In a democratic society, law enforcement must simultaneously deliver services in a fair, unbiased, constitutional, and legal manner, and deliver services effectively. To do both of these things is very difficult and absolutely necessary.
These tasks are the foundations of public trust, confidence in the police function, and public cooperation with police efforts. Such trust and confidence are essential to the successful function of policing. If either the fairness or the effectiveness of the service is deemed insufficient, then policing will lose respect, trust, and public support.
Police leaders and line personnel are aware of a degree of decline in trust and confidence in policing over the past several years. This decline is real, but it is not intractable.
In the final analysis, trust, confidence, and public support for law enforcement occurs when ethical police agency cultures meet high community expectations coupled with an active community commitment to co-responsibility for public safety.
Trust and Confidence in Policing
The declines in public trust and confidence in police have been documented in the results of annual surveys by public opinion polling organizations such as Pew Charitable Trusts Research Center and Gallup Polling Organization.1
The decline is often attributed to incidents recorded on video in which law enforcement officers have either clearly engaged in misconduct and criminal activity or have been perceived as doing so.
The Gallup Organization notes the trust in police has declined from 51 percent to 45 percent over the last three years.2 It is especially concerning that declines in trust and confidence have been most notable in surveys of African American communities. In these communities, trust levels dropped to less than 20 percent in 2020 before rebounding slightly.3 This raises concerns as to how to best serve these communities and for surmounting the ongoing racial divide in the United States.
Mistrust Is Widespread
It is appropriate to note that declines in trust and confidence are not unique to policing. Nearly all key U.S. institutions have seen declines in public trust over the last several years.4 Government institutions such as the U.S. Congress, the courts, and the criminal justice system have adhered to this trend, as have private institutions such as the news media, banks, large business, medicine, labor unions, and organized religion. These are clearly mistrustful times.
Nonetheless, law enforcement cannot take comfort in the idea that mistrust has become the “new normal.” Nor can there be comfort in the fact that police rate the third most-trusted institution in the United States (at 45 percent) behind the military (64 percent) and small business (68 percent).5
A key difference between policing and the other institutions in the surveys is that police personnel interact directly with the public in a manner distinct from all other public services. Policing involves the deployment of “street-level” officials available to respond 24/7/365.6 Police respond to all manner of public concerns from natural and human-caused emergencies to mundane, nonemergency matters. Police are, of course, also primarily responsible for enforcement of laws, regulations, and prohibitions and exercise considerable discretion in fulfilling this responsibility. In addition, policing sets the criminal justice process in motion through investigations and system mobilization.7
Policing requires public access, contact, and cooperation in order to be effective. Thus, community trust and confidence are uniquely essential to law enforcement’s mission.
Implications of Mistrust
In the past several years, the mistrust of police has generated some dramatic rhetoric as well as attempts to legislatively guide police conduct. Some critics, for example, have branded U.S. policing as inherently brutal and racist.8 There have also been calls to “defund the police” as well as the more thoughtful recommendations to “reimagine” the use of police resources.9 There have also been poorly crafted legislative initiatives aimed at reforming policing without regard for unanticipated collateral consequences to community safety.10
Police staffing shortages due to early retirements or resignations, as well as difficulties in recruiting new personnel, are sometimes attributed to the atmosphere of mistrust and poorly crafted reforms.11 This atmosphere is also cited for generating a degree of uncertainty and sometimes even resentment on the part of working officers, contributing to instances of discretionary “de-policing.”12
This is not to argue that policing in the United States can be regarded as flawless or that it cannot benefit from change. Rather, the point is that, whenever change is considered, potential collateral adverse consequences should be anticipated, examined, and contained.
The Depth of the Challenge
Central to mistrust is the perception that police agencies tolerate ongoing inconsistencies between their stated principles and the conduct of their personnel. In order to address the atmosphere of mistrust, law enforcement agencies will need to assess these perceived inconsistencies and reconcile personnel conduct to their publicized values and beliefs. This does not mean that such inconsistencies never occur. Nor does this mean that law enforcement necessarily compares unfavorably with other community institutions. Instead, it means expressions of doubt and distrust are unlikely to be resolved by denial alone. Resolution will require demonstrating a clear and conclusive aligning of conduct with accepted ethical standards and professed agency values.
Given these circumstances and associated social and political issues involved, it is unlikely that some outside group can step in and remedy these concerns. Ultimately, no one is going to rescue U.S. law enforcement from this situation. It will be up to law enforcement leadership and personnel to lead the way.
The solution will require examining the basis upon which trust can be built. Substantial effort and long-term commitment will be required as will a radical recommitment to fundamentals.
Fortunately, there are real assets and advantages that can be brought to this task.
There is, for example, a depth of talent and sophistication within law enforcement ranks. The people currently in law enforcement service are accustomed to hard challenges. Time after time, they do the right thing in the right way. They come with an ingrained affinity for service. More than many other people, they understand the necessity and value of duty, obligation, and sacrifice.
In addition, these people bring an ongoing track record of positive day-to-day service delivery. Every day, millions of community-police encounters are conducted in a peaceful, constructive manner. To ignore or devalue this fact is to mischaracterize policing and overstate the degree to which public opinion surveys precisely reflect the character of actual contacts.
Again, it is not claimed that every member of law enforcement behaves appropriately in every encounter with members of the public. However, the facts support the stance that law enforcement personnel have both the capacity and the propensity to get things right.
Ultimately, the solution to the issues of trust and confidence will require a recognition that real trust is not a static or a passive quality. It is subject to change. It is also, by nature, relational and often reciprocal. Real trust, authentic trust, is “a two-way street.” Real, trusting relationships involve a sense of co-responsibility and mutual obligation.
Co-responsibility
Many people in the United States seem to adopt a consumer attitude toward public safety. People want their public safety “products” to be provided at low cost; to be delivered competently, promptly, and conveniently; and to meet their needs and preferences. Members of marginalized communities in the United States may be more likely to see public safety as a product that can be hard to access or one that, when available, may prove burdensome or not meet their needs.
Either way, public safety is regarded as something which is “out there” to access and use. But public safety is not a consumer product; it is an essential component of community well-being. Public safety is not solely a police responsibility—it is also a community responsibility.
Law enforcement owes a tremendous level of responsibility to the public. But, in return, the public owes law enforcement a strong level of reciprocal responsibility.
The idea of community responsibility is also part of the theoretical foundation for community policing in which the police must rely on the community and vice versa.
To improve public safety—to improve its effectiveness and its fairness—the role of the public cannot simply be passive. Nor should the role simply involve finding fault. Instead, the public needs to be invested and informed and, in some sense, accountable. This requires taking an interest in what U.S. policing is and what it stands for, as well as what it requires to function properly. This idea of co-responsibility and mutual obligation has been overlooked during the discourse of the last few years.
Perhaps reflecting on the origins of democratic policing can suggest a useful approach for the future. In 1829, Sir Robert Peel set down his nine principles of policing as he organized the London Metropolitan Police.13 The nine principles created a set of responsibilities and expectations for how the police should relate to the public. In recognition of the importance of police-public co-responsibility, the United States could benefit from a 21st century version of Peel’s nine principles: a set of responsibilities and expectations for how the public and police should relate to each other.
Ethical Agency Culture
Research has long demonstrated the idea that organizational culture is powerful. Studies speak to the power of informal guidelines and routine accepted patterns of behavior over formal directives.14 Culture is more ingrained than written directives. Culture endures while policies and procedures and program initiatives come and go. Agency culture is a truer indicator of an agency’s identity.
To improve trust, to encourage a sense of co-responsibility on the part of the public, and to operate both effectively and fairly, policing must look to the content and expression of their ethical agency culture.
“Does our conduct match our espoused values and our stated intentions?”
The process of refining agency culture will require stepping away from any tendency toward self-satisfaction or self-justification in law enforcement. It will involve the police being willing, when appropriate, to engage in the practice of “calling themselves out” and “calling out their own.” It will require courage because emphasizing ethical standards can be regarded as a weakness to some and a threat to others, both within and outside of the profession. Consequently, this approach carries the potential for political and career risk.
The aim of emphasizing ethical agency culture goes far beyond attempts to impact the latest public opinion poll. It goes to the essence of what law enforcement is and what law enforcement can be: a path for law enforcement agencies to live more fully through the strongest and best values of the profession.
Where to Begin
For an ethical culture to be promoted and a constructive level of public co-responsibility to emerge, effort must be initiated by law enforcement agencies. It should then be elaborated and refined with the help of community members who subscribe to the ideas of mutual obligation. It cannot simply be imposed from the outside.
Successful implementation does not require adopting a whole new concept of what law enforcement is or what it should be. Rather, the emphasis of ethical policing culture will require a rededication, a deeper commitment, to what law enforcement has always aspired to be. It will require recognizing that ethics and values are key benchmarks for effective policing.
No formal template is offered for values-based leadership. In fact, the greater the formality and the greater the effort to reduce the process to documented measurements, the greater the likelihood of obstruction and litigation.
One likely complication of practicing this approach will involve reconciling ethical culture building with aspects of personnel law. An “ethics-forward” approach will likely meet with some resistance because of its complexity and the prospect of liability exposure. Thus, an ethics-forward leadership approach may serve to complicate or frustrate a “caution-forward” management approach. And yet, ethics-forward leadership may be the kind of approach needed to interrupt patterns of mistrust and public avoidance of civic responsibility. It begins with leaders posing a fundamental question: “Does our conduct match our espoused values and our stated intentions?”
