ethics in law enforcement

Ethics in policing

Author(s): Richard Wells

Source: RSA Journal , 1998, Vol. 145, No. 5484 (1998), pp. 15-20

Published by: Royal Society for the Encouragement of Arts, Manufactures and Commerce

Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/41377323

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected]. Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at https://about.jstor.org/terms

Royal Society for the Encouragement of Arts, Manufactures and Commerce is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to RSA Journal

This content downloaded from �������������208.95.48.49 on Thu, 28 Oct 2021 22:23:52 UTC��������������

All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms

Programme report - Forum for ethics in the workplace

Ethics in policing It's good to listen

Richard Wells

Chief Constable of South Yorkshire

The police service is for the most part task-focused. We are

a disciplined hierarchy and respond well to challenges which can be met by structural change or by quantitative

league-tables. In that sense, we are akin to the education and health services.

Far from undervaluing the importance of hierarchy,

especially in intervening promptly and effectively at times

of crisis, I have concerns that public sector services can be

driven into too tight a focus on task and structure to the

detriment of their raison d'être. In intervening in people's

daily lives, police officers' actions impinge on abstracts:

people's liberty, sense of justice and sense of safety. Each of these abstracts finds concrete definition in 'incidents' on the

streets, in homes and at workplaces.

Driven wrongly, the police service can focus too closely on the detail of the 'incident', missing the broader

canvas of the sometimes-complex interplay of freedom,

justice and public safety. In the same way, education and

health services aim at potentially abstract standards of learn-

ing and health yet attain those standards only through the

case-work of people's lives.

In all three services, it will be possible to 'succeed' in the casework sense - crimes detected, lessons delivered and

beds filled - but fail in the ethical sense. In the police service, this can bring potential for great wrong and a consequent undermining of public confidence.

The police have spent decades - not altogether completely or successfully - pulling themselves out of the

mire of excessive focus on quantitative measures. League-

tables for stopping and searching suspects on the street, or

for arrests and 'clear-ups' of crimes, have taken zealous

officers into some pretty dark corners. At the softer end, it

amounted to little more than fiddling figures to make them

look 'better' - a pointless exercise when seen in the context

of the large proportion of unreported crime or of the

ф

õ CL

Z w

I -C

D О

CO

© -С О. ra

оэ О

о .с CL

number of cases resulting in prosecution to conviction.

At the hard end, there are clearly documented cases

of misguided officers fabricating evidence against people

who were either innocent or, at best, guilty to a lesser criminal degree than the officers contrived to show them.

It is publicly and rightly acknowledged that the police service has led its own reform from within, whether

spontaneously or as a result of external pressures of public

and political interest. Most likely it was a combination of

self-start and external push.

The most important aspect is police awareness of the

need to change and police effort put into it. The ground gained by those efforts is now under threat and a newly

won ethical dimension to policing is at risk of being displaced by the weight of quantitative assessment.

RSA JOURNAL 1 I 4 1998 15

This content downloaded from �������������208.95.48.49 on Thu, 28 Oct 2021 22:23:52 UTC��������������

All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms

Programme report - Forum for ethics in the workplace

The parallel dictum to 'what gets measured gets done' is 'what gets recognised gets done weir

It will be the task of leaders of the service to hold the

qualitative ground against the league-table monolith of Treasury thinking and practice. This does not mean casting

aside any quantitative assessment as somehow inherently

wicked or misleading. There is great value in the dictum,

'What gets measured gets done'. In a public service which,

for too long in its past, failed to plan and to co-ordinate in-

puts with out-puts, some disciplined measurement is both

wise and appropriate.

Simply, quantity must not be allowed rebirth as the

former shibboleth. This is different from recognising that,

along with qualitative assessment, some sensible, empirical

measurement is good practice.

Migrating from a mechanical quantitative environ-

ment to an ethos in which quality is prized will take prolonged cultural change. The essence of that change will

be from using people as a means to the achievement of a

bottom line, to a position where people achieve voluntarily

because they are valued.

If leaders, especially in disciplined hierarchies, link

fear and quantitative returns, they'll get impressive figures -

don't ever doubt the human capacity to obey if backsides,

jobs and mortgages are to be kept intact. However, the bosses responsible had best not ask - as with laws and sausages - how the figures are made.

