The strategic integration of pop and performance management: A viable partnership?

Abstract

The paper critiques the way ForceCo, a medium sized police force conceptualises and puts into practice the nature of POP and performance management methodologies. Based on data gleaned from a perception survey (sample 100% n = 3828, response rate 44%) and participant observation the analysis traces the rationale behind the initiatives and questions the way in which they were defined and implemented. The discussion highlights that there is much confusion about POP and what it means in practice. The same is true in respect of performance management systems. ForceCo illustrates a minimalist and market based approach to the evaluation and assessment of police performance and underplay the processual and behavioural components underpinning POP techniques. The paper concludes by raising concerns about management skills in ForceCo. Principally they fail to recognise that both POP and performance management schemes rest on developing a strategic approach to human resource and culture development.

Born to Fail? Policing, Reform and Neighbourhood Problem Solving

“…Closely related, conventional policing performance management systems tend to be based on response times, arrests and detection rates, but commentators have suggested that these are not effective for holding officers to account for success in dealing with community-based problems and for implementing problem-oriented policing (Braga, 2002). Like others, Metcalf (2001) agrees that the police service has primarily been concerned with the achievement of measurable objectives (such as numbers of arrests or detections) rather than with the processes through which policing is conducted, which, she argued, is essential for implementing problem-oriented policing. She went on to argue that whilst there has been an acknowledgement that policing styles would have to change to facilitate problemoriented policing, this has not happened in practice.…”

“…Like others, Metcalf (2001) agrees that the police service has primarily been concerned with the achievement of measurable objectives (such as numbers of arrests or detections) rather than with the processes through which policing is conducted, which, she argued, is essential for implementing problemoriented policing. She went on to argue that whilst there has been an acknowledgement that policing styles would have to change to facilitate problemoriented policing, this has not happened in practice.…”

“…She went on to argue that whilst there has been an acknowledgement that policing styles would have to change to facilitate problemoriented policing, this has not happened in practice. This might be because it is easier for police supervisors to measure outputs such as arrests rather than the flexibility and creativity called for in solving problems (Metcalf, 2001). Goldstein (1990) similarly argued that routinised jobs are easier to supervise than those that require flexibility and creativity.…”

Law Enforcement Mission Statements Post-September 11

“…However, police organizations, being no different from other organizations, are typically resistant to change and are more likely to be bureaucratically stagnant. This stagnation does have the upside of allowing for consistency, and with consistency comes the opportunity for somewhat more effective long-range planning, as is now being done with community policing (Maguire & Katz, 2002;Metcalfe, 2001;Riley, 1999;Rohe, Adams, & Arcury, 2001;Skolnick & Bayley, 1999;Walsh & Vito, 2000). 1 However, "precipitating jolts" (Greenwood, Suddaby, & Hinings, 2002, p. 60) such as the events of September 11 are easily seen as incentives for change, as opposed to impediments to change.…”