Where Can We Find More Qualified Applicants?

Many law enforcement agencies across the nation have recently reported increasing difficulty in recruiting well-qualified individuals to serve as law enforcement officers. Their recruiting efforts are often targeted at criminal justice students in college, and military veterans. While there is nothing wrong with utilizing these two pipelines for qualified applicants, the fact that these methods are not producing the needed results points to the necessity to change the way law enforcement agencies recruit. This means moving beyond the handful of job fairs that recruiters traditionally attend and casting a wider net.

Are there other fields that contain a high proportion of individuals who also might be interested in a career in law enforcement, but have never taken the time to explore the profession? What career fields might be attracting some of the very same applicants that law enforcement agencies should be recruiting?

In order to explore this question, and many others related to recruiting and hiring for law enforcement, Dolan Consulting Group (DCG) surveyed 1,673 current law enforcement officers from across the nation. We asked them to think back to when they were applying to become a law enforcement officer for the first time. We asked them to imagine they had been blocked from becoming a law enforcement officer for some reason, such as a vision or another health issue. We asked them to tell us what other occupation or career field they would have pursued instead of law enforcement. We did this to explore if there were any common alternative career choices that were revealed among current law enforcement officers. If so, this would suggest these career fields contain individuals who may be interested in police work—individuals who might be swayed to consider a law enforcement career if they knew more about the job and were invited to apply. 

The Sample

All sworn law enforcement officers who attended the various training courses offered by DCG between August 2018 and March 2019 were given the opportunity to participate in our DCG Police Recruiting and Hiring Survey. A total of 1,673 sworn personnel took the survey, of which 286 (17.1%) were female and 1,387 (82.9%) were male. The racial composition of the respondents was 83.4% White (non-Hispanic), 6.8% African-American, 5.4% Hispanic, 1.4% Multiracial, 1.0% Native American, 0.4% Asian, and 1.6% all other groups. In terms of highest education level, 30.8% had less than an associate’s degree, 18.2% had an associate’s degree, and 51% had a bachelor’s degree or higher.

A total of 52.8% of the respondents held the rank of officer, deputy, or trooper, while another 10.0% held the rank of detective. Another 23.0% held first-line supervisory ranks (corporal or sergeant), 4.5% held middle-management ranks (mostly lieutenants), and the remaining 9.7% held command staff ranks (captain or higher). Approximately 65% of the respondents were assigned to the patrol division of their agency, 14% to investigations, and 14% to command administration. The remaining 7% indicated other assignments such as training, community policing unit, or media relations. These respondents came from 49 different states and agencies ranging in size from less than a dozen officers to agencies with thousands of officers.

As stated earlier, we asked these individuals to share what profession or career field they would likely have pursued if the path to a law enforcement career had been blocked for some reason. The responses of the entire sample are displayed in Table 1 below. As this table reveals, there were a wide array of alternative careers disclosed. A total of 246 specific jobs were mentioned, making individual analysis more difficult. The responses were therefore grouped by career categories. For example, individuals who indicated alternative career choices of doctor, pharmacist, nurse, radiologist, physical therapist, speech therapist, and occupational therapist were all grouped into a category titled “Medical Careers.” Once these groupings were accomplished, some trends started to be revealed.

 When examining the entire sample together in Table 1, it is evident that there are specific alternative careers that attract people who have made law enforcement their current career. Despite there being a total of 34 career categories, more than half of the responses were concentrated within only four categories, and three-quarters of the responses fell into the top eight categories. Military careers were the most prevalent, which is probably no surprise as, traditionally, large numbers of law enforcement officers have been veterans.

The second-most common career category, professional business careers, may be more surprising. Fire rescue careers came next, a career field closely related to law enforcement in terms of helping people and being first responders to crises. Education was the fourth most commonly selected field, with several respondents actually disclosing they left jobs they already had as teachers in order to become law enforcement officers. These four categories alone accounted for half (50.7%) of the respondents in the sample.

The fifth top-ranked category was medical professions—another career area where people seek life fulfillment by helping people. This was followed by the building trades, law, and science and technology careers. The remaining 26 career categories combined only accounted for a quarter of the respondents. These results indicate that those who select law enforcement as a career come from a wide variety of interests and backgrounds. Nevertheless, there are notable areas of career interest concentration.

Are there Male and Female Differences?

Next, we divided the sample by sex to see if the responses were different between males and females. Females are underrepresented within the law enforcement profession and if differences were found, they might identify areas for targeting the recruitment of female candidates. As Table 2 below reveals, differences between the sexes were revealed. The top five categories selected by the male respondents accounted for roughly 60% of the male sample. The top career fields identified by the male respondents matched the top five responses for the overall sample with the exception of removal of the medical profession and the addition of the building trades. 

The female responses differed in several ways. One third of the female respondents indicated that if they had not chosen a law enforcement career they would have become (or were) teachers, nurses, or medical therapists—jobs disproportionately held by women in our society. Another quarter of the female respondents identified the business world, the military, and law as their alternative career choices. Attempts to recruit more women into law enforcement should target these career areas, especially college majors and persons working in the fields of education and medicine.

Are there Race / Ethnic Differences?

Many law enforcement agencies feel that they are under social pressure to increase the racial diversity of their organization. In order to assist efforts to recruit more qualified minority applicants, we examined the responses by race / ethnic categories. The largest category in the sample was non-Hispanic Whites (1,395 respondents). African-American and Hispanic respondent representations were large enough for analysis, being 114 and 90 respondents respectively. Only seven respondents were Asian-Americans, however, so care should be taken not to over-emphasize the results for this group. Seven individuals hardly represent the diversity of experiences / attitudes among all of the nation’s Asian-American police officers. Nevertheless, this analysis by race revealed distinct differences in responses across groups, as revealed in Table 3 below. 

As Table 3 reveals, the top five categories for Whites contain about 60% of the White respondents, with more than a quarter of responses falling into military or professional business careers, followed by fire rescue, education, and medical careers. The top five alternate careers for African-Americans, however, has several differences. Despite having military careers as the most frequent response (identical to Whites at 15.6%), African-Americans were more likely than were Whites to identify education and medical careers as their alternative career options. Additionally, unlike Whites, the blue collar fields of corrections careers and the building trades were more commonly selected options by African-American officers.   

The Hispanic respondents also had military careers as the most cited career alternative, however, the proportion of this group that selected the military (21.2%) was far greater than that of the other three race / ethnic groups. Hispanics also highly rated business professions, education, medical careers, and the building trades. Despite keeping in mind that the Asian-American representation was very small, it was noteworthy that the alternative career choices for two-thirds of the Asian-American officers were either medicine, science / technology, or the business professions, which differed from the responses of the other three groups. 

Have Things Changed Over Time?

Finally, we compared the responses of officers hired within the last five years, to those hired more than five years ago. The results, presented in Table 4 below, again suggest differences by era of hiring. A total of 233 respondents had joined the law enforcement profession within the last five years. The top five responses of these individuals reveal either societal changes over time, or economic changes, or both.

While 17.1% of those hired more than five years ago would have selected a military career as their “backup career” option, only 9.7% of those hired within the last five years would have done so. Over previous generations of law enforcement officers, the most recent generation is the least likely to have considered a military career. Instead, the most recent generation of law enforcement officers were much more interested in alternative careers in business, the medical field, or serving in the alternative first responder career of fire rescue. Furthermore, whereas 7.8% of officers from past generations of law enforcement would have selected one of the building trades, this field did not make the top five list for officers hired within the last five years.   

Actionable Steps

The results of these analyses suggest several practical steps with regard to law enforcement recruiting strategies.

Reach Out to Business Professionals – Although most people would not consider the business professions to be associated with law enforcement, no matter how we analyzed the responses the business professions almost always were among the top five categories for alternative career options. Business careers such as sales, management and marketing require strong people skills, creativity and self-motivation—all skills one needs in law enforcement.

Law enforcement, however, provides additional benefits that the business professions usually do not, such as the ability to make a difference in society and greater job stability. According to 2016 data from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, 20% of businesses with employees fail within the first year, 50% fail within five years, and 70% fail within ten years.[1] Some business professionals, tired of the stress of constantly changing companies, locations, and benefits plans, may welcome the stability of a career in law enforcement. Salaries within the business professions are also comparable to the law enforcement career as entry-level positions in marketing start around $40,000 today, and mid-level business managers make around $83,000 annually.[2] 

Many people employed within the business world may not have an accurate view of the law enforcement profession, or the salary and benefits the career offers. Take every opportunity to inform professional business people within your community about the benefits (personal as well as material) of a law enforcement career. When a business in your area announces it is struggling, downsizing, or going out of business, approach the leadership of the business and ask for permission to make a recruiting presentation to their professional staff. Offer ride-along opportunities as well, so that they can see the job first hand. Many of these business professionals might be surprised to learn what police work is really like, and how much money police officers actually make.

Reach Out to Teachers and Education Students – This was another career area that almost always made the top five list, and was the highest ranked for female officers. Public school teachers must be educated, able to take charge of an unruly group of uncooperative individuals using only voice commands, and resolve conflicts on a daily basis. Almost all want to make a difference in society and are focused on helping people. Nevertheless, a 2017 nationwide study revealed that approximately 16% of public school teachers quit (not retire) every year, with only about half of them going on to another teaching job at a better school district. In other words, about 8% of public school teachers become disillusioned with their career choice every year.[3] If they meet your agency’s qualifications, a law enforcement career may allow these individuals to achieve the life purpose they sought in teaching, while giving them the authority to actually make a difference.

Just as with people within the business field, many working within education may not have an accurate image of the law enforcement career, or its salary. According to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics in 2016, the national average salary for a mid-career public school teacher in the U.S. (15+ years of experience and a master’s degree) was $56,000, with career-starting salaries still around $30,000 for those with a bachelor’s degree.[4] Make efforts to reach out to teachers, especially public school teachers with less than five years in the career, offering them materials about the profession and ride-along opportunities to see the law enforcement career first hand. Explain how their current job skills relate well to the skills needed in law enforcement. If you have a former teacher (or teachers) on your department, consider using them as the ones to reach out to these struggling, early-career teachers. 

Reach Out to Nursing and Other Medical Students – Nurses have a turnover rate similar to that of teachers, however the vast majority of nurses and other medical professionals who quit their jobs simply go on to the same job with another employer. They are quitting their employers, not their careers.[5] Medical careers also generally offer equivalent or higher salaries than are offered by a law enforcement career. 

