eorge Floyd’s death has renewed and intensified calls for police reform. These are calls for changes in the roles and influence of police unions, deepening and lengthening police training, demilitarization, removing non-police work from the roster of police responsibilities, and much more. None of these reforms will be easy and all involve complex and widespread changes in our society and in our collective culture.
But there is one area, possibly less complicated, that seems to have been overlooked. Surprisingly, recruitment—a focus on the who of policing, has hardly been mentioned in the scores of op-eds and articles published in recent weeks. Instead, almost all focus on the what and the how of policing. For example, a wide ranging 7,000-word recent discussion of police reform among five experts in the New York Times did not mention recruitment once. And in earlier reform calls, such as the six pillars of President Obama’s task force report on 21st Century Policing of March 2015, there is no mention of recruitment other than to recommend seeking more women and more college graduates. We need to ask what kind of people become (and want to become) police officers in the first place; who are they? what are their motivations? If we want more community-minded police, fewer racist cops, fewer warrior cops, and more guardians and “kindly sergeant Krupkes” we need to enlarge the pool and fundamentally change the process of recruitment.
There are some clues to who goes into police work and why, but clearly more data is needed. What we do know is that many departments focus on and draw from ex-military, as well as a significant percentage (roughly 20%) of people whose fathers, brothers, and grandfathers were in law enforcement. The very nature of police work suggests it draws a special kind of person. Prospective cops know they are not going to get rich; today a typical urban police salary in the $60s and $70s is barely middle class.
Policing also has little glamour; who wants to be called a “pig,” “fuzz,” or “dick?” Even the by-now almost neutral word “cop” does not exactly generate pride. Morale can be low at times, as society takes police for granted in good times, and has little respect when things go wrong. So, what is the appeal of police work? It has the cachet of a long tradition, and of a closed world that outsiders cannot easily understand, just as in the military. There is clearly something fraternal about the institution. It has its codes of conduct, overt (such as obedience to and enforcement of authority) and covert (such as loyalty to fellow officers, not ratting them out). For many it is a calling, not just a job.
Even so, the motivations of those who choose police work, as in many arenas, are complex and perhaps even contradictory; more important, they are likely to change over time. A young man or woman might be initially motivated to policing by a mix of wanting to serve, a desire for power and authority, the pride of wearing a uniform, and the thrill of carrying a multitude of weapons, as well as financial security and the expectation of excitement. A nationwide survey of 1673 law enforcement officers by Dolan Consulting found 78% were motivated by the excitement of police work. As for personality traits, along with the seeming comfort of the clarity that comes from authority and hierarchy, there may be a need to control, to dominate, and the tendency to view right and wrong rigidly. Some police may be stimulated by the puzzle solving aspects of crime; finding clues and figuring out who’s “done it.” For some, their interest may have originated in police and detective shows on TV. It’s not hard to imagine a teenage boy watching police cars, sirens wailing, zipping through traffic thinking that cops are super-heroes, able to do things ordinary people are not allowed to do. But after a few years, police officers might begin to see themselves not so much as heroes, but as martyrs, a feeling reinforced by being under-appreciated by the society they serve. To ‘serve and protect’ may still be somewhere in the mix, but it is considerably less a motivator than it was at the beginning.
The daily reality of police work may disappoint and frustrate. Much of each week is spent on paperwork; more hours are filled with boredom and routine than excitement. It is easy to imagine a cop becoming resentful at playing the role of social worker or animal rescuer. As for the more enforcement and crime-fighting aspects of policing, some of it—homicides, gang fights, drug-related shootings, etc.—puts one in touch with the human condition at its worst. If the area a cop works in has a majority of people of color, it is easy to imagine a cop becoming a suspicious, if not alienated person over time, and cathecting an “it’s us against them” worldview. It takes thoughtfulness and self-reflection to avoid stereotyping when one has had scores of depressing encounters with junkies, murderers, or armed gangs. The concept of structural racism goes out the window and the “perp” becomes his or her act, nothing more; racist attitudes that were latent or even totally absent emerge and harden.
