Rocking out with my Hard Rockin' Amigo

Usually my blogs relate to issues related to policing or some other socio-political issue, however, this time I want to write about something completely different. Music. Last night I saw on of my favourite rock bands, Rush. I have been a fan of their music ever since I first heard side one of Hemispheres in about 1977. I say the first side, but it one single track. I managed to catch them on the Tour of the Hemispheres and I was hooked. Last night must have been the seventh or eighth time that I have seen them and they have never let me down. My favourite period for their music was the '70s and '80's, so I was delighted when they played the whole of the 'Moving Pictures' album.

This is my third arena concert in the last 12 months having seen Kiss in Liverpool and Manchester and I will be seeing my other favourite band Journey on tour with Foreigner and Styx in a few weeks time.

You may well be thinking that I am stuck in a time warp of music appreciation from three or four decades ago, and I would have to agree with you. In the last couple of years I have seen Journey (five times)' Ozzy Osbourne, Heaven and Hell (Black Sabbath with Ronnie James Dio), The Scorpions, Extreme, Ted Nugent, Alice Cooper and Deep Purple. All classic bands who I saw in their original heyday. A second coming maybe?

But what makes these bands stand the test of time? They reform and come back for more and pack out our biggest venues. The answer I believe falls into two areas. The first if professionalism. They can actually play their instruments and have honed down their stage skills to perfection. Having a it of a birds eye view last night gave me an appreciation into how hard Rush work even when they are not stood on the stage. uitar changes, timing to arrive at the perfect point and the ability to connect with 10,000 people with consummate ease.

The second is the fact that they just pen darned good tunes. All of the old classics, recorded on tape and pressed in vinyl stand up to the scrutiny of digital sound that is so clear that you can hear every twang of the guitar and crash of a hi hat. Add an imaginative light show, a few fire pots, fireworks and the odd laser and explosion and you have the makings of a cracking show.

Perhaps the only criticism would be that the 'old' groups are almost too professional. The ease with which they perform tends to mean that there is a lack of 'edge'. Almost nothing goes wrong. There are no surprises. You know what you are going to get and they deliver it in the bucket load. I think the right word would be 'slick'. They are too slick. Don't get me wrong, I would pay to see these bands over many of the modern groups any day. In fact I cannot think of many modern groups that I would pay to see. But if you take a band like Alabama 3, their stage show is electric and it has 'edge'. You just don't know which members of the band will turn up, or when Larry Love will forget the words and the band will have to start the song again. Maybe this is why they play the smaller venues and the old bands who have crafted themselves to suit the arenas stick to what they know best.
So would I pay to see Rush again? In the blink of an eye. You can't keep an old rocker down and as long as Rush, Kiss, Journey et al want to tour the world to entertain us, I will be the ticket in hand ready to sing-a-long and shout 'hey' at the appropriate moment.

Yes, the average age of the people at the gig was about 50, but there were plenty of your people, some of whom would have been getting introduced to the world of live rock music via a band that recorded their first album in about 1973. But that is what music of this genre is all about. Music for the selective masses?
To be able to 'stand within the pleasure dome decreed by Kubla Khan' Is both a privilege and a pleasure.

Police Accountability - Part One

I am sat typing this blog at the Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO) conference on Learning and Development.  The main speaker is Peter Neyroud, a retired Chief Constable and former head of National Policing Improvement Agency and author of a recent review of police leadership. This is the end of a week that has seen the media deliver a great deal of bad news about policing in the UK and I am hoping that the speakers today will bring some clarity to where police leadership is going in the UK.

The first of the bad news came with the verdict from Coroners Court in relation to the death of Mr. Ian Tomlinson.  Mr. Tomlinson walked in front of a line of police officers who were dealing with public disorder at the G20 conference two years ago.  As he walked past the officers Constable Harwood struck Mr. Tomlinson with his baton and pushed him the ground.  All of this was caught on camera.  Mr. Tomlinson got up and walked off only to collapse and die a short distance away.  A Home Office post mortem suggested that Mr. Tomlinson died of natural causes, however, independent examinations suggest that he died from internal bleeding caused by the police officers’ actions.  A result of unlawful death was the verdict of the jury which has resulted in the case being re referred to the Crown Prosecution Service to see whether the Constable should face any charges.