However, the medical professions consistently made the top five list of alternative careers and the washout rate within nursing programs is extremely high. One study revealed that approximately 42% of nursing students in North Carolina do not successfully complete their nursing programs.[6] The academic factors most likely to wash out nursing students are courses in organic chemistry that require a good math aptitude, and physiology courses that require the memorization of all the hundreds of the body’s bones, organs, and their functions.[7] Despite weaknesses in these specific academic abilities, these failing students might still make excellent police officers—a career that offers exciting professional work and the ability to help people in times of crisis.

Law enforcement agencies should make efforts to reach out to local college nursing programs. Recruiters should sit down with the heads of these programs and offer to develop a partnership to talk to students whose academic performance in the nursing program has been less than satisfactory in the areas of math and science. Offer a recruiting presentation on campus that targets students in the medically-related programs that suggests law enforcement as an alternate career. Provide an accurate description of the law enforcement career field and encourage ride-along opportunities.        

Consider Advertising Law Enforcement as a “Helping Profession” and a “Talking Profession” – Our data reveals that the strictly paramilitary aspects of law enforcement is not the draw that it once was. Particularly among those law enforcement officers hired within the last five years, careers in business and medicine significantly outrank the military as career alternatives to law enforcement. 

Maintaining the pipeline of disciplined, mission-focused military veterans that transition into law enforcement seems vitally important. However, recruiters should be careful not to emphasize the similarities between law enforcement and the military at the expense of attracting qualified applicants who never seriously considered joining the military. Placing a disproportionate emphasis on engaging in pursuits and serving felony warrants might make it harder to attract the qualified individuals that law enforcement agencies need to attract—the applicants who are currently considering or engaged in careers in medicine, business, or education.

Conclusion

Our findings suggest that there are career fields that can be mined for qualified individuals who might make excellent law enforcement officers—they just do not know it yet. Several professional career fields attract individuals who want the same things out of career that law enforcement can offer. What these individuals are lacking, perhaps, is accurate knowledge about the law enforcement career field and a personal invitation to apply. It is time we changed that.

 

References

[1] U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (2017). Business Employment Dynamics. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Labor.

[2] Workable Inc. (2019). Salary Profiles Report. San Francisco, CA: Workable Inc.

[3] Carver-Thomas, D. & Darling-Hammond, L. (2017). Teacher Turnover: Why It Matters and What We Can Do About It. Palo Alto, CA: Learning Policy Institute.

[4] U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (2018). National Occupational Employment and Wage Estimates United States. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Labor.

[5] Parveen, M., Maimani, K., & Kassim, N. M. (2017). Quality of work life: The determinants of job satisfaction and retention among RNs and OHPs. International Journal for Quality Research, 11(1), 173-194.

[6] Fraher, E., Belsky, D. W., Gaul, K., & Carpenter, J. (2010). Factors affecting attrition from associate degree nursing programs in North Carolina. Cahiers de sociologie et de démographie médicales, 50(2), 213-246.

[7] Smith, Linda; Engelke, Martha; Swanson, Melvin (2016). Student retention in associate degree nursing programs in North Carolina. Journal of Applied Research in the Community College, 23(1), 41-56.

The Need for Empathetic Verbal De-escalation Training for Healthcare Professionals

Most everyone within the healthcare field has encountered verbal hostility from patients, the family members of patients, or other staff members. However, have healthcare professionals been trained how to handle these situations with empathy, professionalism, and tact? While the significant attention directed toward maintaining the technical or clinical skills of medical staff is necessary, the evidence suggests that not enough attention has been devoted to equipping medical personnel with the skills to handle situations involving verbal conflict.

 

A Need for Empathetic Verbal De-escalation Skills

Persons who provide medical care are often exposed to aggression – both verbal and physical. A national survey of almost 3,500 hospital emergency room staff revealed that 100% of these staff had witnessed both an act of violence and threats of violence at work within the last three years. Of these emergency room staff members, a quarter had witnessed more than 20 incidents of aggressive behavior in the ER in the last three years, and 20% reported dealing with verbal abuse almost daily.1 Another study that observed patient behavior within an urban hospital emergency room revealed that 16% of patients (1 in 6 patients) displayed hostility toward the medical staff.2 A third emergency room study, involving 1,572 patients at one hospital, revealed 1 in 30 patients committed a violent act against the medical staff, and roughly 50% of patients were verbally hostile at some point.3

In addition to the emergency room setting, nursing staff working in geriatric care and psychiatric units have also reported that dealing with verbal and physical hostility is common.4 Paramedics and other rescue personnel encounter aggression and a lack of patient cooperation on an almost daily basis.5 Medical staff providing palliative care regularly encounter anger and hostility from patients and those grieving with the patients.6 Even clerical staff working in intake and records within hospitals and clinics often report having to deal with hostility and threats from waiting patients, or the family and friends of patients.7

Unfortunately, research has also revealed significant deficits in empathetic verbal de-escalation skills within the healthcare field. While the healthcare profession attracts individuals with high levels of empathy for their fellow humans, only individuals who are driven and have strong leadership skills usually complete the training necessary to earn their positions as doctors, nurses, therapists, technicians, or paramedics. As a result, more than one study has suggested that the focus on leadership skills and technical proficiency has been at the expense of empathetic listening and verbal de-escalation skills.8

In survey after survey, healthcare staff report feeling ill-equipped to handle situations involving patient (or even coworker) hostility and aggression. Studies of doctors, nurses, paramedics, and intake staff have revealed that most feel unprepared and untrained to handle patient verbal hostility in an effective and professional manner.9 Even within psychiatric care units, where staff are more likely to have received training for the management of aggressive behavior, treatment staff have complained that their training often emphasizes policies and theoretical concepts rather than providing practical skills people need for calming individuals who are angry or upset.10

 

The Results of Empathetic Verbal De-escalation Skills Training

Even without having had specific training in verbal de-escalation skills, some healthcare staff naturally have outstanding communication skills that involve deflecting verbal abuse, empathetic listening, paraphrasing back statements, and offering options that guide individuals to a peaceful resolution of the conflict. Doctors and nurses who utilize these communication skills are rated as more professional by their patients and coworkers, receive fewer complaints about their demeanor, and experience fewer violent acts.11 Unfortunately, these verbal de-escalation skills do not come naturally to most people.

Realizing the need for verbal de-escalation skills training, some healthcare organizations have recently begun providing this sort of training to their staff – with very positive results. One study involved providing first-year nursing students with a course in patient communication skills and verbal de-escalation. A pretest / posttest survey before and after the course revealed that after completing the course the majority of the nursing students felt much more confident about their ability to handle stressful patient interactions.12 In another example, advanced nursing students completed a verbal de-escalation training course just before beginning their clinical placements. Surveyed 3 months into their clinical placements, the nursing students reported that they felt much better prepared to handle their clinical placement experiences because they had completed the verbal de-escalation course.13

In a third study, a group of 110 palliative care nurses received communication and verbal de-escalation training. Then they were surveyed six months later to determine the effects of the training. These nurses reported being calmer, and experiencing less stress, when communicating with patients, and patients’ families after having completed the training. They also reported feeling more confident about handling all difficult communication situations, such as making death notifications. Many of these nurses emphasized that the role-play portion of the training that allowed them to practice their new skills in a safe environment was one of the most beneficial parts of the course.14

Another study involved providing verbal de-escalation training to a group 78 nurses. A comparison of patient violence before and after the training revealed that after the nurses had received the training, acts of patient aggression fell by about 25% over the 28 months after the training.15 Finally, a review of nine additional studies involving verbal de-escalation training within medical settings revealed that all nine studies saw increased staff confidence and improved skills in handling hostile patient behavior.16

 

Conclusion

Clearly, verbal de-escalation training offers many benefits for those working in the medical field. When healthcare professionals develop verbal de-escalation skills, they feel more confident when handling hostile patients, hostile members of patients’ families, and confused patients in emotional crisis. Healthcare professionals with strong verbal de-escalation skills also better manage conflict situations with their coworkers. They are perceived of as more professional by patients and coworkers and experience fewer aggressive acts or demeanor complaints from patients. Regrettably, these skills do not come naturally to most people, including many within the healthcare field. While highly competent in their clinical skills, many medical professionals tend to be lacking the skills to professionally handle verbal conflict in a safe and tactful manner. As a result, healthcare field personnel should all receive patient communication and empathetic verbal de-escalation training on a routine basis in order to improve staff safety and patient care.

Threats to Surviving This Job

Law enforcement is one of the most difficult, stressful, and dangerous careers an individual can pursue. The threats to your life, however, come from more sources than the knives and guns of criminals. In fact, less than 20% of the law enforcement officers who died over the last three years died as a result of an assault. Even after you leave the job, the things you were exposed to as a law enforcement officer can still shorten your life. Recent research has revealed that law enforcement officers still only live an average of 6 years beyond retirement. While the average life expectancy in the U.S. is about 78 years, it is only 66 years for law enforcement officers. 

Just as it is important in officer safety training to identify and analyze the threats posed by criminals, we should also be doing the same for threats posed by sources other than an attacker. Just as we pass along intelligence updates about the latest concealed weapon or be-on-the-lookout (BOLO) memos about dangerous persons in our jurisdictions, we should be passing along information about the other lethal risks that law enforcement officers face. The information below will remind you of the many health dangers you face in a law enforcement career, and will conclude with a brief overview of ways to protect yourself against these many dangers.

 

Law Enforcement Officer Mortality

According to the Officer-Down Memorial Page website, from 2014 through 2018 a total of 836 law enforcement officers died while on duty or in the line of duty. When one adds the estimated number of active law enforcement officers who committed suicide during that same span of time, the total number of officer deaths rises to 1,516 deaths. This equates to an average of 303 officer deaths each year, approximately 45% of which were officer suicides. As there are approximately 809,000 full and part-time law enforcement officers at the local, state, and federal level in the U.S., this means that every year 1 out of every 2,670 law enforcement officers dies at work, or because of their work. 

 

Deaths Due to Violence

Over the years 2014 through 2018, a total of 335 law enforcement officers died from a violent attack. Of these deaths, 251 involved a firearm, 58 a vehicle used as a weapon, 6 bombs, 18 clubs or fists, and 2 involved an edged weapon. Together, these deaths only made up 22.1% of all the officer deaths from 2014 through 2018.