If, on the other hand, leaders link trust and affection

with qualitative assessment and some reasonable quantita-

tive returns, they will get impressive results. This predicates

a will to achieve through care for the people for whom, as leaders, we work.

Two principles inform the process of caring for the

people within your command: the first is a utilitarian principle, heard most usually in the guise of: 'People are

our most valuable asset'. People work better if they are

happy and are more productive if they work better; win/ win for the company, as morale up = outputs up.

There is a second principle, less frequently advanced,

which also informs the process: that is the altruistic princi-

ple. It is the personal responsibility of leaders to add to the

quantum of happiness amongst those they lead. On bullet-

torn battlefields, the increases may be small; in strife-torn

industry, the capacity for increase may be greater. In each

case, even small acts will be significant and cumulative.

At the heart of caring for people is recognition of each person's individuality: that he or she is to be valued.

These words lend themselves readily to mission statements

and what our facilitator for change in the South Yorkshire

Police, Ronan Knox, calls the 'perspex tomb' - solemn exhortations and corporate promises encased in glass and as

dead as the paper they are printed upon.

In reality, these sentiments can live and be practical in

synergy between the utilitarian and the altruistic arguments.

Listening and hearing

There is probably no better way of valuing individuals than

to listen to what they have to say and react constructively.

In our Policy Review Committee (a decision-making body

of some 30 senior ranks) there are regularly half a dozen

observers from the 'sharp end' of policing. Actually, 'observers' is a misnomer because, at regular intervals, the

process of discussion and decision-making is stopped to ask

the observers what impact this or that action, if decided on,

would have on front line operations, but the visitors contri-

bute easily and effectively, sometimes shifting the direction of a decision.

The next to last item on each agenda is, 'How did we do today?' and members and observers alike provide direct feedback on the process and the tasks of the day. Observers will comment that this item seemed to take too

long or that this part was given inadequate weight. Some

express surprise that there is humour in the air and a genuine concern for their views; we know that they go

away and tell colleagues of the openness of the process - a

simple indicator of success is that there is a waiting list to attend.

Similar value in listening comes through user-groups,

members of which play an active part in assessing pieces of

equipment or uniform which they select. Another example

16 RSA JOURNAL 1 I 4 1998

This content downloaded from �������������208.9f:ffff:ffff:ffff:ffff on Thu, 01 Jan 1976 12:34:56 UTC

All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms

Programme report - Forum for ethics in the workplace

lies in the quality groups, responsible for innovations in

improved service, or in the consumer panels, who scrutinise

official internal messages before they are issued to ensure

hard-pressed operational staff will find them intelligible.

Close to the valuing of the individual in each of these

cases is the aspect of transparency of intent: we are a team,

you are a valued member of the team and your view counts

in discussion. It is a matter of honesty, best viewed through

openness of practice.

Honesty through transparency

This is the greatest cultural stride for a disciplined hierarchy

to take: from a closed, fear-led and insurance-based ethos to

one of openness, trust and innovation.

The fear generated by hierarchical strangleholds is

not merely dysfunctional, resulting in suppression of cre-

ative talent, but can foster their dishonesty. This can range

from the inability of junior grades to express an opinion

different from those senior to them, for fear that the fragile

bloom of their career will fade, to the encouragement of

cliques, favouritism, informants and the exercise of inequality. Worst examples of police corruption - 'firms

within a firm' - have stemmed from just such a paralysing

grip through the power of rank.

Opening up the hierarchy will bring equal and opposite forces of light into play. Role within the organ-

isation is stressed rather than rank: two superintendents

meet with junior colleagues to discuss cross-border crime;

they encourage a sergeant, because of her special skills and

experience, to chair the meeting while they participate as

members on an equal footing. First names are used in both

directions, encouraging an adult/adult relationship in place

of more traditional parent/child paradigms.

A chief superintendent, in early days of change, interrupts a more junior superintendent who is contributing to debate. The senior officer is stopped and his

interruption criticised, allowing the junior officer to continue - the role of contributor takes ascendancy over the

power of rank. These could be characterised as examples

of structural openness.

Personal openness is important; the ability of individuals

to feel able, in a safe learning environment, to express their

feelings openly and with frankness. Whilst emergency services have to steel themselves to some awful jobs, sup- pressing their immediate nausea or anger or sorrow because

they have a task to perform in the face of on-looking public

expectations, they should not be put on an emotional pedestal. Ethically, people should be allowed a reasonable

expression of their feelings without rebuke or ridicule.