As a former police officer I have been involved in many large scale disturbances and it is fair to say that there is a great deal of stress involved as you deal with people who are predominantly intent on causing anti-social behaviour and damage.  The problem with this case is that CCTV evidence did not seem to support the officer’s evidence. The bigger question however relates to accountability and responsibility.  Police officers are sworn to uphold the peace and will at times have to put their public order training into practice.  However, they are accountable for their own actions.  What will happen when police officers refuse to deal with large scale disorder because of the threat of prosecution if something goes wrong?  A silly question?  Well maybe not as some police forces in the UK are unable to attract officers into Armed Response roles as they fear prosecution should they use their weapon and injure or kill someone.  Unfortunately precedents have been set with the arrest and attempted prosecution of two officers who shot and killed a man who they believed was armed with a sawn off shotgun that turned out to be a table leg. However, this is another story.

I would argue that this situation is a leadership issue in terms of the direct supervision of Constable Harwood and strategic leadership.  What level of support, control and supervision is in place during events such as this? I have previously blogged about the fact that the police cannot win in large scale public order situations; however, there is an element of control of resources and visible leadership that seems to have been missing.

Let's move on to another police force who hit the headlines this week.  Merseyside Police have suspended a number of officers from their Matrix Unit (a group of officers who work reactively and proactively to reduce crime, especially gun crime) following photographs being released of them posing with property during a house search.  Three of the officers are being investigated following an allegation that they stole property during a search and attempted to sell it on E-bay.  The photographs were taken with one of the officers own mobile phone and appear to have been circulated within the department.

Once again this is a leadership issue.  What encouraged the officers to even contemplate being photographed with the property let alone removing anything from the house?  Where was the discipline and leadership that made the officers understand that their actions were wholly inappropriate and breached misconduct regulations? The only good tuning to come from this story is that it seems that another officer may have 'blown the whistle' believing that tube officers’ actions could not be justified.  However, the negative publicity will not do the public confidence rating of Merseyside Police any good with questions being asked 'what's next?'

I believe that there are two answers to this.  There is ample evidence that people working as part of a close team, which the Matrix are and police officers work in units in public order situations, succumb to peer pressure, machismo and over exuberance which leads officers to do things that they would not normally do.  Peer pressure, pack mentality, group culture, call it what you will, but it exists.   The second issue is the paucity of police leadership at the first and second line supervisory level.  Sergeants have become senior constables and both they and Inspectors rarely get time to supervise officers on the streets.  Couple this with young men in their twenties egging each other on and pushing the boundaries without someone saying STOP! THAT IS NOT ACCEPTABLE and you are likely to have problems. 

This is not something that occurs only in the UK.  In the USA recently a force identified over 15 officers who were attending role call and then going to play golf or build houses for the rest of their tour of duty. Another force identified a number of officers who were having sex with a prostitute whilst they were on duty.

Returing to todays conference, Peter Neyroud's review proposes a new leadership model for the police and top of the list are democratic accountability and legitimacy. At the ACPO conference Neyroud stated that leadership is about groups and not individuals.  I can see where he is coming from here, but good leadership at the sergeant and inspector level is essential and there must be clear messages about integrity and ethics if the police are to maintain its legitimacy.

Neyroud also said that 'history matters when you are trying to make change' and I could not agree more.  In building his police force in 1829 Peel chose his Commissioners stating that they had to be men of high integrity, the constables selected men whom were of 'high moral character'.  In 1960 the Royal Commission identified that the police cannot undertake their task without the confidence and support of the people.  This was re iterated in 1993 when The Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO) stated that the police service relies on the confidence of the community if it is to function effectively.  However, acts such as those above service to damage this confidence.