 

Deaths Due to Accidents

Over this same five-year span, 250 law enforcement officers died in an accident. Of these deaths, 216 involved a vehicle, such as cars, motorcycles, aircraft, and watercraft. They involved incidents such as normal driving, emergency driving, and being hit by a vehicle as a pedestrian. The remaining 34 deaths resulted from accidental causes such as drowning, electrocution, firearms accidents, poisonous animal bites, lightning strikes, and falls. Accidents accounted for 16.5% of officer deaths from 2015 through 2018.

 

Deaths Due to Health or Exposures

During this time span, 259 law enforcement officers died at work due to personal health issues, or died due to health problems attributable to things they were exposed to at work. Of these deaths, 161 were due to exposures at work to such things as HIV/AIDS, hepatitis, tuberculosis, or toxic substances, including the toxins encountered by officers at the World Trade Center attack site. The remaining 98 died at work due to a heart attack, stroke, or brain aneurism. Death due to health conditions and exposures accounted for 17.1% of all officer deaths. In addition to these numbers, it is unknown how many officers died in retirement over the last three years due to health problems they developed from their career. Retired law enforcement officers die of heart disease, cancer (esophageal, colon, kidney, and lymphatic), and cirrhosis of the liver at much higher rates than the average U.S. retired population. 

 

Deaths Due to Suicide     

Suicide appears to be the leading single cause of death among active law enforcement officers. All of the causes of death discussed above, when combined, only account for approximately 55% of the officer deaths in the U.S. over five years. While firm numbers are hard to get, it is estimated that at least 680 law enforcement officers took their own lives from 2014 through 2018. In 2018 alone, it has been reported that 167 law enforcement officers within the U.S. committed suicide. As law enforcement officers continue to experience ever-increasing public scrutiny and persistently negative media coverage, it appears that police officer suicides are increasing. 

 

Both the New York City Police Department and the Chicago Police Department, for example, have noted sizeable increases in employee suicides over the last two years. Since 2010, the NYPD had averaged five officer suicide deaths every year – a shocking and terrible annual suicide rate for any single police department. As of September 2019, however, the NYPD had already experienced eleven officer suicides for the year – more than twice the average since 2010. Similarly, in previous decades the Chicago Police Department, a third the size of the NYPD experienced less than one suicide a year. As of September, the Chicago PD had already experienced five officer suicides in 2019. Other communities across the nation have also reported recent increases in law enforcement officer suicides. Suicide has already been a serious threat to law enforcement officers for years, and this threat appears to be dramatically increasing further.  

 

Training Yourself to Survive

Odds are that you already participate in officer safety training to combat the threats posed by violence. You train with your firearm and other weapons. You practice your defensive tactics techniques. You are constantly on guard mentally, observing for possible physical threats. You likely read and discuss books and articles regarding officer safety techniques, but do you do the same to defend against the other (more prevalent) dangers from your job? Do you go to training on officer wellness? Do you read books and articles about how to survive this career and live a healthy retirement? Do you utilize the techniques that can help alleviate stress from the job in a safe and healthy way? Do you practice the techniques that can improve your overall physical and psychological well-being? Do you even know what these techniques are?

There are a number of techniques that have been proven to help law enforcement officers reduce stress, prevent the likelihood of suicide, and reduce the risk of physical and psychological health issues. First, just as in training against violent attacks, mental conditioning helps officers prepare for non-violent situations that still pose career dangers or life stressors. Visualizing potential situations and thinking through in advance how you would handle them improves performance and reduces stress. Second, just as is the case on the firing range, breathing techniques can help lower an officer’s hyperarousal to stressful circumstances, reducing tunnel vision and giving the officer clearer thoughts. Third, physical conditioning, in the form of exercise, proper diet, sufficient sleep, and avoiding substances harmful to your body, can have an enormous impact on fighting off illnesses and reducing stress. Finally, hobbies, interests, and relationships outside of public safety work are crucial to an officer’s physical and mental health.

We at the Dolan Consulting Group (DCG) recognize that working in law enforcement can be both the most stressful job, and the most rewarding noble job, a person can hold. We hope that you take as much interest in your total safety and well-being as you do in your safety from violent attack. We hope that you beat the odds and complete your career physically and psychologically healthy. Below are resources we highly recommend that you utilize to improve your health, safety, and well-being. 

 

Stay safe! 

 

Recommended Books:

Gilmartin, K. M. (2002). Emotional Survival for Law Enforcement: A Guide for Officers and their Families. Tucson, AZ: E-S Press.     

Blum, L. N. (2000). Force Under Pressure: How Cops Live and Why They Die. New York, NY: Lantern Books.

 

Recommended Training Courses:

Peer Support and Mentoring in Law Enforcement: Enhancing Health, Performance and Accountability

Navigating the Officer Involved Shooting and Critical Incidents

Officer and Agency Wellness—Hiring and Retiring Healthy®

Words Matter: The Impact of Specific Language on Traffic Stop Interactions

The most common form of citizen complaint filed against the police involves officer demeanor during a traffic stop encounter.[1] While law enforcement officers disproportionately encounter the criminal element of society, vehicle stops for traffic violations are one of their duties that puts officers in contact with a typical cross-section of the community.[2] Traffic stops can involve criminals, but also involve a lot of average citizens too. Most Americans have been stopped for a traffic violation at some point in their lives. It is crucial, therefore, that we do what we can to keep the support of the average citizens and avoid unnecessarily offending average citizens with inappropriate behavior during traffic stops.

One recent study examined the specific words officers used on traffic stops and explored how these words influenced citizen attitudes about the legitimacy of the stop, and their overall support for the police. In this study, 486 average citizens were recruited to watch a video of a traffic stop encounter, and then answer questions about their opinions of the stop. The participants were asked if they thought the officer had been polite, fair, and acted appropriately. They were also asked questions about their own willingness to cooperate with the police, obey the law, and trust the police.[3]

Each participant was shown a video recording of a staged traffic stop encounter. The recording was from the perspective of a body-worn camera, so the viewer could only hear the officer’s words and not see the officer’s race, age or nonverbal behavior. The officer was played by a real law enforcement officer, and the driver was an actor who was compliant but only stated “yes” and “no” during the encounter. However, there were three different versions of the traffic stop and each participant was assigned to view only one of the three versions. This was done so that the researchers could determine if different communication styles produced different reactions among the viewers.[4] 

Version One – The Minimum 

A total of 162 participants viewed a version of the stop in which the officer only stated the minimum words necessary to complete the stop. When the officer approached the driver, he did not greet the driver. Instead, as an opening, the officer stated, “You were going 48 miles per hour and the speed limit here is 30 miles per hour. Give me your license and registration.” The officer’s tone was calm, even, and not harsh. The officer returned to his patrol car, then returned with a citation. The officer handed the driver an ink pen and showed the driver the citation while stating, “You are getting a ticket. Sign here.” After the driver signed the citation, the officer stated, “You are free to go.” At no time did the officer raise his voice, use profanity, or insult the driver. Nevertheless, the officer also failed to greet the driver, say “please” or “thank you,” explain his reasoning for issuing the citation or ask the driver if there was any reason why the driver was speeding.[5]

When answering the survey questions after this video, the participants indicated that they generally trusted the police, respected the law, and were willing to cooperate with the police. In terms of rating this specific interaction, the participants generally thought that the officer was fair, respectful, and unbiased, but only a few thought the officer had been polite.

Version Two – Polite

Another 162 participants observed the second video encounter instead. This interaction differed in that the officer displayed behaviors that linguists have revealed are key to communicating politeness in American culture. The first of these keys was a greeting. In the second recording, the officer opened the interaction by saying “Good evening, sir. You were going 48 miles per hour and the speed limit here is 30 miles per hour.” A second key to politeness in American culture is use of terms of respect. Throughout the second interaction, the officer consistently addressed the driver as either “Mr. Johnson” or “Sir.” A third key to politeness is making requests rather than demands. In the second version of the stop the officer stated, “Could you please give me your license and registration?” The officer also stated, “Could you please sign here?” A fourth key to politeness is displaying regret for causing another person discomfort. Examples of this include saying we are sorry when bumping into others, or a nurse apologizing for giving an injection (“I’m sorry, but this is going to feel like a pinch”). During the traffic stop, this was manifested through the officer saying, “Unfortunately, I have to give you a ticket for that high of a speed.” Finally, the last key to politeness was the use of “please” and “thank you” where appropriate. The officer included the word please in every request and concluded the stop by saying, “Thanks for your cooperation, Mr. Johnson.”[6]

Compared to the group who viewed the first version of the traffic stop, those who viewed the second version of the stop indicated much higher levels of trust in the police, respect for the law, and willingness to cooperate with the police. The participants who viewed the second version of the stop rated the officer much higher in terms of fairness, respectfulness, and being polite. In summary, all of the participants who viewed the second version of the stop displayed more positive views of this officer, and the police in general, than did the participants who viewed the first version of the stop.  

Version Three – Polite & Friendly

The final 162 participants viewed a third version of the stop. In the third condition, the officer applied all of the politeness characteristics of the second version of the video, but also added social similarity between the officer and the driver by trying to build rapport and explaining his actions. To open the traffic stop, the officer greeted the driver informally by saying, “Hey there. Good evening, sir. You were going 48 miles per hour and the speed limit here is 30 miles per hour. Could you please give me your license and registration?” The officer continued his informal language by saying, “Hang tight, sir, and I’ll be back in a moment” before returning to his patrol vehicle. Upon returning to the driver with the citation, the officer gave an explanation to show that he and the driver shared the same concerns for safety. “Unfortunately, I have to give you a ticket for that high of a speed. Here’s the deal, Mr. Johnson. Every year people die on this particular road from speeding and we’re just trying to keep that from happening. Could you please sign here?” The officer finally closes by saying “Thanks for your cooperation, Mr. Johnson. Okay, sir, drive carefully.”[7]

Compared to the responses from the first two groups of participants, those who viewed the third version of the stop provided the most positive responses to the survey questions that followed. Among the three groups of participants, those who had viewed the third version of the stop recorded the highest scores of support, trust, and willingness to cooperate with the police. They also produced the highest rating scores for the officer in terms of fairness, respectfulness, lack of bias, and politeness. Clearly, the words the officer used in each version of the stop made a difference to the people who witnessed the police-citizen interaction.

