ivy—‘—

u..-—

A

 

 

ADESCRIP‘TION or RESEARCH AIIDRLAIIIIIIIIG-III .
FIVE MEDIUM SIZED POLICE DEPARTMENTS : . _
: Thesis for the Degree (If. M. 'S. ‘
MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY
ROBERT A. SCHULTHEISS . _ '
' 1975.

 

u
‘1

ll...

"-
“:

EMESIS

fimra 'Yl'fi'fi'fl‘m‘m‘

 

 

JAIIZA 2005
E1 .L »

 

 

A DESCRIPTION OF RESEARCH AND PLANNING IN

FIVE MEDIUM SIZED POLICE DEPARTMENTS

 

A Thesis
Presented to
The Faculty of
The School of Criminal Justice

Michigan State University

 

In Partial Fulfillment
of the Requirement for the Degree

Master of Science

 

by
Robert A. Schultheiss

March 1975

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I would like to express my thanks to the members of
the thesis committee, Dr. John McNamara, Dr. Robert
Lorinskas, and Mr. Kenneth Christian for their assistance in
this endeavor. I would also like to express my thanks to
the chiefs and personnel of the five departments visited
during this research. Without the help of these people,

this research could not have been undertaken.

ii

Material in this project was pre«
pared under Grant #74 NI 991002
from the Law Enforcement Assistance
Administration, U.S. Department of
Justice. Researchers undertaking
such projects under government
sponsorship are encouraged to ex-
press freely their professional
judgement. Therefore, points of
View or opinions stated in this
document do not necessarily repre-
sent the official position or policy

of the U.S. Department of Justice.

 

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Chapter
1. INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2. REVIEW OF THE RELEVANT LITERATURE . .
Police Literature . . . . . . . . . .
Business Literature . . . . . . . . .
Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3. PROJECT DESIGN . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Sample Selection - - . - - - . - . .
Data Collection - - - - - . . . - . .
Practical Application . . . . . . . .
4. INTERVIEW RESULTS . . . . . . . . . . . .
Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . .
Selected Demographic Characteristics
Organization, Staffing and Responsi-
bilities of the Planning Units . .
Research and Planning Interview
Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Chief of Police Interview Results . .
Command Officers Interview Results .
Operational Interviews . . . . . . .
5. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS . . . . . . . . .

Recommendations . . . . . . . . . . .

The Chief . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

iii

Page

:5

14
15
16
16
l7
19
19

19

30

31
36
41
47
52

54

58

iv

Chapter Page
The Research and Planning Unit . . . . . . 59.
The Command Staff . . . . . . . . . . . . 61

APPENDIX A . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64

BIBLIOGRAPHY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67

ITIIII

.11 J

Chapter 1
INTRODUCTION

The general problem or area of concern of this study
is the effectiveness of police research and planning efforts.
The specific problem is to define and describe the factors
which are prerequisite to the development of an effective
police research and planning unit.

Until recent years, police research and planning
units have been considered by many police administrators to
be luxuries, or "window-dressing,"l units which were to be
staffed only when there were extra people, officers with a
physical disability, 0r officers that just didn't fit the
traditional mold. These units had no real effect upon the
policy or operation of the department. All of this was
possible because the police administrator received very
little pressure to improve the operation of the department
from municipal or state government and, least of all, from
the citizenry. What pressure he (the police administrator)
did receive was primarily concerned with the suppression or

prevention of corruption within the department.

 

1James L. LeGrande & Raymond T. Galvin, "Current
Emphasis on Planning and Research", Planning and Research
Bulletin Number I, Michigan State University, 1968, p. 2.

1

Then, in the late 1960's, riots rocked the nation;
most of the major cities and many of the medium-sized cities
witnessed these civil disorders. Besides whatever social
or political changes which were brought about by the riots,
they also served to focus attention upon the nation's
police departments and their lack of effective planning.

The Kerner Commission (The National Advisory Commission on
Civil Disorders) made several recommendations regarding
police planning which can be summarized as follows:

A. Mobilization plans were, for the most part,
inadequate and should be extensively reviewed.

B. Operational plans failed to take into consider-
ation communications problems, rumor control, and tactical
deficiencies.

C. Logistical support plans failed to consider
equipment and supplies inventories, transportation of both
officers and equipment, and relief of personnel.2

The mid and late 1960's also saw an increased citi-
zen and government interest in the problem of crime in the
United States. The police, being the most visible component
of the criminal justice system, received both the brunt of
early criticism and the lion's share of the federal anti-

crime funds, appropriated by the Omnibus Crime Control Act

 

2Report of the National Advisory Commission on Civil
Disorders (New York: Bantam Books Inc., 1968), pp. 484-489.

 

of 1968. The President's Commission on Law Enforcement and

the Administration of Justice in its Task Force Report: The

 

Police, recommended an increased emphasis upon operational
planning.3

The aforementioned recommendations have continued
to be made by various citizen groups and government agencies.
The Michigan Office of Criminal Justice Programs has con-
tinually allocated money for the improvement of police
research and planning units.

In less than ten years, police research and planning
has been transformed from a luxury item to a high priority
item (at least in the opinion of the "experts"). Since the
use of research and planning units is relatively new to the
police field, there exists among many police administrators
confusion regarding how to organize and utilize these units.
The purpose of this study is to define what factors are

necessary for the development of an effective police research

and planning unit.

 

3The Presidents' Commission on Law Enforcement and
the Administration of Justice, Task Force Report: The Police,
(U. S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D. C., 1967)
pp. 25-27.

Chapter 2

REVIEW OF THE RELEVANT LITERATURE

Police Literature

 

The vast majority of police-oriented literature
regarding the development and use of research and planning
units is divided into three major categories. The first
basically describes the need for effective planning. Exam-
ples of this type of literature are as follows:

In fact, the greatest weakness in the
police field today is the failure of police
executives to plan and anticipate the public
needs.4

or

. . .The application of science and tech-
nology in the police field is divided into
five areas: information processing, crime
prediction, manpower allocation, equipment,
and the role of the police force in society.
. . .The area of crime prediction and man-
power allocation has seen some research and
development done, but there exists a rapidly
growing body of techniques that have not been
applied to this phase of police work. Even the
feasibility of applying these techniques hasn't
been fully explored. . . Finally, the whole
area of the role of the police force in society
has been virtually ignored . . .5

 

4Raymond E. Clift, A Guide to Modern Police Thinking
(2d ed.; Cincinnati, Ohio: W. H. Anderson Co., 1965), p. 35.

5Travelers Research Center, A Literature Reveiw of
Police Planning and Research (Connecticut: Connecticut
Research Commission, 1968), p. 169.

 

4

The recommendation of the Presidents' Commission on Law
Enforcement and Criminal Justice, the Kerner Commission
and the recommendations of the state planning agencies
are all in this category.

The second category of police-oriented literature
primarily discusses the chief's responsibility for planning.
It also suggests that the police executive should stimulate
and support the planning process throughout his department.
These texts appear to use the concepts of O. W. Wilson as
a foundation. They are quite vague with regard to the
steps that the chief should take and the attitudes which he
must support in order to develop an effective planning
unit. The following is an example of this type of litera-

ture; it is taken from O. W. Wilson's Police Planning:

 

The Chief of police has the ultimate respon-
sibility for all processes operating in the organ-
ization. . .however,. . .provision must be made
in organizational structure for a planning unit
to be held responsible for plans that are depart-
ment-wide in scope. . . and for supervising the
planning process throughout the department.6

Wilson and other authors, such as V. A. Leonard and John C.
Kenney, further state that the first responsibility of an
effective planning unit is to stimulate the planning pro-
cess in other areas of the department. These authors do

not explain or identify the factors that are necessary in

 

6O. W. Wilson, Police Planning (Charles C. Thomas,
Springfield, Ill., 1952f: p.'L

 

order to accomplish this end. In fact, there is no attempt
to define an effective planning unit. .

The third category of police literature dealing
with planning and research units generally concerns the
planning process (i.e., discovery of the problem, problem
clarification, collection of data, identification and
evaluation of alternatives) with a few superficial recom-
mendations. The recommendations are usually not detailed

or complete enough for the administrator to use them to

develop an effective planning unit. Municipal Police

 

Administration published by the International City Managers

 

Association is an example of this type of police literature.
The recommendations made in this text are as follows:

The success of the planning unit is largely
dependent upon the qualifications of its staff
members. They should have imagination, good
judgement, initiative, persuasiveness, and know-
ledge of the principals of police administration.
They must be personable and able to work well
with people, since part of their task will con-
sist of gaining consensus on the solution of a
specific problem or the acceptance of a point of
View.

Vital to the operation of any planning unit
is its relationship to the chief. Planning
officers must recognize that their main mission
is to assist the chief and the department in
the accomplishment of primary objectives. . .

