Following a decline in public confidence in policing in the late 1980s, the Association of Chief Police Officers undertook an in depth ‘Operational Policing Review’ to ascertain perceptions of policing both internally and externally. The review resulted in a strategic policy document (SPD) called ‘Setting the standards for policing: meeting community expectation.’ The SPD identified a disconnect between the police and communities that can be broadly described as policing arrogance resulting in the police setting community priorities instead of the public. There was also a lack of focus on customer expectation and a general lack of consistency in relation to fairness, courtesy and sensitivity.
The SPD made a number of recommendations, but perhaps the main issue to come out of the research was the development of the Quality of Service Initiative (QOS). The QOS led to many police forces introducing European Foundation of Quality Management, Total Quality Management or similar processes in order to improve performance across a range of areas. According to Waters (1996) the QOS approach was determined in order to promote a caring service and repair the damage image of the police (the reason for the damaged image is worthy of another blog at a later date).
However, as with any reform agenda, the success or failure would depend on the leadership that it attracted. Within a short period of time, the attention of police leaders was stimulated by the fact that HMIC declared that it would …‘rigorously purse indications that all forces are pursuing measurement of quality of service to the public…’ Measurement was always going to stir activity!
However, there was an enlightened air developing. Chief HMI Sir John Woodcock wrote of the police having to develop from ‘…a nominal service to one with a passion for service. A passion for the customer as an individual, not a view of what the [police] service thinks the public needs as and when the organisation can deliver it.’ (1990).
However, to do this it was accepted that there had to be a change of culture. Woodcock again referred to a cultural change that had to occur at all levels, although he acknowledged that penetration was not happening. The Chief Constable of Leicestershire Michael Hurst addressed a seminar at the national police college in 1991 and also stated that ‘the challenge is to translate our intention into measureable action at street level……It means changing the ethos of policing, its values and standards, from regulations and enforcement to service and protection.’ Now where have I heard those words before? Ah yes, 1829, Peel, Rowan and Mayne in developing the New Police! So almost 200 years later it seems that the police are trying to get back to the principles of 1829.
Let’s fast forward to the 2000s; 2010 to be precise. Jon Murphy QPM is appointed as the new Chief Constable of Merseyside Police and seeks to implement a strategy called ‘Just Talk.’ The idea is that uniformed officers stop and speak to people about everyday issues rather than stopping them and asking them to account for themselves. The Police Minister the Right Honourable Nick Herbert MP also espouses returning to the values of policing developed by Peel. So why does policing seem to be caught in this cycle of late modernity whereby reform is repeated quickly over a short time period and seem to return to the same issue – the standard and manner of service to the public.
Some of the reasons are politicisation of policing; new governments with new agendas; crises in policing resulting in a lack of confidence; a focus on performance and ticking boxes, rather than dealing with people as people and finally, a lack of understanding of what citizens or communities want or expect from the police. This is not an easy nut to crack as there are too many distractions in modern day society. Or are there? We have the EDL – Rowan and Mayne had large scale disturbances in their time. We have changes in government and a lack of clarity on the Big Society – yet political turmoil in the 1800s resulted in changes of policy and personnel on a much larger scale.
It is also too easy to say that inconsistency is down to poor leadership. Many leaders of the modern police force have a focus on their career rather than policing communities, but whose fault is that?
The bigger worry, is whether those identified by Woodcock and Hirst, the front line personnel who are responsible for direct communication with citizens, have the skills and abilities to be able to ‘Just Talk’ or more importantly develop a passion for customer service. This will become a bigger issue once police forces start to recruit again and the Y Generation starts to play a bigger role in policing our society, especially as many forces have disbanded their training schools and academies to cope with the cuts.
As outsourcing starts to play a bigger part in policing there is a clear need for some form of regulation to ensure consistency in delivery, especially in relation to training recruits. It will be interesting to see what part NPIA, or what is left of it, will play in the development of police recruits in the future. Bring on the next generation
No comments:
Post a Comment