Take-Away Lessons

This experiment revealed some key findings that officers can easily apply when interacting with the public to increase citizen support for the police and reduce the likelihood of citizen complaints.

Greet People – It is a norm in every culture that we greet people we meet before we interact with them.

Say Please and Thank You – When people fail to say “please” and “thank you” we consider them uncouth or rude, so avoid acting that way yourself.

Use Terms of Respect – We teach our kids to treat people (especially adults) with respect by requiring them to say “sir,” “ma’am,” or use titles such as Mr. or Ms. When did that stop applying to us?

Make Requests before Making Demands – Nobody, especially Americans, likes being ordered to do something. Sometimes in law enforcement we have to make demands, especially in emergency situations. In all other circumstances, why not ask first?

Give ReasonsPeople want to know why things are happening to them. If you do not explain why, you are leaving the real reasons for your actions up to their imaginations or biases. You are making a just and legitimate enforcement action decision, so be willing to explain that. 

Empathize – Even though it is your job to enforcement the law, and it is the citizen’s own fault for being in this situation, you can always realize that it is no fun to be in their shoes. While is does not change the enforcement action you take, having empathy can help you soften the blow by using words to show you realize this is an uncomfortable and embarrassing situation for the citizen. 

Always remember that your words matter. 


References

[1] Harris, C. J. (2010). Problem officers: an analysis of problem behavior patterns from a large cohort. Journal Criminal Justice, 38(2), 216-225; Hassell, K., & Archbold, C. (2010). Widening the scope on complaints of police misconduct. Policing: An International Journal of Police

Strategies and Management, 33(3), 473-489; Johnson, R. R. (1998). Citizen complaints: What the police should know. FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin, 67(12), 1-5; Terrill, W., & Ingram, J. R. (2016). Citizen complaints against the police: An eight-city examination. Police Quarterly, 19(2), 150-179.

[2] Engel, R. S., & Calnon, J. M. (2004). Examining the influence of drivers’ characteristics during traffic stops with police: Results from a national survey. Justice Quarterly, 21(1), 49-90; Johnson, R. R. (2004). Citizen expectations of police traffic stop behavior. Policing: An International Journal of Police Strategies & Management, 27(4), 487-497.

[3] Lowrey-Kinberg, B. (2019). Experimental results on the effect of politeness strategies on perceptions of police. Language & Communication, 69(1), 42-53.

[4] Ibid.

[5] Ibid.

[6] Ibid.

[7] Ibid.

Recruiting the Next Generation of Cops

Many seasoned law enforcement officers seem to increasingly see the next generation of applicants as a “new breed” compared to applicants of the past. Often times, these differences are inevitably described in a negative light. But if there are significant generational differences, the fact remains that young men and women in their 20s and 30s comprise the pool of candidates from which the future of law enforcement will be drawn. So these differences need to be understood and agencies must make reasonable adjustments. 

But, before formulating approaches to attract the next generation of applicants to policing, we must answer a fundamental question: is there any hard evidence of generational differences? As many law enforcement agencies today are struggling to recruit enough quality applicants to fill law enforcement officer vacancies, the profession needs evidence-based information about the current generation that might be useful in recruiting efforts. This seems particularly true when considering changes that could be based solely on anecdotal evidence of “kids today”. 

Dolan Consulting Group (DCG) recently conducted a large survey of existing law enforcement officers from across the nation in order to determine what factors influenced them to pursue a law enforcement career. We surveyed existing law enforcement officers, knowing that all of these participants had already successfully become law enforcement officers, proving they had the necessary backgrounds and skills to successfully gain employment in the field. We were interested in determining what factors influenced these officers to choose their current profession, and examine if any differences existed between those hired within the last five years and those hired more than five years ago. 

The Sample

All sworn law enforcement officers who attended the various training courses offered by DCG between August, 2018 and March 2019, were given the opportunity to participate in our DCG Police Recruiting and Hiring Survey. A total of 1,673 sworn personnel took the survey, of whom 286 (17.1%) were female and 1,387 (82.9%) were male. The racial composition of the respondents were 83.4% White (non-Hispanic), 6.8% African-American, 5.4% Hispanic, 1.4% Multiracial, 1.0% Native American, 0.4% Asian, and 1.6% all other groups. In terms of highest education level, 30.8% had less than an associate’s degree, 18.2% had an associate’s degree, and 51% had a bachelor’s degree or higher. A total of 52.8% of the respondents held the rank of officer, deputy, or trooper, while another 10.0% held the rank of detective. About 23.0% held first-line supervisory ranks (corporal or sergeant), 4.5% held middle-management ranks (mostly lieutenants), and the remaining 9.7% held command staff ranks (captain or higher). Approximately 65% of the respondents were assigned to the patrol division of their agency, 14% to investigations, and 14% to command administration. The remaining 7% indicated other assignments such as training, community policing unit, or media relations. These respondents came from 49 different states and agencies ranging in size from less than a dozen officers to agencies with thousands of officers.   

Reasons for Selecting the Career

The survey respondents were presented with a list of 17 factors that might have influenced them to pursue a career in law enforcement. The respondents were asked to reflect on their own lives and indicate if each of these factors played a role in shaping their decision to become a law enforcement officer. For each of these 17 factors, the respondents were to indicate their level of agreement (from strongly disagree to strongly agree) on the extent each factor influenced their career choice decision. As was revealed in our earlier article published on July 9, 2019, Why do People Become Cops?, only seven of these factors played a notable role with 25% or more of the sample saying these factors were an influence. The remaining ten factors were each identified by less than a quarter of the respondents. The seven factors that mattered most are displayed in Table 1 below.

Table 1. Reasons for Selecting a Law Enforcement Career (Entire Sample)

 

Next we compared the responses to these seven reasons by the respondents’ length of tenure. Because less than 1% of the respondents in our survey began their careers within the last year, we had to include the next tenure category (served between 1 and 5 years of service). This gave us a sample of 233 respondents who had five or fewer years of service, and a comparison group of 1,440 respondents who had more than five years of service. We compared the two groups by the percentage of respondents that said these top seven factors influenced their decision to pursue a law enforcement career. The results of this comparison are found below in Table 2. 

As Table 2 reveals, those hired within the last five years were more likely than officers hired longer ago to say that wanting a career with interesting/exciting work attracted them to the career. To put this into perspective, about 90 out of every 100 officers hired within the last year, and 76 out of every 100 officers hired before that, said that this influenced their career decision. This result suggested that the desire for interesting and exciting work is of more importance to the current generation than for applicants of years past.  

Table 2. Reasons for Selecting a Law Enforcement Career by Years of Service

 

An even greater margin of difference was revealed with regard to a desire to help people and serve society. Whereas roughly 85 out of every 100 officers with less than five years of service was attracted by this aspect of the job, only 65 out of every 100 officers from earlier generations felt this was a career influence. 

A third important difference dealt with seeing injustice in the world and wanting to correct it. While 57% of officers with less than five years of experience agreed this attracted them to a police career, only 39% of those hired longer ago agreed that this was an influence. To a lesser extent, those hired within the last five years were more likely to have been motivated to join the profession by popular media portrayals of the career.

The responses of the two groups of officers were generally similar with regard to the role seeing the police at work in their communities, knowing an officer personally, or having someone close to them recommend the career. These three factors seemed to influence the career choice decisions of both the current generation, and older generations, to similar extents. 

Conclusion

It is obviously difficult to lump all people of a particular age group into a uniform group without recognizing that individual motivations vary for reasons that have nothing to do with generation or era of hiring. It is also possible that as individuals progress through a law enforcement career, they become more jaded and cynical about the altruistic reasons they once had for pursuing a law enforcement career. As a result, it may be that most of the respondents with more than five years of experience were just as attracted by altruistic aspects of the job when they began their career, but those recollections have dimmed with time. Regardless of whether the new generation is truly different, or all generations are similar and law enforcement experience changes people’s recollections, the actionable take-aways from these findings would be the same. 

The findings suggest that today’s applicants were most influenced to pursue a law enforcement career out of a desire for interesting work, exciting work, a desire to help people, a desire to serve society, and a desire to correct societal injustices. Recent recruits were not primarily driven to a career in law enforcement by an interest in steady work, financial opportunities or retirement plans. These practical concerns may well impact which agency they choose, but the findings indicate that the next generation is similar to the last in that they were not drawn to the profession for money or benefits—there are easier, less stressful and less dangerous career options. Rather, they were drawn to law enforcement for altruistic reasons—exciting work where they have a chance to serve society and play a role in creating a more just society. 

Agency recruiting efforts and individual officers’ recruiting efforts, which are best carried out by individual officers encouraging those in their life to consider the career, should emphasize these aspects of the job when talking up the profession to young people. What is probably toxic to recruiting the next generation is the public venting that often takes place in media interviews and kitchen table conversations—the job isn’t what it used to be, society doesn’t support us like they used to, policing is an impossible job under today’s microscope. New officers are joining the ranks to help people and make a difference, so receiving the message that policing is now a futile enterprise is one of the most effective ways to convince young people not to apply.  

Agency advertising and one-on-one recruiting efforts should focus on the noble aspects of the profession that have been drawing recent recruits. And agencies should designate recruiters and spokespeople who joined the profession for the same reasons and can communicate that message to potential applicants. Also, agency advertising should strike a balance between the adrenaline pumping aspects of the job that emphasize that policing is exciting and interesting work (SWAT operations, foot pursuits, vehicle pursuits) and the more community-oriented aspects of the job that emphasize that policing is about serving society and helping people (“out of car experiences” with members of the public and assisting victims).

Young officers indicate that they were drawn to law enforcement for the opportunity to take on exciting work in which they can serve society and make a difference. This is good news for the profession, because it indicates that the next generation of officers are joining the ranks for noble reasons. And it is good news for the recruits, because they will have a unique opportunity to make a difference as cops. Agencies need to make certain that young people looking for a chance to make a difference consider a career in law enforcement as a way of helping people and serving society.

About the Author

Matt Dolan is a licensed attorney who specializes in training and advising public safety agencies in matters of legal liability. His training focuses on helping agency leaders create sound policies and procedures as a proactive means of minimizing their exposure to costly liability. A member of a law enforcement family dating back three generations, he serves as both Director and Public Safety Instructor with Dolan Consulting Group.

