Procedural Justice
For Law Enforcement Agencies:
Organizational Change through Decision Making and Policy
Non-Procedure Participant Guide
2012
Procedural Justice for Law Enforcement Agencies:
Organizational Change through Decision Making and Policy Participant Guide
Page III Version 4.0 October 2012
Center for Public Safety and Justice
Procedural Justice for Law Enforcement Agencies:
Organizational Change through Decision Making and Policy Participant Guide
Participant Guide
Course Introduction
Overview
Course Development
This course was developed by the Center for Public Safety and Justice (CPSJ) at the University of Illinois, with support from the United States Department of Justice (US DOJ), Office of Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS) through the Community Policing Development (CPD) Program. This course supports the efforts to advance the practice of community policing in law enforcement agencies through training and technical assistance; the development of innovative community policing strategies; best practices; and applied research that is national in scope. This course supports these efforts by promoting organizational legitimacy through transparent and fair practices within law enforcement agencies.
This course is designed as a stand-alone curriculum that can be delivered off the shelf. The course content is designed to be relevant to any law enforcement agency. The information presented and the terminology used in this course was correct at the time the course was developed.
Course Introduction
Procedural justice refers to the principles of fairness in the processes that resolve disputes and allocate resources. It concerns the fairness and the transparency of the processes by which decisions are made. Procedural justice is the fulcrum on which police legitimacy balances.
The four pillars of procedural justice consist of: 1) fairness and consistency of rule application, 2) impartiality and unbiased decision maker neutrality, 3) voice and representation in process, and 4) transparency and openness in process. Procedural justice, within a law enforcement agency, begins with decision making and the treatment of personnel by management and supervisors (sworn and civilian) that is perceived as fair and equitable.
The importance of procedural justice and fairness in organizations has been recognized by professionals from many disciplines. The philosopher Rawls, for example, has referred to justice as “the first virtue of social institutions” (Rawls, 1971). Sociologists have used the concept of justice to explain collective reactions to institutions (Rytina, 1986). Since the establishment of the first United States city police service, the police have endured numerous challenges to their legitimacy as an institution of social control and public safety. The public is often divided over their feelings about the police. A polarized public can be problematic for even the best efforts of law enforcement organizations. This polarization can limit law enforcement personnel from fulfilling their role in communities and can create discontent by certain groups of people who may already feel disproportionately and unfairly mistreated by law enforcement personnel (Sunshine & Tyler, 2003). This discontent can lead citizens to question the legitimacy of the authority of police as well as the broader criminal justice system. Community satisfaction with police is important because the efficiency and effectiveness of law enforcement may depend upon it. Successful law enforcement efforts can be contingent on gaining support from the community and often leads to compliance with police orders and cooperation in their efforts to fight crime. Disapproval of law enforcement personnel by community members may decrease the likelihood that individuals will cooperate with police efforts (Bridenball & Jesilow, 2008).
The institutional legitimacy of policing as a basic social value learned during childhood is evidenced by the extent to which people are willing to accept the authority of individual police officers. As children go through adolescence and age into adulthood, both direct and indirect encounters form opinions of police legitimacy (Tyler & Darley, 2000). The actions of individual law enforcement officers will have a direct and fundamental impact on public opinion by either enhancing or lowering the public’s judgment of police legitimacy. The perspective of legitimacy encompasses a number of aspects; the most important is procedural justice. According to procedural justice research literature, the legitimacy of police is linked to the public judgment about the fairness and the process through which law enforcement personnel make decisions and exercise their authority (Sunshine & Tyler, 2003). This suggests that if law enforcement personnel use fairness in the processes that allocate resources and resolve disputes, including the transparency of the processes by which decisions are made, then the public will view police as being more legitimate and will be more supportive of police as a result of that perspective. However, the inverse is also true, Sunshine and Tyler (2003) indicate that police use of unfair procedures when they exercise their authority can lead to alienation, dissatisfaction, defiance and non-cooperation from the public.
The process of decision making throughout the criminal justice system may or may not reflect the pillars of procedural justice. When decisions are made within the criminal justice system, individuals in positions of authority exercise judgment and make choices among alternative courses of action. For example, such discretion comes into play whenever police make choices about whether to stop, arrest, investigate, search, question or use force. Similarly, prosecutors exercise individual judgment in deciding whether to charge a person with a crime and whether to plea bargain. Defense attorneys exercise choices to reject pleas and how to plead a case. Judges also use discretion when setting bail, accepting or rejecting plea bargains, ruling on pretrial motions and sentencing defendants. Parole board members exercise this discretion when deciding whether and when to release inmates from prison. Procedural justice encourages making and implementing decisions according to fair processes. People feel more satisfied if processes throughout the continuum of the criminal justice system encourage treatment with respect and dignity and are carried out with impartiality, making it easier to accept even outcomes they do not like (Maiese, 2004). In addition to being respectful and impartial, it is also important that the processes throughout the criminal justice system be transparent. Decisions should be reached through open procedures, without secrecy or deception (Reisig, 2007). Transparency is especially important to disenfranchised segments of the community, such as people with mental illness. Criminal justice processes that exemplify procedural justice are more likely to increase satisfaction of those coming into contact with the system. For example, an individual who feels unhappy about being arrested or involuntarily committed yet perceives respectful and fair treatment from police is more likely to cooperate with the police and may ultimately evaluate the incident positively (Watson, 2007).
Many officers cope with the danger and uncertainty of their occupational environment by being suspicious and maintaining the edge (Paoline, 2003).
Paoline explains the mindset this way:
“Officers begin to develop a belief in an ‘insider/outsider’ structure that reinforces to officers that while fellow officers are trustworthy (insiders), they should be skeptical and ever vigilant of non-police (outsiders). Officers maintain the edge by exhibiting a take-charge approach to their work regardless of the circumstances and maintain their authority to be ‘one up’ on citizens” (the outsiders).
This mindset is reinforced by the way recruits are selected, trained and accepted into the police ranks. Police training that constantly emphasizes the potential for danger in police work and reinforces this particular mindset of “insider/outsider” without teaching alternative choices of interaction with the community will only continue to perpetuate this mindset (Kappeler, 2005).
The curriculum promotes organizational legitimacy by incorporating transparent and fair practices within law enforcement agencies. The principles of procedural justice consist of fairness, transparency, objectivity, justice, consistency of rule application, and decision maker neutrality. Procedural justice within a law enforcement agency begins with the decision making and treatment of personnel by management and supervisors (sworn and civilian) that is perceived as fair and equitable.
Law enforcement personnel are more likely to view their agencies as legitimate and will comply with workplace policies and procedures when the agency exhibits a culture where transparency and fairness is modeled through its decision making and treatment of personnel. Once procedural justice principles are valued and practiced within the agency, personnel will incorporate these values in the way they engage and interact with the community. How an officer responds to a situation will impact the community’s perception of the agency and level of trust. In order for the community to view the law enforcement agency and their personnel as legitimate, the principles of procedural justice must be a part of the agency’s organizational culture.
Organizational transformation is a key component of community policing. Procedural justice provides a framework for organizational transformation within law enforcement agencies. By promoting the principles of fairness and transparency in resolving disputes, making decisions and allocating resources, procedural justice provides a structure for developing sustainable organizational practices and procedures.
This curriculum will introduce students to strategies for implementing the principles of procedural justice, raising their awareness and aiding them in becoming more effective in fostering an environment where procedural justice principles become a standard practice within law enforcement and policing.
“No one is compelled to choose the profession of police officer, but having chosen it, everyone is obligated to perform its duties and live up to the high standards of its requirements.”
President Calvin Coolidge
Course Purpose
The purpose of the course is to create a broader awareness of procedural justice and its core principles. Practical steps will be provided to students on how to incorporate procedural justice principles into organizational decision making, policies and procedures at the organizational level.
This course will specifically make evident how to create an environment where procedural justice core principles become standard practice within law enforcement agencies.
This course specifically increases awareness of procedural justice as a framework to implement effective community policing strategies within law enforcement agencies. It will increase the ability of law enforcement leadership to implement procedural justice into an agency’s policies, procedures and standard practices of policing.
Target Audience
The target audience for the course is sworn and civilian law enforcement management and supervisors (chiefs, mid-level and first-line supervisors) with roles and responsibilities in organizational decision making and / or developing, implementing and enforcing agency policies and common practices.
Course Length
Eight (8) hours or one (1) day
Seven (7) hours of instruction time and one (1) hour for lunch
Prerequisites
A solid foundation in understanding the community policing philosophy that promotes organizational strategies, which support the systematic use of partnerships and problem-solving techniques to proactively address the immediate conditions that give rise to public safety issues such as crime, social disorder and fear of crime, is essential.
Scope of Course
The curriculum is relevant and adaptable to law enforcement agencies nationwide.
The course introduces learners to procedural justice and its principles, thus creating a broader awareness of the principles of procedural justice. Implementation strategies and practical steps to integrate procedural justice principles into organizational decision making and policies will be considered. These considerations will provide the framework to assist sworn and civilian law enforcement management and supervisors with developing practices and procedures that will aid them in becoming more effective in fostering an environment which promotes organizational transformation within their agencies.
Course material will make evident how sworn and civilian law enforcement management and supervisors can create an environment where procedural justice core principles become standard practice within law enforcement agencies, by incorporating procedural justice tenants into resolution of disputes, decision making and allocation of resources.
CENTRAL COURSE TOPICS
· The pillars of procedural justice
· Procedural justice and effective community policing
· Building trust and values-based leadership
· Procedural justice and organizational legitimacy
· Procedural justice as a model for strategic decision making
· The mediating role of procedural justice in response to evaluation, promotion and retention of personnel
· Implementing procedural justice into policies, procedures and standard practices of policing
· Procedural justice in allocation of resources
· Organization transformation and legitimacy in influencing public perception and attitudes towards local law enforcement
· Strategies to create and enhance a positive public image through encounters with the public
Course structure
The course is divided into seven modules which are identified below.
Modules:
Module 1: Introduction and Logistics
Module 2: The Pillars of Procedural Justice
Module 3: Organizational Change through Leadership
Module 4: Incorporating Procedural Justice into Policy
Module 5: Recruiting and Recruit Training
Module 6: Evaluation, Promotion and Retention through the Lens of Procedural Justice
Module 7: Practices that Enhance Encounters with the Public
Activities:
Corresponding group activities and discussions are included to deepen the participants understanding of procedural justice and how to integrate core principles into decision making and policy.
Module 1: Three Hats and a Passion
Module 2: The Community Policing Era
A Brief History of Policing in the United States
Police Helping Boy Video Clip
Module 3: Draw “My Vision” Picture
Module 4: Examples of Mission Statement
Southwestern Police Department Tattoo Exercise
Module 5: Houston Police Marketing Video
St. Louis Metropolitan Police Recruitment Video
Sacramento Police Department Marketing Video
Fairfax County Police Department Women in Policing Recruitment Video
Module 6: Operationally Defined Performance Appraisal Dimensions
Module 7:Youtube.com Tracy Meares, Procedural Justice National Institute of Justice six-part series research for the Real World Seminar Series, 2011
Oak Park Policing Unit Video Clip
Traffic Stop Video Clip
COURSE OVERVIEW
Module 1: Introduction and Logistics
Scope Statement
This module provides a review of the course learning objectives, course structure and common course terminology. It provides the first opportunity for the instructor/s and students to introduce themselves to each other. The students will complete all administrative requirements as well as a course pre-test to assess knowledge and experience.
Terminal Learning Objectives (TLO)
Students will acquire a general overview of the Procedural Justice for Law Enforcement Agencies: Organizational Change through Decision Making and Policy course.