I think that the only way we will ever truly implement a change in policing that is based on decision-makers using crime intelligence information to make changes that impact the criminal environment for our common good (ILP) is through the implementation of systems thinking. In an article asking whether a certain systems thinking tool or a particular program change is more likely to be successful in creating meaningful change in an organization, systems thinking expert Jeremy Cox states:
"The simple answer is that leading this transformation is all about leadership, not the way you design the change programme. A well designed programme will help you make the change from a command-and-control to a systems design quicker and with fewer problems, but without leadership, you are destined to fail."
In Jerry Ratcliffe's three i's model of the intelligence cycle, there are three named systems: crime intelligence analysis, decision-makers, and the criminal environment.
Currently, we look at those systems as separate entities and do not study their interrelationships and how effectively they relate to one another in relation to the objective of policing: increased public safety.
Intelligence Led Policing is a new system, but its parts are disconnected.
We look at the field of analysis and train in it in an isolated fashion, getting to know the technology and techniques, but working in isolation from the decision-makers' systems. We need to be integrated into their systems in order for ILP to work.
Analysts seldom venture into the criminal environment systems to learn about it so that we can ask new questions. Nor do we look at our whole data sets and ask, how do these fit together? What parts are interrelated? Where are the leverage points where our analysis can make a real difference? Rather, we look at numbers and maps and notes to make sense. We seldom look at the criminal environment as a dynamic system, rather than as threats, cases, series, or trends.
Decision-makers rarely understand how crime intelligence analysis operates, what it needs to work, and how it can benefit them. They do not require the input from good data that the analysis system needs, nor do that envision its potential outputs. They do not see that effective analysts can be their greatest allies.
Systems thinking involves looking at how a system as a whole works, rather than try to fix its broken parts. Then, after learning how it functions, systems thinking involves strategically designing new ways of working. These ways of working must be invented, and thus often involve radical change. It must start from the top, where the power to implement change rests.
Intelligence Led Policing centers around leadership. Decision-makers are central.
Here is more from the article:
"Leadership is a deal-breaker
Why is it that leadership is so important? The bottom line is that systems thinking ideas are counter-intuitive, and represent a direct challenge to the prevailing method of management. Individuals and organisations have spent a lot of time, effort and money learning how to be good at command-and-control management. The government tell us it is the right thing to do, drives us to equate improvement with cost savings and the achievement of central targets, and sends inspectors out make sure we are following their prescriptions. Many people instinctively know that there must be a better way, and it is hard to imagine what that might be. Systems thinkers know that making that a systems alternative a reality requires direct, dedicated, leadership, what Deming called ‘Constancy of Purpose’.
When we learn to understand and manage our organisations as systems, it turns out that our present (command-and-control) ideas are the very thing that is driving waste and poor performance into our organisations. Our assumptions about structure and hierarchy, work design, roles, measures, ‘performance management’, budgets and finance, regulation, appraisals, business planning, and change management all need to change. I could go on with the list, but you see my point… Systems thinking is counter-intuitive and counter-cultural, and to ‘get it’ we need help to un-learn our command-and-control assumptions before we can re-learn. This can be strong medicine and requires direct, committed, supportive leadership – your change from a ‘command and control’ to a systems thinking organisation must be led from the top because it is a ‘leadership thing’ and ‘thinking thing’."
No comments:
Post a Comment