Recruitment and retention will be one of the most significant challenges facing law enforcement in the near future; in fact, it is already a challenge for many agencies. There are several reasons for this difficulty, including tighter budgets, the effects of social media on the perception of law enforcement, and a lack of qualified people applying. There are three particular areas to be reviewed when addressing this challenge: the legacy of the agency, generational differences, and motivation.
Legacy
Before discussing legacy, the agency should review its current state. A mirror needs to be taken out, and the reflection needs to be looked at deeply. Law enforcement leaders and personnel should be able to quickly answer the following questions:
- What is the agency’s mission?
- How does the whole community see the agency?
- Does the agency seek public “favor” from any one group within the community?
- Does the agency receive a high number of complaints?
The answers to these questions create a picture of the agency. The core of the questions come from Sir Robert Peel’s principles from 1829, with the creation of the modern police service in London.1 Sir Robert Peel’s Principles of Law Enforcement are still in use with Durham Constabulary and are a requirement of all officers and staff to follow.2 Four of Peel’s principles provide the basis for the questions previously presented.
Principle 1: The basic mission for which police exist is to prevent crime and disorder as an alternative to the repression of crime and disorder by military force and severity of legal punishment.
This principle aligns with the first question about the agency’s mission. This question can go very deep into self and agency. Does the agency’s mission line up with personnel’s goals or why they came to the agency? Does the agency’s mission line up with the direction of the community? Does the mission meet the overall purpose of law enforcement, which should be to prevent crime and disorder? If the personnel or community is not on board with the agency’s mission, then there will be internal and external pushback. An agency’s purpose should not just be clear to its staff, but it should also be clear to those whom they serve.
Principle 2: The ability of the police to perform their duties is dependent upon public approval of police existence, actions, behavior, and the ability of the police to secure and maintain public trust.
This principle aligns with question two: how does the whole community see the agency? No public service can survive without public approval; credibility and legitimacy are the keys for any organizational success. A community that respects its law enforcement will stand up for its agency, even when things go bad. Respect plays a role in recruitment, too—local candidates are not likely to apply to work at places that they do not respect. Respect is very powerful for an agency’s funding, as well. That respect will influence if there will be cuts or if critical additional funding will be given.
Principle 5: The police seek and preserve public favor, not by catering to public opinion, but by constantly demonstrating absolute impartial service to the law, in complete independence of policy, and without regard to the justice or injustice of the substance of individual laws; by readily offering individual service and friendship to all members of society without regard to their race or social standing, by ready exercise of courtesy and friendly good humor; and by readily offering individual sacrifice in protecting and preserving life.
This principle gives rise to question three. Agencies can fall into this trap of seeking public “favor” from one group within the community. However, this creates divides and issues within a community. It becomes even more important to remember two commonly cited rules: “Treat people as you want to be treated,” and “respect is earned not given.” Internal favoritism can also cause problems, leading to divides within the agency. It is hard to solve the issues of the community if an agency cannot solve its own issues. It all starts with people treating their co-workers, supervisors, and staff with respect.
Principle 7: The police at all times should maintain a relationship with the public that gives reality to the historic tradition that the police are the public and the public are the police; the police are the only members of the public who are paid to give full-time attention to duties that are incumbent on every citizen in the intent of the community welfare.
Thus, the final question—does the agency receive a high number of complaints? Complaints are valuable intelligence that can help an agency evaluate how its officers and the whole agency is doing. Complaints show where there is room for improvement. They generally come from mistreatment (real or perceived) or someone’s feeling of being wronged. This notion also goes back the concept about treating people fairly and with respect. If there is no ownership of something, why should someone care about it? It is essential for an officer to feel that they are a part of the community and believe that the community will be there for them.
An agency’s legacy is about the mentorship and leadership that is passed on to future generations—not only to prospective and future members of the department, but to the community as a whole. What is passed on is simply what has been left behind, intentionally or unintentionally.