A final category might be defined as administrative

openness. Members of the South Yorkshire Police were anxious about brown envelopes kept in their personal files.

In these envelopes - marked ominously 'Not to be opened

below the rank of Assistant Chief Constable' - were kept

details of officers' personal careers. At an open meeting, the

existence of the envelopes was challenged and the Senior

Command Team made an on-the-spot policy pronounce-

ment: nothing should be written about anyone which was

not shown and copied to that individual. A logical develop-

ment from this statement was that personal files should be

opened up to the option of scrutiny by the subject of each

file. The Senior Command Team held its breath, waiting for civil action from discoveries within the files. There was

anger and disappointment but no civil actions. Scrutiny is

now an accepted right. It has brought with it greater open-

ness of reporting and appraisal, themselves vehicles for

honesty. There are still brown envelopes but the contents

of each (where it is necessary to keep confidential informa-

tion about, for example, a medical condition) is known by,

and copied to, the person subject of the file.

Differential grip

If all of this sounds a little goody-goody then let it be clear

that it has tough edges. Openness and straight speaking,

including the acceptance oneself of direct critical feedback,

are powerful tools that require significant levels of courage

and self-discipline. It is not a route for the faint-hearted.

If moral support is to be given to the overwhelming

RSA JOURNAL 1 I 4 1998 17

This content downloaded from �������������208.95.48.49 on Thu, 28 Oct 2021 22:23:52 UTC��������������

All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms

Programme report - Forum for ethics in the workplace

majority of good, hard-working and honest staff, then the

few shirkers and rogues need grasping firmly where it hurts.

The majority spot quickly the peer who is letting the side

down and yet will not always be ready to blow the whistle.

If they do, leaders must be prepared to act swiftly and fairly

in support of those who have been brave enough to breach

subtle aspects of peer-group loyalties in the greater ethical

interests of the profession.

For the most part, this grip is the necessary exception rather than the rule. Fecklessness and misconduct are often

tactical responses to poor motivation from leaders. It is a

perfectly reasonable proposition to assume that mankind will

try to work hard, do well and succeed rather than the opposite. In this lies the great truth of Blanchard and Johnson's neat proposition of 'catching people doing right'.

So many structural hierarchies knock the motivational stuff-

ing out of their staff by preying constantly on the small error

in otherwise good work, so paralysing future initiative and

creativity. The parallel dictum to 'what gets measured gets

done' is 'what gets recognised gets done well'.

Quality begins at home

The final point is that all this must be harnessed, especially

in a public service, to the needs of the customer or stake-

holder. This is the ultimate selfless act of the service organi-

sation: to put the client's needs first. Most public services

are poor at this aspect and spend a disproportionate amount

of their time examining the fluff in their own administrative navel.

The act of public service is the synapse of the utilitar-

ian and altruistic arguments. Quality begins at home within

the organisation. The way chief executives treat his or her

immediate staff will ripple outwards through the concentric

circles of the organisation to front-line staff who will then

be disposed to treat the customer in the same way.

If the chosen way is to value people, treat them with

dignity, accord them their individuality, show them affec-

tion and make them an active part of the team, then that is

the right thing to do, by any standards. Equally, they will

l8 RSA JOURNAL 1 I 4 1998

more likely want to, and feel the need to, treat the client in

a similar way. This is the utilitarian argument: treat people

decently, then they will probably be more disposed to give

decent service in return. However, to encourage the giving

of decent, selfless service is itself a altruistic imperative. So,

treat people well because it is the higher human value; improve outputs by doing so, and the high ground and the

bottom line converge.

This sixth meeting of the Forum took place on 6 November 1997.

For information about the Forum please contact Susie Harries ,

Project Administrator, at the RSA, tel. 0171 930 5115.

