborhood during the day? A. Very safe B. Safe C. Not Safe D. Very unsafe E. Unsure We are concerned with how people with different ages, jobs, gender, etc. feel about this neighborhood. The following questions ask. you. to tell us something' about yourself. Remember that no one will know who you are. 53. 54. 55. 56. 57. 58. 59. 94 Based on your current job, which group would you best fit? A. B. C. D. E. Factory worker, plumber, welder, construction Teacher, doctor, banker, counselor Secretary, typist, restaurant worker, salesperson Retired Unemployed What is your age? A. B. C. D. E. F. Under 16 16-25 26-35 36-45 46-55 56-older What is your sex? A. B. Male Female What is your race/ethnic group? A. B. C. D. E. In A. B. C. D. White/Non-Hispanic Black/African American Oriental/Asian Hispanic Other the place you live, do you? Own Rent Live with a friend/relative Other How long have you lived in this neighborhood? A. B. C. D. Less than 6 months 7 months to 2 years 2-10 years Over 10 years How many children live with you? A. B. C. D. None One Two-Three Four or more 95 60. How much education have you had? A. B. C. D. E. Less than High School High School Graduate Some College College graduate Graduate school 61. Marital Status A. B. C. D. E. Single, never been married Married Single, divorced Separated Widowed Thank you for completing this survey. sheet into the envelope and mail it. If you would like to make any comments please write them in the space below. Please place the answer If you would like to know the results of this survey, send a eepenepe postcard to the same address with your return address included. Appendix C Department Survey Please circle the answer which most appropriately reflects what you think about Community Policing for the year 1991. I would ask that you respond to the questions regarding your direct contact with Community Policing Officers and your experience working in the Community Policing areas -- n9; what you heard others say (positive or negative). Key: A Much Less B Somewhat less C About the same D Somewhat more E Much more Questions 1. What change have you noticed in criminal activity? A B C D E Comments: 2. What change in epinee reported? (Not social problems) A B C D E Comments: 3. Calls for’ Service? (Nuisance lcalls, noise, neighbor disputes, etc.) A B C D E Comments: 96 97 When problems within C.P. Areas were noticed by yourself, were they communicated to the C.P. officer? Yes No How? Informal contact / Written / Answering machine Comments: If you are a district driver in an area with a CP officer, how would you rate the information "exchange" between yourself and the C.P.O.. Poor Okay Good Comments: Do you understand the importance of "community building” (Neighborhood clean-ups, picnics and parties) activities as it relates to crime? Yes No Please Explain: Have you used any of the C.P.O.’s contacts outside of the police department to help correct an underlying nuisance problem? Yes No If yes, what type of service? As a Patrol officer, the C.P. program has: A. Helped make my job much easier B. Helped make my job somewhat easier C. Been of no help D. Caused more work for myself I think the Community Policing ‘Unit is 4 beneficial to the Lansing Police Departmentt’ A. Somewhat B. Not C. Very Comments: 10. 11. 98 As you respond to calls in C.P. areas you have noticed citizen/police relationships to be: A. Worse B. No change C. Improved Other ideas, comments, etc. Appendix D ADDITIONAL RESPONSIBILITIES When the researcher became established and recognized outside of the police department, additional .responsi- bilities were undertaken. This section is included to provide the reader with additional information about the additional responsibilities which surfaced later in the study period. 