His training courses include Recruiting and Hiring for Law EnforcementConfronting the Toxic OfficerPerformance Evaluations for Public SafetyMaking Discipline Stick®, and Supervisor Liability for Public Safety.

Serious Violence at Places of Worship in the U.S.—Looking at the Numbers

Violence at places of worship in the U.S. appears to have been increasing over the last two decades. While the most tragic and shocking incidents dominate media attention and public awareness, many smaller incidents of violence occur at places of worship every week. In order to develop an accurate picture of the scope and nature of these violence incidents, and better prepare religious leaders to protect against them, Dolan Consulting Group (DCG) examined official FBI data on incidents of serious violence committed at places of worship.

Each year the FBI gathers detailed data on a sample of crimes reported to local police through the National Incident-Based Reporting System (NIBRS). NIBRS data is gathered about 49 different types of criminal offenses as reported to approximately 5,300 local, county, and state law enforcement agencies across 32 states. The law enforcement agencies participating in NIBRS make up only about 31% of the law enforcement agencies in the nation, and police only about 20% of the U.S. population. Nevertheless, NIBRS data do serve as a good sample of what crimes are occurring at places of worship, and how they occur. 

Prevalence of Violent Serious Crime at Places of Worship

We examined the NIBRS data for the 17 years from 2000 through 2016 (the most recent year NIBRS were publicly available). We examined all incidents of armed robberies, aggravated assaults, shootings, stabbings, or bombings that were reported to have occurred at (or on the property of) a place of worship. This revealed 1,652 such incidents of serious violence at places of worship; an average of 97 incidents per year within NIBRS-reporting jurisdictions. A total of 155 deaths and 742 injuries resulted during these 17 years of data, for an annual average of 9 deaths and 44 wounded. Since NIBRS-reporting agencies only cover about 20% of the nation’s population, the national-level numbers are actually much higher. Extrapolating to the whole U.S. population, we estimated that there are actually about 480 incidents of serious violence at places of worship in the U.S. each year. These incidents produce about 46 deaths and 218 serious injuries annually. This is a serious problem.    

The Settings

As the vast majority of places of worship in the U.S. are Christian churches, it is not surprising that 94% of the incidents occurred at Christian churches. Likewise the denominations of these Christian churches generally parallel the proportions of places of worship across the nation, with Baptist (21%), Roman Catholic (15%), Methodist (7%), Lutheran (4%), and Presbyterian (4%) topping the list. The only religions that showed a clearly disproportionate rate of violence incidents were Islamic mosques and Sikh temples. Islamic mosques make up less than 1% of the places of worship in the U.S., yet 2% of all violence incidents occurred at mosques. Sikh temples make up less than 0.1% of the places of worship in the U.S., yet 1% of all violent offenses occurred at these temples. Examining the details of each of these Islamic and Sikh incidents revealed three primary motives for these offenses; religious / ethnic-bias hate crimes, personal disputes between members of the place of worship or people from the surrounding neighborhood, and neighborhood crime that spilled over onto the property of the place of worship due to the location being in a high crime area.      

Motives and Methods

When examining the violent crimes at all types of places of worship, many of the cases had multiple motives. For example, an individual may be suffering a mental health crisis, but also targeting a family member as part of an act of domestic violence. The NIBRS data, however, identifies a primary motive for each incident. These primary motives included mental illness / derangement (28%), robbery (26%), family dispute / domestic violence (17%), personal dispute (14%), ethnic, racial, or religious hate crime (6%), and 9% were undetermined.

A majority of the incidents (52%) occurred outside of the building, while 48% occurred inside. Of the incidents that occurred inside the building, the assailant entered via a main entrance 29% of the time, while the remaining 71% involved entry via a side entrance, back door, or window. Approximately 58% of the incidents occurred immediately before, during, or immediately after a formal event (worship service, prayer service, youth event, etc.). Another 14% occurred during weekday office hours, and 28% occurred afterhours when the building was unoccupied by church staff. Incidents that occurred when the building was unoccupied included beatings, shootings, or robberies involving individuals from the surrounding neighborhood that happened to occur on church property, as well as fire-bombings of a place of worship. Most of the incidents, including the most severe mass shooting incidents, were over quickly, with most lasting no longer than 6 minutes.    

Only about 13% of the reported incidents involved unarmed physical violence, such as punching and kicking. It is possible that far more incidents of this type of violence occurred annually, but were simply resolved within the congregation and not reported to the police. Such incidents are also more likely to be classified by the police as simple assaults (a lesser offense), and therefore not included within the NIBRS categories of serious violence. Nevertheless, 57% of the reported incidents involved a firearm (75% of these involved handguns and 25% rifles, assault rifles, or shotguns), and 14% involved knives or other bladed weapons. Another 11% involved a club or other blunt object, 3% had a motor vehicle used as a weapon, and 2% involved an explosive or incendiary device.  

The Assailants

Approximately 77% of the incidents involved only one assailant, while 23% had two or more assailants. Almost all of the multiple-assailant incidents were robbery situations. The assailants were overwhelmingly male 91%, but 9% were female. Of the assailants that were identified, their ages ranged from 15 to 73 years old. In situations where the assailant’s race / ethnicity could be determined, 50% were White (non-Hispanic), 40% were African-American or Black, 8% were Hispanic, and 2% were Asian. The overwhelming majority of offenses were intra-racial in nature, meaning that the assailant and the victims were of the same race or ethnicity. For instance, 93% of the incidents at predominantly African-American churches involved an African-American assailant. Likewise, 87% of serious violence incidents at predominantly White churches were committed by White assailants.  

Approximately 75% of the known assailants had prior criminal arrest records, 43% had prior arrests for violent offenses, and 60% had been previously treated for a serious mental illness or disorder. A full 67% of the assailants had no affiliation with the congregation involved, while 10% were loosely affiliated (came at least once before), and the remaining 23% of the assailants were regular congregants, former regular congregants, clergy or staff, or former clergy or staff.

Common Case Examples

In order to provide a better picture of the most common types of scenarios found within the data, ten specific case examples are described below.

Case 1: A funeral was being held at a Baptist church for the grandson of one of the regular congregants. The deceased was a 23-year old who had gang affiliations, and the funeral was attended by several other young men with gang affiliations, but no affiliation to the church. As the attendees were leaving the funeral, a violent dispute broke out between two 22 year-old males who pulled out handguns and opened fire on one another. Family members and bystanders had attempted to break up the incident, and when the shooting began they were caught in the crossfire. None of the shooters were hurt, and both fled the scene. Unfortunately, six bystanders had been hit by bullets, two of which died. 

Case 2: The leadership of an Islamic mosque had been in a dispute for several months with a man who ran a convenience store directly across the street from the mosque. The dispute had involved a number of issues that the man felt had hurt his business, including attendees of the mosque filling up the parking spaces at the convenience store so that customers had no place to park. The store owner and the imam of the mosque had engaged in several heated arguments over these issues. On the day of the violence incident, as the imam and an associate were leaving the mosque after services, the shop owner confronted them and another heated argument ensued. The store owner then stabbed both men several times with a knife before fleeing the scene. 

Case 3: On a Wednesday morning a formal prayer service was being held with 30 people in attendance at a large, non-denominational church. The assailant was a 52-year-old male with a prior criminal record who had formerly been a janitor at the church. His employment had been terminated on the previous Monday and he blamed the worship pastor for his termination. The assailant entered the church through a side door, armed with a handgun. He entered the prayer service from a side door to the chapel room and shot the worship pastor several times at close range. The assailant then fled the scene without harming anyone else. 

Case 4: A 62-year-old woman was exiting the main doors of her African Methodist Episcopalian church after Sunday morning services when she was ambushed by her estranged 46-year-old daughter. The daughter had a history of mental health problems and had recently been released from jail. The daughter stabbed her mother several times before being overpowered by other members of the congregation. The mother was critically wounded but survived.

Case 5: On a Thursday night, a Catholic church was hosting English as a Second Language (ESL) classes. A 66-year-old woman and her 41-year-old daughter were walking across the parking lot to attend the classes when the older woman’s ex-husband drove up and opened fire with a handgun. The ex-husband had previously engaged in domestic violence and had a restraining order against him. The assailant immediately fled the scene after the shooting. The wife died of her injuries, and the daughter was critically wounded. 

Case 6: At midday on a Friday, a 25 year old male was walking through the parking lot of a Baptist church and approached two men (ages 22 and 31) sitting in a car within the church parking lot. The assailant produced a handgun, pointed it at the men in the car, and demanded their valuables. The men resisted and each was shot twice, but survived the incident. The shooter fled with their wallets, watches, jewelry, and phones. None of the individuals involved were affiliated with the church and it appears to have been a robbery of two drug dealers. 

Case 7: On a Friday morning a 56-year-old homeless man with a history of mental health problems entered the office area of an Episcopal church and aggressively demanded access to the church’s food pantry. The man was a frequent visitor to the food pantry and had already reached his limit for the number of times he could visit the pantry in a month. The church secretary and rector directed him to other resources in the area and he angrily stormed out. He returned a short time later with a handgun, shooting and killing both the secretary and the rector, before turning the gun on himself to commit suicide.     

Case 8: On a Wednesday evening, an 82-year-old man was leaving a prayer service at his Church of God church when he was confronted in the parking lot by a 15-year-old and a 17-year-old male. The youths produced handguns to rob the man, who tried to talk the youths out of what they were doing. Unhappy that the man was not complying fast enough, the teens shot and killed the man, took his belongings, and fled in the man’s car.

Case 9: On a Wednesday afternoon, a man and woman in their fifties walked into a Catholic church. The church was unoccupied, but open to the public at all hours of the day. A motion-activated camera inside recorded that the couple knelt at the altar to pray. While praying, the man removed a handgun from his waistband and shot the woman four times in the torso. The man then shot himself with the gun. Both died. Both individuals lived in another town and were not affiliated with this particular Catholic parish. The incident is believed to have been a domestic violence-related. 

Case 10: At 8:00 a.m. on a Monday morning at a Baptist church, a 33-year-old male entered the church through the children’s ministries door, armed with a baseball bat. The assailant, who had a personal dispute with a specific church staff member, demanded to see this staff member. He threatened the church office staff with the bat. When the assailant learned that the staff member he was seeking was not present, he struck several of the office staff, smashed several windows, broke furniture, and then fled the scene.

