Loading...

Strategic Management

Open Posted By: highheaven1 Date: 03/03/2021 High School Report Writing

Strategic management is the process of setting goals, procedures, and objectives in order to make a company or organization more competitive. ... Often, strategic managementincludes strategy evaluation, internal organization analysis, and strategy execution throughout the company.

Each student shall prepare a 600 word report that examines whether, how, and why strategic management is/could/should be relevant and important for the criminal justice specialization.  Use APA formatting, and include title page and references. 

Category: Mathematics & Physics Subjects: Algebra Deadline: 24 Hours Budget: $80 - $120 Pages: 2-3 Pages (Short Assignment)

Attachment 1

CRIMINAL JUSTICE

Criminal Justice>Criminal Justice System>Strategic Planning in Policing

Strategic Planning in Policing

There is a growing and rather extensive literature on strategic planning. For example, the Learning Resource Center at the FBI Training Academy has compiled a ten-page bibliography on strategic planning. This bibliography lists items available at the FBI Academy Library. Melcher and Kerzner (1988,20), tracing the evolution of strategic planning theory, write that the first interest in the subject can be traced to the Harvard Business School in 1933, when top management’s ”point of view” was added to the business policy course. This perspective emphasized incorporating a firm’s external environment with its internal operations.

George Steiner’s classic work Strategic Planning: What Every Manager Must Know was published in 1979 and is generally considered to be the bible of strategic planning. Steiner asserts that strategic planning is inextricably interwoven into the entire fabric of management. Steiner lists fourteen basic and well-known management processes (for example, setting objectives and goals, developing a company philosophy by establishing beliefs, values, and so forth) that make up the components of a general management system and links them to a comprehensive strategic planning process (7-8).

There are many different models or approaches to strategic planning. Melcher and Kerzner’s topic Strategic Planning: Development and Implementation provides an excellent description and review of various models. In essence, strategic planning is a highly rational approach to the management process. It seeks to answer the following questions: Why does the organization exist? What is the organization doing today? What should the organization be doing in the future? What short-term objectives and longer- term goals must be accomplished to bridge the gap from the present to the future?

There is some debate among strategic planners as to whether this analysis can be meaningful without identifying the organizational culture, its values and norms, and the values of critical decision makers. Thus, a number of models of the strategic planning process include a values identification, audit, and analysis step. Many other models do not include this step. The writer’s experience has been that many law enforcement officials are turned off by what they see as ”mushy, touchy-feely, organizational psychology concepts” intruding into the planning process.

The writer believes that an understanding of the organizational culture is extremely important to the success of any attempt to change an organization. Strategic planning is such an effort—changing the organization from its present to its future. Nevertheless, many organizations and their members are not ready for this kind of self-examination. Strategic planning can assist law enforcement agencies in performing their mission without including the values analysis step.

Evolution of Management Thought Up until the 1950s, organizations were governed by one set of rules. There were a variety of highly respected theories about organizations, including Henry Fayol’s classical organization theory/administrative science, Max Weber’s bureaucratic theory, and Frederick Taylor’s scientific management, but all prescribed the same set of rules. First, simplify work as much as possible. Second, organize to accomplish routine activities. Third, set standards of control to monitor performance. Finally, take no notice of any changes in the world at large that might affect the organization. There was very little expectation of change and no effort made to anticipate it.

However, these theories with their ”principles” of administration did result in dramatic gains in productivity. In fact, these ideas led to substantially enhanced profits and corresponding salary increases for workers. Why? Because they placed a premium on a rational approach to organizing work, and they stressed the importance of qualified and competent managers—a definite departure from earlier approaches that encouraged nepotism and amateurism.

Unfortunately for these ideas, the world changed. In the latter half of the twentieth century, change itself became the critical variable. Once we could safely wager that tomorrow would be like today in all important respects, today it is a fool’s bet.

Beginning around 1950, we saw the development of administrative philosophies that recognized this new pervasiveness of change. Change was viewed as a certainty, not as an anomaly. It was not to be treated normatively (that is, as either good or bad) but was seen as inevitable. Thus, organizations had to be structured to accommodate and anticipate change. Also, the focus was shifted from the routine duties that employees perform each day to the results that were expected to flow from all of this effort. The new buzz phrase was ”manage for results.” The new paradigm called for flexible or ad hoc organizational structures that organized for desired results, developed goals to direct or focus effort, and anticipated changes.

