Looking Inward with Problem-Oriented Policing.

For two decades, the concept of problem-oriented policing has influenced how law enforcement agencies respond to the communities they serve. Because the approach concentrates on solving problems, rather than solely responding to complaints, it offers agencies an opportunity to apply the technique to problems that exist within their organizations, as well as those occurring in their communities.

To employ the concept of problem-oriented policing (POP) to internal departmental problems in contrast to external community problems constitutes a logical, yet novel application of such a well-known policing approach. Taking into account the history, problem-solving techniques, and decision-making styles of POP, agencies may want to consider the hiring and retaining of qualified personnel as a promising area for them to apply this concept.

HISTORY OF POP

In 1979, an article appeared in a criminal justice journal that described a concept for improving policing through a "problem-oriented approach." [1] The author defined this approach as a new way of thinking about all aspects of policing, from administration to operations to personnel. Critical themes in the philosophy included the "end products" that policing produces, the need for substantive community involvement, and the complexities of effectively implementing change. The end-products theme, perhaps the most important, focused on the need to assess policing in terms of problems solved or diminished, quality of life issues, and crimes, such as panhandling, robbery, graffiti, and sexual assault.

During the 1980s, numerous law enforcement agencies throughout the United States and in other countries began a wide variety of problem-oriented policing initiatives. For example, agencies in Madison, Wisconsin; Baltimore County, Maryland; Newport News, Virginia; and London, England, applied the problem-oriented policing concept to their operational approaches. [2] At the same time, other factors propelled the POP concept forward. For example, in 1988, a law enforcement research group began an ongoing publication devoted to problem solving [3] and, in 1996, developed a computerized database, the Problem-Oriented Policing Network (POPNET), which has received over 18,000 inquiries since its inception. In 1990, the first National Problem-Oriented Policing Conference convened in San Diego, California. This conference, now known as the International Problem-Oriented Policing Conference, has continued each year since that time.

These efforts and many others, along with published literature on the topic, demonstrate that POP has become a highly visible and utilitarian policing philosophy. In contrast to community-oriented policing (COP), which has a less uniform and clearly defined quality, POP constitutes a rather easily understood concept that focuses on different end products. Whereas the main thrust of COP centers on fostering community cooperation, facilitating the work of the police, and reducing fears and tensions, POP emphasizes the measurable reduction of crime and other features of community and neighborhood turmoil.

PROBLEM SOLVING WITH POP

Although a number of different problem-solving techniques exist in POP initiatives, one of the most popular is known by the acronym "SARA." This acronym stands for scanning, analysis, response, and assessment.

Scanning identifies a problem through a variety of sources of information, such as calls for service and citizen surveys. Citizens must consider the problem as important for this phase to succeed. Next, analysis requires the thoughtful examination of the nature of the problem. Input from police personnel and residents pertaining to the problem is important, as well as the collection of data the department may have about the frequency, location, and other significant characteristics of the problem. Third, response fashions one or more preferred solutions to the problem. This step, as well as the preceding analysis step, benefits from creative deliberation, or "thinking outside the box." Input clearly should come from police personnel, but also from residents, experts, and other individuals who can address the problem thoughtfully. Finally, assessment evaluates the effectiveness of the expected solution. Agencies must evaluate the solution as objectively as possible because this step speaks to end products, the key theme in POP initiatives.

DECISION MAKING WITH POP

For personnel engaging in one or more POP initiatives, the application of the SARA problem-solving technique becomes necessary, but may not suffice for a successful problem-oriented effort. Unlike many patrol situations involving a response to a call for service where, in SARA terminology, the officer goes from scanning to response, in a POP activity, much more time exists to deal with the situation/problem, thus making the intermediate analysis step critical.

This, however, frequently conflicts with officers' past decision-making experiences. When officers start their careers, they often must embrace the value of decisive decision making. The ability to make decisive decisions proves just as important, perhaps even more important, than the quality of the decision itself. Right or wrong, the critical element impressed upon most new officers is that they make some decision and, of course, in a timely manner. Their agencies expect and excuse mistakes, if they come from the heart with good and noble intention. This decision-making style remains applicable and appropriate in most circumstances at the patrol-officer level. However, as officers move up the management hierarchy and their agencies initiate problem-oriented policing, decisiveness can become a liability.