Are You Prepared?

Places of worship are expected to be places of peace, love, and acceptance, yet are often targeted for violence. Through understanding how serious violence at places of worship typically transpires, religious leaders can work with their volunteers and staff to institute policies and practices that can reduce the likelihood of these events occurring, or reduce the potential damage these events can create. Serious violence at places of worship happens far too frequently to ignore. People who attend places of worship need to prepare in advance for how to respond when events like these occur.

The Mollen Commission Report 25 Years Later – Lessons in Police Management

On July 7, 1994, the Mollen Commission publicized its findings related to police corruption in the New York City Police Department.  One of the focal points of the Commission’s work was depicted in the 2015 documentary The Seven Five.  The acts of corruption and brutality committed by the likes of Officers Michael Dowd, Kevin Hembury, and Bernard Cawley (nicknamed “the Mechanic” for his habit of “tuning up” suspects) and others spawned a two-year investigation into the “the nature and extent of corruption in the Department,” “the Department procedures for preventing and detecting corruption,” and concluding with the Commission’s best attempt “to recommend changes and improvements in those procedures.”

Like the Knapp Commission before it in New York, and the Christopher Commission in Los Angeles, the Mollen Commission Report was the latest in a lineage of investigations driven by investigators from outside the department in the wake of corruption scandals involving police officers. It resulted in diagnoses of pitfalls in police management that applied then, and now, well beyond the New York City Police Department. These reports should be studied by law enforcement leaders across the country. The loss of public trust associated with these scandals should serve as cautionary tales that are universally relevant.

There are so many lessons to be derived from failures of leadership at all levels described in the Mollen Commission Report that a brief article cannot begin to cover it all. But, as an attorney focused on the legal liability and best practices associated with personnel management in law enforcement—from hiring to discipline to termination—I was struck by how familiar some of the Commission’s key findings sound in 2019. These lessons go well beyond egregious and unlawful acts of corruption. The findings of the Mollen Commission should be viewed in light of an agency’s ability to effectively manage all types of officer misconduct and performance issues.

The Hiring Frenzy

What could easily be missed in the lengthy Commission Report may be the most frighteningly applicable to law enforcement in 2019. Agencies across the country are struggling to recruit qualified applicants to serve as law enforcement officers. This presents an opportunity for unqualified men and women to gain employment because agencies need “warm bodies.”

The Mollen Commission Report found that the rising crime of the 1980s led to a striking increase in the rate of hiring new officers that was accompanied by a systemic failure to conduct thorough background checks and hold applicants to standards beyond the stated automatic disqualifiers.  

“There is a widespread perception among officers of many ranks that hiring standards have fallen dramatically over the years,” the report stated. The Commission determined that “approximately 20 percent of the officers suspended or dismissed should never have been admitted into the Department. This is based merely on information available in these officers’ personnel files at the time of hiring.” In other words, 20 percent were deemed unfit, not because of a thorough background investigation but rather due to obvious red flags that made their way into the personnel files and were apparently ignored.

A particularly disturbing example of lackluster background investigation procedures is found in the Commission finding “that the Department has routinely admitted applicants to the Department—and put them on the streets as sworn officers with guns and shields—before their background checks are complete. Eighty-eight percent of the officers in our study, for example, entered the Police Academy before the completion of their background.”

Furthermore, the Commission found that background investigations often were not completed “until after the applicant becomes a sworn police officer … This is particularly troublesome because by the time recruits have graduated from the Police Academy and become sworn members of the Department, much time, energy and money has been invested in them.  Consequently, the focus … shifts from the question of whether the applicant is qualified…to how the Department could justify dismissing a sworn police officers which carries a heavier burden of proof.” 

This idea of working hard to find a reason to keep someone should sound familiar to law enforcement professionals across the country in a time when hiring frenzies are the national norm. How much unnecessary and painfully predictable risk is taken when backgrounds are rushed, steps are skipped, and it is all rationalized by the idea that if there’s a real problem they’ll catch it in the academy or they’ll catch it in field training?  

The Mollen Commission Report echoes what agency leaders are learning and re-learning across the country: when people show you who they are, believe them and act as soon as possible to remove them from the hiring process.

The critical issue is not just one of liability management, but of leadership. Are agency leaders willing to take the time and use the resources necessary to conduct adequate background investigations in spite of the pressure to hire anyone who is not automatically disqualified?  Meeting this obligation requires a conscious acknowledgement that the integrity of any law enforcement agency is dependent upon the character of the men and women chosen to serve and protect.

Utilizing the Probationary Process as a Unique Vetting Opportunity

The Commission echoed a key conclusion reached by its 1970s predecessor (the Knapp Commission) when it noted, “[A]s the Knapp Commission recognized a generation ago, often the most reliable predictors of an officer’s performance first appear in recruit training and during the eighteen-month probationary period. And yet the commission report found that in the years leading up to the creation of the Commission, “probationary officers are seldom dismissed.”

The probationary employment period presents law enforcement leaders with a unique opportunity to evaluate performance, identify “red flags” and take proactive measures to address misconduct. For most officers, the close supervision and continual feedback that they receive from their Field Training Officers (FTOs) during this period will not be replicated for the entirety of their career. If, during this period, FTOs find probationary officers demonstrate fundamental character deficiencies, then there is no better time to have the difficult but critical conversation concerning whether the officer is salvageable. 

While it is certainly normal for probationary officers to make mistakes, there is often a clear distinction between understandable mental mistakes, versus performance issues that reflect on core character issues such as honesty, willingness to accept responsibility for errors, and ability to receive corrective feedback. 

There is no good time for agency leaders and front-line supervisors to determine the severity of performance issues with the possibility of termination on the table. But, from a legal liability and risk management standpoint, there is no better time than during the probationary process—prior to an officer’s status shifting from probationary to permanent, with all of the arbitration, appeals and/or due process rights that come with this change in employment status. 

Agencies across the country often realize too late that the chance to streamline the evaluation and possible termination of the few bad apples inside the department has come and gone only after the probationary process has ended and a problem officer’s status has gone from probationary to permanent status.

“Copy and Paste” Performance Evaluations

The Commission found that, beyond failing to aggressively pursue indications of corruption among their subordinates, supervisors in the New York City Police Department were not accurately evaluating the performance of those officers they supervised more generally.  “[M]any [supervisors] have even abandoned their responsibility to evaluate officers in their command—and to flag ‘problem’ officers … supervisors admitted that performance evaluations were typically boilerplate … performance evaluations often covered suspected corruption problems.”

Even Michael Dowd, the focus of The Seven Five documentary, managed to receive “meets standards” evaluations. “Dowd, like many other openly corrupt officers with whom we spoke, reported that this lack of strong supervision and many supervisors’ apparent willful blindness made him believe that he could ‘do just about anything and get away with it.’”

Why are we conducting performance evaluations and how are they making the agency better? These are fundamental questions for agencies that require standardized performance evaluations. Without clearly answering these questions, supervisors are often put in the position of pursuing the “path of least resistance” when it comes to conducting performance evaluations. This path is understandably tempting for supervisors, but it often results in serious agency problems relating to legal liability in discipline and promotions—not to mention officer morale.

When problem officers are given positive performance evaluations as standard operating procedure, personnel decisions become much more difficult to defend in court or in arbitration.  The “copy and paste” evaluations essentially become “get out of jail free cards” that serve to insulate officers from negative employment actions that can withstand scrutiny in arbitration or in court. Too often and to the great detriment of the profession, the only time that these individuals’ real performance issues are openly discussed is when criminal charges are involved, as we see in the characters portrayed in the Mollen Commission Report. 

25 Years Later—What Have We Learned in Personnel Management?

It seems clear to reasonable observers that the law enforcement profession in the United States has continued to improve in professionalism and transparency over the last 25 years, as has generally been the case throughout the history American policing. However, with regard to the fundamental pitfalls of (1) hiring frenzies, (2) the failure to utilize the probationary period as a vetting opportunity and (3) the “copy and paste” performance evaluations that are all too common throughout the profession, the Mollen Commission Report seems extremely relevant.   

The Mollen Commission Report serves as an important reminder that the fundamental challenges facing law enforcement agencies are not new. When it comes to personnel management, identifying the points of failure within police organizations is simple—although correcting course is not necessarily easy.  

We have case studies that answer questions like, What happens when we throw warm bodies into police uniforms for the sake of getting our numbers up at any cost? What happens if we don’t believe people when they show us who they are in the probationary period? What happens if we have ineffective performance evaluations that boil down to checking a box?

The answers are fairly clear. What happens? Nothing good.

About the Author

Matt Dolan is a licensed attorney who specializes in training and advising public safety agencies in matters of legal liability. His training focuses on helping agency leaders create sound policies and procedures as a proactive means of minimizing their exposure to costly liability.  A member of a law enforcement family dating back three generations, he serves as both Director and Public Safety Instructor with Dolan Consulting Group.

His training courses include Recruiting and Hiring for Law EnforcementConfronting the Toxic OfficerPerformance Evaluations for Public SafetyMaking Discipline Stick®, and Supervisor Liability for Public Safety.

__________

1 Holzman, E. (Producer), & Russell, T. (2015). The Seven Five  [Motion Picture]. United States, Sony Pictures.

2 City of New York (1994). Commission to Investigate Allegations of Police Corruption and the Anti-Corruption

Procedures of the Police Department: Commission Report  . New York, NY: City of New York; p. 1.

3 Mollen Commission Report, p.65

4 Mollen Commission Report, p.111

5 Mollen Commission Report, p. 111

6 Mollen Commission Report, p. 112

7 Mollen Commission Report, p. 113

8 Mollen Commission Report, p. 117

9 Mollen Commission Report, p. 117

10 Mollen Commission Report, p.80.

11 Mollen Commission Report, p.81.

Why are We Grading Performance Evaluations?

Why are we conducting performance evaluations and how are they making our agencies better? Ask this question to groups of sergeants, command staff, chiefs and sheriffs across the country and you will get shrugs, smirks, and eye rolls. It is the fundamental question that often gets lost in the day-to-day realities of personnel management in law enforcement.