Many readers are familiar with some of these new paradigm theories: management by objectives (MBO), planning, programming budget system (PPBS), zero-based budgeting (ZBB), contingency approaches, and situational theories. For a variety of reasons these administrative efforts met with varying levels of success—mostly disappointing—when implemented by organizations. For example, the federal government tried and abandoned PPBS, then MBO, and finally ZBB. Even so, management philosophies that emphasize end results have remained popular.

As a next step managers not only wanted to know the future direction of their organizations, they also wanted to identify their strengths and weaknesses. This approach is called long-range planning. In the United States, long-range planning became a popular management philosophy in the early to middle 1970s. Long-range planning, however, also has its shortcomings, primarily because it ignores external factors that affect an organization’s performance. Some people felt that long-range planning focused too exclusively on internal factors and created an introspective mind-set. Strategic planning, by contrast, is conceived as a management-for-results philosophy that uses both an internal assessment and an environmental assessment.

A major difficulty in understanding these different managerial philosophies is that writers use different names for these ideas and they also develop unique definitions for them. Nevertheless, almost all are in agreement that strategic planning is a results-oriented philosophy that employs both an internal organizational assessment and an external environmental analysis.

Models of Strategic Planning As detailed earlier there are a number of different approaches to strategic planning, requiring varying levels of resource commitments, and each organization needs to adapt or modify these different ideas to fit its unique situation. There is no universal ”best way.”

In this section two models will be described. The first of these, applied strategic planning, is defined as ” the process by which the guiding members of an organization envision its future and develop the procedures and operations necessary to achieve that future” (Pfeiffer et al. 1986, 1). The environmental scanning process should be continual and ongoing over the entire process because strategic planning demands that an organization keep a finger on the environmental pulse that can and will affect its future.

The performance audit step in the model includes a simultaneous study of internal strengths and weaknesses and an effort to identify significant external factors that might affect the organization. The organization may well be continually scanning its environment, but here is where the environmental information is actually analyzed in the context of internal assessment data and future goals.

A second model, developed by United Way of America, is called strategic management. United Way defines it as ”a systematic, interactive process for thinking through and creating the organization’s best possible future” (United Way of America 1985, 3). The purpose is to enhance an organization’s ability to identify and achieve specific desired results by integrating information about its external environment, internal capabilities, and overall purpose and direction.

The Essential Elements of Strategic Planning This section provides a number of ideas and suggestions to help readers understand how to conduct strategic planning efforts in their own departments. The first element—a manage-for-results orientation— requires people to distance themselves somewhat from their daily duties and think about the big picture. What are the major issues affecting my department? What’s happening in the community? What do I want this department to look like and be doing in five to ten years?

Since this manage-for-results perspective is common to most current administrative approaches (such as MBO, PPBS, and ZBB), many individuals and departments are familiar with various methods to accomplish it. Frequently a management retreat is conducted at a nearby hotel or resort. Sometimes key managers are asked to prepare a list of those factors or results most critical to the success of the organization. A group facilitator can then lead a meeting in which a master list of these results is produced.

A couple of cautions are in order, however. First, when describing the desired future direction of the organization, people must be realistic and identify attainable results that are consistent with anticipated resources. Second, beware of a future that looks exactly like the past. It has been said that the largest impediments between humans and their future are human themselves and what they are able to imagine and conceive.

The second element is environmental analysis. The primary activities here are data gathering and analysis of

relevant trends. Where do you look for these data? At a national level, the U.S. Census Bureau’s Census of Population and Housing is a valuable tool. The Department of Commerce’s City and County Data topic, as well as reports of the Department of Labor and other national indicators, can also be helpful. With respect to criminal activity, Crime in America, compiled by the FBI, is an excellent source. Academic and professional journals and societies frequently focus on developments and events that will significantly affect law enforcement organizations.

At the local level, relevant and critical trend data can often be obtained at area universities—particularly business schools, economics departments, and sociology departments. The chamber of commerce, local trade associations, and municipal, county, and state governments generally are good sources of information. A survey of knowledgeable people in the community may also help identify relevant information.

A seldom-used form of environmental analysis, scenario development, is the most future-oriented approach. Scenarios attempt to integrate a number of separate trends and develop a consistent and coherent view of plausible, alternative futures. Generally, several scenarios will be developed and a few will be selected for planning purposes. This approach has special significance in university and ”think tank” institutions.

Obviously, the goals of environmental analysis are to identify the most significant trends for the organization and describe their likely implications. Contingency plans can be prepared or special monitoring arrangements can be set up to track these trends.

