Several years ago during in-service training, my Department’s (then) Deputy Chief proclaimed during in-service training, “Morale is a personal issue.” The Deputy Chief went on to say (essentially) officers can choose to come to work happy or sad; the Department has nothing to do with an officer’s morale. He continued by offering that if officers do not like it here, they can go somewhere else because there are plenty of people who are more than willing to take the officers’ places. So much for a positive, upbeat, and motivating speech from one of my Department’s top managers. While I do agree with the Deputy Chief that people choose their level of motivation, I disagree that organizations have nothing to do with people’s motivation. I believe managers of organizations must create an environment through influence in which people will choose to be positively motivated. The former Deputy Chief’s comments have always stuck with me, because they are typical of the status quo, traditional command and control management style used, touted, and rewarded by law enforcement agencies.
Effective Leaders vs. Ineffective Managers
Throughout my 38-year law enforcement career, I have worked for some excellent supervisors. These supervisors were effective leaders who demonstrated impeccable character and confidence, led by example, and created positive, encouraging environments that made me feel I was working with rather than for them. These supervisors influenced and inspired me to work hard and be the best law enforcement official I could be. I have also worked for many ineffective managers who subscribed to an authoritarian (command and control) management style. These managers were not inspiring and did not lead by example. Many lacked either character or competence; many lacked both. The effective leaders propelled me to follow and emulate them; the ineffective leaders drove me to promote.
Recognizing the True Cost of Low Morale
A friend of mine (and fellow command-level officer from another law enforcement agency) sent me an article published in Police Chief Magazine written by David Cruickshank titled Recognizing the True Cost of Low Morale. Cruickshank’s (2012) article discussed the affect and cost poor morale has on organizations. Cruickshank pointed to the traditional law enforcement management style of command and control as the culprit of low morale and organizational stress. Cruickshank identified the following as the “five primary issues impacted by a morale problem” (para. 9): turnover, absenteeism, low productivity, civil liability, and officer suicide.
Cruickshank’s (2012) article is “on point.” Organizational stress is a byproduct of non-supportive and often caustic management practices, which are the norm, rather than an anomaly, for American law enforcement agencies. Cruickshank’s comments back up my longstanding belief that law enforcement agencies are responsible for creating a positive environment, so employees are happy and positively motivated to do the job. I opine the problem with many articles and books written about leadership and morale is such articles and books never clearly address the real issues and why things do not change, which is the broken law enforcement culture that grooms and promotes the wrong people into the driver’s seat of organizations. Cruickshank hinted at this when he wrote the following:
Top administrators are generally in the twilight of their careers and are therefore hesitant to institute change. Senior law enforcement professionals have worked their entire careers to advance and are unlikely to risk failure or admit that there are issues within their agencies after coming so far. Accordingly, they keep to the ways they know–the same ways that got them to where they are.
The Broken Law Enforcement Culture
Traditional law enforcement management is one of command and control, which uses legitimate (authority) and coercive (punishment) power bases (French & Raven, 1960)—almost exclusively—to get things done. This “do it because I said so or else” management style creates an “us against them mentality” within organizations, which causes separation and disconnection between the command and lower ranks. Additionally, law enforcement agencies are bureaucracies that create conformist followers (i.e. “yes people”), because of command-and-control management. Such bureaucracies reward those who conform to this style of management with promotions and good assignments. Individuals who attempt to buck the command and control management style for a servant or transformational leadership style (i.e., the use of referent and expert power bases [French & Raven, 1960]), which is preached as the leadership style of choice in the International Association of Chiefs of Police’s (IACP) Leadership in Police Organization’s (LPO) class, are often punished or banished for attempting to buck the norm and change the culture and management style. Couple this with the common traits of those that are often driven to promote (e.g.,. a need for power, arrogance, and narcissism) and one can see why the command and control style and the “good ole boy” systems are alive and well in law enforcement agencies. Research conducted by McQuaid in 2012 (as cited in Kiisel, 2012) showed that approximately 65% of employees thought their bosses sucked because the bosses’ demonstrated behaviors associated with poor managers (e.g., micromanaging, “do as I say not as I do attitude, poor communication, playing favorites, playing office politics, etc.).
The Need for Change
Authors and researchers can write, talk, research, and present all the findings they want to explain the differences between bad managers/leaders and effective ones. Unfortunately, nothing will change until management stops grooming and rewarding bad managers and bucks the status quo to change the management culture. Change will only happen when those that display effective manager/leader behaviors decide to promote and fill the seats, taking them from the old heads. Easier said than done, you say? Yes it is, because many do not want to work with those currently in the seats. Think about this, who do you surround yourself with, people you like or people you do not like? Many will not test for promotion, because if they do test and are promoted, they are now peers with people they do not like or agree with (from a management/leadership perspective). I have talked to several people about this very issue and they all say they do not want to promote and be around those people. My rebuttal is “well then you will have to continue to work for them.”
I can go on and on, standing on my soapbox, but I will stop. The other issue is that municipalities, when it comes to hiring police chiefs, need to start hiring those that demonstrate effective leader behaviors. Unfortunately, this again is often not the case, because the city officials in power often have the same command-and-control mentality and look to hire conformists as chiefs, who will gladly accept that role, for the financial rewards and to fuel their egos, arrogance, and quench their need for power. As such, this vicious poor management cycle continues.
My Challenge to You
I cannot end my commentary without a challenge to all who are sick and tired of poor managers and ineffective management. I challenge each of you to write down 10 behaviors you associate with effective managers/leaders. Behaviors are actions that individuals demonstrate. So, if I sat down with you and asked you to name an effective manager/leader, I would ask you to identify the behaviors the person displayed that influenced you to believe the person was an effective manager/leader. After you write those 10 behaviors down, I want you to think about someone you believe was a poor manager/leader. Write down 10 behaviors the person demonstrated that caused you to label that person a poor manager/leader. Once you have written down both sets of behaviors, I want you to read both and ask yourself these questions: “What set of behaviors do I like?” “Who would I rather work for, the person demonstrating the effective behaviors or the person demonstrating the ineffective behaviors?” I surmise you like effective manager/leader behaviors and want to work for the person demonstrating such behaviors. If my assumption is correct, then my challenge is that you demonstrate effective manager/leader behaviors at whatever management level or rank you hold in your organization. I must note you do not have to hold a managerial rank to be a leader and demonstrate effective manager/leader behaviors. My challenge is for you to be the leader you would follow and be the follower that if you were the leader, you would want to follow you. Additionally, I want you to answer this question: “What type of behaviors are typically displayed by managers in the organization I work for?” If your answer is the poor manager/leader behaviors you identified, then my challenge to you is to promote, challenge, and change the status quo traditional management style, and unseat those who subscribe to, tout, and maintain it. If you choose to do nothing, do not complain about your organization’s poor management, because you are part of the problem. Rather than choosing to be part of the problem, be part of the solution.