The official, textbook answers to these questions tend to fall somewhere along the lines of the following:

Regular performance evaluations are intended to ensure (1) that supervisors are communicating clear performance objectives to subordinates, (2) that subordinates are aware of their areas of needed improvement as well as the areas in which they excel, and (3) any questions associated with subordinate performance are answered and performance objectives are clarified with specificity.

Performance evaluations improve agency functions by providing a pre-disciplinary setting in which to address performance deficiencies as early as possible before formal discipline is necessary and before performance issues results in significant damage to agency operations.

These types of policy manual descriptions are rooted in a simple idea: supervisors should be continuously “kicking tires” and evaluating the work being done by their officers to find problems early and “nip them in the bud” as quickly as possible. This is in the interest of the individual officer who is under-performing and in the interest of the agency. But how are the benefits of continuous communication and early intervention affected by forcing supervisors to grade or rate their subordinates through annual evaluations?

How Attaching Ratings to Evaluations Hurts Communication

Accurately evaluating performance and communicating expectations to subordinates—whether on the side of the road after a traffic stop, or as part of a pre-scheduled performance appraisal meeting—inevitably involves difficult conversations. Many law enforcement supervisors seem more comfortable confronting violent offenders on the street than they are confronting a subordinate at the precinct. This tendency to shy away from confrontation with subordinates is often exacerbated by the fact that, beyond a difficult conversation and documentation of areas of some deficiency, the subordinate is getting a “failing grade” in the form of a number or rating that amounts to a D or an F.

In most agencies, officers don’t grieve the narrative facts of the evaluation—they grieve the grade. Many supervisors and officers readily admit that, as long as they are receiving positive ratings on the evaluation, officers don’t even bother to read the narrative notes and comments. This is a huge problem—the notes and comments are supposed to be the point of the evaluation, not the rating score.

How Attaching Rating Scores to Evaluations Impacts Defensible Promotions and Discipline

Broken performance evaluations that don’t accurately reflect the realities on the ground can do a great deal of damage to a department. They can de-motivate high-level performers who are keenly aware of the fact that their pay and evaluations are the same as the “bad apple” in the unit. They can undermine, or even demoralize, supervisors who feel that they are expected to “check a box” without causing any waves rather than actively taking ownership of their subordinates’ conduct in furtherance of their duties. But possibly the worst outcome is that broken performance evaluations can often serve as “get out of jail free cards” for the worst officers in the agency.

The pressure to circle a 3, or “meets expectations,” can be strong when the supervisor knows that circling anything less than that puts the onus on the supervisor to meticulously document why the performance is substandard, how long it has been a problem, and what the supervisor plans to do to improve it. 

When the time comes to suspend, demote, or even terminate an officer, stacks of these yearly “meets expectations” evaluations—no matter how truly inaccurate—prove to be one of the best friends that a “bad apple” officer ever had.

What if We Conducted Feedback Sessions Without Grades?

What if a supervisor sat down every 3 or 6 months with every subordinate and briefly went over a couple of pages of concrete feedback? What if the supervisor laid out the positives, the negatives, and their expectations moving forward? Then, what if the supervisor simply required an acknowledgment of receipt signature from the subordinate without attaching a grade? 

If an officer is demonstrating significant deficiencies, the supervisor should be engaging in progressive discipline—beginning with “knock it off” verbal warnings and continuing with more formal performance improvement plans. If an officer is outstanding—the agency should consider how excellence is recognized within the organization, whether through commendation or some other form of formal recognition.

But if an officer is neither a problem employee nor an outstanding performer, why are agencies spending time handing out grades? After all, the narrative feedback between the grades is supposed to be the rationale for conducting these evaluations in the first place. What better way to minimize the risk of the rating score becoming the focal point than to get rid of it all together?

This idea is far from guaranteed to have a positive impact on agencies’ personnel management. If what your agency has done for years isn’t working, however, then it might be time to try something different.

About the Author

Matt Dolan is a licensed attorney who specializes in training and advising public safety agencies in matters of legal liability. His training focuses on helping agency leaders create sound policies and procedures as a proactive means of minimizing their exposure to costly liability. A member of a law enforcement family dating back three generations, he serves as both Director and Public Safety Instructor with Dolan Consulting Group.

His training courses include Recruiting and Hiring for Law EnforcementConfronting the Toxic OfficerPerformance Evaluations for Public SafetyMaking Discipline Stick®, and Supervisor Liability for Public Safety.

Diversity in Police Recruiting—What Draws Members of Racial Minority Groups?

Many law enforcement agencies today are struggling to recruit enough quality applicants to fill the law enforcement officer vacancies they currently have or will have soon. At the same time, these agencies are under increasing pressure to achieve greater racial diversity in their pool of qualified applicants. To do so, law enforcement agencies need evidence-based information about how to increase the effectiveness of their recruiting efforts and how to attract more qualified applicants who are members of racial minority groups.

Dolan Consulting Group (DCG) recently conducted a large survey of existing law enforcement officers from across the nation in order to determine what factors influenced them to pursue a law enforcement career. Specifically, we surveyed 1,673 law enforcement officers, knowing that all of these participants had already successfully become law enforcement officers, proving they have the necessary backgrounds and skills to successfully gain employment as law enforcement officers. We were interested in determining what factors influenced these officers to choose their current profession. We examined if any significant differences existed in their answers between officers of different racial / ethnic groups.

The Sample

All sworn law enforcement officers who attended the various training courses offered by DCG between August 2018 and March 2019 were given the opportunity to participate in our DCG Police Recruiting and Hiring Survey. A total of 1,673 sworn personnel took the survey, of which 286 (17.1%) were female and 1,387 (82.9%) were male. The racial composition of the respondents were 83.4% White (non-Hispanic), 6.8% African-American, 5.4% Hispanic, 1.4% Multiracial, 1.0% Native American, 0.4% Asian, and 1.6% all other groups. In terms of highest education level, 30.8% had less than an associate’s degree, 18.2% had an associate’s degree, and 51% had a bachelor’s degree or higher. A total of 52.8% of the respondents held the rank of officer, deputy, or trooper, while another 10.0% held the rank of detective. About 23.0% held first-line supervisory ranks (corporal or sergeant), 4.5% held middle-management ranks (mostly lieutenants), and the remaining 9.7% held command staff ranks (captain or higher). Approximately 65% of the respondents were assigned to the patrol division of their agency, while 14% were assigned to investigations, and 14% to command or administration. The remaining 7% indicated other assignments such as training, community policing unit, or media relations. These respondents came from 49 different states and agencies ranging in size from less than a dozen officers to agencies with thousands of officers.   

Reasons for Selecting the Career

The survey respondents were presented with a list of 17 factors that might have influenced them to pursue a career in law enforcement. The respondents were asked to reflect on their own lives and indicate if each of these factors played a role in shaping their decision to become a law enforcement officer. For each of these 17 factors, the respondents were to indicate their level of agreement (from strongly disagree to strongly agree) on the extent to which each factor influenced their career choice decision. As revealed in our earlier article published on July 9, 2019, Why do People Become Cops?, only seven of these factors played a notable role with 25% or more of the sample saying these factors were an influence. The remaining ten factors were each identified by less than a quarter of the respondents. Therefore, we focused on these seven most important factors which are displayed in Table 1 below.

 
Table 1. Reasons for Selecting a Law Enforcement Career (Entire Sample)

 

Racial Group Differences

The three largest racial / ethnic groups among the survey respondents were Non-Hispanic Whites (1,395 respondents), African-Americans (114 respondents), and Hispanics (90 respondents). The remaining 74 respondents were spread out across five more categories, including multiracial, so the analysis was limited to only the three categories with substantial numbers of respondents—Whites, African-Americans, and Hispanics. The responses of the participants in the survey are displayed by race within Table 2 below. As Table 2 reveals, some notable racial differences were found when it comes to why individual respondents pursued a career in law enforcement.

More than two-thirds of the respondents in each of the three groups selected a career in law enforcement because it was interesting / exciting work, but responses differed by race for several of the other influences. While a strong majority of all three groups indicated they were drawn to the career by a desire to help people and serve society, the African-American respondents ranked this desire to help people much higher than did White or Hispanic respondents. This difference was statistically significant. Placed into context, this means that out of every 100 white officers, about 68 indicated they selected the career to help people, and about 71 out of every 100 Hispanic officers did as well. Out of every 100 African-American officers, however, about 83 indicated they chose their career to help people or service society. 

 
Table 2. Reasons for Selecting a Law Enforcement Career by Race / Ethnicity

 

Compared to Whites and Hispanics, the African-American respondents were less likely to be drawn to the career by seeing the police at work in their community or interacting with these officers. Perhaps this suggests a greater need for outreach and citizen interactions by beat officers working in predominantly black neighborhoods. This difference, however, was not statistically significant.

Compared to Whites, the African-American and Hispanic respondents were much more likely to say they chose their career to correct injustices in society. About 40 out of every 100 White officers indicated this was an influence, compared to 50 out of every 100 Hispanic officers and 58 out of every 100 African-American officers. This difference was statistically significant. Compared to Whites and African-Americans, the Hispanic respondents were less likely to indicate they selected their career due to a recommendation from a friend or family member. 

Our results also revealed that, compared to Whites and Hispanics, the African-American respondents were more likely to have been influenced by popular media portrayals of the law enforcement career (i.e., television shows and movies). In terms of advertising mediums, this finding reveals important racial and ethnic differences. According to a large study published by the Nielson ratings organization in 2014, African-American households generally watched more television as compared to White, Hispanic, and Asian households. According to that study, the form of entertainment media most consumed by African-American households was traditional television (cable, dish, or antenna). Among Hispanic households, the most consumed media was radio. Among White and Asian households, the form most consumed was Internet content. Recruiting efforts may benefit from strategically targeting these media forms with advertising about the career, with advertising content targeting each group by the media source.    

Conclusion

Our findings suggest that there are noteworthy differences between racial / ethnic groups in what influenced their decision to become law enforcement officers. The primary motives for pursuing the career for all racial groups was a desire to do interesting work and help people, but the “helping people” part was a markedly stronger influence for African-Americans as compared to other groups. African-American and Hispanic officers were also found to be more attracted to fighting societal injustice than were White officers. Recruiting messages directed toward minority groups should emphasize these aspects of the job.

As White officers were more likely to have known a law enforcement officer personally, and have someone in their life recommend the career, this also suggests we need to be more proactive in establishing personal relationships with members of minority communities and encouraging qualified individuals from those communities to consider the profession.  

