TQM AND THE FUTURE OF POLICING

VOLUME 5 NUMBER 2 APRIL 1995
TQM AND THE FUTURE OF POLICING
Previous papers (Manning, 1992, 1994, 1994a), identified
central ideological and political forces I felt were lransfonning
police organizations, especially the ideology of top and
middle management The problematic was the unanticipated
consequences of managerial and economic rhetoric as reform
vehicles and the impact of infonnation technologies on
police work. These papers overlooked several matters of
considerable importance to the future of policing and police
research. Events have progressed more rapidly than I expected.
This brief comment again assays the character of
current effortS at police reform.
Imagery
Policing, like all organizations, works in part because audiences
and organizational performers trust, credit and inter·
nalize the imagery by which it defines itself, and accept both
the mystification and reality of the institutional mandate.
Insofar as participants are committed to an organization, they
tend to both overvalue and elevate their own organization
when compared with others. This halo effect has valuable
positive consequences for morale, governance, perfonnance
and external relations. Problems arise, however, when
ideologically driven imagery outstrips established institutional
functioning. There are also material limits on symbolic
claims and rhetoric.
An organization like public policing that is losing authority,
and witnessing its mandate contracting, is often engaged in a
struggle of imageries-several being proposed as part of
refonn movements. Policing has long battled the "paramilitary"
imagery developed in part to produce the semblance of
managerial control over lower participants. This imagery of
tight control, supervision, and swift punishment, as in the
nineteenth century in England, has tenacious ideological
clout with citizens, managers, and politicians who fear police
violence, deviance and corruption. The paramilitary command
and control imagery is justone amongst many compet·
P.K. Manning
School of Criminal Justice
Michigan State University
ing images of policing. The police are vulnerable to ideological
trends and fads because they are questioning their mandate,
and seeking new validation and justification for their
traditional functions.
The confiating economic imagery that views policing as an
imperfectly managed or even failed business, has become a
specious vision for reformers (See the series of brief publica·
tions from NO and The Kennedy School at Harvard). Economic
rhetoric, which caricatures organizations, public and
private, as governed by inexorable market mechanisms that
reward "efficiency," "performance," and "effectiveness;"
produce goods and services that can be compared strictly
using a monetary metric; and have "outputs," ''reward structures"
and "incentives" that are universal, comparable and
measurable, has penetrated public sector organizations. Even
the notion of "collective or public goods," that to which all
contribute and from which all benefit, has been reduced to a
positive externality often passed on the public sector by
private corporations. Extending this imagery, one could see
these as social 'costs' that corporations and other agencies
passon. "[Perhaps] the height of cynicism is to bring the cops
up against efficiency rules and productivity standards (John
Van Maanen, personal communication 17 March, 1995).
Economistic thinking is now reshaping the infrastructure of
evaluation, supervision and reward throughout the "private
sector": in universities, government, and agencies such as the
police, social services, and corrections (called "correctional
services," in an Eastern Kentucky University job notice of
February, 1995).
Variants of this economic imagery are found in appeals for
quality management (to reduce costs), continuing education
and accreditation (to reduce liability and civil suits), and new
information technologies (to reduce pass through costs and
increase output). These are cynical attempts at reducing the
altruism, sacrifice and welfare structures ofAnglo-American
societies. All are couched in the misleading language of the
@ 1995 Academy of Criminal Justice Sciences ISSN 1061·1517
Published by Alpha Enterprises, Post Office Box 326, Richmond, Kentucky 40476 (606) 623-0792

market, advance current managerial ideologies, and serve to
constrain and bureaucratically "manage" the good people do
for each other.
Clearly, the consequences of adopting this new economic
imagery are complex and differential for police departments
of varying size, mission and age. Generally, new imagery is
shaped and diffuses from the top, usually adopted or borrowed
from other sources, and thus generally indicatesmanagerial
power. Conversely, it indicates the impotence of the
lower participants to shape the mission and imagery of the
institutions they serve. They can control praxis and generally
they do. Thus, it is not surprising that lower participants
remain loyal to "the job" and to economic rewards, not to
nascent imagery, profits, and shifting managerial ideologies.