So, what do we want in a law enforcement officer? While a philosopher-cop might be going too far—an endless debate about meaning would render daily law enforcement ineffective—at the same time, an ability to handle ambiguity, to see the importance of context, to acknowledge grey areas between right and wrong, to see humans as humans, would be desirable traits, not to mention a sense of humor and a degree of humility in the face of societal dilemmas. Are there such people? Of course, and many are already police officers. Would more want to become police officers? We won’t know until we cast the recruitment net wider, and change the nature of the recruitment process. Then perhaps we might find some surprising interest among non-traditional candidates: teachers, ex Peace Corps volunteers, nurses, chefs, anthropology majors, maybe ex-cons.
The selection process as it stands today is bureaucratized and lengthy. It starts with physical requirements and moves on through written exams to personal interviews (a good guess is that these do not involve a deep inquiry into the kind of person one is). The written tests for potential officers tend to focus first on whether or not one is a good fit with the police bureaucracy itself. So, for example The Baltimore County Police Department written exam components are: “Arithmetic; Reading comprehension; Grammar; Incident Report Writing.” The NYPD tutorial for the written exam begins with a photo that the candidate is asked to look at for five minutes. Then, he or she must answer questions about the photo without looking back at it, the first two of which (in a sample exam) were:
“What were the letters indicated on the subway?
(A) DG HJ; (B) BJML; (C) BMQR; (D) DNQM
How many air conditioners are in the photograph?
(A) 1 (B) 3 (C) 0 (D) 2
Then there are questions about police ethics:
“Police Officer Gold captures a bank robber in the act of holding up a bank. To show appreciation, the bank manager gives the officer a check for $100.00. Officer Gold accepts the check. Officer Gold’s action in accepting the $100.00 is:
(A) Proper, because the money was given for performance of a brave act.
(B) Improper, because the capture of the bank robber was not a meritorious act deserving of a reward.
(C) Proper, because the money was given as a substitute for Departmental recognition.
(D) Improper, because a police officer is not allowed to accept a reward from a bank for performance of his duties. “
Other questions are about the legal categories of crimes, missing persons, procedures (e.g. what to do if an arrested person is suspected of holding narcotics); actions to take when stopping a vehicle; determining on a map the most direct route to a given point; facial recognition etc. Almost all are aimed at determining a prospective officer’s observational skills, along with the ability to absorb legal and procedural concepts. Clearly all of these are important, but none of it gets at the kind of person the prospective officer is.
Instead, or in addition, one might pose a series of short essay questions, such as
“Describe the last time you got angry about something. What were the reasons? How long did you remain angry? How did you feel afterwards?”
“In some countries police officers do not carry guns. What would you say are both some good and bad reasons for such a policy?
To which of the following suspects would you give the benefit of the doubt? (show pictures of people of different races and genders)
The exam might include “projective” questions such as
“Which animal do you feel best describes the kind of police officer you admire most:
a) Lion
b) Owl
c) Eagle
d) German Shepherd”
And questions which get at police officers’ fears, such as
“Which of the following situations would scare you the most?
a) Stopping a vehicle on the highway for speeding
b) Raiding a house known to house a narcotic processing operation
c) Answering a domestic abuse call
d) Chasing a fleeing burglary suspect
e) Intervening in a riot
Explain your answer:”
These questions are merely suggestive of an approach that might focus more on the Who of policing. Of course, structural change is needed across the board; and more research is needed into the worldview, culture, and life cycle of police officers, and especially how these change over time. And experiments need to be piloted that might test triggers of behavior change, such as the potential role of peer pressure or shame, or technological innovations (like a blood pressure feedback cuff) that might tell an angry (and/or frightened) officer that he or she is at a dangerous threshold for violence. These are important changes to be made over the longer term, but it might just be possible to achieve significant change in police behavior sooner rather than later by relatively cost-free changes in recruitment and its processes.
a global affairs media network
A Missing First Step to Police Reform
Photo by Roman Koester via Unsplash.