At the same time, the administration must provide

 

7Municipal Police Administration 5th Edition,
International City Managers Association, Chicago, 1961,
p. 86.

the planning unit with an appropriate environ-
ment. Creativity and initiative should be
encouraged, experimentation should be rewarded.
. . .With a balanced relationship such as the
one discussed above, any department should be
able to execute a sound planning program.8

A more recent booklet in this same category purports to
discuss and analyze the "structure, function and resource
requirements of planning units in a local police depart-
ment. . . The role of the police chief as the basic link
between police planning and police management."9 The
booklet does summarize the many faceted role of the police
chief, but it does not address the specifics of developing
and supporting an effective planning unit.

The National Advisory Commission on Criminal
Justice Standards and Goals made several very specific
recommendations regarding police planning. The publica-
tions of this commission provide the most useful informa-
tion for the development and evaluation of a planning and
research unit. The commission dealt briefly with the
attitudes that the chief must develop.

The police chief executive must provide
the proper direction and an atmosphere that

 

8Municipal Police Administration 7th Edition,
International City Managers Association, Chicago 1971,
p. 216.

9Walter J. Diggles, Police Planning and Analysis
Office, College of William and Mary Metropolitan Criminal
Justice Center, Williamsburg, Virginia, 1973. Authors
Abstract.

encourages operational planning throughout the
agency. 0

The Commission further recommends the following methods
for developing the proper atmosphere:
The first step should be the formulation
and dissemination of a strong and unequivocal

policy statement expressing a commitment to
planning and to positive change.

Also recommended was that the agency's planning policy be
written. This policy should state the goals of the planning
unit, the need for and commitment to continual planning, and
the qualifications of planning personnel. The responsibi-
lities of the planning unit should at a minimum include:

A. Developing plans to improve the performance
of the agency.

B. Reviewing and updating existing plans.

C. Coordinating the planning of other divisions
in the department.

D. Organizing planning information.

E. Assisting the chief executive in setting

agency goals.

 

10National Advisory Commission for Criminal Justice
Standards and Goals, Police, U. S. Government Printing
Office, Washington, D. C., 1973, p. 118.

llIbid.

The commission concluded that one of the best measures of
planning unit effectiveness is successful implementation
of plans.

The police-oriented texts were not very helpful
with regard to the "mechanics" involved in developing an
effective planning unit. An example of the kinds of
"mechanics" which would haVe been more useful to the police
executive searching for a means to improve the effectiveness
of his planning unit was found in an article in a profession-
al journal describing the use of planning task forces for
solving departmental problems and for goal setting.12
Another example of relevant material, which is generally
missing from police-oriented literature, was a discussion
of the relative merits of alternative decision making
methods.13 The primary problem with utilizing journal
articles and other similar publications is that they seldom

contain sufficient detail to be utilized for anything more

than idea generators.

Business Literature

 

Research and planning or research and development

offices have been commonplace in the business world for a

 

12Charles R. Ray and Miles R. Warren, "Kansas City-
Long Range Planning Program", Police Chief, Volume 39, #5,
May 1972, p. 72.

13Thomas G. Nicholson, “Delphi: Revolutionary New
Tool for Use in Criminal Justice Administration", Michigan
State University (term paper), November 1972.

 

10

long time; so long, that business literature no longer
discusses the pro's and con's of establishing a unit, but
rather discusses the "mechanical“ aspects of developing and
supporting a planning office. There seems to be a great
deal of concurrence among business and management "experts"
as to the placement of the planning unit within the organi—
zational structure--in close proximity to the executive.
One of the points which is continually discussed is the
need for the chief executive to take the planning unit
into his confidence:
To a marked degree, the success of the

planning efforts depends on the confidence that

the chief executive acquires in the maturity and

ability of his planning group. He will be ready

to take them into his confidence only if he re-

spects their judgement and objectivity. And

they in turn will be able to put forth tentative

ideas and suggestions only if they feel that
they have gained his confidence.1

Another point which is continually a part of the
business literature is that the chief executive must be
intimately involved in the planning process. Myles L.
Mace very succinctly described this involvement.

Effective corporate planning is not
possible without the personal involvement of

the chief executive. . . Involvement and

leadership mean spending the time and energy
to manage the function to see that something

 

14David Ewing, editor Long Range Planning for
Management; Eli Ginzburg and Ewing Riley, "The Executive
in Charge of Change," (New York: Harper and Row Publishers,
1972), p. 160.

 

 

11

concrete is done. This means personally putting
into action what is too often abrogated by gen-
eral words and phrases. In specific terms, there
are two fundamental functions which absolutely
demand the chief executive's active involvement:

1. Leadership in the tough and laborious
process of realistically evaluating existing
product lines, markets, trends, and competitive
positions in the future.

2. Leadership in the establishment of
corporate objectives.15

As stated previously, the research and planning
unit should be in close proximity to the executive. However,
it should not be placed outside the mainstream of organiza-

16 If the planning

tional management and decision making.
office is placed outside the management mainstream, the
following problems will, in the opinion of most management
experts, arise:

l. The initiation of innovative ideas will be
more difficult, because of the need to get the ideas into
the mainstream of management.

2. Resistance to change on the part of lower and
middle management will be increased.

3. The cost of change - both mental and physical -

will be increased by requiring a change in orientation.17

 

15Myles L. Mace, "The President and Corporate
Planning" Harvard Business Review, January/February 1965.

16Russell L. Achoff, A Concept of Corporate Planning
(New York: Wiley-Interscience, 1970), p. 132.

l7Melvin Anshen, "The Management of Ideas,"
Harvard Business Review, July/August 1969, p. 101.

 

12

The literature also discusses a number of planning
models, however, it seems to favor a company wide, demo-
cratic model. This model features, in its ideal state,
input from all levels of the organization, with each major
subdivision of the organization doing its own planning. The
corporate planning unit, in this model, serves as a resource
center, a catalyst, and a coordinator. No matter what
planning model is chosen, the literature does warn against
the assignment of all planning responsibility to a planning
unit. Mr. Russel Ackoff stated the warning quite clearly
when he wrote, "If a planning unit is given the complete
responsibility for preparing a plan and submitting it for
approval by managers, then, in most cases, planning has
been given the kiss of death. This is because there is a
necessity for obtaining input from all units affected by
the plan. These units would be most likely to have an
intimate knowledge of the effect new plans would have on
their particular operation and would also be more committed
to achieving a successful implementation of those plans in
which they participated."18

Besides advising the executive on the means of
developing a planning unit, the business literature also

discusses the "mechanics" of motivation and possible problem

 

18Anshen, op. cit., p. 129.

13

areas with regard to planning unit effectiveness. The
police-oriented literature discussed the need for planning
unit personnel to be highly motivated and creative. It
failed to discuss the indicators that the chief could use
to determine the degree of motivation or what factors
affected the development of creativity. The business
literature, on the other hand, is very specific regarding
these areas of concern. With regard to the indicators of
a high degree of motivation, Russel H. Ewing states that
highly motivated men:

A. Are interested in their jobs.

B. Feel that their jobs are important.

C. Feel informed about things vital to them.

D. Feel that supervisors are considerate.

E. Develop active and effective teamwork.

F. Value efficiency, creativity and productivity.19

Mr. Ewing states that if these factors are missing, the
executive should attempt to increase the motivational level
by involving more people in the decision-making process,
and also delegating authority. According to Mr. Ewing the
development of creativity is stiffled by:

A. Apathy

B. Lethargy

 

19Russel H. Ewing, Principles of Motivation, National
Institute of Leadership, Beverly Hills, California, 1962,
p. 21.

14

C. Complacency
D. Inertia

E. Tyranny20

If these factors are present either in the planning staff
or in management, the concerned executive should take corr-

ective action.

Summary

The police—oriented literature was instrumental in
defining planning unit responsibilities, establishing the
need for a research and planning unit in the police organi-
zational structure and providing a partial method of
evaluating planning units.- The business literature defined:

A. The relationship of the planning unit to the
executive/chief.

B. The means by which the executive/chief supports
the planning unit.

C. The placement of the planning unit in the organ-
izational structure.

D. A model of planning unit functioning.

E. Indicators of motivation and creativity.

These definitions will be utilized in the examination of the
five police research and planning units which are the basis

for this paper.

 

201bid., p. 25.

Chapter 3

PROJECT DESIGN

Purpose

This study will investigate the state of research
and planning efforts in five medium-sized police depart-
ments. It will focus upon:

a. the relative effectiveness of the research

and planning units, and

b. the comparison between recommendations made

in the relevant police administration and

business oriented literature.
The end result will be the development of a set of guide-
lines to aid the police executive in improving the effecti-
veness of his department's research and planning capabili-
ties.