In policing, with a tripartite occupational culture with command,
middle management and lower participant (sergeants
and patrol officers) segments, the social bases of self-investment
differ. The appearance of a new rhetoric in connection
with police reform suggests, as it has for forty years or so, a
power struggle between command "management" and the
lower participants. Managerial rhetoric is atool in asymbolic
struggle over control of predominant imagery and action
choices.
Changes in Policing
A series of important changes in big city policing have taken
place in the last 20 years (See longer summaries in Manning,
1994). These include reduced personnel, shrinking Pudgets,
the spread of declining multi-problem urban neighborhoods
and the on going attempt to control drug use and dealing by
use of the criminal law. Sophisticated information-processing
technology is changing the police role (Manning, 1992).
Political interest is increasing in new forms ofcrime. Crimes
of order and property (which with the exception of burglary
and auto theft have been declining) remain, while symbolic
crimes, local terrorism, and computer crime and corporate
malfeasance merit attention. The fear of crime is rising,
suggesting "crime" is symbolic and non-local in many respects.
The crime-focus of the police is needed, yet is inadequate
alone to calm public concerns. Historically, the police
target areas and people who are most likely to cause eruptions
variations in routines, work, family life, and leisure (Bittner,
1990). This makes the police ill-prepared for preventing or
punishing symbolic crimes, crimes of technological stealth,
crimes of trust and disloyalty (treason, industrial espionage,
embezzlement, fraud, and malfeasance).
As Albert J. Reiss Jr. (1992) brilliantly outlined, the
consequence of the scientific management reform movement
was to isolate officers in cars, reduce contact and interaction
with the public; and contain corruption. It also served to
erode political legitimacy and power within local government,
and to produce public dissatisfaction with a distant and
Police Forum! 2
officious police. I would add that it elevated the power of
unions and focused issues of job control on the conditions of
work because unions became the only viable form of collective
opposition to command and control ideologies. Crime
fighting became a managerial priority, while public contact,
service, and providing comfort to the weak, helpless and
exploited did not. The police are thus challenged to broaden
their forms and types of "services" while faced with rising
costs and reduced (relatively) budgets and personnel.
Internally, the police typically displace energies from goals
to means, from crime control and order to discipline and
control of the lower participants (Goldstein, 1990). The
primary concern of command officers is not crime control,
service, or order maintenance; it is control and direction of
the patrol officer. Two new variants on this theme are
"communitypolicing" and"total quality management." Both
have facilitated new modes of control and discipline under
the guise ofchanges in the ethics and management of policing.
Community policing is discussed elsewhere (Manning,
1994). TQM is yet another means-focused strategy that aims
to reform by refming and applying managerial techniques in
the absence of other structural changes.
Police are affected by broad trends in American management,
and the erosion of public sector autonomy and authority
generally. For example, interest in TQM arises in part
from the enthusiastic endorsement of budget and planning
officers and City managers acting through their professional
associations. Moreover, changes in police management are
amplified by the current anti-intellectual populism (and an
anti-government congress) that supports privatization of
institutional functions, and the use of market mechanisms to
ameliorate social problems, bureaucratic stagnation and ossification.
I restrict the remainder of this essay to an analysis
of the ostensive effects of TQM in policing.
TQM and Policing as Depicted l
The argument for TQM has apparent validity and appeal. Let
us review some ofthe claims for TQM in policing. I take the
metaphoric language as given, and will not burden the reader
with quotes around the concepts employed. Suffice it to say
the key concepts are slippery, contextual, shifting in meaning
over time, and often borrowed uncritically from the closed
system logic of economists. Each of these assertions is a
claim.
TQM is said to produce results in industry by empowering
employees through setting mutual performance goals with
management; increasing performance thereby, and so reducing
(transaction orpass through) costs, and indirectly increasing
profit
It is said also to encourage, or even perhaps, require more
ethical kinds of supervision insofar as it rejects a "blame and

shame" model and strives for mutually negotiated accountability
and work -process analysis and correction. Instead of
capricious managerial intervention, workers internalize and
"buy into" standards for evaluation and the quality of work.
It is said to be service-oriented and attends to customer
demands and needs, and eventually to precipitate customerbased
modes of evaluation of both products and services.