The third element is organizational assessment, a step that determines an organization’s capabilities (its strengths and weaknesses). Generally, a number of resource assessments (for example, human, facilities, financial) are conducted. For instance, does the organization have enough people with the appropriate education and skills to accomplish its purposes? Also, an examination can be made of an organization’s structure and culture. Are they consistent and compatible with the mission and future direction of the agency?

It is important to review the previous performance of an organization and its major entities. Were previous objectives achieved? Are records and reports of a high quality? Employee or customer surveys and interviews can shed much light on perceptions of performance. In the FBI, for example, the inspection, evaluation, and audit processes tell a lot about the performance of various organizational components and programs.

The product of this step should be a precise listing of all the organization’s competencies and shortcomings. Obviously, this knowledge, coupled with relevant environmental information, will help determine the future direction of the organization.

Strategic Planning in the FBI Strategic planning in the FBI is the responsibility of the director. Early each fall the director and several top executives review, revise, and revalidate the FBI mission and the component missions. A strategic plan is prepared each year, projecting FBI activities five years into the future. The mission and components are carefully examined to ensure that they describe the major purposes toward which FBI efforts will and should be expended over the next several years.

This ”mission review” step begins the development of the new plan. It is also the place where the director and senior executives articulate their vision regarding the future direction of the FBI, focusing on exactly what the bureau wants to achieve during the next five years. At this stage the vision is broad in scope.

Subsequently, other FBI executives and program managers develop precise objectives and action strategies that give practical shape to the director’s vision. While the writer was chief of the Strategic Planning Unit (SPU) of the FBI Inspection Division, he authored a detailed reference, ”A Guide to Strategic Planning in the FBI,” to help FBI employees develop these precise objectives and action plans. Also, he prepared a pamphlet entitled ”An Overview of FBI Strategic Planning Efforts.” In an organization the size of the FBI, the planning document is quite voluminous. Still, it is critical that precise strategies and action plans be prepared that will lead to the accomplishment of the organization’s broad purposes.

The strategic planning process itself, that is, scanning the environment, assessing performance, thinking about the future direction of the FBI, and developing action plans to achieve stated goals, is more important than the document that contains the strategic plan. Still, the plan is a tremendous vehicle for communication within the bureau. One of the most common reasons for organizations failing to achieve their purposes is that many people do not know what is expected of them. They don’t understand what the organization is trying to achieve and how their work fits into the overall picture. The strategic plan assists all FBI employees in understanding their contributions to the work of the bureau.

The SPU is responsible for conducting the environmental analysis function for the FBI. This unit performs exactly the kinds of activities and analyses described earlier. With respect to the internal organizational assessment step, the SPU coordinates the activities of various FBI entities. As described previously, the inspection reports of FBI offices, program evaluation, and audits provide invaluable performance information.

The FBI has been involved in strategic planning since the spring of 1987. The process is evolving, and nobody would argue that it is perfect. Still, FBI leaders are convinced that it is the most appropriate managerial approach for the administration of the agency.

Conclusion Strategic planning grows out of administrative philosophies that emphasize a management-for-results approach and recognize the pervasiveness of change throughout society. Although there is no standard or universally accepted definition of strategic planning, most administrators would agree that it has three primary elements:

1. Management-for-results orientation 2. External environmental analysis 3. Internal organizational assessment

While some writers distinguish between strategic planning and strategic management, the author believes that the primary difference is one of semantics.

Ideas and theories about how best to organize will continue to evolve in the years ahead. Still, it is reasonable to expect that future concepts will be built upon many of today’s ideas. In this light, the essential elements of strategic planning— managing for results, environmental analysis, and organizational assessment—can be expected to remain important tenets of future philosophies.

This article has described the benefits of strategic planning for law enforcement agencies and outlined some of the steps necessary to perform the essential elements of strategic planning. Effective American law enforcement is a goal to which all Americans are entitled. Although there are no magic panaceas or guarantees of effectiveness, strategic planning is a straightforward administrative approach with a proven track record. All law enforcement officials are encouraged to consider this approach as they guide their organizations into the future.

References:

1. Melcher, Bonita H., and Harold Kerzner. 1988. Strategic planning: Development and implementation. Blue Ridge Summit, PA: TAB Professional and Reference Books.

2. Pfeiffer, J. William, et al. 1986. Applied strategic planning: A how to do it guide. San Diego, CA: University Associates.

3. Steiner, George A. 1979. Strategic planning: What every manager must know. New York: The Free Press.

4. United Way of America. 1985. Strategic management and United Way. Alexandria, VA: United Way of America.

5. University Associates Consulting and Training Services, 8380 Miramar Mall, Suite 232,San Diego, CA 92121 (619 552-8901).

← Stress and Police Work Sting Tactics →

CRIMINAL JUSTICE RESEARCH

CRIMINAL JUSTICE RESEARCH

Crime

Criminology

Forensic Psychology

Criminal Justice System

Criminal Justice Ethics

Criminal Justice Topics

Contacts Us

CUSTOM WRITING SERVICES

Copyright © 2021 · Metro Pro Theme on Genesis Framework · WordPress · Log in

Custom Writing Services How to Write a Research Paper Research Paper Topics Research Paper Examples Order

FIND YOUR NEXT FAVORITE

S I G N U P N OW

Share0 Share0 Tweet Pin0 Share0 Share0

Attachment 2

Strategic Planning.

Detailed Record

PDF Full Text

Source: Sheriff

Date: May 1, 2004

Inside this work

«

Full Text Contents

Strategic Planning. 64

TRAINING NEWS. 69

Sheriffs Make "Opera... 70

Traffic Safety Roundup. 71

Flying While Armed. 74

Illustrations

Google Drive

Print

E-mail

Add to folder

Cite

Export

Permalink

« Result List Refine Search Download PDF Sign In Folder Help

16 - 20

Attachment 3

The Strategic Management of the Police.

Detailed Record

PDF Full Text

Source: Harvard Business Review

Date: May 1, 1991

Inside this work

»

Full Text Contents

A Blueprint for Fina... 73

The New Old-Fashione... 87

Teaching Smart Peopl... 99

Crime and Management...

110

The Strategic Manage...

122

Illustrations

Choose Another Issue

HTML Full Text

Google Drive

Print

E-mail

Add to folder

Cite

Export

Permalink

« Result List Refine Search Download PDF Sign In Folder Help

1 - 5 6 - 10 11 - 15

Attachment 4

The Police Chief is the o!cial publication of the International Association of Chiefs of Police.

All contents © 2003–2021 International Association of Chiefs of Police. All Rights Reserved.

Copyright and Trademark Notice | Member and Non-Member Supplied Information | Links Policy

44 Canal Center Plaza, Suite 200, Alexandria, VA USA 22314 | 703.836.6767 or 1.800.THE IACP

Designed and Built by Matrix Group International, Inc.®

Leadership

LOG OUTLOG OUT ! " #

SELECT LANGUAGE ​ ▼

Police Chief Magazine | Topics | Leadership | Strategic Management in Policing: The Role of the Strategic Manager

Strategic Management in Policing: The Role of the Strategic Manager Kim Charrier, Strategic Manager, Phoenix Police Department, Arizona

Successful police executives are driving organizational change through strategic management-an ongoing process that seeks opportunities to enhance operational e!ciencies by identifying internal issues and external in"uences that hinder organizational sustainability. It focuses on management’s responsibility for implementation to create a customer-focused, high-performance learning organization. Strategic managers integrate strategic planning with other management systems.

Read More

CURRENT ISSUE

READ ISSUEREAD ISSUE

Contact Us IACP IACP Conference Discover Policing Copyright Privacy Policy

$ % &

MAGAZINE TOPICS COLUMNS TRANSLATIONS SUBMISSIONS ADVERTISINGsearch '

Attachment 5

Chapter 1

U.S. Department of Justice Criminal Division

I C I T A P S T R A T E G I C P L A N F I S C A L Y E A R S 2 0 1 8 – 2 0 2 2

The opinions contained herein are those of the author(s) or contributor(s) and do not necessarily

represent the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. References to specific

individuals, agencies, companies, products, or services should not be considered an endorsement

by the author(s), the contributor(s), or the U.S. Department of Justice. Rather, the references are

illustrations to supplement discussion of the issues.

The internet references cited in this publication were valid as of the date of publication. Given

that URLs and websites are in constant flux, neither the author(s), the contributor(s), nor the COPS

Office can vouch for their current validity.

This resource may be subject to copyright. The U.S. Department of Justice reserves a royalty-free,

nonexclusive, and irrevocable license to reproduce, publish, or otherwise use and to authorize

others to use this resource for Federal Government purposes. This resource may be freely

distributed and used for noncommercial and educational purposes only.