For personnel progressing to higher rank, the nature of most positions and decisions allows for considerable deliberation. In fact, when that considerable deliberation does not take place, poor decisions often result. However, exceptions exist. For supervisors and mid-level managers occupying volatile operational assignments (e.g., drug enforcement), decisiveness remains an important quality. As a rule though, as a supervisor, mid-level manager, or executive, more time to make thoughtful decisions becomes part of the decision-making environment. More time to acquire important information essential to the quality of the decision also becomes available. Unfortunately, many officers fail to recognize this difference as their careers progress and continue to exercise the same decision-making style that they employed as patrol officers--a style that emphasized the importance of decisiveness above all else. Therefore, law enforcement managers must rethink their decision-making styles and consider that decisiveness applied in POP initiatives can become a significant impediment.

INTERNAL USE OF POP

With the success that many POP initiatives have experienced when applied to external, end-product issues, it seems prudent and appropriate to also apply the concept to internal problems. Yet, little evidence exists of such application. For example, with the possible exception of the area of calls for service, none of the 41 problems cited on POPNET 4 have dealt with internal issues. Interestingly, however, during a 1987 problem-oriented policing initiative in Newport News, Virginia, the agency addressed two internal problems (automobile accidents involving city vehicles and police morale), although both clearly were peripheral to the main focus and purpose of the project (external community problems, such as thefts from vehicles in downtown parking areas and burglaries in a local apartment complex). [5]

Although it proves essential to emphasize the importance of the end product (that is, the impact of police actions on crime and other forms of social disorder), the likelihood of success with those end products is much influenced, if not driven, by the organization's internal constitution. A functionally disabled police department cannot possibly deal with the kinds of issues problem-oriented policing is designed to and capable of resolving. And, an agency experiencing significant internal strife also will be less able to successfully implement POP or POP projects. Problem-solving focusing on internal issues must not preoccupy the department's efforts and resources. Rather, an agency must attend to these issues with the kind of thoughtful deliberation imbedded in the problem-oriented policing concept and approach.

As so-called "outsiders," citizens, business leaders, and other local government officials can contribute greatly to the success of external problem-oriented initiatives. Likewise, law enforcement personnel at the rank of patrol officer can contribute significantly to the success of internal problem-solving through the use of POP. To the extent that a police department remains open to the inclusion of these individuals, the likelihood of successful internal problem-solving increases.

Always vigilant of the end products, agencies using the POP concept may expect that better problem solving, which results in the reduction or elimination of internal issues, produce better problem solving regarding external issues. Whether the issues are internal or external, POP can facilitate effective problem solving.

A POP APPLICATION TO AN INTERNAL PROBLEM

Today, many law enforcement agencies find it difficult to hire qualified officers. Tighter labor markets (i.e., less unemployment and more jobs) and higher entry-level standards, such as educational requirements, has caused this condition. However, by employing the SARA problem-solving technique, agencies can apply a POP approach to such an internal departmental problem. After first creating a problem-solving group, or task force, to handle the initiative, agencies can begin the four-step process.

Scanning

Agencies must establish the significance of the problem and the need to solve it in the first place. In this regard, the role of the head of the agency proves critical to avoid expending a great deal of time and energy on an issue of only marginal significance while neglecting one of considerable importance.

Conditions in support of the significance of hiring difficulties could include sworn entry-level vacancies, projected retirements, and officer access to time off. Police personnel undoubtedly would agree that this issue represents a significant problem. Moreover, citizens also may recognize this issue as one of importance, although for reasons perhaps different from those embraced by police officers (e.g., responsiveness to calls for service).

Analysis

To make informed decisions, agencies should obtain data pertaining to current sworn vacancies, projected retirements, exit interviews, anticipated future staffing, reasons for premature sworn personnel departures (i.e., nonretirement attrition), sources of attrition in the recruitment and selection processes, and the number and sources of sworn applicants. Also, agencies may find additional information on comparative salaries and benefits with other departments, total time to process applicants, and recruiting techniques and resources helpful. Agencies could acquire such input from a variety of sources, including police officers, citizens, experts, other sworn personnel, and staff members of the municipality's personnel department. Finally, agencies should review literature in the field, other departments' experiences, and input from colleagues.