TQM is said to induce or bring about increased efficiency. It
reduces the need for immediate work supervisors, since
quality control is built into workers' values and the structure
of the work or "production"; it reduces worker opposition to
supervision that is punitive and external because workers
accept and internalize the nature of work processes and
accountability; and it reduces time wasted on irrelevant tasks
(and reduces occupational deviance and lost worker time).
Finally, TQM claims that it increases managerial flexibility.
An "avoidance culture" or a shame and blame culture (based
on fear of punishment for mistakes) does not develop, and
union strength may be undercut (a value from this managerial
perspective) by workers' acceptance of TQM. Material rewards
are less significant than symbolic ones, and internal
commitments to quality work will increase long term worker
satisfaction. The overall purpose of applying TQM has been
summarized well by Gary Sykes, a leading advocate ofTQM
in policing. He argues: "We need to change the business
they're in [the police] and change the way they do business"
(Seminar at MSU cited above).
Some Consequences of TQM in Policing
The economic metaphor embodied in the language of TQM
when applied to people work, is profoundly misleading. As
I have argued previously, police is a product of the collective
consciousness that imputes sacred properties to agents of the
authoritative core of a society. The question of efficiency is
a vexing and primary one because it applies the flawed
product language ofnineteenth century economics to government
service.
Policing does not "produce" a product, and its "services" are
fundamentally subject to conflict and dispute. Policing is an
exercise in symbolic demarking of what is immoral, wrong,
and outside the boundaries of acceptable conduct. It represents
the state, morality and standards ofcivility and decency
by which we judge ourselves. That society gets (roughly
speaking) the police they deserve is an old, but nevertheless
true, English clicM. More importantly, the contribution of
the police to civil society cannot be measured, demarcated
narrowly, nor reduced to a monetary metric. It is precisely in
doing that which third-rate economics applied to policing
threatens to end: serving the collective interests of society
that people find difficult to precisely define (They know what
it is not- exploiting the weak to make profit). The sacred and
mysterious quality that attaches to policing endures because
it is, metaphorically at least, a kind of service or even "gift"
society uses to stimulate the best in citizens on behalf of
others.
The proposition that efficiency should govern policing is
dubious and naive. Ifeconomic terms of reference alone are
used, absent the very political and social values that underlie
all our great institutions, the reduction and mitigation of
human risks and losses, we destroy the moral web in which
we are entangled and by which we are sustained. Further
efficiency in social control violates other values such a
individualism, freedom of action, the entrepreneurial and
innovative spirit, non-conformity to governmental rules and
edicts, civil liberties, and the protections offered by the Bill
of Rights.
Police work is unexpected work, uneven, unpredictable, and
diverse, dispersed over time and space, and thus it is essentially
inefficient. Policing is inefficient because it was so
designed. Police functions were public functions precisely
because they could not be privatized and made profitable
without threatening the civil fabric. Police cope with the
untoward at length and in an inefficient manner because their
"technology" is language and speech- persuasion, guile, lies,
and fmally, threats and applied force, just as their primary
work is "people work." Their fundamental resource is public
trust, and their obligation is to sustain it. Without it, they must
resort to force or unmitigated fraud.
Policing necessarily retains and nurtures "slack resources"
(Thompson, 1967), resources held in abeyance for allocation
to matters arising. These resources, personnel, weapons,
tools, and reciprocal mutual aid obligations binding them to
other agencies, are built into the structure and process of
policing. To trim (or add to) police resources on the basis of
a hypothecated ideal level would fly in the face of all
reasonable experience with hazards, terror, riots, frres, civil
disturbance and rebellion, any matter which if left alone
could become even more vexatious and dangerous (Bittner
1990).
TQM in the police context, as I have shown, advances a
number of specific claims. No research has established the
advantages or disadvantages of adopting TQM in a police
department, so one can only speculate, not cite data. Let us
consider them in brief.
Claims
1. TQMisdesigned to empowerthe worker, but the discretion
of officers at the bottom stands as antithetical to managerial
authority, and the values of the lower participants in patrol
surround job control, original authority to act in the name of
the state, and loyalty to one's colleagues. Reducing costs and
increasing ''profits'' or even output has different meaning to
sub-segments of the patrol world (Walsh, 1988}-some seek
April 1995/ 3

ank promotion. some time off. some overtime and related
income. some avoid work generally. The unity of this
segment is based on opposition to managerial supervision
and control. not loyalty to a common culture. Because the
work is fundamentally uncertain, standards for judging it are
"clinical" and obviate easy evaluation after the fact. Interventions
by supervisors are prefigured as unwanted and
capricious.
The "oppositional culture" (Sykes, seminar cited above) that
develops around the lower participant's life interests of
policing has always been problematic for command officers.
But perhaps one might consider this-the working officer's
culture operates in effect to loosely couple managerial
schemes, visions and plans. with the demands made upon
officers dealing with human misery and despair. Itefficiently
provides the necessary "cushion" that pennits slack to be
mobilized. and produces situationally sound. shrewd, creative
and weD-crafted responses to complex problems. The
fundamental purpose of policing in a democratic society is
not efficient law enforcement, but maintaining the peace and
reducing human misery.
2. TQM wishes to increase responsiveness to the "customer."
As James Q. Wilson (1968) notes. the police are not popular-the
police keep a jail. arrest people, apply violence,
write tickets. and surveil, control, and manage citizens'
conduct. The role implies conflict and conflict-resolution.
The police officer does not serve individual citizens. nor seek
to please them; the officer serves the public interest as the
state and its political officers define it. This role is supported
by law, public morality and tradition. To reduce officers'
functions to providing "public service," even defmed as a
source of conflict, is to make a mockery of the work: and the
traditional mission of policing in a democratic society. Since
the middle classes and above are typicaUy seen in the victim
role, responsiveness to the customer will hold within it a
potential for producing increases in class inequalities, rationing
of service to the more powerful and conventionaUy
worthy. in order to increase customer satisfaction.
Ifthe "customer" is to be given the power tojudge, evaluate,
and alter the nature of the "services" provided, then the
fundamental grounds of an occupational mandate are undercut.
As E.C. Hughes (1958) argues, occupations, once given
a mandate, believe it is within their authority to define the
nature of work and to hold out judgments of competence. A
consumer orientation is appropriate when the consumer has
the skiD, knowledge and willingness to risk consequences of
a decision, but inappropriate when the consumer cannot
judge, is held at law to be unable to judge, or whose our selfinterest
supersedes the public interest. If"customer satisfaction"
is weighed heavily, then market forces may substitute
for values. judgment. discretion and forbearance of others'
flaws and weaknesses, the very mobilizing touchstones that
Police Forum/4
make policing and other civil justice roles humane and
tolerable in a mass democratic society.
3. TQM seeks to increase managerial flexibility. Implementation
of a TQM scheme, as with all refonns, hinges upon
managerial decisions. It will be carried out via top-down
commands and orders, often associated with implicit or
explicit punishment and persuasion. What goals of policing
are being mutually discussed and implemented? The focus
here ison means, and it serves to displace attention away from
unclear and ambiguous ends.
It appears that TQM is yet another attempt by top command
to control the patrol officer, to coopt officers to a pseudo
democratic approach while encouraging self-surveillance,
internalized controls, reduced control over the conditions of
work (unions and reduction of procedural guarantees for
certain delicts) and a false sense of public accountability.
"Citizens" do not exist as a social group and wield no power
or legitimate authority.
4. The idea that workers can be converted to value symbolic
rewards overmonetary rewards assumes that they wiD take to
heart the governance of the organization. There is no evidence
that a large number of police chiefs are willing to do
this or have done it. Experiments with TQM have been done
on a top-down basis, ordered from outside, or carried out in
service-oriented departments with prevailing "customer orientation"
because they were low-crime small towns or suburbs.
The very fact that the few large departments that have
introduced TQM have encountered strong employee resistance
suggests that it has elements of managerial arrogation
of power, not a sharing of responsibility and accountability
with officers.
5. TQM holds out reduced operating costs as a consequence,
yet it is unclear how TQM might reduce costs. The police,
except with respect to seizures and traffic tickets, have little
potential to generate "profits." A police budget is relatively
fIXed, and officers can do little to reduce costs. Cost control
is by definition a top management function, not the worker's
role (in fact workers are prohibited from doing so). Unit
activities, arrests, traffic tickets. seizures, clearances are not
measured, given precise value, nor costed out, so they cannot
be compared across units. The fixed costs of policing
(buildings. vehicles, salaries, retirement and benefits), like
those of corrections, are vast and almost irreducible, so costsavings
will be effectuated by further rationing of services.
Externalities, such as the costs of suits for damages, and
payments for settlement of suits out of court, are not controlled
by the police, but detennined by City officials, attorneys.
and negotiators. Savings effectuated here would have
no direct bearing on police operating costs. In summary, the
economic concepts used to refonn police are also misleading.
The 'business of the police' is not 'business.' TQM hides

managerial aims that may not further the purposes of democmtic
policing. It may serve to undermine unions and their
ability to argue for legalistic protections, civil procedures,
and tolemnce. It will serve to rationalize firing and
"downsizing" on the grounds of "efficiency," or "good business,"
or "productivity." While the community policing
movement has the potential for reforming and opening up
opportunities for officers to redefine their roles, TQM is a
countermovement designed to arrogate further power neither
to officers nor citizens, but to command management.
Comment
In the context of the present struggle for policereform several
images are competing for salience. TQM substitutes new
versions of managerial control for previous bureaucratic
approaches. The net result would appear to besubstitution of
an inappropriateeconomic metaphorforreviewing andevaluating
traditional police practices. The consequence is not the
spread of democmtic values within policing, but a broadening
of the scope of managerial power with no appreciable
gain to citizens or officers.
Note
IMany ofthese points were advanced by Prof. Gary Sykes in
a seminar at Michigan State University School ofCriminal
Justice, on Feb 13,1995.
References
Bittner, Egon 1990. Aspects of Police Work. Boston:
Northeastern University Press.
Goldstein, H. 1990. Problem-oriented Policing New York:
McGmw-Hill
Hughes, E.C. 1958. Men and Their Work Glencoe: Free
Press.
Manning. P.K. 1992. "Police and Information Technologies"
in M. Tonry and N. Morris (eds.) Modern PoliCing.
Chicago: University of Press.
1994 ·'Community Policing" in V. Kappeler ed.
The Police and Society. Prospect Heights,lll: Waveland
Press.
1994 "Economic Rhetoric and Police Reform" in
V. Kappelered. The Police and Society. Prospect Heights,
lll: Waveland Press.
1994a" Violence and Symbolic Violence" in V.
Kappeler ed. The Police and Society ProspectHeights, Ill:
Waveland Press.
Reiss, AJ. Jr. 1992 "Twentieth Century Policing" in M.
Tonry and N. Morris (eds.) Modern Policing. Chicago:
University of Press.
Thompson. J. 1967 Organizations in Action. New York:
McGmw-Hill.
Wilson, J.Q. 1968 Varieties ofPolice Behavior. Cambridge:
Harvard University Press.
Walsh, W.1985 "Patrol officer Arrest Rates..." Justice Quarterly
2 (September): 271-290.
Call for Papers
The Society of Police
Futurists International
invites those interested in the future of
crime, criminal justice, and public policy to
submit a paper for
presentation at PFI's Second Symposium:
2020 Vision: Policing
25 Years in the
Future
October 1-4, 1995
Chicago, Illinois
Abstracts due: May 1, 1995
Papers due: August 1, 1995
Details may be obtained from
Symposium Program Chair:
Richard W. Myers
Chief of Police
lisle Police Department
1040 Burlington Avenue
Lisle, Il 60532
(708) 719-0800
FAX: (708) 719-0807
April 1995/ 5

J
[.... POLICE PUBUCATION NEWS ·
Book Review
Common Sense About Police Review
by Douglas W. Perez.
Temple University Press, 1994.
322 pages.
Can police departments objectively and adequately police
themselves? Can civilian review mechanisms evaluate the
intricate workings of the police from an outside position.
Douglas W. Perez's Common Sense About Police Review is
an ambitious look at the base causes of complaints against the
police, how various jurisdictions review alleged police misconduct,
and what system best answers the needsofthe police
and the public. Perez's research covers seven- teen years of
studies and observations of several selected police departments
and their chosen methods of review. However, the
most important facet of this book is the extraordinary effort
made by Perez to balance statistics and laws with the human
elements of both the police and civilian complainants.
The Introduction to Common Sense About Police Review is
one of the strongest points of the book. Instead of immediately
entering into a discussion of various types of review
systems, Perez discusses the multiple roles and responsibilities
which society has assigned to the police and how the
police administer those tasks. He is particularly on target
when he likens the police officer to an administrator who
must base his decisions on more than black and white laws.
The flexibility of the police officer's job is what makes it
often times successful, and sometimes leads to complaints of
misconduct.
Perez devotes all of Chapter One to the nature of police
malpractice. The history of police malpractice is reviewed to
show that major change in police review has always come on
the heelsofa majorincidenL He then reviews two currentday
incidents, Rodney King (Los Angeles) and Malice Green
(Detroit), which are used during the remainder of the book to
compare opposing styles of police review. Complaint demographics
are discussed as they relate to the types of complaints
ftled and the different types of review processes
adopted in various localities. Perez's discussion of the
various categories of police abuse in present day society is
very useful in that it offers the reader a view of why some
segments of society are more likely to sustain certain types of
abuse than others. Perez also tries to give some insight into
how the community's acceptance of certain types ofmalpraclice
affects the outlook and actions of their police force.
Police Forum/6
No present day system can operate in a vacuum and in
Chapter Two Perez outlines some of the environmental
forces affecting present day review systems. The limits to
reform begin with the conceptions, both true and misconceived,
held by the police and public of each other. Perez
touches on the feelings of ostracism harbored by many police
officers because ofthe unwarranted hostility directed toward
them and the many administrative and judicial obstacles
placed in their path. He also examines the "growing anonymity"
(p. 36) of American society and how the problems
brought to the police are more polarized and more difficult to
resolve. The public's distrust of government is often directed
toward the most visible symbol; the police.
Reform, according to Perez, is also limited by various institutions;
prosecutors, courts, legislatures, grand juries, and the
media. They apply pressure in the form of laws, rulings and
publicity which help form the boundaries within which the
police review system must function. Perez is very informative
in his descriptions of the many emotional and administrative
factors affecting the review systems ability to succeed
and how these factors both help and hinder the police officer
involved.
Chapter Three involves the discussion of what makes an
effective complaint review system. Perez looks at the three
main groups involved in the complaint process (complaining
citizens, police officers, police organizations) and evaluates
those areas which are of importance to each group in the
review process. The fair representation of each group's
desires. interests. and rights is what determines the effectiveness
of any given review system, according to Perez.
Perez uses integrity. legitimacy. and learning as the three
evaluators of the effectiveness of a review system. He is open
in his admitting that the rating of these three factors is most
certainly subjective in many instances, but he nonetheless
outlines several criteria which he has used in his study to
make his results as accurate and applicable as possible. Perez
makes an excellent case for the importance of learning as a
criterion through its ability to not only deter future misconduct,
but to also provide the police organization with feedback
concerning public perceptions of the departmentand the
success or failure of current institutional processes.
Chapters Four, Five, and Six are the heart of Common Sense
About Police Review because they combine Perez's in-depth
study and personal observations of the three main types of
police review systems. These systems are evaluated using
integrity• legitimacy , and learning as the major determinants
of effectiveness. He also reviews the input mechanisms,
investigative procedures, and method of deliberation and

determination. Perez makes it easier for the reader to keep
track of the similarities and differences between the three
system styles by reviewing important points of comparison
periodically within his analysis.
Oneofthe few criticisms I have ofthis book is that Perez often
interjects subjective opinion alongside objective observations
without clearly delineating between the two. This is
done in several observations concerning the early development
of certain review institutions and how their members
worked against harmony with the police organizations involved.
The third and final section of Common Sense About Police
Review looks at the various entities that are able to affect
change in administrative review systems, compares the review
systems examined, and proposes an ideal police review
system. In Chapter Seven, Perez identifies police unions,
chiefs, the media, the community, political elites, and local
bar members as potential agents of change who share some
responsibility for police misconduct and should also share in
solving the problems identified with the police and review
systems. Perez outlines the current status of these players and
suggests how they might augment active review systems to
better provide needed solutions. He provides not only theoretical
fodder, but includes examples of real-life programs
and situations involving the previously mentioned agents of
change.
A comparative analysis of the police review systems mentioned
earlier in the book allows Perez to compare specific
points as the relate to the three main evaluation criteria of
integrity, legitimacy, and learning. Perez highlights the most
positive aspects of the systems and how those areas can be
implemented to best serve the goals ofpolice review. In his
comparisons Perez is very astute at pointing out the personal
concerns of the groups effected by the review process and
how the individual systems answer those concerns. Chapter
Eight provides the components for Perez building the "ideal
police review system" in Chapter Nine.
In the last chapter, Perez assembles what he feels are the best
components of the systems previously observed into one
proposal which best outlines the necessities for a fair, impartial,
and functional review system. He views the police
accountability system as consisting of three information
loops which channel review findings in several directions;
police policy development, training, and complaint investigation
I adjudication.
The training and learning element is singled out by Perez as
the most important mission of any review mechanism. He
emphasizes, and I believe rightfully so, that the knowledge
gained from the review system can be very critical in the
formulation of training procedures in recruit and in-service
systems. Training can be instrumental in both curbing actual
misconduct and in making officers aware of the perceptions
held by citizens which may contribute to the number of
complaints reported.
One of the more innovative and potentially beneficial elements
of Perez 's "ideal system" is the use ofpeer counseling,
mediation, and other forms of informal resolution for minor
complaints. These methods, according to Perez, will allow
peer pressure and retraining to correct misconduct in a more
positive manner while saving countless dollars spent during
a full scale review.
Douglas Perez has presented a well thought out and researched
analysis of existing and proposed police review
systems, while acknowledging the impossibility of doing so
in clear-cut, black and white finality. He has made a commendable
effort to look at all sides and provide the reader
with a workable outline for a system which incol'JX)rates the
best ideas from several working models. Instating what most
legitimate complainants look for, Perez states, "they want a
reasonably objective evaluation of their allegations. They
want some action taken, not necessarily punitive, which will
assure that future similar incidents will not recur. In short.
they want to have their government respond to their grievances
openly and effectively" (pp. 67). Perez has providedan
outline for a system which seems to reasonably provide that
response.
Robyn A. Wiley
Indiana University at Fort Wayne
Book News
Policework:
The Need for a Noble Character
by Rickey D. Lashley
Forward by Stan Stojkovic
Westport, CT: Praeger Publishers, 1995
144 pages, $49.95
to A strong challenge against the present American system of
law enforcement, this book contends that politics have prevented
police from achieving their sworn mission. Although
his analysis is based on established theory, the author uses his
own research and experience as evidence of the failure of the
criminal justice system. Police departments are revealed as
examples of a bureaucracy that has lost sight of its pU1JX>se
and only seeks to survive. This work will be of interest to
those seeking a different and controversial view of criminal
justice, police science, public administration, urban studies,
and political science programs."
April 1995/ 7

CHANGING THE FACE OF POLICING:
The Community Policing Paradigm
A. Steven Dietz
Research Specialist
Austin Police Department
Austin, Texas
Community policing, though not a new concept for police,
has only recently been the focus ofa presidential administration.
Through the 1980' s and into this decade the Department
ofJustice has funded community oriented policing programs
and projects inan effort to help city government reduce crime
and assist neighborhoods in reclaiming their identity. These
programs were generally conducted by a relatively small
number ofofficers. and in neighborhoods requiring substantial
repair of "broken windows." 1 The results indicate community
policing is successful. However, maintaining these
programs has required resources beyond those normally
provided a police department. The programs are seen as
special assignments for the officers involved, and once officers
are reassigned the neighborhoods return to their earlier
state or worse, and the officers return to their traditional
policing techniques. The importance placed on community
policing at all levels of government suggests that there is a
need to identify effective methods oftransition to community
policing.
Research on policing, and in particular community policing.
has been undertaken from a traditional policing paradigm.
This paradigm is based on the reactive nature of the traditional
9-1-1 driven semi-military hierarchy of traditional
policing. A community policing paradigm provides a more
comprehensive framework for policing and also includes the
critical aspects or tools of a traditional policing paradigm
which are essential to police being able to protect citizens and
enforce laws and ordinances in their precincts. This represents
a significant change for policing and police research.
Austin Police Department
Community policing has been a fact of life for the Austin
Police Department (APD) for a number of years, as it has
been in many other departments across the country. However,
while APD has initiated numerous community oriented
activities, coordinating these activities became extremely
staff and time demanding.
APD received a Bureau of Justice Assistance Community
Policing Demonstration Site Grant in October of 1993. The
department decided this would be the catalyst for becoming
a true community policing department. To accomplish this
Police Forum/ 10
the department has developed three goals/ assumptions that
are in keeping with the basic concepts of community policing:
• police departments must understand the needs/ expectations
of the citizens they serve;
• police departments must live within their means;
• police departments must optimize resources through
investment in technology and long range planning for
unresolved budget issues.
These assumptions represent the foundation fora community
policing paradigm. They suggest that the police in Austin
must understand the expectations of citizens, and teach
citizens what police are able to do to meet those expectations,
as well. APD has recognized that funding and staffing levels
for the department cannot keep pace with the growth of the
city. The assumptions also suggest a systemic organizational
change as opposed to simply implementing community p0licing
programs, pilots or projects. Finally, the department
must make a concerted effort to invest in cutting edge
technology and innovative organizational strategies.
In traditional policing the reality of crime is considered the
problem of police, and the perception of crime is discounted
as the problem of the citizen. The community policing
paradigm suggest that the perception of crime is real to the
citizen and is as much a challenge for the police as it is for
citizens. Therefore, the role of community oriented police is
to understand the citizens' perception, develop initiatives to
reduce the crimes! incidents that form the basis of these
perceptions. and work with citizens to change these perceptions.
This first goal, identifying the needs and expectations of
citizens, may be one of the hardest facing police. APD
conducted public meetings to get an initial understanding of
the expectations of citizens. These meetings suggested several
areas of concern:
• crime in general;
• perception of crime in one's own neighborhood;
• fear of becoming a victim of crime.
To further determine the extent of these concerns among the
citizens of Austin, APD conducted a city-wide survey. The
results of the citizen survey and neighborhood meetings
provided APD with a clearer understanding of what citizens
expect and what APD needs to do to meet those expectations .
However, meeting the identified needs of citizens required
APD to conduct further analysis. The perspectives provided

y the second and third assumptions - living within their
means. and optimizing resources -applied to the results of the
surveys generated the following list of recommendations:
• Use citizens' perception of the "quality of police
service" as one measure ofthe effectiveness of APD' s
community policing initiatives;
• Use measures of fear of crime, and citizens' perception
of crime as measures of neighborhood wellness
(quality of life), and not effective policing;
• Examine current police policies and determine which
support a community policing department and which
do not;
• Establish criteria for recruit selection and training.
reflecting the appropriate qualities of an ideal community
oriented police officer;
• Align officer assessment and in-service training more
closely with the community policing paradigm and
with the criteria used for hiring and for the training
academy;
• Organize so that APD can take advantage of the
experiences of the patrol officer to respond flexibly to
an ever changing environment by allowiqg decisions
to be made at the lowest possible level of the department;
• Examine the very structure of the organization to
identify those aspects of the organization which most
limit the systemic shift to a community policing department.
Comment
A change in perspective or paradigm has never been easy for
any organization, including police, and has always been done
in bits and pieces. One day the chief of police looks out and
realizes that policing is not the same as it was in the "good old
day." Historically, there have been few changes that have
affected the very foundation of policing. This is the impact
the community policing paradigm will have on policing. It
will be a systemic change that will effect the very structure of
the policing organization. Community policing represents
notonly a change in perspective for conducting policing. but
also a change in evaluating policing effectiveness. and police
initiated programs.
Note
IBroken Windows. by James Q. Wilson and George L.
Kelling was published in the March 1992 issue of The
Atlantic Monthly.
This Periodical is Indexed in
The Criminal Justice Periodical Index
U·M·I
A Bell & Howell Company
300 North Zeeb Road
Ann Arbor, M148106·1346 USA
April 1995/ 11