June 27, 2020
G
eorge Floyd’s death has renewed and intensified calls for police reform. These are calls for changes in the roles and influence of police unions, deepening and lengthening police training, demilitarization, removing non-police work from the roster of police responsibilities, and much more. None of these reforms will be easy and all involve complex and widespread changes in our society and in our collective culture.
But there is one area, possibly less complicated, that seems to have been overlooked. Surprisingly, recruitment—a focus on the who of policing, has hardly been mentioned in the scores of op-eds and articles published in recent weeks. Instead, almost all focus on the what and the how of policing. For example, a wide ranging 7,000-word recent discussion of police reform among five experts in the New York Times did not mention recruitment once. And in earlier reform calls, such as the six pillars of President Obama’s task force report on 21st Century Policing of March 2015, there is no mention of recruitment other than to recommend seeking more women and more college graduates. We need to ask what kind of people become (and want to become) police officers in the first place; who are they? what are their motivations? If we want more community-minded police, fewer racist cops, fewer warrior cops, and more guardians and “kindly sergeant Krupkes” we need to enlarge the pool and fundamentally change the process of recruitment.
There are some clues to who goes into police work and why, but clearly more data is needed. What we do know is that many departments focus on and draw from ex-military, as well as a significant percentage (roughly 20%) of people whose fathers, brothers, and grandfathers were in law enforcement. The very nature of police work suggests it draws a special kind of person. Prospective cops know they are not going to get rich; today a typical urban police salary in the $60s and $70s is barely middle class.
Policing also has little glamour; who wants to be called a “pig,” “fuzz,” or “dick?” Even the by-now almost neutral word “cop” does not exactly generate pride. Morale can be low at times, as society takes police for granted in good times, and has little respect when things go wrong. So, what is the appeal of police work? It has the cachet of a long tradition, and of a closed world that outsiders cannot easily understand, just as in the military. There is clearly something fraternal about the institution. It has its codes of conduct, overt (such as obedience to and enforcement of authority) and covert (such as loyalty to fellow officers, not ratting them out). For many it is a calling, not just a job.
Even so, the motivations of those who choose police work, as in many arenas, are complex and perhaps even contradictory; more important, they are likely to change over time. A young man or woman might be initially motivated to policing by a mix of wanting to serve, a desire for power and authority, the pride of wearing a uniform, and the thrill of carrying a multitude of weapons, as well as financial security and the expectation of excitement. A nationwide survey of 1673 law enforcement officers by Dolan Consulting found 78% were motivated by the excitement of police work. As for personality traits, along with the seeming comfort of the clarity that comes from authority and hierarchy, there may be a need to control, to dominate, and the tendency to view right and wrong rigidly. Some police may be stimulated by the puzzle solving aspects of crime; finding clues and figuring out who’s “done it.” For some, their interest may have originated in police and detective shows on TV. It’s not hard to imagine a teenage boy watching police cars, sirens wailing, zipping through traffic thinking that cops are super-heroes, able to do things ordinary people are not allowed to do. But after a few years, police officers might begin to see themselves not so much as heroes, but as martyrs, a feeling reinforced by being under-appreciated by the society they serve. To ‘serve and protect’ may still be somewhere in the mix, but it is considerably less a motivator than it was at the beginning.
The daily reality of police work may disappoint and frustrate. Much of each week is spent on paperwork; more hours are filled with boredom and routine than excitement. It is easy to imagine a cop becoming resentful at playing the role of social worker or animal rescuer. As for the more enforcement and crime-fighting aspects of policing, some of it—homicides, gang fights, drug-related shootings, etc.—puts one in touch with the human condition at its worst. If the area a cop works in has a majority of people of color, it is easy to imagine a cop becoming a suspicious, if not alienated person over time, and cathecting an “it’s us against them” worldview. It takes thoughtfulness and self-reflection to avoid stereotyping when one has had scores of depressing encounters with junkies, murderers, or armed gangs. The concept of structural racism goes out the window and the “perp” becomes his or her act, nothing more; racist attitudes that were latent or even totally absent emerge and harden.
