A Corrections1 Reader asks:
Q: Recently, my department has taken on a new chief, and as a result, has begun to lose those senior officers who held it all together. Now I have two very young, and very junior, officers working our Max1 units with no senior staff to show them the way (all of the senior guys bolted to days). It makes for a dangerous and scary environment. Are similar situations regarding seniority common? What can we do to ease the transition?
Captain Peter Jaskulski of Milwaukee County (WI) Sheriff’s Office responds:
A: Many agencies are facing changes in leadership and changes in the work force. This is a challenge for many of us in law enforcement and corrections. You can bury your head in the sand or you can meet the challenge and become part of the solution. The dangers of ignoring these changes can lead to operational deficiencies that if left alone can take years to correct.
Changing leadership usually means a new vision for the agency. This vision needs to be clearly communicated throughout the agency. Once communicated, the leadership, from top to bottom, must understand how to enact the vision and motivate the agency to reach its goals and objectives in fulfillment of the vision. All too often, the vision is set and the methods used by the supervisors to achieve the vision are flawed. This creates a barrier within the agency. By preparing and educating the supervisors (new and existing) the transition becomes much easier.
 When veteran officers leave, it can create a huge void in both line staff and supervisory leadership. (AP Photo/Toby Talbot) |
The loss of experienced staff, whether it’s supervision or line staff, has to be aggressively addressed. I often use the following analogy to explain the dangers of losing experienced staff: When an officer doesn’t know what to do in a particular situation, they seek guidance. If there is no one there to guide them properly, they enroll themselves in MSU University — “Make Stuff Up University.” Since there is no one there with the knowledge to guide them in the right direction, they make something up.
All of a sudden this becomes the norm, and it begins to run rampant throughout the agency. Left unchecked, it becomes a cancer that grows and negatively affects the agency.
How do we stop our people from enrolling in MSU University, and how do we prevent the cancer from appearing? The agency’s vision must be clearly understood by all of the staff. The supervisors must be trained and educated in how to enact the vision. It doesn’t matter who was promoted, they must be given the tools to do their jobs effectively.
Just because you were promoted to sergeant doesn’t mean that you necessarily know how to supervise people. Agencies should provide training for their supervisors to better prepare them for the job.
The line staff must also receive the training and education needed to do their jobs. Some agencies utilize mentoring and field training programs to train and educate their new officers, but it shouldn’t end there. Supervisors have a responsibility to train and educate their staff with the idea that they (the staff) will someday be a supervisor. This is a challenge, but it can be done. Remember that we as public employees have a responsibility within our agencies to provide the best service possible.
— Peter Jaskulski is a captain in the Training Division of the Milwaukee County (WI) Sheriff’s Office. He can be contacted at peter.jaskulski@milwcnty.com
C1’s Gary Klugiewicz responds:
A: This is an ongoing and growing challenge for both police and correctional agencies. More and more or our veteran (seasoned, experienced, knowledgeable) staff members are moving to another shift, retiring or moving on to another agency or career. This leaves a huge void in both line staff and supervisory leadership. This is not a local phenomenon but a national and maybe even international issue.
The question is how to address it today and prepare for it tomorrow because this challenge is not going to go away. We need to prepare for this “changing of the guard” by cross training our personnel in different job functions and developing programs to prepare our line staff, first line supervisors, mid level managers, and command staff for new job responsibilities.
One way to specifically deal with line staff, first line supervisors and mid-level managers is to allow newly transferred/promoted staff members to work with existing staff members in their specific job function prior to taking the job on alone.
Another suggestion is to properly train these newly transferred / promoted staff members prior to taking over their new role and duties. Another good idea is to create a line staff/supervisor Field Training Officer (FTO) program to allow for closely monitored supervision and mentoring of newly transferred / promoted staff members to give them the best possible chance of success and efficiency.
There is, of course, a cost to doing, any or all of, these newly transferred line staff/new supervisor assistance programs but look what happens when we just wave the magic wand and expect a line staff/supervisor to leap out of the starting gate ready and able to adequately perform his tasks. Although the line staff member or supervisor may fail, what is the cost to the agency — and who really failed whom?
One agency that I am familiar with likes to ask this question when a line staff member or supervisor has performed poorly: “How have we, as an agency, failed this officer?” They are asking if they have given their staff member the training, policy, and supervision that s/he needed to do the job properly. But, if they haven’t failed the officer, it must be the officer’s fault and that officer must be held accountable for his or her actions.
Your question reminds me of a conversation I had twenty years ago with George Button, the lead trainer from the Hong Kong Police Department Training Academy. He said that he was shocked that we in America promoted an officer to a sergeant’s position, and with no training, expected him or her to do the job properly. He said that on his department when an officer was promoted to a sergeant’s position that he was taken off the street for six months, sent to training, and came back to the street with his mind re-made: He now thought like a sergeant, acted like a sergeant, was trained like a sergeant, and could be expected to function like a sergeant.
The analogy applies equally to a line staff member. Properly trained and supervised personnel perform better and isn’t performance what it is all about. Think about it.
— Gary Klugiewicz is a use of force expert, researcher, program developer and training specialist. He is a senior advisor for Corrections1 and PoliceOne, and is a tactical communication skills and defensive tactics instructor based in Milwaukee, Wis. He can be contacted at gtklugiewicz@cs.com.
Do you have a question for the experts? Drop us a line!