Recommended citation:

International Criminal Investigative Training Assistance Program. 2020. ICITAP Strategic Plan:

Fiscal Years 2018–2022. Washington, DC: Office of Community Oriented Policing Services.

Published 2020

Contents Foreword from the Assistant Attorney General . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . vii

Message from the Office of the Director . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ix

Mission and Goals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

Mission Scope . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

ICITAP in the U.S. Department of Justice . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5

ICITAP in the U.S. Interagency . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

Core Values . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9

Cross-Cutting Principles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11

Unity of effort and purpose . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11

Fusion of law enforcement expertise . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11

Comprehensive justice sector reform . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12

Champion American values . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12

Sustainable development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12

International norms and professional standards. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13

Responsiveness and accountability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13

Goals, Objectives, and Strategies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15

Management Goals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21

Appendix A. ICITAP’s Strategic Framework . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23

Appendix B. ICITAP’s Historical Milestones . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25

IC I TAP S T R AT E G I C P L A N F I S C A L Y E A R S 2 0 1 8 – 2 0 2 2iv

Appendix C. Program Delivery Partners . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29

U.S. Department of Justice . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29

U.S. Department of State . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30

U.S. Department of the Treasury . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30

U.S. Department of Defense . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30

U.S. Department of the Interior . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32

U.S. Department of Agriculture . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32

U.S. Department of Commerce . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32

U.S. Department of Homeland Security . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32

U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33

International partners . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33

Appendix D. List of ICITAP Foreign Partner Countries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35

v

“In this time of ever increasing threats from

transnational criminal organizations and

terrorism, the importance of ICITAP’s

mission has never been greater.”

— Brian A. Benczkowski Assistant Attorney General, Criminal Division

U.S. Department of Justice

Panama – Crime Scene Investigation Training

IC I TAP S T R AT E G I C P L A N F I S C A L Y E A R S 2 0 1 8 – 2 0 2 2vi

Philippines – Special Boat Unit Training

“When DOJ leads international law

enforcement assistance efforts—

through ICITAP or another DOJ entity—

U.S. national security is strengthened.”

vii

Foreword from the Assistant Attorney General It is a privilege for me to introduce the FY 2018–2022 strategic plan for the Criminal

Division’s International Criminal Investigative Training Assistance Program (ICITAP).

ICITAP’s mission to strengthen national security by advancing U.S. law enforcement

operations abroad is a core element of the Criminal Division’s efforts to protect the

homeland and preserve the rule of law. In this time of ever-increasing threats from

transnational criminal organizations (TCO) and terrorism, the importance of ICITAP’s

mission has never been greater.

This strategic plan is grounded in the fundamental principle that foreign assistance

funding for law enforcement capacity building must be targeted to achieve tangible

operational outcomes that protect Americans. Perhaps the best way to ensure that

taxpayer funds are spent most effectively to achieve that goal is for the U.S. Department

of Justice to continue its leadership role in working directly with our counterpart agencies

around the globe.

President Trump’s February 2017 Executive Order on Enforcing Federal Law with

Respect to Transnational Criminal Organizations and Preventing International

Trafficking”1 emphasizes that protecting the homeland from violent crime involves more

than domestic crime fighting. Instead, the Executive Order reinforces the importance of

the Criminal Division’s ongoing work with our foreign law enforcement partners to fight

transnational crime at its source, before it reaches our borders. Through its successful

work over many years, ICITAP has proven that properly targeted security sector

assistance can ensure the safety of the American people here at home.

This strategic plan ensures that ICITAP will continue to build foreign law enforcement

capacity to fight TCOs and terrorist networks in two ways: (1) by providing foreign law

enforcement with the means to investigate and prosecute transnational crime before it

reaches our borders and (2) by developing effective foreign law enforcement partners

on whom we can rely to help address transnational criminal activity that does reach the

United States.

1. Exec. Order No. 13,773, 82 Fed. Reg. 29 (Feb. 14, 2017), www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2017-02-14/pdf/2017-03113.pdf.

IC I TAP S T R AT E G I C P L A N F I S C A L Y E A R S 2 0 1 8 – 2 0 2 2viii

I am very proud to lead the men and women of ICITAP, many of whom operate in

complex, challenging, and often dangerous environments around the globe. Because of

their unwavering efforts in the last 33 years, ICITAP has become the U.S. government’s

leader and premier institution for the design and delivery of law enforcement capacity

building around the world. The United States is safer because of ICITAP, and I am

honored to support its mission.

