“What Should I Do Sarge?” - Opportunities to Develop Decision Makers at PC & PCSO Rank
Mark Brennan
BA (Hons) Criminology and Criminal Justice – Policing
Health and Life Sciences, De Montfort University
June 2014
Declaration
Except where due acknowledgements have been made, this work is my own. The work has not been submitted previously, in whole or in part, to qualify for any other assessment. The content of this thesis is the result of work which has been carried out since the official commencement date of this approved research programme. Any editorial work, paid or unpaid carried out by a third party, including study and learning advisors, is acknowledged.
Acknowledgements
I would like to thank my Academic Tutor Annette Crisp for her ongoing guidance during this research.
I would also like to thankthe Head of Learning and Development for Leicestershire Police,Sarah Pinner, for sponsoring this research and the Chief Inspector Rosie Grant, for authorising its completion.
I would like to thank Dick Clancy for his guidance on the internal leadership strategy for Leicestershire Police and Jo Ingall for her assistance in placing the research questionnaire into an online format.
I would like to thank my line managers, specifically DI Mark Parish and Mr Barney Thorne for their support and assistance in allowing me to complete this research while balancing operational commitments.
Finally I would like to thank my partner Rachel and my family for their close emotional and practical support to allow me to complete this research.
Contents
“What Should I Do Sarge?” - Opportunities to Develop Decision Makers at PC & PCSO Rank
Abstract8
List of Figures10
List of Tables15
Chapter 1 – Introduction16
1.1- The requirements for self-confident decision makers throughout 16
the organisation
1.2 - Research objectives and research questions16
1.3 – Research methodology17
1.4 – Research findings and implications 17
1.5 – Structure of research report 18
Chapter 2 - Literature Review19
2.1 – Literature review questions 19
2.2 – Literature review methodology19
2.3- What leadership styles are used by sergeants within police organisations? 20
2.3.1- Transformational Leadership20
2.3.2- Transactional Leadership23
2.3.3- Laissez-Faire Leadership23
2.3.4- Distribution of leadership styles23
2.3.5–Summary24
2.4- What effects do these leadership styles have on subordinateself-confidence in decision-making? 25
Chapter 3 – Methodology26
3.1 - Research Approach26
3.2 - Research Design26
3.3 – Research Sample26
3.3.1 - Response Rate30
3.4 - The Pilot Project31
3.5 - Research Methods33
3.6 - Research Measures33
3.7 - Research Analysis34
3.7.1 - Statistical significance36
3.8 - Other methodological issues37
3.9 - Ethical and dataprotection issues37
Chapter 4 – Results39
4.1 - Research Question 1) - To what extent are transformational, transactional and laissez-faire leadership styles used by sergeants within police organisations 39
4.2 - Research Question 1a) - How does this vary due to gender, length of service and type of deployment of the subordinate? 41
4.3 - Research Question 2): What is the relationship between transformational, transactional and laissez-faire leadership styles and subordinateself-confidence in decision-making? 55
4.4 - Research Question 2a): How does this vary due to gender, length of service and type of deployment of the subordinate? 59
Chapter 5 – Discussion72
5.1 - Research Question 1) - To what extents are transformational, transactional and laissez-faire leadership styles used by sergeants within police organisations? 72
5.2 - Research Question 1a: How does this vary due to gender, length of service and type of deployment of the subordinate? 73
5.3 - Research Question 2): What is the relationship between transformational, transactional and laissez-faire leadership styles and subordinate self-confidence in decision-making? 75
5.4 - Research Question 2a) - How does this vary due to gender, length of service and type of deployment of the subordinate? 77
5.5 - The Effect of Methodology86
5.5.1 - Research Approach86
5.5.2 - Research Design86
5.5.3 - Research Sample87
5.5.4 - Research Methods87
5.6 Conclusion, Implications & Recommendations88
5.7 – Future Improvements90
References91
Appendices 94
Abstract
In today’s policing environment, staff at lower levels of the organisation have to feel confident to make well-considered, independent decisions without the need to refer them upwards to an ever-decreasing number of supervisors. This research attempted to stimulate organisational change to develop thedecision making self-confidence of PC and PCSOs within Leicestershire Police. It attempted to do this by identifying the distribution of leadership styles used by sergeants within the organisation, as well as testing the relationship between leadership style and self-confidence in decision-makingof the subordinate. It alsowent beyond previous literature to identify how these relationships varied due to gender, length of service and type of deployment.
Research took a quantitative approach, employing a cross-sectional design of 255 PCs and PCSOs based within the City and County Basic Command Units (BCUs) within Leicestershire Police. The method of research was an anonymous self-completion questionnaire administered to the organisation e-mail account of respondents in April 2013. Respondents were required to assess the extent to which their main first-line supervisor possessed a number of leadership qualities, as well as the extent of their confidence to make their own decisions. Descriptive statistics, independent t-tests and Pearson correlation coefficient statistics were generated using the Statistics Package for Social Scientists (SPSS), to identify evidence in relation to the research questions.
Results suggest that the on the whole sergeants in the organisation are using appropriate transformational and transactional behaviours according to the needs of their staff. All transformational behaviours and the transactional behaviour of rewarding individuals weresignificantly and positively related with self-confidence to make decisions, although the size of correlations suggests that there are other contributing factors.
To achieve improvementthe organisation should attempt to identify “laissez-faire” leaders to focus improvement efforts, either via training or dealing with inadequate performance. Furthermore,sergeants could consider more “coaching” styles of leadership particularlyamongst PCSOs, as well as some specific behaviours aimed at those with 0-2 years, 3-10 years and those with 21+ years of service.
Research also presented possible organisational improvements, including regular supervision appointments between line manager (or sergeant qualified PCs) and subordinate, personal mentors for PCSOs, methods for highlighting good practice, annual 360 feedback of sergeants’ leadership behaviour, specific training and internal communications.
In the future, qualitative research could identify the intricacy in these relationships to fully understand and to realise further potential benefits for teams’self-confidence to make decisions.
List of Figures
Figure 3.1 – Deployment breakdown of respondents in research sample
Figure 3.2 – Gender breakdown of respondents in research sample
Figure 3.3 – Length of service breakdown of respondents in research sample
Figure 3.4 – Rank breakdown of respondents in research sample
Figure 4.1 – Mean agreement scores for whole research sample on 10 transformational leadership qualities
Figure 4.2 – Mean agreement scores for whole research sample on 3 transactional leadership qualities
Figure 4.3 – Predominant leadership style reported in whole research sample
Figure 4.4 – Predominantleadership style reported by role deployment
Figure 4.5 – Predominant leadership style reported by gender
Figure 4.6 – Predominant leadership style reported by length of service
Figure 4.7 – Predominantleadership style reported by rank
Figure 4.8 – Mean agreement scores for PCSOs, PCs and whole sample on reprimanding styles from sergeants
Figure 4.9 – Mean agreement scores by length of service on sergeant attempting to improve abilities
Figure 4.10 – Mean agreement scores by length of service on sergeant giving good advice
Figure 4.11 – Mean agreement scores by length of service that sergeant was approachable
Figure 4.12 – Mean agreement scores by length of service that sergeant motivated respondents
Figure 4.13 – Mean agreement scores by length of service that sergeant has earned respondents’ respect
Figure 4.14 – Mean agreement scores by length of service that sergeant encourages respondent to learn from mistakes
Figure 4.15 – Mean agreement scores by length of service that sergeant supports respondent if they make a mistake
Figure 4.16 – Mean agreement scores by length of service that sergeant tells respondent what to do
Figure 4.17 – Mean agreement score that respondent was confident to make their own decisions, by predominantleadership style reported.
Figure 4.18 – Correlationscores between self- confidence in decision making and the 10 transformational leadership qualities and 3 transactional leadership qualities
Figure 4.19 – Correlationscores between self-confidence in decision making and predominantleadership style reported
Figure 4.20 – Correlationscores between self-confidence in decision making and the 10 transformational leadership qualities and 3 transactional leadership qualities (response sample)
Figure 4.21 – Correlationscores between self-confidence in decision making and the 10 transformational leadership qualities and 3 transactional leadership qualities (SNT sample)
Figure 4.22 – Correlationscores between self-confidence in decision making and the 10 transformational leadership qualities and 3 transactional leadership qualities (female sample)
Figure 4.23 – Correlationscores between self-confidence in decision making and the 10 transformational leadership qualities and 3 transactional leadership qualities (male sample)
Figure 4.24 – Correlationscores between self-confidence in decision making and the 10 transformational leadership qualities and 3 transactional leadership qualities (0-2 years of service sample)
Figure 4.25 – Correlationscores between self-confidence in decision making and the 10 transformational leadership qualities and 3 transactional leadership qualities (3-10 years of service sample)
Figure 4.26 – Correlationscores between self-confidence in decision making and the 10 transformational leadership qualities and 3 transactional leadership qualities (11-20 years of service sample)
Figure 4.27 – Correlationscores between self-confidence in decision making and the 10 transformational leadership qualities and 3 transactional leadership qualities (21+ years of service sample)
Figure 4.28 – Correlationscores between self-confidence in decision making and the 10 transformational leadership qualities and 3 transactional leadership qualities (PC sample)
Figure 4.29 – Correlationscores between self-confidence in decision making and the 10 transformational leadership qualities and 3 transactional leadership qualities (PCSO sample)
Figure 5.1 – Correlationscores between self-confidence in decision making and the 10 transformational leadership qualities and 3 transactional leadership qualities (0-2 years of service sample controlling for rank)
Figure 5.2 – Correlations score between rewarding the respondent and self-confidence in decision making by length of service
Figure 5.3 – Correlations score between reprimanding the respondent and self-confidence in decision making by length of service
Figure 5.4 – Correlationscores between giving the respondent good advice and self-confidence in decision making by length of service
Figure 5.5 – Correlationscores between self-confidence in decision making and the 10 transformational leadership qualities and 3 transactional leadership qualities (3-10 years ofservice sample controlling for rank)
Figure 5.6 –Correlation scores between self-confidence in decision making and the 10 transformational leadership qualities and 2 transactional leadershipqualities by rank
Figure 5.7 – Correlation scores between self-confidence in decision making and the 10 transformational leadership qualities and 3 transactional leadership qualities (PCSO sample controlling for length of service)
List of Tables
Table 3.1 – Comparisons between force strength (PC or PCSO rank) and sampling frame size
Table 3.2 – Reminder links sent to main survey and effect on response rate
Chapter 1 - Introduction
1.1 - The requirements for self-confident decision makers throughout the organisation
In his 2011 Home Office commissioned “Review of Police Leadership and Training”, Peter Neyroud states that the Coalition government’s proposed reforms,summarised in the Home Office paper “Policing in the 21st Century” (Home Office, 2010), “will impact on leadership and training at all levels” (Home Office, 2011:25). One overarching aspect of these reforms is that of budgetary constraint which has led to “a culling of middle and senior management posts.” (Neyroud, 2011:353).
Leicestershire Police recognised this, identifying “Ensuring the effective and efficient use of resources at all times”as one of the five key values of the organisation. In this context staff at lower levels of the organisation have to feel confident to make well-considered, independent decisions without the need to refer them upwards to an ever-decreasing number of supervisors. This has in turn driven the identification of a systematic leadership strategy within Leicestershire Police, with a chief aim of developing leaders at all levels, by realising another key value of the organisation of “Trusting our people to provide a quality service”.
1.2 – Research objectives and research questions
This research attempted to contribute to this systematic leadership strategy by producing primary research to answer the following research questions which were generated after a literature review of previous research:
1)To what extent are transformational, transactional and laissez-faire leadership styles used by sergeants?
1a) How does this vary due to gender, length of service and type of deployment of the subordinate?
It was hypothesised that there would be evidence of the use of “transformational leadership”, “transactional leadership” and “laissez-faire leadership” styles. Previous research had not identified whether this would vary due to gender, length of service and type of deployment of the subordinate, so hypotheses were not made in relation to this aspect.
2)What is the relationship between transformational, transactional and laissez-faire leadership styles and subordinateself-confidence in decision-makingand;
2a) How does this vary due to gender, length of service and type of deployment of the subordinate?
It was hypothesised that there would be a positive statistical relationship between “transformational leadership” and “self-confidence in decision-making”. Again previous research had not identified whether this would vary due to gender, length of service and type of deployment of the subordinate,so hypotheses were not made in relation to this aspect.
1.3–Research methodology
Research took a quantitative approach, employing a cross sectional design of 255 PCs and PCSOs based within the City and County BCUs within Leicestershire Police. The method of research was an anonymous self-completion questionnaire administered to the organisation e-mail account of respondents in April 2013. Respondents were required to assess the extent to which their main first-line supervisor possessed a number of leadership qualities, as well as the extent of their confidence to make their own decisions. Descriptive statistics, independent t-tests and Pearson correlation coefficient statistics were generated using the Statistics Package for Social Scientists (SPSS) to identify evidence in relation to the research questions.
1.4 – Research findings and implications
Results suggest that the on the whole sergeants in the organisation are using appropriate transformational and transactional behaviours according to the needs of their staff. All transformational behaviours and the transactional behaviour of rewarding individuals were significantly and positively related with self-confidence to make decisions, although the size of correlations suggests that there are other contributing factors.
To achieve improvement the organisation should attempt to identify “laissez-faire” leaders to focus improvement efforts, either via training or dealing with inadequate performance. Furthermore,sergeants could consider more “coaching” styles of leadership particularly amongst PCSOs, as well as some specific behaviours aimed at those with 0-2 years, 3-10 years and those with 21+ years of service.
Research also presented possible organisational improvements, including regular supervision appointments between line manager (or sergeant qualified PCs) and subordinate, personal mentors for PCSOs, methods for highlighting good practice, annual 360 feedback of sergeants’ leadership behaviour, specific training and internal communications.
1.5 – Structure of research report
This research report will first summarise previous research in this area and explain how this led to the formulation of the research questions. It will explain the methodological approach taken, while at the same time discussing the potential benefits and pitfalls of the approach. The report will then summarise key results in relation to the research questions, employing appropriate graphs where relevant. It will then discuss the findings, relating them back to the research questions, literature review and the methodological approach taken. Finally, the report will discuss the significance of the findings and identify potential ways in which they can positively influence the organisational environment.
Chapter 2 - Literature Review
2.1 – Literature review questions
Prior to the creation of final research questions, a literature review conceptually collated and critically analysed previous academic research in relation tothe following two literature review questions:
1)What leadership styles are used by sergeants within police organisations?
2)What effects do these leadership styles have on subordinates’self-confidence in decision-making?
The literature review then informed the creation of the final two research questions.
2.2 – Literature review methodology
Research evidence for this review was identified through an extensive literature search of nine electronic databases of social research literature and also the UK national police library catalogue using specific key words related to police leadership, supervision management and the role of sergeant (See Appendix 1.1).
Research evidence for this review was then included if it was:
1)In English
2)From academic journals or government published research, which having undergone a peer review process would provide greater assurance that the results reported in the review were reliable;
3)On review of the abstract, the research reported outcome evidence from research subjects using a recognised social research design and method. This prevented the review’s validity from being biased by non-evidence based theoretical opinions.
4)On review of the abstract, the research focus included that of the first line supervisor (Sergeant). It was judged that research studies based only on other ranks could potentially distort the validity of the findings of the review due to the fact that “each rank of senior officers had unique sets of leadership behaviours” (Densten, 2003:1).
5)On review of the abstract, the research reported outcome evidence from a direct assessment of supervisors’ styles. It was judged that opinions of ‘ideal’ leadership behaviours would be influenced by a combination of different experiences of leadership and factors making it difficult to confidently confirm the validity of causal links between a particular style or characteristic and a particular outcome amongst subordinates.
6)On review of the abstract, the research reported outcome evidence relevant to answering one or more of the literature review questions.
This literature search identified 11 research studies that met the inclusion criteria. The reference section of each journal/report was also searched to identify any further research studies that met the inclusion criteria, providing a further 4 studies for the review (See Appendix 1.2 & 1.3).
2.3 - What leadership styles are used by sergeants within police organisations?