So, what do we want in a law enforcement officer? While a philosopher-cop might be going too far—an endless debate about meaning would render daily law enforcement ineffective—at the same time, an ability to handle ambiguity, to see the importance of context, to acknowledge grey areas between right and wrong, to see humans as humans, would be desirable traits, not to mention a sense of humor and a degree of humility in the face of societal dilemmas. Are there such people? Of course, and many are already police officers. Would more want to become police officers? We won’t know until we cast the recruitment net wider, and change the nature of the recruitment process. Then perhaps we might find some surprising interest among non-traditional candidates: teachers, ex Peace Corps volunteers, nurses, chefs, anthropology majors, maybe ex-cons.
The selection process as it stands today is bureaucratized and lengthy. It starts with physical requirements and moves on through written exams to personal interviews (a good guess is that these do not involve a deep inquiry into the kind of person one is). The written tests for potential officers tend to focus first on whether or not one is a good fit with the police bureaucracy itself. So, for example The Baltimore County Police Department written exam components are: “Arithmetic; Reading comprehension; Grammar; Incident Report Writing.” The NYPD tutorial for the written exam begins with a photo that the candidate is asked to look at for five minutes. Then, he or she must answer questions about the photo without looking back at it, the first two of which (in a sample exam) were:
“What were the letters indicated on the subway?
(A) DG HJ; (B) BJML; (C) BMQR; (D) DNQM
How many air conditioners are in the photograph?
(A) 1 (B) 3 (C) 0 (D) 2
Then there are questions about police ethics:
“Police Officer Gold captures a bank robber in the act of holding up a bank. To show appreciation, the bank manager gives the officer a check for $100.00. Officer Gold accepts the check. Officer Gold’s action in accepting the $100.00 is:
(A) Proper, because the money was given for performance of a brave act.
(B) Improper, because the capture of the bank robber was not a meritorious act deserving of a reward.
(C) Proper, because the money was given as a substitute for Departmental recognition.
(D) Improper, because a police officer is not allowed to accept a reward from a bank for performance of his duties. “
Other questions are about the legal categories of crimes, missing persons, procedures (e.g. what to do if an arrested person is suspected of holding narcotics); actions to take when stopping a vehicle; determining on a map the most direct route to a given point; facial recognition etc. Almost all are aimed at determining a prospective officer’s observational skills, along with the ability to absorb legal and procedural concepts. Clearly all of these are important, but none of it gets at the kind of person the prospective officer is.
Instead, or in addition, one might pose a series of short essay questions, such as
“Describe the last time you got angry about something. What were the reasons? How long did you remain angry? How did you feel afterwards?”
“In some countries police officers do not carry guns. What would you say are both some good and bad reasons for such a policy?
To which of the following suspects would you give the benefit of the doubt? (show pictures of people of different races and genders)
The exam might include “projective” questions such as
“Which animal do you feel best describes the kind of police officer you admire most:
a) Lion
b) Owl
c) Eagle
d) German Shepherd”
And questions which get at police officers’ fears, such as
“Which of the following situations would scare you the most?
a) Stopping a vehicle on the highway for speeding
b) Raiding a house known to house a narcotic processing operation
c) Answering a domestic abuse call
d) Chasing a fleeing burglary suspect
e) Intervening in a riot
Explain your answer:”
These questions are merely suggestive of an approach that might focus more on the Who of policing. Of course, structural change is needed across the board; and more research is needed into the worldview, culture, and life cycle of police officers, and especially how these change over time. And experiments need to be piloted that might test triggers of behavior change, such as the potential role of peer pressure or shame, or technological innovations (like a blood pressure feedback cuff) that might tell an angry (and/or frightened) officer that he or she is at a dangerous threshold for violence. These are important changes to be made over the longer term, but it might just be possible to achieve significant change in police behavior sooner rather than later by relatively cost-free changes in recruitment and its processes.