The focus on ethical principles also provides a basis establishing common cause with communities. It provides an opportunity to demonstrate that agencies are serious about their expectations of themselves as well as their expectations of the communities they serve. It proceeds from the idea of self-examination and self-correction. It goes on to constructively challenge the public even as agencies challenge themselves.
Currently, in many agencies, reference to core ethical values arise only when considering such issues as recruitment, hiring, or promotion. An ethics-based culture would apply such references more widely.
Many agencies are already practicing aspects of this idea. Some reference core values in their personnel evaluations. Some provide commendations for individuals or units displaying conduct that clearly reflects the agency’s core ethical values. Some specifically reference the core ethical concepts associated with any violations of agency policies, procedures, and regulations in the disciplinary process.
More agencies, for example, now highlight the importance of upholding constitutional rights as part of their mission statements, thus illustrating that policing is clearly in the business of protecting and upholding rights along with ensuring public safety and public order. While this has always been true, it was not necessarily as clearly communicated in the past.
Efforts to strengthen ethical agency cultures will not abruptly resolve issues of mistrust between the public and the police. But such efforts will help agency leadership and personnel focus on the preferred, principled, and proper outcomes. Such efforts should also allow agencies to begin a forthright dialogue about community obligations and co-responsibility.
Conclusion
It is both naïve and inaccurate to regard policing in the United States as flawed beyond repair. This is the attitude of critics who put slogans and ideology above the need to make difficult choices to properly provide crucial public services.
This approach disregards the fact that while the public has expressed concerns about policing in general, they often show greater support for their local police agency when there is a greater likelihood of informal interaction.15 Additionally, it ignores the fact that community-police contacts more often end peacefully even in situations when the odds do not favor that outcome.
U.S. law enforcement agencies should not automatically disregard or minimize concerns about the quality of police services or discount the central issue of trust. But this does not and should not require automatic agreement with the tone or the content of all criticism that is voiced.
The best path for policing is to lean into the issue of trust; constructively examine and upgrade the ethics of agency cultures; and recognize that effective, ethically centered policing is essential to the rights, dignity, and well-being of both the profession and the communities police serve. d
Notes:
1“Trust in America: Do Americans Trust the Police?” Pew Research Center video, 3:39, January 5, 2022; Gallup, “Confidence in Institutions.”
2Jeffrey M. Jones, “Confidence in U.S. Institutions Down; Average at New Low,” Gallup, July 5, 2022.
3Jeffrey M. Jones, “In U.S., Black Confidence in Police Recovers from 2020 Low,” Gallup, July 14, 2021.
4Jones, “Confidence in U.S. Institutions Down.”
5Jones, “Confidence in U.S. Institutions Down.”
6William Ker Muir Jr., Police: Streetcorner Politicians (Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press, 1979).
7Donald J. Black, “The Mobilization of Law,” The Journal of Legal Studies 2, no. 1 (January 1973):125–149.
8Stephen A. Schwartz, “Police Brutality and Racism in America,” Explore (NY) 16, no. 5 (Sept-Oct 2020): 280–282.
9Mary Zerkel, “6 Reasons Why It’s Time to Defund the Police,” American Friends Service Committee, October 15, 2020; Tobias Winright, “Review: Defend or Defund the Police ? It’s More Complicated Than That,” America: The Jesuit Review, September 9, 2022. See also, Barry Friedman, “When Not to Send the Police: A Conversation with LAPD Chief Michel Moore” (webinar, The Policing Project, New York University School of Law, April 2023).
10Paul A. Pastor, “Criminal Justice Reform in Washington State and the ‘Dunning-Kruger Effect,’” LinkedIn, March 6, 2023.
11Neil MacFarquar, “Why Police Have Been Quitting in Droves the Last Year,” New York Times, June 24, 2021; Police Executive Research Forum, “PERF Survey Shows Steady Staffing Decrease Over Past Two Years,” March 10, 2022.
12Rosenfeld, Richard, “Is De-Policing the Cause of the Spike in Urban Violence? Comment Con Cassell,” Federal Sentencing Reporter 33, no. 1–2 (October/December 2020): 142–143. Also see, generally, Willard M. Oliver, De-Policing: When Police Officers Disengage (Boulder, CO: Lynne-Rienner Publications, 2019).
13Law Enforcement Action Partnership, “Sir Robert Peel’s Policing Principles.”
14Edgar H. Schein, Organizational Culture and Leadership (San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass, 1985); Scott E. Wolfe et al., “Why Does Organizational Justice Matter? Uncertainty Management Among Law Enforcement Officers,” Journal of Criminal Justice 54 (January-February 2018): 20–29.
15Cheryl Maxson, Karen Hennigan, and David C. Sloane, Factors That Influence Public Opinion of the Police (Washington, DC: National Institute of Justice, 2003).
Please cite as
Paul A. Pastor, “Ethical Agency Cultures and Public Trust,” Police Chief Online, October 18, 2023.