Generational Differences
Generations are a large topic in the law enforcement community. Many have probably heard the common stereotypes that newer generations are lazy, do not know how to talk to people, are always on their phones, don’t want to work overtime, only want to work one shift with weekends off, think they should be chiefs of police, and so forth. To move forward, though, it is time to stop blaming the new generations, instead determine how to find a way to connect.
A first step of change is building knowledge of generations. There are many resources out there on the issues of generations. Jason Dorsey and his team from the Center for Generational Kinetics have some great information out there on generations, and Dorsey has given a TedTalk on the topic.3
Generations have been given labels in order to be studied, and normally a study will define the times and names to be used. Often, for consistency, the names and dates will match other studies done on the same generations.
Major events affect generations. Those who lived through a major cultural event will see life differently than a person who knows that major cultural event only as history. Thus, those who are of different age groups will see life differently.
Some basic information from Dorsey’s research, which defines millennials as those born from 1977 to 1995, can help explain some of the current and upcoming issues with hiring and retention:
- 48 percent are more likely to find their first position through the online job search.
- 40 percent don’t spend a full minute reviewing job descriptions.
- 46 percent prefer going to the company’s website to apply for a job.
- 30 percent think is acceptable to arrive five minutes late (or more) for a job interview.
- 33 percent decide if they will stay long-term at a job within the first week; 63 percent decide in the first month.
- 43 percent want professional feedback once a week, and 58 percent are more productive when happy at work.
- 58 percent feel awkward when their boss “friends” them on Facebook.
- 45 percent quit a job if they did not see a path for career growth.
- 34 percent would leave a job on the spot if asked to delete their Facebook page.4
Want to test the effectivness of an agency’s job posting? Hand it to a high school student or college student and have the student look it over and provide feedback. There is a lot to be learned. For example, the posting might be too long or might include informaiton that student did not understand. Look at local schools, and see how students are taught. Are they taught to take tests or think critically? This will affect how they remember things and what they might remember. The job posting has to get them to the door to start the long hiring process.
The millennials that are entering law enforcement tend to be focused more on personal lifestyle balance, then the job of law enforcement. Law enforcement still might be a calling for them, but it is not the career it once was for previous generations. There tends to be more overtime open at agencies, as the millennials are not taking every chance at extra hours like older generations did. As the reseach provided previously shows, they will know in the first month if they will stay at the agency long term. In addition, 45 percent of millennials would quit a job if they didn’t see a career path they wanted at the company. If looking at retaining personnel, an agency needs to look at the work-life balance for employees, and the employees’ purpose of being at the agency will be important.
Another change being reported from a few departments is shown during employment interviews. The candidates are looking at the agency to see if it is the right fit for them. This has led to interview panels feeling like they were being interviewed by the candidate instead of the typical reverse. It is something to think about when setting up a interview panel—those on the panel need to be ready to answer human resource questions or questions about the department that might be somewhat blunt. Agencies are losing candidates in the academy, and one of the reasons stated by recruits is “this is not what they expected.” So, before investing in recruits, make sure the interview panel presents a clear picture of the agency, including job expectations and career paths in the department.
To avoid this issue, it is recommended that agencies spend time up front with the candidates, as this will save time and money in the long run. A ride-along program for candidates can go a long way in increasing their understanding of the job. Consider using field training officers (FTOs) for this ride-along, as they can answer more questions about the hiring and training process. Plus, it can help build an early positive relationship between the candidate and the department.
The bottom line in hiring incoming and future generations is do not apply what worked for older employees to newer ones. In hiring and retention, there needs to be an understanding of the generation and individual. Remember, it is the newer generations that will drive changes forward for the profession.
Motivation
The research to examine motivation is very helpful in determining solutions for recruitment and retention. Business writer Daniel Pink talks about the development of motivation in his book, Drive: The Surprising Truth About What Motivates Us. The first type of motivation “Motivation 1.0,” which deals with the basic needs to survive. Next is “Motivation 2.0,” which involves the “carrot and the stick”—the use of reward or punishment to control someone’s behavior. Finally, there is “Motivation 3.0,” which Pink uses to refer to autonomy, mastery, and purpose.5
The biggest issue that Pink found between motivation 2.0 and 3.0 had to deal with complex tasks. What the research showed was that on simple tasks, motivation 2.0 worked well. However, with complex task, the motivation 2.0 with a reward base would slow down versus motivation that was non-reward driven: “An incentive designed to clarify thinking and sharpen creativity ended up clouding thinking and dulling creativity.” The focus split between the reward and task.6 Does this mean that 2.0 is bad? No, not at all. However, it does have its time and place, which is when it is being used to motivate people to complete simple tasks.