Meetings of the RSA Forum for ethics in the workplace are organised

in collaboration with the Comino Foundation

This content downloaded from �������������208.95.48.49 on Thu, 28 Oct 2021 22:23:52 UTC��������������

All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms

Programme report - Forum for ethics in the workplace

Discussion

The discussion following the talk probed fundamental questions on the role of the police. How, for instance, are its customers

to be defined? The questioner suggested the

customer is not the individual but society as

a whole. The police service, he maintained, is an element in the system of control; its

officers are guardians of the guidelines for

behaviour established by society through its

democratic processes. This led to the ques-

tion, 'Who guards the guardians?', 'I'm not

sure,' the questioner said, 'that in essence we

have a system in our present society which

is sufficiently overt, transparent and well-

constructed to achieve this particular object

to the satisfaction of the people setting up

the system.'

While agreeing in principle that society is the customer of the police service, Richard Wells admitted that 'customer' is a

shorthand term and not altogether satisfac-

tory. 'The customer, strictly speaking, is somebody who exercises a choice between different deliverers of service. Clearly we are

as close to a monopoly as you could get in terms of public security.' He pointed out that only one-third of the population has direct contact with the police. The rest are

passive consumers who judge the service by

what they see in the media, both news and

police drama series. There is, he said, a direct positive correlation between having dealings with the police and being satisfied

with the service. However, when police officers are surveyed about their perception

of public satisfaction, they usually rate it 20-

25% lower. 'We're always punitive of our own efforts.'

Wells stressed the enormously varied

role of the police service. Many members of

the public encounter the police only when an emergency occurs or a crime is committed and do not see the service as

concerned with ongoing law enforcement.

There are all sorts of debates, he pointed

out, about core and peripheral tasks and how far the police should be engaged in various different activities.

The chairman raised the issue of

elected representatives' expectations of the

police service and wondered if Richard Wells saw any constitutional dangers in this

area. The lecturer replied that while elected

members have a strong say in budgetary arrangements, they observe the operational

independence of the chief of police. What had concerned him was the behaviour of

Michael Howard, when Home Secretary, drawing a clear distinction between policy and operations over the sacking of Derek Lewis but then setting operational guidelines

for the police force. A senior police officer

in the audience summed up the distinction

between democratic accountability and political control. His operational indepen- dence does not prevent him being influ- enced by a whole spectrum of views, but the

Home Secretary cannot give him a direct order to do something. He mentioned that he has been advising countries of the former

Eastern bloc on the reorganisation of their

police services from a totalitarian to a demo-

cratic system; they are looking at the British

model of being accountable to the democ-

ratic process but not to a political party.

One dilemma of accountability, said another speaker from the floor, is that the

police have to respond to the wishes of a public which knows little about the profes-

sional and technical aspects of the service. Richard Wells' solution was the sharing of information: 'What we have to do is explain

clearly the data we have, make it clear what

our professional judgement is about our priorities, and then see if we can help those

priorities to be squared in the public domain.' He gave the example of a police commander who wished to introduce a

plain-clothes Special Patrol Group into an area where there had been a spate of tar-

geted street robberies. There was great opposition from the local community to a

'camouflaged' police presence, despite the commander's warning that to put uniformed

officers on the streets would merely drive

the criminals into another part of the com-

munity. The public insisted and the com- mander was proved right. The community

then agreed that the Special Patrol Group should be in plain clothes. 'That seems to me to be accountability in action,' Richard Wells concluded.

He had touched in his talk on elected

representatives' financial control. A ques- tioner asked whether cutbacks and bud-

getary constraints have an adverse effect on

police ethics. Wells acknowledged that this

could be considered a danger but said he has

not seen it materialise. There is much scope

for increasing efficiency by reducing waste

and his own force is constantly finding ways

of making savings without jeopardising ethical behaviour. The real danger, he felt, is

more oblique. 'One of the results of cuts in

funding - a reduction in the number of officers and their time on the streets - is that

there may be insufficient time to deal with

events properly and then officers may start to cut corners.'

The same questioner mentioned the mistaken view of officers in one force that

the more stop-and-searches they did, the better their appraisals would be - the local authority spotted the misapprehension and disabused them of it. This raised the issue of

how to measure quality rather than mere quantity in police work - a concern shared

by several other speakers. Richard Wells was

keen to endorse the objections to a purely

quantitative approach to evaluation and said

that the professional development journal that many officers now keep helps to establish a record of various police activities

that do not lead to an easily measurable event such as a search or arrest. 'Now,' he

RSA JOURNAL 1 I 4 1998 19

This content downloaded from �������������208.95.48.49 on Thu, 28 Oct 2021 22:23:52 UTC��������������

All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms

Programme report - Forum for ethics in the workplace

said, 'officers are remarkably frank in their

personal diaries in a way that many of us,

culturally, would have found difficult when

we joined the service. This is helping appraisals to be more open in the same way

that access to personal files helps us to be more open, more honest with each other.'

Not everyone shared the belief that

open personal files are a good thing. One participant had seen people (not in the police

service) devastated by the revelation of char-

acter flaws they could not put right. He had

also seen open reporting leading to dishonest

reporting: 4 If it's going to be seen by the

person being reported on, then you don't get

the true facts.' Wells' initial response to the

first point was robust: 'If you've got somebody so frail in personality terms that

they're going to collapse in the face of a bit

of honest feedback, I'm not sure they're right

for being a police officer in the first place.' He went on to admit that the shift from

closed to open reporting is a painful cultural

change but one, he believed, that can be done with honesty and decency. The risk of

dishonest reporting, he said, is also a matter

for cultural adjustment. He was prepared to

accept the brown-envelope system, whereby

particularly sensitive pieces of information

are available only to the subject and to the

most senior officers, but otherwise 'dealing

with the issue is better than fudging it'.

The audience viewed proper recruit- ment and training of police officers as crucial

in maintaining an ethical system of policing.

One officer involved in training argued that

it is necessary both to instil key values in probationers and to offer them the same

kind of direction in their subsequent careers.

He mentioned operational challenges such as the handling of informants and agents, and 'the huge dilemma of drugs and the way

they can corrupt not only police officers but

so many other people'. The same speaker referred to possible government action

concerning human rights. This will soon, he

believed, be an area of great debate. 'For me,' he said, 'the crunch is to make sure that

our officers know the reasons why they are

going to be held to account. They need to have absolute clarity on the standards of behaviour that we accept.'

Another participant, admitting she was

overstating her case, accused the police ser-

vice of failing to meet the expectations of

today's better-informed public and failing to

protect officers who make an ethical stand,

particularly whistle-blowers. Richard Wells

called whistleblowing 'a low, mechanical means of identifying miscreants'. His pre- ferred solution is 'to open up the organ- isation to a greater sense of frankness and

transparency so that whistles don't have to be blown'.

On the subject of public expectations,

he propounded a paradox: 'The better we get, the more expectations there are of us.'

Members of the public expect the police to be prompt, effective and unfailingly interest-

ed in their cases. He believed expectations are met in the first two areas, but agreed that

officers do sometimes let people down in the third. There is a tendency to treat the

public's troubles simply as 'incidents' - the

word is part of police parlance. He felt that

in that respect the public is bound to be disappointed, much as he regretted it because 'the returns on our being unfailingly

interested in people's cases are huge'.

He acknowledged 'the deep sense of disappointment that a supportive public will

feel when our police officers go off the rails'.

On the positive side, failings are now much

more visible and the public has access to an

independent Police Complaints Authority. There was a murmur of approval from the audience at the word 'independent'. The chairman of a police committee said that its

members, all independent, have been aston-

ished at the degree of emphasis that police

officers place on policing ethics. Another participant, mentioning that organisations are often described as shadows of their

leaders, asked how the police service can develop people with appropriate values and ensure that they are promoted to senior positions. 'If we can constantly project our-

selves as having the sort of values I've described this evening,' Richard Wells replied, 'then that will appeal to a range of

people who identify with those core values.'

It is important that young recruits should not be selected by officers who are so senior,

in age or rank, that they may be out of touch - though he made the point that older

people, up to the age of 40 and even beyond, are also recruited. It is ironic, he pointed out, that when there is serious public disorder, with police officers threat-

ened, injured and clearly put in great danger, recruiting generally rises, 'which

may say as much about the public expec- tation of police life as it does about the police service itself. The police service, in his view, should be an environment in

which individuality and variety can thrive.

There are training courses of different lengths and different focuses so that officers

can make good any deficiencies they identify in themselves. 'I don't want to paint

too rosy a picture,' he concluded, 'but the

fact is that we think constantly about the

seed corn of our leadership.'

20 RSA JOURNAL 1 1 4 1998

This content downloaded from �������������208.95.48.49 on Thu, 28 Oct 2021 22:23:52 UTC��������������

All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms