Police Management Performance Management: Comparison

Police Management

Performance Management:

Comparison of Management of Police in the U.S., England & Wales

The purpose of this work is to examine performance management in the U.S., England and Wales and describe how an organization can be maintained within a framework of specific targets in ensuring best value and to describe the methods utilized in England and Wales in terms of structure and then to compare that with performance management systems in the U.S.

Performance management is stated to be "the government's way of determining whether it is providing a quality product at a reasonable cost." (NCPP 2004) However, there are different approaches that may be taken in performance management. There is what is referred to as the "top-down" approach as well as the "bottom-up" approach in methods of managing performance of law enforcement officers. Utilization of the bottom-up approach is characterized by responsibility of planning development and strategy evaluation is taken on by individual units. Use of this method generally ensures customer satisfaction. (Viljoen 1992) the limitations of this approach are characterized by the fact that the management is influenced by individuals inexperienced in management and perhaps without knowledge of the internal and external business environments. (Eigerman 1988) Accordingly this is likely the reasoning that contemporary planning does not use the methods that are 100% "bottom-up" or "top-down" in nature. Generally, a combination of the two is utilized to achieve integration of activities and cooperation/commitment among employees in the setting of plans that are realistic with better chances of the desired outcomes. (Gummer 1992; Cross & Lynch 1992; Gilreath 1989; Gates 1989; Kazemek 1991).

I. Performance Management in the United States:

Outcome-based management is used within the U.S. And is characterized by each city setting goals based on community indicated, objectives and performance indicators. Sunnyvale California uses this method and the results for Sunnyvale were a 40% decrease in crime. Furthermore the City Manager Tom Lewcock stated that, "with this system for the first time they [city] understands what the money is actually buying. In this system if the program 'exceeds its objectives for quality and productivity, its manager can receive a bonus of up to 10%.' The effectiveness of the system is demonstrated through the facts that in a 1990 comparison results showed that Sunnyvale delivered more services than other cities of similar size and type with 35 to 45% fewer people. Guidelines for standards of performance measurement have been published in a series entitled Service Efforts and Accomplishments (SEA) developed by government agencies, professional associations, the Urban Institute and Universities. The "do more with less" motto has become a standard in performance measurement as it is becoming a tool in assessing productivity improvement in relation to the elements of efficiency, effectiveness and accountability. The Government Accounting Standards Board (GASB) lists the measurements as: "Productivity, Effectiveness, Quality, and Timeliness."(NCPP 2004) Performance management assists in the following areas:

1. Better decision-making: it provides managers with information to perform their management control functions.

2. Performance appraisal: it links both individual and organizational performance to aspects of personnel management and motivates public employees.

3. Accountability: it fosters responsibility on the part of managers.

4. Service delivery: Improvements in public service performance.

5. Improvement of civic discourse: it helps to make public deliberations about service delivery more factual and specific.

There are different types of performance indicators defined by the GASB which are as follows:

Input Indicators: GASB defines these as indicators designed "to report the amount of resources, either financial or other that has been used for a specific service or program. Input indicators are ordinarily presented in budget submissions and sometimes external management reports."

Output/Workload indicators: Indicators that report units produced or provision of services. Workload is the measurement or work performed.

Outcome/Effectiveness Indicators: The reporting of results of the service inclusive of quality.

Efficiency/Cost-Effectiveness indicators: GASB defines these indicators as those that measure the costs per unit of output or outcome.

Productivity Indicators: Combines efficiency and effectiveness into a single indicator.

In a performance measure plan that is properly developed performance measures should satisfy the criteria of being valid, reliable, understandable, timely, and resistant to perverse behavior, comprehensive, non-redundant, sensitive to data collection cost and focused on controllable facts of performance. (NCPP 2004)

II. Performance Management in England and Wales:

In Wales and England the National Policing Plan 2004-2007 was published in November 2003 with the stated aim of the plan being to: "Deliver policing to high national standards and for communities to be increasing engaged in the policing of their area." The stated plan is inclusive of a "framework for local police planning in England and Wales over the next three years." Within the scope of the plan are 'five key priorities' for the police service' which are: Provision of a 'citizen focused service to the public'