One important idea to remember is “having a job” is not a reward for the newer generation of employees. It could work in the short term if there is something else driving to them to stay there. However, newer generations are not afraid to start over somewhere else.
Here are a couple of issues with motivation 2.0 or reward and punishment.
The carrot is simply a reward or incentive of some type. The carrot comes with pitfalls for leaders. One pitfall is the risk that incentives that are working to drive desired behavior could run out as funding gets cut. The second pitfall is not having a large enough incentive. What tends to happen is the current incentive is just not enough, which forces the leader to give more. This can lead to entitlement and motivation will drop when there is nothing more the leader can give. The final pitfall is the desire for the incentive wears off and does not motivate anymore. This forces the leader to find something else—if they have something else. The carrots can create many internal issues if not used correctly and can lead to (or give the image of) favoritism, which has its own issues.
The stick is designed to be used when the carrot is not working. The stick (punishment) does serve its purpose when discipline is required. The pitfalls of using the stick include causing staff to avoid making decisions for fear of punishment, which can lead to a need for micromanagement, or a total loss of motivation if they feel that no matter what they do, they will be punished. Overuse of the stick will lead to loss of personnel and possible internal damage to the agency.
Pink’s ideas for motivation 3.0 work well as a replacement for the “carrot and stick” when it comes to motivating people to complete complex tasks. Motivation 3.0 includes autonomy, mastery, and purpose.
Autonomy is giving a person clear directions and allowing that person to complete the task on his or her own. Without clear guidelines, anything is possible. Failure is part of the learning process; however, there is a time and place to allow failure to happen in law enforcement. The goal is not to get anyone hurt if they fail. Autonomy does not mean letting people run wild; they still need direction, just not someone constantly managing their every step.
Mastery is having the skills to complete the task. When employees have achieved mastery, then giving them autonomy becomes more comfortable for leadership. However, it is important to communicate that employees continue to learn and develop even after they have “mastered” something. As things change, so too do the skills needed.
Purpose is the reason why a task needs to be done. A reason for a task allows a person to be self-driven, which is more powerful than the “carrot and stick” motivation. If people enjoy doing something or find it important, they don’t usually need to be told to do it.
The essential parts of motivation 3.0 is having a right balance between autonomy, mastery, and purpose. Too much of one can cause issues with the others.
Motivation is the heart of an agency, and it requires care from every member of the agency. A lack of motivation (and heart) causes problems for both the agency and the community it serves.
Conclusion
An agency’s legacy is dependent on the people that make up the agency. Respect for each other and the community can build a strong legacy for future generations. Understanding those generations and ensuring the right fit for both the person and agency are significant for the agency’s legacy, and using the right motivation is important in recruiting and retaining those who will carry the agency forward.d
Notes:
1 Norman Gash, “Sir Robert Peel: Prime Minster of United Kingdom, ” Encyclopædia Britannica.
2 Durham Constabulary UK, “Sir Robert Peel’s Principles of Law Enforcement, 1929.”
3 The Center for Generational Kinetics; Jason Dorsey, “What Do We Know About the Generation After Millennials?” TedXHouston, November 18, 2015, video 18:29.
4 The Center for Generational Kinetics, “Is There REALLY a Generational Divide at Work?” infographic, 2014.
5 Daniel Pink, Drive: The Surprising Truth About What Motivates Us (New York: Riverhead Books, 2009).
6 Pink, Drive, 42.
Please cite as
Shawn Walker, “Three Areas of Consideration for Solving Recruitment Challenges,” Police Chief online, October 24, 2018.