There are two key terms that require definition.
The first is "research and planning unit". A research and
planning unit is a portion of an agency dedicated to the

"marshalling of facts relevant to the solution of parti-

 

cular problems, evaluation of alternative solutions, and

 

the detailing, in advance, of action to be taken toward

21

implementing desired changes", and the analysis of both

 

21LeGrande and Galvin, op. cit., p. 2.

15

16

old and new policies, procedures or equipment, to discover
possible application for the solution of contemporary
police problems. The second term is effectiveness. It is
defined as the ability to produce progress toward the

desired goal of planned change.

Sample Selection

 

The five agencies were selected from a list of
cities with populations ranging from 100,000 to 250,000
people and with police departments ranging in size from
250 to 500 sworn personnel. The list was developed from
a listing published by the International City Managers

Association.22

Those agencies on the list (as determined
by population and department size) that had research and
planning units were eligible for selection. The final
selection was based upon the area of the nation and the
distance from the researcher's base. An attempt was made

to include a department from each major region of the

nation.

Data Collection

 

The data was collected by using three interview

schedules (Appendix A), one for the police chief, one for

 

22Municipal Yearbook, 1974, International City
Managers Association, Chicago, Ill., 1974.

 

17

research and planning personnel, and one for other depart-
mental personnel--which included all major divisional
commanders, representative shift and bureau commanders,
detectives and patrol officers. The interview schedules
were pretested in the Ann Arbor, Michigan Police Department.
This department did not meet either the population or the
department size parameters, but it did have a Research and
Planning Unit. The purpose of the pretest was to determine
if any revision of the interview schedule was necessary.
The accuracy of the data collection instrument was measured
in a gross sense by conducting several interviews within
each agency; in this way, any major inconsistencies were
likely to appear. Interviews with agency personnel were
compared to discover common elements. The result is a
descriptive report of the methods, procedures and attitudes
found in five medium-sized police departments with regard

to the operation of the Research and Planning Unit.

Practical Application

 

Most of the literature regarding police planning
has been theoretical in nature; there has been very little
written about the actual operation of police planning
units. Consequently, it is very difficult for the chief
to know how to develop an effective planning unit. It
is hoped that this project will provide police executives

with a realistic concept of how to either improve their

existing planning capability or how to develop a planning
unit by providing them with methods and procedures which

have been useful in other agencies.

18

Chapter 4

INTERVIEW RESULTS

Introduction

 

This chapter will include a brief discussion of the
demography of each of the sample cities. Included in this
discussion, is a description of the political climate in
each of these cities as it pertains to the operation of
the police department.

This chapter will also compare the attitudes and
opinions regarding the Research and Planning Unit of the
various command, staff, and operational personnel from
the sample departments toward their Research and Planning
Units.

The police chiefs in each city were assured that
the name of the city would not be used. This was done to
quiet any fear that this research would cause any unpleas-
ant repercussions, and thus reduce the risk of false or

misleading information.

Selected Demographic Characteristics

 

City A. City A is located in the north-central
region of the United States. It has a population of

approximately 200,000 people and is a major industrial,

19

20

educational and business center for its particular state.
It has a manager/council form of government.

The police department has approximately 350 sworn
officers. The Chief of Police reports directly to the City
Manager, as do other department heads, and serves as chief
at the discretion of the City Manager. The Chief does,
however, hold a permanent civil service rank of Captain.

Both the news media and the city council seem quite
concerned about the crime problem, and appear to exert
considerable pressure upon the police department to correct
the problem. In fact, when the researcher was in City A,
there was a considerable furor over the way in which City
A compared to cities of similar size with regard to Uniform
Crime Report returns. City A had suffered an increase in

reported crime in comparison with these other cities.

21

 

mGOADMOAadEEOO

 

 

T

 

 

«menu .umma
mm0H>uom

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Dunno Hmcofluwuacmmuo .d muflo
smouzm.
_woa>__mawcm>sh_ m>auowumo

 

 

_

 

 

 

 

“menu .ummm
macauwmwumm>cH

 

 

 

maficgwam
w soummmmm

 

mpamuua

 

 

 

 

 

_ “weav—

 

HmcumucH

 

 

 

mmaeo .umma
Houumm

 

 

 

22

City B. City B is located in the south-central
region of the country. It is a major industrial and trans-
portation center for the region. It has a population of
168,000. The city has a strong mayor form of government.

The police department has approximately 320 sworn
officers. All officers above the rank of Captain are
appointed and serve at the discretion of the mayor. The
Chief had been recently appointed, as had the rest of the
command staff. With the exception of the chief, the
command staff is quite young, with the average age in the
early 40's. All of the command staff have worked their
way up through the ranks, with an average time-in-service

of 17 years and time—in-grade of one year.

23

 

mmwccmHm
w noumomwm

 

unmnu HmcowumNflcmmuo

 

 

oocmmflaaoucH

 

 

 

 

 

 

Home:
mm0H>Hmw

 

 

 

fl

_

.m pamfiuummwo

 

 

 

 

smwusm
o>fluomuwo

 

 

i mHHcmEBb—

 

g

 

Hoflmz
mcoflummflumm>cH

 

 

 

 

 

 

moflsu wusmmo

 

 

H
“ohms
Houumm

a

 

 

 

 

24

City C. City C is located in the southeastern region
of the United States. It has a population of approximately
195,000 people, and is a major industrial and educational
center for its particular state. The industry is widely
diversified, but is largely oriented toward the manufacture
of heavy machinery. A major state university is located in
City C.

This city has a strong mayor form of government.

The Chief of Police reports to the Director of Public
Safety, who in turn is responsible to the City Commission;
the Chief serves at the discretion of the Director of Public
Safety. The Chief and all of the Division Commanders are

in their late 40's to early 50's, and they all have worked
their way up through the ranks. The Director of Public
Safety, on the other hand, spent several years in another
law-enforcement agency before being appointed to his present
position. The Director of Public Safety does not appear to
take an active role in the day to day functioning of the
police department, but is more involved with the development

of public safety (police and fire) objectives.

25

unmso HmeowumNHcmmuo .U ucofiuummmo

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

ouoommcH Hmummo “ohm: :Hmummu GHMDQMU
mcwcwmua monoomm mcoflummwumw>cH oemmmua Houumm
. maficcmHm
_w soummmmm mmflzu

 

 

26

City D. City D is located in New England. It is
a major business and educational center for its region. The
city is quite small in land area, but it has a resident
population of 150,000 people and a commuter population of
approximately 300,000 persons. A major portion of the
city's land area is devoted to commercial purposes. A very
high proportion of its residents are in the lower socio-
economic strata. City D utilizes the council/manager form
of government.

The police department has approximately 450 sworn
officers. It has a highly developed, although quite
splintered, administrative staff structure, with several
sections having overlapping responsibilities. The Chief of
Police is directly responsible to the City Manager. The
chief has been recently appointed; having been hired from
outside the department. He has had considerable adminis-
trative experience, as a result of having risen to a
position of considerable importance in one of the nation's
largest police departments. The department is in a state
of flux, as the influence of a new chief begins to be

felt.

27

 

 

HOmH>U<
moa>umm
muflcsEEoo

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

unmno sowuwuwcmmuo .o ucmfiunmmma
coflmfl>flo COHmH>HQ
mmoa>uom eoflucm>mum mmEHuO moofl>umm
uuommsm wEHHO uoflmz oaoflm
F H H L
owsvm
mmocmmflaamchw mEHHU
Hmpflmmo
mcoflumummo
mo mmflzu
HOmH>U¢
Hmmmq
coamfl>fio conH>Ho
mcflummosm ucmEmoam>mo mwofl>uwm conH>Ho HOmH>U4
w mcflccmHm Hmmumo HmcofluoommcH cofluwuuchHEUd ucmfimmmcmz

 

 

 

 

m>Husomxm

HOOHMMO

 

 

 

 

_mmߣ0 _

 

28

City E. This city is located in the southwestern
region of the United States. It has a population of
approximately 180,000 people and is located in a metropol-
itan area of 500,000 people. City E is a major industrial,
educational and transportation center for its region. It
has a commission form of government.

The police department has approximately 340 sworn
personnel. The Chief reports to the Public Safety Commis-
sioner, an elected official, and serves at his discretion.
The Police Chief does retain a permanent civil service
rank, usually Captain, if he has risen through the ranks.
The present chief, however, did not come from within the
department, and for this reason, has no civil service
rating. The Chief is appointed by the Public Safety
Commissioner, and he (the Chief) appoints three assistant
chiefs from the Captains ranks. The assistant chiefs also
hold their permanent civil service rank. An unusual aspect
of this department, when compared with other departments
in this study, is that this was the first year that the
department was given a budget. In the past, each request

for funds was acted upon individually by the city commission.

