Becoming the top law enforcement executive in a local or state police agency is the ultimate goal of many up-and-coming police leaders. In accomplishing their career goals, chiefs spend many years learning and practicing the art of management and leadership. Thousands of hours and dollars are spent pursuing advanced degrees and professional development opportunities. After much sacrifice and effort, and some good fortune, a few will be given a chance to lead an agency as its top executive.
Given the never-ending professional molding and shaping, it is reasonable to expect a police chief to be successful in helping organizations overcome their challenges. It is a daunting and noble task for a person to take on such responsibility, and those who dare to take on the role of a change agent want to do their best and hope to be good guardians of those who put their trust in them. The challenge for a new chief is often not in knowing what changes to make, but in knowing how to get the members of the organization to accept the changes. The human aspect of implementing change in an organization is stress. Several studies have determined that the majority of the stress police officers experience comes from within their organizations. As a change agent, how does a new chief implement change, while minimizing stress on officers?
Organizational Stress
The study of stressors associated with the law enforcement profession was first discussed in the mid-1970s. The earlier studies on the topic focused on the sources of police stressors. These studies divided the causes of police stressors into two categories. The two most common types of police stressors identified by researchers are inherent police stressors and organizational stressors. The former are psychological and physical dangers that police officers can expect to experience while carrying out their enforcement-related duties. The latter (organizational stressors) are stressors related to job dissatisfaction. The scale used by researchers to measure job-related attitudes is an officer’s satisfaction with salary, coworkers, promotion, supervision, discipline, administration, and work.
A study in the early 1990s examined the interrelationship between the two categories of police stressors, inherent police stressors, and organizational stressors. They found that “the organizational stressors had a total effect on the distress of approximately 6.3 times that of inherent police stressors.”1 Although many law enforcement organizations have increased their efforts in the area of officer wellness and health, suicide rates in the police profession continue to grow. The suicide rate in law enforcement is found to be the second-highest suicide rate among occupations in the United States (the highest rate is among the U.S. military personnel).2 The fact that inherent police stressors, potentially caused by managerial decision-making, are negatively affecting officers six times more than the operational stressors on the street should be sounding alarms for all police leaders.
Police chiefs may argue that they are, at times, stuck between a rock and a hard place. In most cases, police chiefs work for an elected mayor, council, board, or an appointed county or city manager. The police chief has to simultaneously serve the will of his or her bosses, the community, and the agency’s members. This trifecta can unquestionably be a tricky balancing act that many career or educational programs do not prepare police leaders to overcome.
Newly appointed police chiefs will naturally want to implement strategic plans as the improvement tool for their organizations. Much like a performance improvement plan for a subordinate, a police chief will set out expectations, timelines, a vision, a mission, and goals for the agency and its members. Because many leaders see themselves as change agents, they may believe that being a change agent without negatively putting stress on employees is just not possible. Depending on a variety of factors, police leaders may be realistic in the life expectancy of their careers and be keenly aware of the limited time given to them to bring about change, with the average chief’s tenure lasting two to three years.3 It seems nearly impossible to accomplish lasting organizational change in such a brief time frame without imposing a significant amount of stress on the workforce. Time is a limited commodity.
Assessing Agency Culture
So how does a chief meet his or her goals and lessen the emotional impact on the workforce? Before implementing any strategic plan, the chief must understand the agency’s culture. This is especially important if the new chief is coming from the outside of the agency. Once a leader has a better understanding of the culture, he or she can develop strategic plans that minimize the organizational stressors by including organizational resiliency and habit-changing strategies.
Research on leadership and change provides a roadmap for identifying an organization’s culture and in determining the best approaches to mitigate issues and desired outcomes. Organizational culture can be defined as “a system of shared meanings held by members that distinguish the organization from other organizations.”4 The seven characteristics that represent an organization’s culture are innovation and risk-taking, attention to detail, outcome orientation, people orientation, team orientation, aggressiveness, and stability. A strength assessment, which can take the form of a survey of each of the seven characteristics of the organization’s culture, is needed to determine how the employees perceive each attribute.