Response

This step, of course, would hinge directly on the preceding analysis phase. Results of this step could include--

* more effective recruiting techniques;

* additional recruitment/hiring staff;

* removal of irrelevant selection requirements;

* increase or change in salary or benefits; and

* better cooperation with municipal personnel department staff.

Other promising responses can emerge from the analysis step. For example, if an agency has a residency requirement and the analysis step shows that viable nonresidents interested in a police career exist, the agency may consider eliminating or modifying the residency requirement.

Assessment

Agencies must allow for sufficient time to pass before drawing any assessment conclusions. However, once this occurs, the number of entry-level vacancies (i.e., the smaller/lower, the better) constitutes the key criterion agencies can employ to assess the effectiveness of implemented responses. The number of premature departures from the department (i.e., the lower, the better), the number of applicants (i.e., the higher the better), and the time to process applicants (i.e., the lower, the better) also represent important factors that agencies should evaluate.

CONCLUSION

Since the 1980s, law enforcement agencies have applied the concept of problem-oriented policing to many community problems, such as alcohol-related crimes, burglaries, graffiti, sex offenses, and trespassing. While POP has become a highly visible and utilitarian policing philosophy, the use of the SARA problem-solving technique has contributed greatly to its effectiveness. However, this technique impacts officer decision making. Because POP emphasizes solving a problem as the dominant decision-making mode, officers attaining management positions must rethink their decision-making styles learned earlier in their careers. They must consider that the appropriateness of different decision-making styles varies depending upon whether officers are responding to calls or solving problems.

The application of POP to internal departmental problems, in contrast to external community problems, has occurred infrequently, yet its appropriateness appears considerable. Although focusing on the end products of policing, the application of problem-oriented policing to internal matters proves promising and deserves a wider exploration. It would seem to follow that if an agency can solve its internal problems more effectively, it can improve its ability to solve external community problems as well. Regardless of whether agencies apply problem-oriented policing to external community or internal management problems, all levels of law enforcement personnel from patrol officer to agency director will benefit from leadership development training focusing on the successful application of the POP approach.

Endnotes

(1.) Herman Goldstein, "Improving Policing: A Problem-Oriented Approach," Crime and Delinquency 25 (1979): 236-258.

(2.) Herman Goldstein, Problem-Oriented Policing (New York, NY: McGraw Hill, 1990), 50-57.

(3.) Police Executive Research Forum, Problem-Solving Quarterly (Washington, DC).

(4.) POPNET lists 41 problems and issues that a problem-oriented policing approach has addressed: 911 abuse, alcohol-related crimes, assault/battery, auto theft, border problems, breaking and entering, burglary, calls for service, campus security, code/zoning violations, community decline, community dissatisfaction, disturbance, domestic disturbance, drag racing, drugs/narcotics, elder abuse, gangs, graffiti, health hazards, homicide, illegal dumping, juveniles, lack of communication, litter, loitering, noise, panhandling, people with mental illness, prostitution, public drinking, public safety, robbery, sex offenses, stolen property, theft, traffic, traffic safety, transients/street people, trespassing, and vandalism.

(5.) John E. Eck, William Spelman, Diane Hill, Darrel W. Stephens, John R. Stedman, and Gerard R. Murphy, U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice, and the Police Executive Research Forum, Problem Solving: Problem-Oriented Policing in Newport News (Washington, DC, 1987), 43-44.

Handling a Call                         Versus
Call/case-driven response
Temporary/transient result
Less effort/energy required/expended
Less imagination applied
Limited results expected by officers
Little collaboration with others
Response driven by limited information
Handling a Call                         Solving a Problem
Call/case-driven response               Problem-driven response
Temporary/transient result              Longer lasting/permanent result
Less effort/energy required/expended    More effort/energy required/
                                         expended
Less imagination applied                More imagination applied
Limited results expected by officers    Less limited results expected
                                         by officer
Little collaboration with others        Much collaboration with others
Response driven by limited information  Response driven by much
                                         information