1. Re ar h 0 ac ' s a c Community surveys such as that in Appendix B are designed for the purpose of further understanding community input. Having knowledge in additional research.methods and assisting officers in conducting such surveys are skills future first line supervisors will benefit from. Also, to learn more about how those inside the organization view community policing the survey in Appendix C was developed and distributed. Survey data are operationally useful information and, by comparing responses over time, they measure the impact of community policing. 99 100 . - e ' - : ._,._ .1._11_,' -. ”1. .. -:; In order to assign officers where they would be most effective, researching criteria such as; calls for service, crimes reported, low priority calls, percentage of rental properties, building/zoning code violations, population density, quantity of active drug houses and juvenile arrests inside police reporting areas were examined. Selection of these officers was normally dictated by union contract. MAW With officers remaining in the same assigned area for long periods of time, often trouble makers would file harassment type complaints on the community policing officers to the city’s Human Relations Department and/or the police department’s internal affairs unit. Thorough investigation of each complaint is a necessary function of the first line supervisor. MW An assignment to the community policing unit at the site studied was considered a special assignment. Therefore, the community policing sergeant was required to complete bi- monthly performance evaluation reports on each officer for the first year. The Annual Performance Evaluations were in addition to these bi-monthly reports. 101 ° Each month qualitative and quantitative data was captured and reported to the Uniform Division Commander for evaluation. These reports included activities of each community policing officer and their supervisor. Letters of appreciation to other officers and/or units for their support of community policing activities along with recognition letters to officers were also commonly written. 6. Deiiy Aeninistrapiye Ineke Each day assignment sheets were completed and distributed to the 911 Center and each patrol shift for their information as to which community policing officers were working and the times of their work hours. Each week daily absentee reports and shift premium reports were forwarded to the Administrative Services Unit.along with.sick'time, overtime, and compensatory time sheets. Completing monthly assignment sheets which included days off and assigned training also was a routine supervisor task. 7, flprking pith Budget Pezsen To plan for the following year the budget person had to continually be kept up to date on each of the five grant funding sources and the status of the community policing petty cash fund. 102 8. W it n tra nin Re ests Attendin ain n When officers became aware of training seminars being offered the benefit of them attending would be discussed. If the officer and the first line supervisor thought the training would be appropriate then the first line supervisor would write a formal request to the department’s Personnel and Training Division. On going in-service training such as; firearms, defensive tactics, cultural awareness and first aid/CPR was attended as well. 9. Attenging Meetings The researcher was assigned to several committees which normally required monthly meetings. Those committees were: The Mayor’s Social Development and Recreation Task Force Committee, the Network Center Staff Committee, the Police Advisory Committee, the Neighborhood Youth and Parent Partnership Prevention (anti-drug effort) Committee, a Sub- Committee of the Neighborhood Youth and Parent Partnership Prevention program, a judge for the Boys and Girls Club ”Youth of the Year" Award Committee, and a weekly "Core-Team Network" Committee. 10 s s' ' ' As the Network Center of social service agencies became a reality the researcher accepted the responsibilities to oversee; the Network Center bank account for payment of 103 utilities, etc. , the hiring of a maintenance person, the supervision of college interns who in turn supervised people sentenced to do community service hours, and.making decisions on which agencies would assign employees at the Network Center building. Appendix E INTERAGENCY AGREEMENT (A SAMPLE OF THE LANSING INTER-AGENCY AGREEMENT) Trojanowicz, Bucqueroux, McLanus, and Sinclair, (1992 p. 44) This Letter of Understanding is made and entered by and between Ingham County Department of Social Services, Ingham County for the Ingham County Health Department, the Lansing School District, the Ingham Intermediate School District, the Ingham County Probate Court, and the Clinton-Eaton-Ingham Community Mental Health Board. WITNEBBETH . Whereas the signing’ parties ("Agencies/Agency") are committed to a cooperative process in providing a continuum -of quality services for children and families as close to the home environment as possible; and Whereas the agencies recognized that, for the benefit of servicing clients with multiple problems, who are in the service area of the agencies, it is appropriate to meet, from time to time, to discuss and implement, where appropriate, inter-agency cooperation, with the goal of better servicing 104 105 the needs of the citizens within the service areas of these agencies; and Whereas to help fully meet the needs of all children in the Agencies’ service areas, the Lansing School District, the Ingham Intermediate School District, the Ingham County Department of Social Services, the Clinton-Ingham-Eaton Community Mental Health Board, Ingham County for the Ingham County Health Department, the Ingham County Probate Court have prepared this Letter of Understanding. Therefore, the parties have reached the following understanding: I. The agencies signing this Letter of Understanding agree that the directors of those agencies or their designees will meet from time to time, but no less often than quarterly, for the purposes set forth in this Letter of Understanding. II. The purpose of this Letter of Understanding and the joint meetings as specified herein are as follows: A. Problem identification in the community of gaps in human services and to attempt to identify funding sources to meet those gaps in services. B. To identify areas and circumstances in which potential clients of the agencies would benefit from services of more than one agency. C. To evaluate and determine specific initiatives that require agency or inter-agency cooperation to meet the needs 106 of unserved and underserved persons in need of coordinated services from these human service agencies. D. To seek out, consider, and develop possible funding proposals for the funding of coordinated human services from and for these agencies for the residents of Ingham County. E. To identify and bring consideration to issues that may benefit from joint problem-solving initiatives. F. To work cooperatively for the commitment and planning of benefits and services to be provided by the agencies to the residents of Ingham County, recognizing that each agency must work within the constraints of that agency’s statutory responsibility and limitations. III. This agreement shall commence (date) and. may’ be terminated by any participating party by thirty (30) days advance notice to the other parties. IV. This Letter of Understanding relates to discussion and communications in meetings concerning problems of joint and mutual interest as set forth herein. V2 This agreement is not a commitment of funding or specific programs by any party. All programming and funding decisions shall continue to be made by each party in the manner and procedure utilized by that party. VI. Each party agrees to hold harmless the other parties and their agents, servant, and employees from liability resulting from or arising out of the services provided by that party. 107 VII. This Letter of Understanding may only be amended by written agreement of the parties hereto. ' IN 'WITNESS WHEREOF that parties have entered this agreement on the date to be effective as set forth herein. (Signatures included: For the Ingham County Department of Social Services- Director For Ingham County for the Ingham County Health Department-Chairperson of the Board of Commissioners - County Clerk - Health Officer For the Lansing School District - Superintendent For the Ingham County Probate Court - Chief Judge For Clinton-Ingham-Eaton Community Mental Health- Chairperson For Ingham Intermediate School District - Superintendent BIBLIOGRAPHY BIBLIOGRAPHY Babbie. E- R. (1989)- Ihe_nractise.of_§esial_reeearsho California: Belmont. Barker, T. & Carter, D. (1991). Beliee_deyienee. Cincinnati, OH. Berg, B.L. (1989). ua' ' rc e e sociei seiences. Massachusetts: Allyn and Bacon Braunstein, S. & Tyre, M. (1992). Building a more ethical police department. The_£oliee_§hief. January, pp. 30-34. Brown, L. (1989, August). Community policing: a practical guide for police officials. Ine Poiiee Qnie . pp. 72- 82. Brown, L. (1989, September). ° ° W (NIJ- No. 12)- Harvard University. Brown, W. (1986). Organization assessment: Determining the state of police organization- .Iournal_of_£olise_§giense and_Administra_i2nl 1A(4). 267-284 Brown, W. P., & Yeager, M. (1978). Police professionalism and corruption control. leurnal_of_£oliee_§2ienee_and Administration. §(3). 273-281- Buber, M. (1955) . W Boston: Beacon Press. Burns, G.H. & Shuman, I. G. (1988). Police manager’s perception of organizations leadership style. Mic; Personnel_nanagement. 17(2). 145-157- Burns, J. M. (1978). Leagezship, New York: Harper & Row. Carter, D. & Sapp, A. (1989). The effect of higher education on police liability: Implications for police personnel policy. Ameriean_lournal_of_£elice. a. 153-165. 108 109 Chavis, D. & Newbrough, J. (1986). The meaning of community policing in community psychology- W E§29h212911.11(4)1 335-339- Clarke, M. (1987) . Citizenship, community, and the management of crime. WM. 21(4). 384- 400. Cordner, G., Otwin, M., & Murphy, J. (1986). Police responsiveness to community norms. Relissl 5(2). 83-107- Couper, D. C. (1988, April). Quality leadership; The first step towards quality policing- The_£oliee_ghief. pp- 70-34. Esbensen, F. (1987). Foot patrols: of what value? Anepieen W. étl) . 45-65- Felkenes, G. (1984). Attitudes of police officers toward their professional ethics. W. 12. 211- 219. Franz, V. 8 Jones, D. (1987). Perceptions of organizational performance in suburban police departments: A critique of the military model. WW mm 15(2). 153-161- Gaines, L., VanTubergen, N., & Paiva, M. (1984). Police officer perceptions of promotion as a source of motivation. MW. 12.. 265-275- Goldstein. H- (1977)- W Cambridge. MA: Ballinger. Golembieske, R.T. and McConkie, M. (1975). The center of interpersonal trust in group processes. W QIQBE_EIQ£§§§§§1 13-185- Greene, J. (1987). Foot patrol and community policing: Past practices and future prospects. W 29.11.93: fit 1'17- Gubrium, J. (1988). Anelyzing_fieid_peeiity. Beverly Hills: Sage. Hitt, W.D. (1988). e ea e - ana e : u e ' s o eepien. Columbus: Battle Press. Inkster, N. (1992, March). The essence of community policing. W. pp 28- 31- 110 Kaohigan. 8- (1986)- 5tatistical___analxsisi___5n nt- -_f 9 °1ae .1 .01- 0 0 1 a a ‘ s11 multixariate_method§- New York: Radius Press Katz, D- & Kahn. R. (1988). Ihe__social__psxehologx__ef engenizepipne. New York: Wiley and Son. Kelling. G- (1988. June). W pevoiupion (NIJ. Rep. No. 1). Harvard University. /Kelling, G. 8 Moore, M. (1988, November). Wing strategx__of__polising (NIJ- Rep- NO- 4). Harvard University. r/Kelling, G., Moore, M. 8 Trojanowicz, R. (1988). Crime eng Belieing (NIJ. Rep. No. 2). Harvard University. Lacayo, R.(1991, April). Back to the Beat. Time, pp. 22-24. Levine, C. (1985, November). IPolice management in the 1980’s: From decrementalism to strategic thinking. nenegenenp and_Qgranizational_Bexiex. pp- 691-699- Liquori, W. A. (1992, January 22). Maintaining departmental credibility- The__2112e_§hief pp 70- 76- Manning, P. (1987). mio ' s ' l w . Beverly Hills: Sage. Marrett, C. 8 Hage, J.(1975). Communication and satisfaction in organizations. Human_3elations_lournal. 28. 612- 622. Moore, M. 8 Stephens, D. W. (1991). e on c d n eontrol: The strategic managenenp of police depertnenpe. Washington: PERF. Moore. M. & TrojanowiCZ. R. (1986). corporate_§1rategies_fer Belieing (NIJ. Rep. No. 6). Harvard University. Mulvey, A. 8 Silka, L. (1987). A community training model incorporating history, empowerment, and ecology. leer-n11 .of.§9mmunitx_2sxsholegxl.15. 365- 375. Myron, P. (1992, January). Crooks or cops: we can’t be both. The_£eliee_9hief. pp- 23-28- Nila, M. (1990, October), Defining the police mission: a community/police perspective. W, pp. 43- 47. 111 Pangano, C. and Dintino, G. (1982, June). Managing change: Overhauling police management in a period of governmental retrenchment. Ins_zolios_ohisf. pp 26-32- PerrOW. C- (1986)- Qonplsx_organizarions1_A_oririoal_sssax- New York: McGraw-Hill. Punch. M- (1988)- MW Berverly Hills: Sage. Rainquet, F. W. (1992, January). No excuses management. (The Bolios_§hisf. pp- 18-21- Roberg, R. (1978). An analysis of the relationships among higher education, belief systems, and jobmperformance of patrol officers. u 0 Administration. §(3). 336-344- Sandler, G., Benner, H. 8 Mintz (1984). Police organizations: Their changing internal and external relationships. Ionrnal_of_2o1ios_soionos_and_Adninisrrarion. 2. 458- 463. Shoffner, L. 8 Sumnik, G. (1991, February), Controlling drug- related activitiy in residential leaseholds. Journal. 168-172- Skolnick, J. H. (1975). Qnepiee_giphpn§_ppiel. New York: John Wiley and Sons. Sparrow, Malcolm K. (1988, November). pelieing, (NIJ. No. 9). Harvard University. Steinman, M. (1986). Managing and evaluating police behavioru 1onrnal_of_Bolios_soionos_and_Adninisrrarion. 11, 285-292. Steinman, M. (1984). Rationalizing police operations: some explanatory factors- Jonrnal_of_§rininal_1nstiss. 12. 221-233. Stern, G. (1991, May). Community policing six years later: What have we learned? Leg_en§_gngez, pp. 52-54. Schatzman, L. 8 Strauss, A.L. (1973). W §aaanrsd1rL_Jrn;_an_nar_ral__sooiologx e u . New Jersey: Prentice-Hall. Strauss, A.L. (1988). eeienhiepe. New York: Cambridge University Press. Toffler, A. (1990). Eppezehifihp New York: Bantam Books. 112 Tafoya, W. (1990, January). The future of policing. (£51_Lep Enforosnsnr_nnllstin. 52(1). 13-17- Tafoya, W. (1990). The changing nature of the police. Vite; Epssohss_of_tns_nax. LYIlal. 244-246- “'TrojanOWiczI R. 8 Bucqueroux, B. (1990). Communirx , . Cincinnati, OH. iTrojanowicz, R. 8 Bucqueroux, B. (1991). Qpnnnnihy_pglieing$ 21, East Lansing: Michigan State University, National Center for Community Policing. /’Trojanowicz, R. 8 Bucqueroux, B. (1992) . Regime Mm 1L East Lansing: Michigan State University, National Center for Community Policing. ”Trojanowicz, R., Bucquerouz, B., McLanus, T., 8 Sinclair, D. (1992). ne' hborhood e w k t ° ic s snr1_planning1rnn1_inn1snanrarion.1n.J£nnrhr11_Miohiganl 1;, East lensing: Michigan State University, National Center for Community Policing. ”Trojanowicz, R. 8 Carter, D. (1990, January). The changing face of America. EBI_Lar_Enforosnsnr_Bnllstin. p- 6-12- ’"Trojanowicz, R. 8 Carter, D. (1987). gennnni§y_pplieingp 11, East lensing: Michigan State University, National Center for Community Policing. Vaughn, J. (1991, June). Community oriented policing...you can make it happen. Leg_§_gzge;, pp. 35-39. Vonder Embse. T- (1987). Ins_fonndarion_esssnrials1 Y J 3 Il' . neg_e;n. pp. 64-85. Dayton: Macmillan. Wadman, R. 8 Olson, R.K. (1990), ’ - rhsorx_of_polioing- PERF- Washington. D-C-- Wasserman, R. 8 Moore, M. (1988, November). VeineLin ppiieing. (NIJ. No. 8), Harvard University. Wasserman, R., Williams, H. 8 Kelling, G., (1988), 29.1193 . (NIJ. No.7), Harvard University. Weber, A. (1991), Crime and management; an interview with New York City police commissioner Lee P. Brown. ' , May-June, 111-126. 113 Weisburd, D., McElroy, J., 8 Hardyman, P. (1988) . Challenges to supervision in community policing: Observations on a pilot prOiect- WM. 1'. pp- 29-47- ~illitlllllllll'