Are the employees encouraged to be innovative? Do the employees feel they are encouraged to think outside of the box to come up with new ideas and solutions? Are employees risk-averse or risk-prone? A critical characteristic to evaluate is the agency’s attention to detail. Are programs and projects managed effectively and efficiently? Does an environment of good order and discipline exist within the ranks? To assess outcome orientation is to determine if the management team operates strategically. Is the management team results-oriented, or are they stuck on procedures and techniques? How do the employees feel about people and team orientations? Do they think that the effects of decisions on employees are considered by management? Is there a team-oriented environment in existence within the agency, or are there silos? Evaluating the level of aggressiveness within the agency will help determine if employees are aggressive and competitive or laissez-faire. Last, are activities organized with the mind-set of growth and improvement, or is the culture one of maintaining business as usual?
Examining the responses to these questions produces clarity in understanding the agency’s culture and the challenges the culture might contribute to implementing a strategic plan. It will be telling to know if the agency is innovative or if “business as usual” is the accepted norm. It is critical to know if managers lead by mandating strict adherence to volumes of general orders or if employees are trusted to make the right decisions based on common sense. Do the employees at all levels have a secure sense of autonomy in doing their jobs, or do they feel micro-managed? Understanding the culture of the agency is critical to the successful implementation of a change plan. It is the missing ingredient in most agency’s strategic plans and the reason why so many employees suffer from organizational stressors. Once an agency’s culture is revealed and understood, a chief can include organizational resiliency strategies into the overall change plan to address unexpected challenges.
The American Psychological Association defines resilience as “the process of adapting well in the face of adversity, trauma, tragedy, threats, or significant sources of stress.”5 Chiefs will benefit from establishing and implementing organizational resiliency strategies within their change plans.
In addition to the daily inherent operational stressors of the job, a strategic plan with new and unfamiliar expectations of the officers may only add to their actual or perceived levels of stress. Developing and increasing workforce resiliency is key to helping the organization overcome these challenges and successful change plans.
As previously mentioned, research confirms organizational stressors as the primary source of stress for police officers, and a concerning employee behavior arising from organizationally induced stressors within law enforcement organizations is suicide. It has been proposed that organizationally based stresses negatively affect police officers and are “predictors of depression, anxiety, and traumatic stress symptoms,” leading to recommendations that law enforcement leaders consider their organizationally based stressors as they evaluate their agency’s wellness and suicide prevention programs. Leaders might also consider any roles their disciplinary process may be playing in creating stress.6
Strategies for Workforce Resiliency
Four strategies for police leaders to address workforce resiliency within their strategic plan implementation follow.
Strategy #1—Supportive Leadership
Literature on the topic supports the assertion that organizational stressors is the top issue for rank-and-file police officers, and effective leadership is key to building individual and organizational resiliency.7
A wellness study of 25 Canadian police organizations found the role of leadership to be a contributing factor to the efficiency of the agencies studied, and supportive administration is strongly associated with employee well-being. The researchers noted that “supportive leadership plays a significant role in maintaining the mental health of police service personnel and assisting those with issues to remain at or return to work quickly.” The Canadian study highlights a leadership training program implemented at the Ontario Police College to help police leaders improve their skills with developing their subordinates’ resiliency and creating a work environment that engages in identifying and mitigating organizational and operational stressors, known as the Mental Readiness Program.8
The implementation of a program such as the Mental Readiness Program for supervisors and commanders should be considered at agencies of all sizes to help minimize stress throughout their careers, particularly during times of change.
Strategy #2—Education-Based Disciplinary Program
Another organizational stress factor is officers’ concern with their agency’s disciplinary process. Police discipline has long been a major administrative issue within police organizations. In most police agencies, leaders are frustrated with the lengthy procedures, grievances, unions, and public perception associated with holding their employees accountable. In spite of police leaders’ best efforts, disciplined officers often do not feel they are treated fairly in administrative disciplinary processes, increasing their stress and frustration. A notable variation from the traditional disciplinary process in law enforcement has been implemented at the Los Angeles Sheriff’s Department (LASD). LASD’s Education-Based Discipline (EBD) is a voluntary program that allows employees to avoid traditional punishment by participating in training that aims to change the behavior for which they are being disciplined.9
Law enforcement leaders should re-evaluate their disciplinary procedures and implement best practices, such as the LASD EBD to mitigate organizational stressors associated with employee discipline.
Strategy #3—Physical Fitness Program
Employee wellness indicators must be a key aspect of any law enforcement organization’s strategic plan. To focus strictly on the law enforcement organization’s performance indicators without considering the health of its employees is akin to a business plan that focuses solely on profits.
A physical fitness program is a necessary aspect of addressing organizational stress. It also brings with it many benefits related to reduced injuries and better performance. A physical fitness program should have job-specific physical fitness standards and be incorporated into the job description requirements for sworn personnel. The physical fitness standards should apply to all sworn employees, from the police chief to the recruit. The physical fitness standards should be part of the hiring process, and all sworn employees should be required to pass an on-going annual physical fitness test.
The physical fitness program should make fitness specialists available to employees to help them meet the new standards. The expertise necessary to help employees include physical fitness coaches, nutritionists, yoga instructors, physical therapists, and injury prevention specialists. The agency should either create positions for these experts within the agency or contract out the services at no cost to employees. The physical fitness program should incorporate the necessary personnel and non-personnel funds needed for any equipment and other services to help employees meet their physical fitness goals.
Strategy #4—Mental Health Fitness Program
As discussed, the adverse outcomes of the stressors on officers have led to a high rate of suicides within the law enforcement profession. To improve officers’ job satisfaction and reduce the stress that can lead to suicide, a mental health fitness program should be implemented to address the psychological and spiritual well being of officers.
As in the physical fitness program, outside experts are needed to help guide employees to build resiliency against inherent police stressors and organizational stressors by sustaining and improving their mental health. If an agency is fiscally capable, it should make available to staff a full-time, licensed clinical psychiatrist and therapist. In addition to a licensed clinical psychiatrist and therapist, the implementation or expansion of an employee assistance program (EAP) should be considered. The EAP program should be accompanied by peer support, a critical incident debriefing team, and chaplain services.10
Conclusion
Police leaders should not view organizational strategic plans and employee wellness programs as independent silos. They must both be viewed as essential and integrated elements that have clear consequences on each other’s success. Research shows that what takes place within the organization is the driving cause of employees’ job dissatisfaction and organizational performance.11 By considering and implementing the four resiliency strategies into the agency’s strategic plan, chiefs can help develop a positive employee work environment and therefore improve the chance that their change plans will succeed and last. The listed evidence-based strategies, if strategically implemented and measured periodically with employee feedback surveys, can reduce employees’ stress by increasing their resiliency. Anyone placed into an executive role can use their office’s power as a Machiavellian tool to execute and mandate change. But, to be a true leader, a person must be able to bring about change by inspiring the employees to want to take part in the change process. d
Notes:
1 John M. Violanti and Fred Aron, “Sources of Police Stressors, Job Attitudes, and Psychological Distress,” Psychological Reports 72, no. 3 (June 1993): 899–904.
2 Steven Pitts, James Greenwald, and Robb Wolf, “Resiliency as a Path to Wellness,” Officer Safety Corner, Police Chief 79, no. 12 (December 2012): 18–24.
3 Edward Connors and Barbara Webster, Transforming the Law Enforcement Organization to Community Policing, Final Monograph (Alexandria, VA: Institute for Law and Justice, 2001), 118.
4 Stephen P. Robbins and Timothy A. Judge, Essentials of Organizational Behavior, 14th ed. (Boston, MA: Pearson Education, 2016).
5 American Psychological Association, “The Road to Resilience.”
6 John M. Violanti et al., “Effort–Reward Imbalance and Overcommitment at Work: Associations with Police Burnout,” Police Quarterly 21, no. 4 (December 2018): 440–460.
7 Thomas E. Coghlan, “Organizational Contributions to Police Suicide,” Officer Safety Corner, Police Chief 85, no. 9 (September 2018): 12–13.
8 Irene Barath, “The Role of Supportive Leadership Practices in Maintaining the Health and Wellness of Law Enforcement Personnel and Organizations,” Police Chief Online, Nov 16, 2016.
9 Darrel W. Stephens, “Police Discipline: A Case for Change,” New Perspectives in Policing (June 2011).
10 David Estep and Rhonda Allen, “Building a Case for Comprehensive EAPs in Law Enforcement Agencies,” Change Management: An International Journal 17, no. 3 (2017): 11–20.
11 John M. Violanti and Deborah J. Campbell, “Building Resiliency: A Protective Leadership Strategy for Increasing Performance,” Police Chief 84, no. 5 (May 2017): 30–33.
Please cite as
Shahram Fard, “Harmless Change Agent,” Police Chief Online, January 22, 2020.