29

 

mcflccmam w

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

uumsu HMGOHumNflcmmHo

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

wmflzo .umm¢
coflummflumm>cH
new .cflEU<

 

 

 

r

 

macaumummo m>Huomqu Fnusowfi
soummmmm Hmwommm
DNA
WCOHDMOHGSEEOO

 

 

 

 

 

 

“menu .umm<
mmofi>umm

HMOHszoma

 

 

.m muao

moflzo .ummd
maceumummo

UHOHm

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

30

Organization, Staffing and
Responsibilities of the
Planning Units.

 

 

 

There was a great deal of difference among the sam-
ple departments with regard to the organization, staffing
and responsibilities of research and planning units. The
units ranged in size from two civilians with no police
experience to a staff of ten, most of whom had police
experience. The units' responsibilities varied between
coordinating the planning effort for the entire department
to minimal planning responsibility. City A is the only
one of the sample cities that had a written definition of
its responsibilities; this definition is as follows:

The purpose and function of this section

is to perform an administrative staff function

for the Chief of Police in the development and

implementation of short and long range planning

and procedure application for the department.

The Research and Development Section shall

further analyze and assimilate police statistics

and current crime and traffic data. The Research

and Development Section shall also provide staff
assistance where more than one division is

involved, or where assistance is requested by
an Assistant Chief on behalf of a division.

City D had written statements of the supervisor's responsi-
bilities, but no overall statement of the unit's responsi-
bilities. In City C, the Planning Unit was partially
funded by a federal grant, and the grant provided minimal
guidelines for the functioning of the unit. Cities B and

E had no formal statement of the units' duties. In these

two cities, it appeared that this created a sense of

31

aimlessness, with neither the planning unit nor the
administration being really sure of the unit's responsi-
bilities; this led to the assignment of non-planning
related duties. For instance, in one city, the police
planning unit supervised the move from the old headquarters
to the new headquarters; it was also responsible for the
assignment of office and building keys. In the other city,
the planning unit was assigned responsibility for setting
up a police booth at the state fair and also arranging
communications for officers assigned to the fair.

In three of the sample cities, (A, C & D) the
Research and Planning units were directly responsible to
the Chief of Police. The Research and Planning Units in
cities B and E were responsible to the Commander of the
Services Division; as a result of this arrangement, the
planning unit was seldom allowed to participate in admin-
istrative staff conferences. This, in turn, reduced their
knowledge of departmental problems.

Research and Planninngnterview
Results

 

In all five cities, interviews with Research and
Planning personnel produced three common denominators.
Virtually all of the respondents felt that the planning
units' greatest assets were personnel oriented. This

included the personalities and capabilities of planning

32

unit Personnel and also the personal relationships between
the planning unit and the other organizational units. It
was generally felt that the relationship between the
planning unit and the organizational units had a great
influence upon the effectiveness of the planning unit.
The most critical relationship was the one between the
Chief and the planning unit. If it was strong and the unit
felt that the Chief would support them in their endeavors,
then the unit felt more effective. An example of this kind
of relationship was in City A, where, when the Chief wanted
to divide the city into two radio frequencies, the Planning
Unit opposed the plan basing their opposition on the then
existing patrol sector configuration and the number of
times a patrol unit was dispatched outside of his sector
boundaries. After considering their arguements, the Chief
tabled the frequency plan until Research and Planning
could develop new patrol districts.

The personalities of the Research and Planning
personnel were also found to be important. They had to
be "easy to get along with," friendly, and honest in order
to perform effectively; they also had to be adept at problem
solving. One planning officer described problem solving as
"finding the back door"; he said that he very seldom
approached a problem directly, but always looked for "the

back door."

33

The second common denominator was in regard to the
units' greatest deficits. This also was personnel oriented;
everyone felt that their unit could easily use one or two
more men. They gave the following reasons:

City A, with an authorized staff of 7 but func-
tioning with 5 because of budgetary limitations, felt that
most of its planning was of an operational nature. They
would use additional men to implement long range planning.

City B, with a staff of 3, was not able to keep
pace with requests for information or statistics from the
various division commanders.

City C, with 2 civilians, authors and administers
all of the department's grant applications. The director
would like someone with an auditing background to assist
in grant administration.

City D, with a staff of 10, needs someone with a
knowledge of computer programming to aid in the develop-
ment of their management information system.

City E, with a staff of 2, would use an additional
person to solicit comments and opinions from operational
staff and also to aid in the implementation of projects.

The third common denominator was money; virtually
all of the departments studied were on a semi-austerity, if
not austerity budget. Without applying for federal funds,

there was no money to implement innovative projects. The

34

lack of money also affected the size of the department, and
most of the departments were at minimum staffing levels.

All three of these common denominators are supported
by the recommendations made in the literature. With regard
to personnel and personal relationships as assets to the
planning process, the literature indicates that these are
very important assets. It also recommends that a planning
unit be adequately staffed in order to perform effectively.
Money is always important, especially with regard to
implementing change.

While the aforementioned items were common to all
of the departments studied, a number of differences were
noted. One of these differences was the degree of research
and planning unit involvement in the development and
administration of the department's budget. In City A, the
Planning, Programming and Budgeting system is used; the
Research and Planning Unit administers the department's
budget and also assists other divisions and units in the
preparation of their budget proposals. In contrast, City
C's Planning Unit is not at all involved in the budgeting
process. The other three cities fall on a continuum
between these two extremes. City A's involvement with the
budgetary process enabled them to influence the flow of
funds to those areas of the department's operation which
had the greatest need. It also provided the opportunity

to assess the functions of the various units within the

35

department. The Research and Planning staff felt that

this was one of the keys to their success. The planning
staff in City C felt somewhat frustrated because the only
way in which they could effect the operation of the depart-
ment was through the obtaining of federal funds. From the
cities studied it appeared that the greater the involvement
with the development and administration of the budget, the
greater effect the planning unit had on the implementation
of change in the department.

Another area of divergence among the sample depart-
ments is the degree of involvement in the goal setting
process. Of the sample cities, City E appeared to be the
most heavily involved in the development of departmental
goals. They have developed a five year plan, which is
updated annually. This plan was developed from interviews
with both command and operational personnel, and it encom-
passes virtually the entire department. City A, on the
other hand, has not had the same degree of involvement.
They have been more concerned with operational planning
and implementation of recommendations made by the I.A.C.P.
as a result of a study conducted in 1969. City C's planning
unit is only involved in goal setting to the extent of
attempting to find funding for some of the desired depart-
mental improvements. The planning staff of both Cities A
and C felt that if they became more involved with the goal

setting process and longnrange planning, they would be more

36

effective. Cities B and D do not appear to be at all
involved in this process. It should be remembered that the
full impact of the new Chief in City D has not yet been
felt.

A third area of difference is the effect that
Research and Planning has upon departmental policy. The
effect ranges from City A, where the Planning Unit authors
most policy statements for virtually all areas of the
department's operation, to City B, where the Planning Unit
has only a marginal effect upon departmental policy, because
it only becomes involved at the request of the Deputy Chief.
City C affects departmental policy by obtaining federal
funds for special operations, equipment, training, etc.

In City D the planning unit edits, "polishes," and coordi-
nates policy generated within each of the department's
major divisions. City E, like City B, only rarely became
involved with policy making, and when it did, it was only
to make recommendations and suggestions. If changes in
departmental policy are made as a result of an analysis

of departmental problems and also in response to the stated
goals of the department, then progressive change is more

likely.

Chief of Police Interview Results

 

An attempt was made to interview the Chief of

Police in each sample city. This was not possible in two

37

of the cities, because of illness in one city, and the
development of an administrative crisis in the other. In
these two cases, the Assistant or Deputy Chief was inter-
viewed instead of the Chief.

'With one exception, none of the chiefs received
any sort of explicit guidelines from their city governments
regarding the administration of the police department.
City A was the exception. Its Chief had been given two
directives; the first was that the city commission wanted
a "clean" department with no scandals, the other directive
was to implement as many of the I.A.C.P.‘s recommendations
as possible. The Chief in City D was not given such pre-
cise directives, but had been led to believe that, since
he had been hired from outside the department, he was to
"revitalize" the operation of the police department. The
chiefs and planning staffs jobs were made more difficult
by a lack of direction from city hall. Without it, the
chief and planning staff can never be certain of their
city government's long-range desires.