Interestingly, African-Americans also appeared more likely to have been drawn to the career by entertainment media portrayals of the career field. The law enforcement profession can lobby for positive entertainment media portrayals of the law enforcement career, especially featuring African-American officers. Nielsen research has also revealed that radio is one of the most effective ways to reach the Hispanic community, so recruiting efforts targeting this segment of the population should include radio advertising. 

It is obviously difficult to lump all African-Americans or all Hispanic-Americans in one uniform group without recognizing that individual motivations vary for reasons that have nothing to do with race. However, as agencies struggle to find a more diverse pool of qualified applicants, evidence-based strategies seem much more likely to succeed, rather than those based on purely anecdotal examples.

About the Author

Matt Dolan is a licensed attorney who specializes in training and advising public safety agencies in matters of legal liability. His training focuses on helping agency leaders create sound policies and procedures as a proactive means of minimizing their exposure to costly liability. A member of a law enforcement family dating back three generations, he serves as both Director and Public Safety Instructor with Dolan Consulting Group.

His training courses include Recruiting and Hiring for Law EnforcementConfronting the Toxic OfficerPerformance Evaluations for Public SafetyMaking Discipline Stick®, and Supervisor Liability for Public Safety.

References

1.Nielsen Corp (2014). The Total Audience Report, December 2014. New York, NY: Nielson.
2.Ibid.

 

Why Do People Become Cops?

Many law enforcement agencies today are struggling to recruit enough quality applicants to fill the officer vacancies they currently have or will have soon. As a result, law enforcement agencies need evidence-based information about how to increase the effectiveness of their recruiting efforts to attract more qualified applicants. Unfortunately, many agency leaders have been forced to rely on anecdotal stories of what drew a particular individual to law enforcement as the basis for formulating recruiting strategies. This approach is far from evidence-based and, instead, relies on the experience of a small group of decision-makers who may, or may not, represent the qualified applicants agencies are seeking. How do we determine that what drew you to law enforcement is what drew others? An extensive nationwide study would be a very good start.

In recent years, several studies have examined the motivations or interests in seeking a law enforcement career among members of the general public, college students, and police academy applicants. Studies of these populations can prove useful, but they also suffer from a notable limitation—not all of the participants may have had the qualifications, skills, and abilities to successfully become law enforcement officers. Furthermore, these studies involved samples of a few hundred participants.

Dolan Consulting Group (DCG) sought to overcome these limitations by conducting a large-scale survey of existing law enforcement officers from across the nation to determine what factors influenced them to pursue a law enforcement career. By focusing on existing law enforcement officers, we explored the experiences of individuals who had the necessary skills and temperaments to successfully gain employment as law enforcement officers. We surveyed 1,673 law enforcement officers from across the nation to determine what factors most influenced them to choose their current profession.

 The Sample

Sworn law enforcement officers who attended the various training courses offered by DCG between August 2018 and March 2019 were given the opportunity to participate in our DCG Police Recruiting and Hiring Survey.

A total of 1,673 sworn personnel took the survey, of whom 286 (17.1%) were female and 1,387 (82.9%) were male. The racial composition of the respondents was 83.4% White (non-Hispanic), 6.8% African-American, 5.4% Hispanic, 1.4% Multiracial, 1.0% Native American, 0.4% Asian, and 1.6% all other groups. In terms of highest education level achieved, 30.8% had less than an associate’s degree, 18.2% had an associate’s degree, and 51% had a bachelor’s degree or higher. A total of 52.8% of the respondents held the rank of officer, deputy, or trooper, while another 10.0% held the rank of detective. About 23% held first-line supervisory ranks (corporal or sergeant), 4.5% held middle-management ranks (mostly lieutenants), and the remaining 9.7% held command staff ranks (captain or higher). Approximately 65% of the respondents were assigned to the patrol division of their agency, 14% to investigations, and 14% to command administration. The remaining 7% indicated other assignments such as training, community policing unit, or media relations. These respondents came from 49 different states and agencies ranging in size from less than a dozen officers to agencies with thousands of officers.   

Reasons for Selecting a Law Enforcement Career 

The survey respondents were presented with a list of 17 factors that might have influenced them to pursue a career in law enforcement. The respondents were asked to reflect on their own lives and indicate if each of these factors played a role in shaping their decision to become a law enforcement officer. For each of these 17 factors, the respondents indicated their level of agreement (from strongly disagree to strongly agree) regarding the extent to which each factor influenced their career choice. The survey results are displayed in Table 1 on the next page, showing the percentage of respondents who answered agree or strongly agree with each statement.

 The results in Table 1 reveal several common themes. First, a sizeable proportion of the sample chose a career in law enforcement because of the excitement associated with the career as almost 78% wanted a career with interesting or exciting work, 45% watched the police at work in their communities, about 27% were drawn by popular entertainment media portrayals of the career, and 7% selected the career after seeing it first-hand through a ride-along or college internship. Second, a great proportion of the respondents wanted to help people in society (68%), wanted to address injustice in society (41%), or wanted to fight back after having been a victim of crime (8%).

 The third theme that was evident in the responses was the importance of personal relationships in one’s life on deciding to pursue a law enforcement career. Approximately 45% were influenced to pursue a law enforcement career by personally interacting with officers who were at work in the community, 43% were influenced by knowing an officer personally (family member, friend, neighbor, etc.), 35% had a friend or family member recommend the career, 16% had a teacher, professor, or coach recommend the career, and 8% had interacted with officers in a police-sponsored youth program (camp, police athletic league, explorers program, etc.).

 Table 1. Reasons for Selecting a Law Enforcement Career

The final trend evident in the results was the relative insignificance of formal recruiting activities in effecting the respondents’ decisions to pursue a law enforcement career generally. (Please note that this does not indicate that formal recruiting and advertising were necessarily ineffective in attracting a particular individual to a particular department within the law enforcement profession). Less than 6% of the respondents credited a recruiter or formal advertising of any kind as having influenced their decision to become a law enforcement officer. In fact, a simple lack of other job opportunities (14%) was more than twice as strong an influence as were formal recruiting activities.

 Conclusions

These results suggest that most individuals who are drawn to law enforcement are drawn as a uniquely exciting and honorable profession in which they can help people. In spite of high profile instances of officer misconduct accompanied by overwhelming media coverage, the law enforcement profession remains one of the most highly respected institutions in American life (See the DCG research brief The Public’s Confidence in the Police Might Be Higher Than You Think).  Anything that a member of law enforcement can do to maintain the public trust is, in and of itself, a recruiting strategy. 

 The most effective police recruiting efforts appear to involve all members of the department developing personal relationships with people in the community on and off the clock (family members, neighbors, students, and average people on the patrol beat). People on the department need to talk to members of their community about how noble, rewarding, and exciting a law enforcement career is. When officers personally advertise the nobility of their profession, in both word and deed, people who desire an exciting career that involves helping people and fighting injustice are drawn to the profession.

 The most important steps any law enforcement agency can take in order to improve recruiting efforts include: 

Protect the public’s trust in the police. In whatever capacity you find yourself within an organization, do what you can to minimize the misconduct, unnecessarily hostile community interactions, and viral videos that steer people away from law enforcement those individuals drawn to an exciting career in which they can help people. These same efforts serve to maintain the help of the many advocates in communities across the country—parents, family, friends, coaches and teachers—who encourage those they mentor to join law enforcement.

 With this broad view, it becomes clear that anything that weakens the relationship between the police and the public hurts recruiting. Poor supervision hurts recruiting. Failure to mentor young officers who are struggling hurts recruiting. Failures by command staff to heed the warnings of front-line supervisors before poor performance escalates to newsworthy police misconduct that hurts recruiting.   

 Seriously embrace the idea that every member of your department is a recruiter—for better or worse. Empower and encourage all personnel to engage in recruiting efforts, both on and off duty. Empress upon your personnel that the qualities of the individuals they attract to the department will determine their type of future coworkers and work environment. Encourage them to seek out people in the community with qualities and skills they would like to see in their coworkers, and recruit these people. 

 Unimpressed with the number or quality of applicants? Concerned about the prospect of working with the applicants walking through the door? Then do something about it. Utilizing citizen interactions as an opportunity to vent frustrations about the profession doesn’t help. Take the same steps that we ask of community leaders critical of recruiting efforts—become part of the solution and personally invite men and women of character to the profession.

 Create opportunities to connect with potential applicants and potential advocates. Create as many opportunities for personnel on your department to develop personal connections with individuals who might someday become law enforcement officers, as well as the parents and mentors who might someday recommend the career to others. During unassigned time on duty, encourage officers to be out of their cars, and supervisors away from their desks, in order to get to know average citizens. Get law enforcement officers into the schools as much as possible for the purposes of fostering positive interactions between youths and officers. Sponsor youth sports, explorer, and internship programs to further foster these contacts. Develop a citizen police academy and promote a ride-along program for qualified individuals, to expose average citizens to the realities of the career and the people on the department. Lastly, invite people to participate in the ride-along or citizen police academy programs.

 Make personal invitations. Policing tends to be an insular career that often makes non-law enforcement officers feel like outsiders. Many law enforcement officers are also family members, thus further strengthening the impression to outsiders that the career in an exclusive club. Many of the respondents in our survey, however, indicated that someone in their lives had personally recommended the career to them as individuals. This reveals the power of the personal invitation. When a member of your department finds a good potential applicant, it may not be enough just to share information about the department or the career. Personnel should personally invite the person to complete the application process or do a ride-along, also telling the individual specifically why he or she might make a good police officer.

 Tone down the negativity. Because law enforcement officers often see the worst of society, it is easy to become negative, jaded, and cynical. However, few people want to join a profession or organization that seems full of negativity. What is particularly damaging is when law enforcement officers argue—privately and in sometimes in public—that they would discourage their own children from becoming officers. If we would not want our sons and daughters to become officers, how can we expect other people’s sons and daughters to join our ranks? 

 Lastly, media interviews should not be viewed as an opportunity to publicly vent about the downsides of a law enforcement career and explain why you’re not surprised that people aren’t applying. If we want to attract quality applicants, and draw more good people to this career field, then we need to speak positively about the profession when interacting with the public.  

For a more in-depth discussion of ways to improve your agency’s recruiting efforts, you can learn more about our Recruiting and Hiring for Law Enforcement classes at the link below: