Change in Law Enforcement Agencies Essay

During the twentieth century there was a serious change with the police. These changes came due to investigative commissions, political reform, civil rights movement, modern technologies, and reform by police

All together law enforcement has changed, but few see the drastic changes that have happened. Everyday, police and sheriffs are working to keep the people in their community safe. With improved technological advances and social changes, police and sheriffs are keeping a closer eye on things today. For example, improved weapons such as tasers have helped keep suspects safe, computers in police cruisers allow instant access of information of individuals. Other social changes, such as women allowed to join the police forces have helped law enforcement a lot with domestic violence cases because they are calmer then most men. No matter what happens police and the sheriffs will be there to protect and serve

• Describe some of the change(s) the criminal justice system as a whole has made in response to the issue you selected.

In the early stages of the development of policing in the United States there were a lot of issues, concerns and problems with how police forces functioned through the entire country. All these Issues were noticed and changes within police departments began to take place. Before any changes were implemented American Police Departments fell directly under the influence of each state specific partisan government. Fortunately, America was able to stray away from the corruptions of how police officers were selected into their position because of their political preferences and also, how departments functioned, and other exploitations from law enforcement agencies throughout the country.

Police, courts and corrections are part of criminal justice organizations. Each of these organizations face challenges every day and the leaders of these agencies must deal with these challenges (Duelin, 2010). The types of criminal justice leaders range from police chiefs and sheriffs to prison superintendents, and heads of government, state, or local task forces. Some of the challenges they confront are budget and staffing shortfalls, political perspectives on the roles of law enforcement personnel in society, and the changing nature of crime and the difficulties associated with keeping up with these trends (Bryant, 2010).

The issues that our police departments face in today’s society consist of corrupt police departments, publicity, operating expenses, and constant training to meet the guidelines set by court decisions.

Historically, policing in America mimicked that of the English. American ideas expanded on the English way of policing, to start an era of ever evolving police agencies. In the beginning policing was considered the civic duty of members of a community. These “drafted” officers were not paid or trained. Appointed Sheriff’s were motivated by money, and lost focus on enforcing the law. Policing was considered reactive in nature. This began to change as did society, industrialism and urbanization, brought with it a rise in crime, causing police to shift towards a more proactive approach to law enforcement. In the 1800’s new technologies began another change

Since the founding of this country, to the wild west, and up to the present, the agenda of the policing bodies have been clear: to uphold and enforce the laws of our society. Of course the way they do this today had undergone changes from the first police forces of early America, law enforcement has seen trends come and go.

While the Reform Era worked to professionalize police, as society became more complex, so did the role of the police officer. The Community Policing Era was developed as a result of the need to develop cooperation and positive relationships between the police and public. What developed out of this era was an essential element of community policing – public accountability. Police officers became accountable to their supervisors who in turn became accountable to the community. Accountability can be seen as an honest evaluation of achievement based on clearly defined objectives. Many of these objectives are defined by complex community and social problems; as such police officers require the capacity and flexibility to work on them in a variety of styles and employing a variety of strategies.

In order for departments to provide high quality and unbiased service, departments need to have integrity and hold individuals accountable for their behaviors and/or actions. For this to be effective, it needs to start at the top and work its way down the chain of command. Once officers see ranking officers being a good role model the officers would fall into place. However, if the top of the chain of command does not make a good role model then the officers will feel that they could do what they want since the

We know that change is constant. However, it is critical to determine the need and type of change necessary, first order, or second order. First order change focuses on strategies in support of the status quo or non-transformational activities. This area gets the most attention as it makes departments feel like they are making progress. Second order change focuses on the culture and transformational efforts and requires more time, effort, and commitment. The decision on the type of change required is dependent on specific departmental cultural factors and outcomes desired in a specific law enforcement organization. As most law enforcement departments are autocratic and paramilitary, an assessment of how tolerant the

In many regards, some of these advancements mirrored the standards of policing that had existed amid the political period however had since blurred in light of the change development. Despite the fact that the group period speaks to another theory and state of mind about policing, plainly many police divisions keep on clinging to leftovers of the expert time. In this regard, some police divisions have been more effective at consolidating divided components of group period changes however less fruitful at adjusting approaches, hones, and composed methodologies steady with this new model (J. R. Greene and Mastrofski,

A lot of people see the paramilitary model to be an obstacle to law enforcement agencies when it comes to serving the changing needs of their communities. Many studies have been done; have proven that this model often fails in trying to develop an open and constructive communication as well as laterally from the lower ranks which the agencies agree. This model has been known to restrain individual’s creativity within the organization and boost a lack of flexibility and resistance

The style of police leadership has gradually changed over the last several years. The traditional belief that the solitary leader who possessed the wisdom, integrity, and courage to manage a police department, or a shift of officers has been replaced with the concept of teamwork (Wuestewald, 2013). The idea of using a team to manage an organization is nothing new in the private sector, however, replacing the old idea of a solitary leader has taken time and is slow to take hold in some organizations.

The New Zealand Police force has been in the public spotlight since 2004, where there have been many enquiries into the way they do things and acquisition raised against them. Peter Marshall came in as the Commissioner of New Zealand Police in 2011 and from there has faced a “massive clean-up of the force” (Bridgman, 2011). This essay will consist of an analysis of the New Zealand Police and the errors that they have faced over the past few years. To do this analysis I will be using two articles to analyse the errors, the first being written by Kotter & Schlesinger which is about choosing successful strategies for changes within an organisation (Kotter & Schlesinger, 2008) and the second written by Kotter titled – Leading Change; why