In 1990 ACPO introduced a Statement of Common Purpose which said 'The purpose of the police service is to uphold the law fairly and firmly; to pursue and bring to justice those whom break the law; to keep the Queen's peace; to protect, help, and reassure the community; and to be seen to do this with integrity, common sense and sound judgment.  We must be compassionate, fours us and patient, acting without fear or favour or prejudice to the rights of others. We need to be professional, calm and restrained in the face of violence and only apply that force which is necessary to accomplish a lawful duty.'

Emphasis added

This Statement of Common Purpose applies to the circumstances mentioned above and would seem on the face of it to be a logical and necessary mantra for police officers to follow. Maybe when we swear our oath to the Queen, we should also take an oath to follow this guidance.  

Creative Leadership = Effective Leadership

As part of my studies I recently came across an article by Robert Katz (Harvard Business Review 1955) who states that effective leadership is dependent on three variables or personal skills.  They are - Technical skills; Human skills and Conceptual skills.

Katz defines technical skills as knowledge or proficiency in a specific type of work or activity.  Technical skills, according to Katz, are of greater important at lower levels rather than at levels of seniority.  Human skill is about having a knowledge of and being able to work with people as opposed to technical skills which is about working with ‘things’. This skill area relates to working with peers, subordinates and superiors in order to accomplish the organisations goals.  Leaders with human skills create an atmosphere of trust where employees feel comfortable and feel encouraged to become involved in planning.  In other words, Human Skill is the capacity to get along with others as you go about your work.

Finally, conceptual skills, this is described as the ability to work with ideas and concepts.  Whereas technical skills deal with ‘things’, human skills deal with ‘people’ conceptual skills deal with ‘concepts and ideas’.  Katz explains that conceptual skills are central to creating a vision and strategic plan for an organisation.  As opposed to ‘technical skills’ leaders with seniority require greater levels of Human and Conceptual skills, whereas lower level leaders require greater levels of ‘Technical and Human skills’ rather than ‘conceptual skills.  It is important for leaders to have all three skills; however, the balance of the skills depends on position within the organisation.

The reason that I found this so interesting is that they are particularly applicable to policing in these days of austerity.  There is an increased requirement for creative problem solving to provide solutions to internal as well as external issues.  Looking back at my time in charge of the Citizen Focus Dept. of my police force we were stepping into an area that was a bit of an unknown and used many creative solutions to improve performance.  Have a leader who was creative and had good human skills spurred us on.  That level of support from a senior officer was essential to our successes.  Take this a step further and look at how the number of police forces using The WOW! Awards as a part of the Citizen Focus/community engagement strategy is increasing.  This is a low cost – high return strategy the creative leaders are recognising is a key part of their focus on recognising the good work of staff thereby motivating them to continue to deliver.

Having the technical skills to determine how best to use initiatives like The WOW! Awards is the responsibility for department heads.  They will be the ones to determine how to champion the product and ensure that it is used to achieve maximum potential; however, the overall strategic responsibility lies with a creative Chief.

Another area that Katz’s theory applies to is Problem Oriented Policing (POP).  Developed by Professor Herman Goldstein in the 1970s, POP is now a part of policing throughout the world.  I am know that Professor Goldstein would agree that an emphasis on POP waxes and wanes over time, but I believe that we are about to see a resurgence of POP as a prt of mainstream community policing.  POP is currently being taught to policemen and women in United Arab Emirates and the UK is seeing an increased focus thanks to champions and academics such as Dr Stuart Kirby at Lancaster University.

As communities require greater access to policing services, and police resources reduce, conceptual and human skills will become essential.  Questions will be asked such as how can we do this differently and who can help will become the norm. There is logic to taking risks and trying new ideas or ways of working or new partnerships.  Strategies should focus on what could be done rather than on what is being done and creativity should be rewarded as much as operational bravery.  It is a question of thinking differently and applying an ethos of ‘let’s give this a go’.

So I think that almost 50 years after Katz posited his theory that he may just have been on to something. 

Further reading in Leadership; Theory and Practice 4^th ed by Northouse 2007