There was a great deal of consensus among the chiefs
regarding the criteria for selecting planning personnel.
The three major criteria were:

A. Education

B. Experience

C. Personality

38

Three of the chiefs felt that a college education was
desireable for planning staff. Their reasoning ranged from
the feeling that college provides exposure to innovative
ideas to the belief that college provides a person with
certain basic research skills such as “knowing where to
look" for possible answers. The experience that was
mentioned was primarily police experience, but it was not
limited to police experience. Two of the cities had
civilian planning directors, and their experience was in
the realm of administrative or systems analysis. In fact,
the Chief in City D stated that he would prefer a mixture
of sworn and civilian talent in his planning staff. The
sworn staff provide the "operational knowledge," while the
civilian personnel contribute their knowledge of adminis-
trative and systems analysis. This is exactly the case in
City A. The third factor was personality. The chiefs felt
that the planning staff must be tactful and have the ability
to work with and/or around the various personalities in the
command and supervisory staff in order to solicit ideas
and assistance in the implementation of various projects
or policy changes.

Three of the chiefs (Cities A, C and E) felt that
their planning units were very effective and were quite
happy with the operation of their units. The chiefs pri-

marily used the amount of positive change which had been

39

brought about by the planning units' activities as the
measurement of effectiveness. The methods utilized by the
various planning units varied from changes in administrative
and operational policies (City A), to extensive use of
federal grant money (City C), to basic problem solving (City
E). In City A, the chief would like to improve the units
long range planning capability, and also their diagnostic
ability. The former is not possible without the assignment
of additional personnel, the latter requires additional
training which the Chief is trying to arrange. In City E,
the only difficulty that the Chief has with the planning
unit is that it lacks a "self-starting" capability. In
other words, the unit waits for assignments, it does not
actively seek new concepts to explore or engage in any
independent research studies. In City B, the Deputy Chief
(the chief was ill) stated that the Research and Planning
Section had not been very effective. He reasoned that this
was the result of several factors, including:

A. Lack of definition of the Planning Unit's
responsibilities, which created difficulties for both
planning personnel and department administrators in under-
standing the functions of the unit.

B. Lack of use by the department administration,
which was caused in part by a lack of understanding of the

planning function and also, in part, by a desire on the

40

part of the administrators to entirely control their own
divisions without accepting ideas or assistance from staff
units such as planning.

C. Lack of either training or research background
on the part of the planning staff.

He did state that he would be utilizing the planning unit's
capabilities with greater frequency, and that he was trying
to arrange for some specialized training for the planning
unit staff. The chief in City D had not been on the job
long enough to evaluate the effectiveness of the planning
unit.

One area in which the various chiefs differed
considerably was goal setting. In City A, the major goals
were set by the I.A.C.P. study of 1969. The chief and his
command staff, including the Planning Unit, had developed
a couple of goals based upon their analysis of the city's
law enforcement problems. In City B, the chief and deputy
chief set the goals of the department after reviewing
various L.E.A.A. publications and after drawing upon their
own knowledge of the city's problems. In City C, the chief
developed the department's goals on his own. The chief in
City D believes in unit goal setting, with a final review
by the planning staff. The chief, the assistant chiefs,
the Planning Director and the Director of Public Safety in

City E developed a five year plan based upon their analysis

41

of the city's law enforcement needs. This plan is reviewed
and updated annually. In the researcher's opinion, a com-
bination of cities A, D and E's approaches to goal setting
would be the optimum. City A relies on an impartial party
for recommendations regarding the operation of the department.
City D requires each unit in the department to do some
planning on their own and to justify their existence. City

E adds the input from an elected city official (the Public
Safety Commissioner) and thereby receives an insight into

the expectations of city government.

Another area of difference, was the amount of
communication between the chief and the planning staff.
This ranged from daily conferences in City A, to only
occasional contacts in City B. The other cities varied
between these extremes. The chief in City A thought that
it was important for the planning staff to have intimate

knowledge of the administrative concerns of the department.

Command Officers' Interview Results

 

Most of the division and bureau commanders in each
of the sample departments were interviewed by the researcher.
The interviews were structured to obtain the respondents'
opinions primarily regarding:

A. The value of a Research and Planning Unit.

B. The Research and Planning Unit's affect upon

the internal operation of the police department.

42

C. The perceived effectiveness of the Planning
Unit.
D. Possible means of improving the Research and

Planning Unit's performance.

The vast majority of the command officers were of
the opinion that a Research and Planning Unit was a necessary
and valuable factor in the operation of the police depart-
ment. These officers did present a variety of reasons for
holding this opinion. In City A, for example, the Research
and Planning Unit is primarily considered to be an adminis-
trative resource center. They have aided the Patrol
Division primarily by conducting a beat configuration study,
and are actively involved in crime and traffic analysis.
These activities aid the patrol division commanders in
planning their response to the crime and traffic problems
of the city. The Services Division has received Research
and Planning assistance in the improvement of the depart-
ment's Communications Center and in the implementation of
computer assisted record keeping. 'These projects and the
development of a regional training academy have been
accomplished with the aid of federal grants. The Research
and Planning Unit prepares and submits all grant applica-
tions, thereby relieving command personnel of becoming
involved with grantsmanship. Grantsmanship is defined as
the development and negotiation of federal grant applica-

tions.

43

The Research and Planning Unit in City B has had
less effect upon the operation of the department than the
unit in City A. The unit has assisted the Patrol Division
by conducting a manpower allocation study, which was pri-
marily concerned with the division of manpower among the
various shifts. They also investigated for the Patrol
Division, the use of prisoner security screens for patrol
vehicles. The Planning unit was again active in setting
uniform specifications. The Services and Investigative
Divisions view the Planning Unit as a source of information
on innovative projects being tried in other departments
across the nation. Both of the division commanders were of
the opinion that Research and Planning Unit had not been
very effective in their information gathering in recent
years. The Investigative Division commander, especially,
felt that the Research and Planning Unit should have on
hand information on virtually every aspect of innovative
law enforcement just waiting for this particular commander
to ask for it.

In City C, all of the command officers viewed the
Research and Planning Unit solely as a funding source.
Virtually all the commanders discussed only the ways in
which planning had obtained federal funds for this project
or that project. It should be noted that at the time of
this research, City C had more than twenty-five L.E.A.A.

sponsored projects in operation.

44

The commanders in City D felt that the primary
value of the Research and Planning unit was the coordination
of the planning activity of the individual units within the
department, and also the development of emergency contin-
gency plans. The opinion of most of the command officers
was expressed by the Records Bureau commander. He said that
the purpose of the Planning Unit was: to polish ideas
generated within the individual department unit, to draft
general orders for the department's administration, and to
serve as a coordinating unit for plans made in other areas
of the department.

There was a considerable difference of opinion
between the bureau commanders and division commanders in
City E. The bureau COmmanders generally felt that the
Research and Planning Unit was most useful for coordination
of department operations and the ability to study each
unit's activities objectively. The division commanders
were more interested in the Research and Planning Unit's
ability to evaluate programs, complete internal audits of
departmental procedures, and its ability to provide more
complete information to aid in administrative decision
making.

In the opinion of the command officers, the Research
and Planning Unit had a variable effect upon the internal
operation of the police department. In cities A and C, the
Planning Unit had, for differing reasons, a major impact

upon the operation of the police department. In City A,

45

the impact was a result of the trust placed in the Planning
Unit by the Chief and other top department administrators.
The Planning Unit was an integral part of the administrative
staff, and having an equal voice in the administrative
decision making process, its services were sought on a daily
basis. However, in City C, the only way in which the
Planning Unit affected the operation of the department was
by obtaining federal funds for special projects--over
twenty~five active grants. As stated previously, this unit
was viewed only as a source for funding; it was only rarely
involved in the administrative decision making process.
There were only marginal similarities among the other

three departments with regard to their impact on the
department. In City B, the planning unit has had little
impact on the operation of the department in recent years,
with two of three division commanders (Services and Investi-
gations) having little use for the unit. This has not
always been the case. The unit has been responsible for
obtaining (with federal funds) a helicopter, a computer
system and has improved in-service training. In City D,

the Research and Planning Unit has been primarily active

in the area of developing department-wide policy, and
coordinating the planning activities of the various units.
The Planning Unit has more involvement with the division
commanders than with the bureau or unit commanders. The

Research and Planning Unit in City E has little direct

46

involvement with the bureau commanders. They are, however,
heavily involved with the division commanders. This impact
is felt, for the most part, by providing the administration
with both the pros and cons of many operational and procedural
problems. The division commanders said that the Planning
Unit's recommendations provided the basis for many adminis-
trative decisions.

There was a marked disagreement over the effective-
ness of the Planning Unit. The differences were not so
much between the individual police departments, but between
the command levels within the departments. The division
commanders, with few exceptions, felt that the Planning
Unit was as effective as could be expected with the existing
manpower shortage. Their opinions were based upon the
assistance that they received from the Planning Unit. The
bureau commanders were not nearly as uniform in their
opinions. Many of the bureau commanders felt that the
Research and Planning Unit should be more concerned with
long-range planning; they should be "less crisis oriented

23 Others felt that the Planning

and do less 'firefighting'".
Unit personnel were not familiar enough with the day to day
operation of their bureaus to provide any kind of useful

assistance.

 

23Command Officer, City D.

47

Several suggestions were offered by the command
officers for improving the operation of the Research and
Planning Unit. The most common suggestion was to increase
the size of the Planning Unit. As previously stated, the
reasoning for requesting manpower increases for the Planning
Unit were many and varied. It was also suggested that
planning personnel become more thoroughly acquainted with
a particular unit's difficulties through first hand obser-
vation, i.e., temporary assignment of Planning personnel
to these units, or temporary assignment of operational
personnel to the Planning Unit. Another frequent suggestion
was to improve the level of planning expertise within the
individual Planning Units, either through increased training
for unit personnel, or through the hiring of personnel
specifically trained in systems analysis or other related
fields. Many of the command officers felt that formal
educational development is more important for Planning

personnel than police experience.

Operational Interviews

Several operational personnel - patrol officers
and detectives - were interviewed in each of the departments
visited by the researcher. The purpose of these interviews
was the same as that stated for the command officers. The
majority of those interviewed had little knowledge of the

functioning of the Research and Planning Unit. A second

48

point of concurrence is that most operational personnel had
little contact with the Planning Unit. There were a few
suggestions made to improve the effectiveness of the
Planning Unit. Operational personnel in City A suggested
that Planning Unit personnel should occasionally be assigned
to the Operational divisions in order to gain a better
understanding of that division's problems. In City C, the
suggestion was made to expand the function of the Planning
Unit beyond the development of grant applications. They
also felt that a larger number of departmental personnel

should be involved in the planning process.

Interview Summary

 

The following set of tables compares the sample
cities with the motivational and supportive relationship

discussed in the literature.

MOTIVATION

 

City A
City B
City C
City D
City E

a. Men interested in their jobs yes yes yes yes yes

b. Men feel that they and their
job is important yes yes yes yes yes

0. Feel informed about things
vital to them yes no yes no no

d. Feels supervisors are
considerate yes no yes

’0

no

MOTIVATION (cont.)

 

Develop active and effec-
tive teamwork

Are efficient, creative
and productive

SUPPORTIVE RELATIONSHIPS

 

Does the chief seek recomm—
endations from the Planning
Unit on the following items.

NH

mQO'NUer-w
0

DO

Forms control/development
Personnel matters-creation
or deletion of ranks
Organizational alignment
Equipment acquisition
Budget

Manpower Allocation
Operational policies
Strategic policy

other top department ad-

ministrators request advice/
recommendations on the
following areas.

Forms control/development
Personnel matters-creation
or deletion of ranks
Organizational alignment
Equipment acquisition
Budget

Manpower allocation
Operational policy
Departmental policy

Does the department adminis-
station generally accept

the planning unit's recommen-
dation.

City A

yes

yes

yes

yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes

yes

no
no

yes
yes
yes
yes
yes

yes

City B

no

no

no
no

no

yes
yes
yes
yes

no

no
no
no
no
yes
no
no

yes

City C

yes

yes

no

no
no
yes
yes
no
yes
yes

no

no
yes
yes
no
no
no
yes

yes

City D

'0

yes

yes

no
no
no
yes
no
yes
yes

no

no
no
no
no
no
no
yes

no

City E

yes

yes

no

no

no

yes
yes
yes
yes
yes

no

no
no
no
no
no
no
no

yes

SUPPORTIVE RELATIONSHIPS (cont.)

Does the chief hold staff
meetings on a regular basis

Is Research and Planning
represented at staff
meetings

1. All of them

. Most of them

. Some of them

. Not usually

boom

Is Research and Planning
free to start projects on
its own.

Does the chief delegate
his planning responsi-
bility

Are any of these attitudes
apparent in planning per-
sonnel.

l. Apathy

2. Lethargy

3. Inertia

4. Tyranny

5. Complacency

Are any of these attitudes
apparent in administrative
personnel

1. Apathy

2. Lethargy
3. Inertia
4. Tyranny
5. Complacency

Does Research and Planning
have a budget

Is Research and Planning a
necessary function of

police

1. Patrol command

2. Investigative command

3. Services command

4. Patrol operations

5. Investigative operations

City A

yes

yes

yes

yes

no
no
no
no
no

no
no
no
no
no

yes

yes
yes
yes
yes
yes

City B

yes

yes

no

no

no
no
yes
yes
no

no
no
yes
yes
no

no

yes
yes
yes
no
no

City C

yes

yes

yes

’0

no
no
no
no
yes

yes
yes
no
no
yes

yes

yes
yes
yes
yes
yes

City D

yes

yes

yes

yes

yes
no
no
no
no

no
no
no
no
no

yes

yes
yes
yes
yes
yes

50

City E

yes

yes

yes

'0

no
no
yes
yes
yes

yes
yes
yes
yes
yes

no

yes
yes
yes
maybe
maybe

SUPPORTIVE RELATIONSHIPS (cont.)

Suggestions for improvement

2.

More personnel

Develop long range
capability

Better qualified personnel
Occasional operational
experience (refresher)
More independent
Training for planning
Job description and
procedures

Larger budget

More command involve-
ment

How are ideas sent to
Research and Planning

1.
2.
3.

Through chain of command
Personal discussion
Memo

Did you find it hard to
get used to working with
Research and Planning

City A

yes

yes
yes

yes
yes
yes

yes
yes
yes

no

City B

yes

yes
yes
yes

yes

yes
no
no

yes

City C

yes

yes
yes

yes
yes

yes
yes
yes

no

City 0

yes

yes
yes

yes
yes

yes

yes

no

51

City E

yes

yes

yes

yes

yes

yes

yes
yes

yes

Chapter 5
SUMMARY AND CONCLUS IONS

As stated in the explanation of the research
design, one objective of this study was to describe the
"state of the art" of research and planning units in
medium-sized police departments. A second objective was
to compare the reality of police planning with the recom-
mendations made in the relevant literature. The third
objective was to develop a set of model guidelines designed
to improve the effectiveness of research and planning
units.

With regard to the "state of the art," the develop-
ment of research and planning units in medium-sized police
departments is a recent phenomenon. Only one of the five
sample agencies (City D) had a planning unit that was more
than five years old. There were a surprising number of
law enforcement agencies that met the researcher's parameters
for inclusion in this study, except that they had not
implemented a research and planning unit. This situation
could be the result of several factors, among them a lack
of knowledge on the part of the respective chiefs of the

value of such a unit, or possibly because of budgetary

52

53

limitations. This, however, is beyond the scope of this
study and could be the object of further research. A

second observation is that there are very few areas of
similarity among the sample agencies with regard to the
operation of the research and planning units. The following
are examples of the few similarities that do exist. The
research and planning unit is generally considered part of
the administrative staff and is directly responsible to

the chief. Another similarity among the sample planning
units is that the staff is generally quite young in relation
to the chief and command level personnel. Planning unit
staff typically either hold or are close to obtaining a
baccalaureate degree. In contrast, the majority of the
chiefs and command officers had little, if any, college
level education. This presents a major hurdle for many
planning units, because they must first educate their depart-
ment's administration in the principles of modern adminis-
tration. A final observation regarding the "state of the
art" is that there is very little long-range planning done
inthe sample cities. The exception to this is City E with
its five year plan, which encompasses the majority of the
department's operations. Most of the planning units were
kept very busy with administrative "fire-fighting." That is,
they are continually developing some sort of short-range

response to departmental problems. Examples of this "fire-

54

fighting" are crime analysis, changes of shift hours, and
preparation of administrative reports. Planning personnel
should be instrumental in the development of these on-
going activities, but should not be expected to perform
them on a continuing basis.

With the exception of City A, there was little
comparison between the activities of the planning units
in the sample cities and the recommendations made in the
literature.

The following chart lists recommendations made in
the literature and indicates the degree of compliance for

each sample city.

RECOMMENDAT ION
Cities
A 1.3. E 2 E

a. Has the department devel-

oped a planning policy

statement? yes no no yes no
b. Have the planning unit

responsibilities been

defined? yes no no yes yes/

no

G. Does the department employ

a democratic model for

planning? yes no no no no
d. Does the planning unit

serve as a resource center

for unit planning? yes no no yes yes

e. Has the chief taken the
planning unit into his
confidence? yes no yes/ no yes/
no no

55

RECOMMENDATIONS (cont.)

Cities
A 13. E 2 .F:
f. Does the chief encourage
creativity? yes no no yes yes
g. Has the chief taken the lead
in conducting a realistic
evaluation of existing
operations? yes no no yes yes
h. Has the agency established
a set of objectives? yes/ no yes yes yes
no
i. Has operational planning
been encouraged throughout
the department? no no no yes yes

In the opinion of this researcher, the departments
which have been most successful in implementing planned
changes are also the ones that come closest to meeting the
recommendations made in the literature. It is not known
how these departments began the development of their planning
units, or whether they sought the advice of experts in the
development of their organizational planning. It does,
however, suggest that the recommendations made in the
relevant professional literature are applicable to medium-
sized police departments.

As it was previously defined, an effective research
and planning unit is one which produces progress toward

the desired goal of planned change, or in short, a "change

56

24 Of the five planning units examined in this

agent."
report, four were effective to a certain extent. They are,
in the opinion of the researcher, ranked as follows:

City A. City A is the most effective. It has earned
the confidence of the chief and division commanders, and
is instrumental in the development and administration of
the department's budget. The planning unit has also been
active in virtually all areas of the department from man-
power allocation and beat design, to equipment evaluations
and the development of a management information system-

The unit has not been very successful in developing planning
capabilities in other units in the department, nor has it
been successful in the development of a long-range planning
capability. Both the chief and the director of research

and planning recognize these problems, and hope to improve
in these areas if their budget will allow.

City D. City D and the second most effective
planning unit. While the impaCt of the new chief has not
been felt in many areas of thedepartment, it is known
that he favors the unit planning concept and considers the
research and planning unit the coordinator of the individual

unit planning activities. This research and planning unit

 

24Bennis, Warren G., Benne, Kenneth D., and Chin,
Robert, The Planning of Change, New York: Holt, Rinehart
and Winston, Inc., 1969, p. 69.

 

57

has also been quite active in both operational and strategic
planning. It did not appear to the researcher that the
planning unit had had as great an impact upon its depart-
ment as the planning unit in City A had had on its depart-
ment. This may have been caused by the recent arrival of

a new chief.

City C. City C is ranked third because of its
success in obtaining federal funding for special projects,
however, the planning unit has little influence upon the
operation of the department beyond the conditions made on
the grant money. The planning unit has not been very
successful in educating the department's administration
in the function of a research and planning unit.

City E. City E is rated fourth. This unit has
only been in existence for two years. It has not had the
opportunity to "prove itself" to many of the department's
bureau commanders. It has, however, developed both a five
year plan and completely revised and updated the depart-
ment's operations manual. If this unit can win the con-
fidence and support of the bureau commanders, it has the
potential for being very effective.

City B. City B was, in the opinion of the researcher,
a planning unit in name only. Its placement in the organi-
zational structure effectively isolated the unit from both

the operational and administrative mainstreams.

58

With the relevant literature and the results of
this study as a base, the following recommendations are made
for the development of an effective police research and
planning unit. They describe the functions and responsi-
bilities of those most directly related to the effective
functioning of such a unit; the chief, research and

planning staff, and command personnel.

The Chief

 

l. The chief must be committed to planning. This
means that he must be willing to take the time and effort
necessary to think through and explore possible alternatives
to responses to departmental problems. He demonstrates his
commitment in several ways, which include the development
and dissemination of a written planning policy. At a
minimum, this policy should include a statement of the
planning unit goals, the need for continual planning and
the responsibilities of the planning unit.25 Another means
of demonstrating his commitment to planning is by being
actively involved in the process of departmental goal

setting.

 

25National Advisory Commission on Criminal Justice
Standards and Goals, Police, U. S. Government Printing
Offices, Washington, D. C., 1973, p. 118.

59

2. The chief must support the planning unit. He
does this by delegating his planning responsibility to the
unit, by providing the unit with adequate staffing and
resources, by including the unit in all staff meetings,
and by personally utilizing the abilities of the planning
staff. He also shows his support of the planning unit by
taking action based upon their recommendations and encour-
aging other members of the command staff to utilize the
planning unit capabilities.

3. The chief must have a working knowledge of
personnel motivation.26 This means that he must be able
to recognize and assess the motivational level of both
his planning and command staff. He must also be aware of
the methods available to him for increasing motivation.

4. The chief should encourage the use of a demo-
cratic model of administration, which means that he should
encourage input from all levels and areas of the depart-
ment. The chief does this through the use of committees

and the task force approach to decision making.

The Research and Planning Unit

 

l. The Research and Planning Unit's responsibilities

should include the following:

 

26Russel H. Ewing, Principles of Motivation, National
Institute of Leadership, Beverly Hills, Calif, 1962.

 

60

a. Aid in the development and implementation
of both short and long-range goals.
b. Encourage the development of a planning
capability within the major divisions of the
department.
c. Serve as a resource center and coordinator
for the individual unit's planning.
d. Aid the chief and command staff with the
development of departmental policy.
e. Conduct tests and evaluations of equipment.
f. Assist in the evaluation of existing depart-
mental operations and in the design of alterna-
tive methods.
g. Keep abreast of new developments in law
enforcement and related fields.
h. Aid in the development of the department's
budget.

2. The planning staff should have the following

qualifications:

a. An interest in and commitment to planning.
b. An analytical and logical mind.
0. An open personality, which will enable the
staff to work with all types of people,

irregardless of education, position, rank, etc.

61

d. Must have imagination, good judgement,
iniative, perseverance, persuasiveness and a
knowledge of police administration.27
e. An ability to assimilate large amounts of
knowledge about a vast array of subjects.
f. Training in systems analysis techniques.
g. An ability to communicate concepts and
ideas both verbally and in print.
If any of the planning staff lack the above-mentioned
qualifications, an effort should be made to correct the
deficiency.

3. The planning unit must develop and maintain
channels of communication with all areas and levels within
the department, and also with other agencies and sources
of research information.

4. It appears to be immaterial as to whether the
planning staff is sworn or civilian, or whether they have

had prior police experience. The most important require—

ment is their desire to learn.

The Command Staff

 

1. They should assist the chief and the planning

unit in the development of department goals.

 

27Municipal Police Administration 5th Edition,
International City Managers Association, Chicago, Illinois,
1961, p. 86.

 

62

2. The command staff should develop a planning
capability within their own divisions, always keeping in
mind that any plans developed within the division must be
coordinated with the overall goals of the department.

3. The command staff should freely utilize the
capabilities and resources of the research and planning unit,
especially as a resource center.

4. The command officers should endeavor to keep
an open mind toward innovative approaches to law enforcement.

5. They should also develop and maintain channels
of communications within their respective commands. They
should also seek input from all levels of their commands.

In addition to the particular recommendations, there are a
couple of general recommendations to be made for the
development of an effective research and planning unit.
According to Major Keiter, commander of the Kansas City,
Missouri Police Research and Planning Unit, there are three
prime factors in the development of an effective research
and planning unit. These factors are:

1. Departmental administration interested
in moving ahead.

2. Adequate resources for the planning unit
including funds to implement improvements,
and a competent staff.

3. The ability of the planning unit to "sell"
top management on innovative approaches to
law enforcement.28

 

28A personal interview, Major Keiter, Kansas City,
Missouri Police Department, July, 1974.

63

As a final recommendation, the following quotation is

offered from a 1969 I.A.C.P. organizational study of

City A:

Leadership is the most important single
factor in the success or failure of police
operations. In observing successful
agencies, we find a strong executive has been
the driving force in elevating the level of
performance. Conversely, where failure
exists, the cause can usually be traced to
incompetence in management.

Appendix A

INTERVIEW SCHEDULES

Interview schedule for the police chief.

1.

10.

11.

12.

What kind of guidelines are you given from the City Manager and/or
the city commission?

How are priorities assigned to the goals of the department?
What kind of procedure did you use to set these goals?

How does the Research and Planning unit assist in attaining these
goals?

Do you hold regular command/staff meetings to discuss departmental
problems on new projects? If so, who is invited to these meetings?

What criteria is used to select personnel to staff the planning and
research unit? ie - seniority, education, experience.

What is your opinion of the effectiveness of your Research and
Planning unit? What criteria do you use to evaluate this unit?

What would you like to do to make your research and planning unit
more effective?

What do you consider are the most important assets of your planning
unit?

What do you consider are the most significant deficiencies of the
planning unit?

Are the recommendations made by the planning unit based on accurate
research?

What do you see as the responsibilities of a research and planning
unit?

64

65

Interview schedule for Research and Planning personnel.

10.

11.

12.

13.

14.

15.

16.

17.

18.

19.

20.

What are the goals of the department?
How were these goals arrived at?
How are you involved in the preparation of the department's budget?

Is the Research and Planning Unit represented at all command/staff
meetings?

What are the unit's greatest assets?
What are the unit's greatest liabilitieS?

What opinion does the rest of the department have of the Research
and Planning Office?

How do you become involved in specific projects?
Are you involved in operational/tactical planning?

Have you had any specialized training in planning methods or other
similar areas?

Do you feel that the department administration is fully committed
to planning?

What do you see as the responsibilities of a research and planning
unit?

How would you evaluate the effectiveness of this unit?
How would you improve the effectiveness of this unit?

How much does the Research and Planning unit effect departmental
policy? What specific areas?

What types of projects were they?

How many grant applications have been developed and submitted by
this unit during the past two years?

How many of those grant applications have been approved?

How many pilot projects have been continued after federal funding
expired?

What is the budget for this office, and the department as a whole?

66

The following interview questions were used with:

Two shift commanders Two detectives
Two patrol supervisors Two record bureau personnel
Two patrol officers

Interview schedule for other departmental personnel.

1.

2.

How does the Research and Planning operation affect you?
Do you feel that the unit performs adequately? Yes No

How has the Research and Planning Unit brought about meaningful
improvements in the Department?

Do you feel that Research and Planning is a necessary function
of police agencies?

What would you suggest to improve the effectiveness of the
Research and Planning Unit?

How do you communicate your ideas to the planning unit?

Did you find it hard to get used to using Research and Planning?

BIBLIOGRAPHY

67

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Albers, Henry H. Principles of Management: A Modern
Approach. 4th ed. New York: John Wiley & Sons,
Inc., 1974.

 

Anshen, Melvin. "The Management of Ideas," Harvard
Business Review, July-August 1969.

 

Asenhurst, Paul H. "The Goal: A Police Profession,"
Journal of Criminal Law, Criminology, and Police
Science, March—April, 1959.

 

Ashburn, Franklin G. "A New Dilemma in Police Planning
and Research," The Police Chief, Vol. 36, #5:
42-47, May 1969.

 

Ashley, John, LeGrande, James L., and Galvin, Raymond T.
"The Nature of the Planning Process," Training
Bulletins for Planning and Research Units in
Medium-sized Police Department, Michigan State
University; School of Police Administration and
Public Safety, 1968.

 

 

Barres, Anthony. "A Rational Road for a Sensible Police
Policy," The Police Chief, June, 1969.

 

Bennis, Warren G., Benne, Kenneth D., and Chin, Robert.
The Planning of Change, 2nd ed. New York: Holt,
Rinehart and Winston, Inc., 1969.

 

Branon, Bernard C. "Professional Development of Law
Enforcement Personnel," Sixth Annual National
Institute on Police Community Relations, Michigan
State University, May 16, 1969.

 

 

Chapman, Samuel G. Police Patrol Readings. Springfield,
Illinois: Charles C. Thomas Co., 1964.

 

Clift, Raymond E. A Guide to Modern Police Thinking. 2nd
ed. Cincinnati, Ohio: W. H. Anderson Co., 1965.

 

Creation of a Model Planning Unit in a Medium-Sized Police
Department, Washington, D. C., Law Enforcement
Assistance Administration, 1973.

 

68

69

Dale, Ernest. Management: Theory and Practice. 3rd
ed. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1973.

 

Davis, Keith and Scott, William G. Human Relations and
Organizational Behavior. New York: McGraw-Hill,
1969.

 

 

Diggles, Walter J. Police Planning and Analysis Office.
Springfield, Va., National Technical Information
Service, 1973.

 

Drucker, Peter. The Practice of Management. New York:
Harper and Brothers, 1954.

 

Ehlers, E. C., Webb, R. H., Jr., and Schuler, Terry.
"Planning and Research Organization: A Status
Report," National Police Journal, VIII, No. 2:
15-16, Spring, 1973.

 

Ewing, David W. The Human Side of Planning; London:
Collier-MacMillan Ltd., 1969.

 

. Long Range Planning for Management. New York:
Harper and Row, 1968.

 

. The Practice of Planning. New York: Harper
and Row, 1968.

 

Ewing, Russel H. Principles of Motivation. Beverly Hills,
California, National Institute of Leadership, 1962.

 

Falzone, Paul R. A Comparative Analysis of the Executive's
Role in Business and Law Enforcement, (Master
Thesis, Master of Science at Michigan State Uni-
versity), 1965.

 

 

Fillis, Dewey J. and Detton, D. D. "The Need for Crime
Prevention in Contemporary Society: A Challenge
to Law Enforcement," The Police Chief, June, 1969.

 

Fleck, T. A. and Newman, T. J. "The Role of the Police
in Modern Society," Police, March-April, 1969.

Germann, A. C. "Police Planning and Research as it Affects
Police-Community Relations," Police, January-
February, 1962.

70

Gourley, G. Douglas. Effective Municipal Police Organiza-
tion. Beverly Hills, California: Glenco Press,
1970.

, and Bristow, Allen P. Patrol Administration.
Springfield, Illinois: Charles C. Thomas Co.,
1961.

 

"Implementing Change Through Personnel Participation,"
Police Chief, pp. 26-40, March, 1971.

 

Institute for Training in Municipal Administration,
Municipal Police Administration. Chicago, Illinois:
International City Managers Association, 1961.

Kenney, John P. Police Management Planning. Springfield,
Illinois: Charles C. Thomas, 1959.

Key, Charles R. and Warren, Miles R. "Kansas City-Long
Range Planning Program," Police Chief, Vol. 39,
#5: 72, May 1972.

 

LeBreton, P. P. and Henning, D. A. Planning Theory.
Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall Inc.,
1961.

Leonard, V. A. Police Organization and Management.
Brooklyn, N.Y.: Foundation Press, 1964.

LeGrande, James L. and Galvin, Raymond T. "Current
Emphasis on Planning and Research," Planning and
Research Bulletin, No. 1, Michigan State University,
1968.

 

 

Likert, Rensis. New Patterns of Management. New York:
McGraw-Hill, 1961.

McDonnel, R. E. "Organization and Function of Planning
and Research Units," The Police Chief, September,
1972.

Misner, Gordon C. "Recent Developments in Metropolitan
Law Enforcement," Journal of Criminal Law, Crimino-
logy, and Police Science, January-February, 1960.

 

Municipal Police Administration. Chicago, Ill.: Interna-
tional City Managers Association, 5th Edition,
1961.

71

Municipal Police Administration. Chicago, Ill.: Inter-
national City Managers Association, 7th Edition,
1971.

 

Municipal Yearbook. Chicago, Ill.: City Managers Associ-
ation, 1974.

 

National Advisory Commission on Criminal Justice Standards
and Goals, Criminal Justice System, Washington,
D. C., Government Printing Office, 1973.

 

Newman, William H. and Summer, Charles E., Jr. The Process
of Management. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey:
PrentiCe-Hall Inc., 1967.

 

 

O'Brien, John T. "Police Administration-Art or Science,"
Police, Vol. 16, #12; August, 1972.

Olson, Bruce. "A Center for Police Planning and Research,"
Journal of Criminal Law, Criminology, and Police
Science, September-October, 1959.

 

Pierce, James L. "The Planning and Control Concept,"
Readings in Management. Cincinnati, Ohio: South-
Western Publishing Company, 1963.

 

"Police and Criminal Justice Research in Great Britain,"
Police Chief, May, 1969.

 

"Police Planning-Stimulus for Needed Organizational Change,"
Police, June, 1972.

Pomeroy, Wesley A. "New Trends in Police Planning,"
Police Chief, Vol. 38, #2: 16, February, 1971.

 

President's Commission on Law Enforcement and the Adminis-
tration of Justice, Task Force Report: The Police.
Washington, D. C.: United States Government
Printing Office, 1967.

Purcell, Theodore V. and Webster, Rosalind. "Window on
the Hard-core World," Harvard Business Review,
July-August, 1969.

Report of the National Advisory Commission on Civil Disorders.
New York: Bantam Books, 1968.

Scott, Brian W. Long-Range Planning In American Industry.
New York: American Management Association, 1965.

72

Smalters, D. J. and Ruggles, R. L. "Six Business Lessons
From the Pentagon," Harvard Business Review, July-

August, 1969.

Southwestern Law Enforcement Institute, Police Management
for Supervisory and Administrative Personnel,
Springfield, Ill.: Charles C. Thomas, 1963.

"Theory and Practice in Law Enforcement," Police Chief,
December, 1971.

Traveler's Research Commission, A Literature Review of
Police Planning and Research, Connecticut,
Connecticut Research Commission, 1968.

Wilson, James O. Varieties of Police Behavior. Cambridge,
Massachusetts: Harvard University Press, 1968.

Wilson, 0. W. Police Administration. 2nd ed. New York:
McGraw-Hill, 1963.

. Police Planning. Springfield, Illinois:
Charles C. Thomas, 1952.

 

1:16. $71111] I'L'BTAII'ESII

31293 01739 5215