Respectfully,

Brian A. Benczkowski

Assistant Attorney General, Criminal Division

ix

Message from the Office of the Director It is a unique privilege to lead the hundreds of dedicated women and men who work

tirelessly around the world to further ICITAP’s mission to strengthen our national security

by advancing U.S. law enforcement operations abroad.

As Assistant Attorney General Benczkowski references in his foreword, in the last

33 years the impact of ICITAP’s mission has grown profoundly and has become an

invaluable component of the U.S. Department of Justice’s (DOJ) law enforcement strategy

to combat complex crime, including TCOs and terrorism around the globe.

DOJ has long recognized that the peace and security of the United States is strengthened

by the development of professional foreign law enforcement partners that practice the

most modern law enforcement techniques and respect and uphold the rule of law. This

principle is prominently reflected in DOJ’s strategic plan, which identifies international

law enforcement capacity building as an essential strategy necessary to achieve DOJ’s top

strategic goals of combating complex crime and terrorism.

ICITAP approaches its partnerships within DOJ, the U.S. interagency, and the

international community with energetic collaboration and a dedication to common goals.

Within DOJ, ICITAP coordinates closely with DOJ law enforcement as well as with key

prosecutorial sections to ensure that its design and delivery of law enforcement assistance

directly supports their strategic objectives.

ICITAP’s strategic plan focuses on the core mission of developing foreign law enforcement

that respects human rights and human dignity; that possesses the basic capacity to

support a fair and effective criminal justice system; and that is organized, trained, and

equipped to combat transnational organized crime, terrorism, and corruption. ICITAP

also seeks to improve collaboration and information sharing between U.S. and host

country law enforcement on crime and security issues of mutual concern, as well as to

ensure that the U.S. foreign assistance planning and budgeting process reflects DOJ’s law

enforcement priorities.

IC I TAP S T R AT E G I C P L A N F I S C A L Y E A R S 2 0 1 8 – 2 0 2 2x

As the singular, dedicated international law enforcement capacity-building agency,

ICITAP plays a key role in support of U.S. foreign policy and national security strategies.

In support of U.S. foreign policy, ICITAP’s role is to advance peace and security and

good governance abroad. ICITAP is funded by and works collaboratively with the U.S.

Department of State (DOS), the U.S. Department of Defense (DoD), and the U.S. Agency

for International Development (USAID). ICITAP takes particular pride in our partnership

with the Bureau of International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs (INL) and the

Bureau of Counterterrorism (CT).

This strategic plan informs and guides ICITAP’s commitment to working as an effective

vehicle—both within DOJ and throughout the interagency for the design, delivery, and

coordination of law enforcement development missions around the world that advance

U.S. national security and foreign policy objectives and protect the homeland.

Sincerely,

Gregory E. Ducot

Acting Director

1

Mission, Vision, and Goals

ICITAP’s mission is to strengthen national

security by advancing U.S. law enforcement

operations abroad.

The International Criminal Investigative Training Assistance Program (ICITAP) carries

out its mission by working with foreign governments to develop effective, professional,

and transparent law enforcement capacity that protects human rights, combats

corruption, and reduces the threat of transnational crime and terrorism in support of U.S.

law enforcement and national security objectives. Within the U.S. government, ICITAP

has become the recognized leader and expert in international law enforcement capacity

building and security sector assistance.

ICITAP’s vision is to have our engagement with foreign law enforcement be recognized

and resourced as a necessary tool within DOJ’s strategic arsenal—a capability that is

essential to strengthening national security, advancing U.S. law enforcement operations

abroad, and protecting the homeland.

ICITAP works with foreign police, criminal and anticorruption investigative entities, and

border and maritime security forces, as well as forensic, cyber, and correctional agencies

to build capacity in a comprehensive array of law enforcement subject matter areas.

ICITAP’s engagement with foreign law enforcement is an essential tool within the U.S.

Department of Justice’s (DOJ) strategic arsenal—a capability that is prominently reflected

in DOJ’s 2018–2022 strategic plan, which “places a stronger emphasis on protecting

America’s national security by countering the threat of terrorism, (and) disrupting and

dismantling Transnational Criminal Organizations. . . .”2

As detailed in DOJ’s 2018–2022 strategic plan,

The Department is committed to vigorous enforcement efforts against violent

transnational criminal organizations and gangs . . ., using all of the tools at the

Department’s disposal, including extraditions and building the capacity of our

foreign partners to investigate and to prosecute those criminal networks before

they can reach our borders.3

2. Department of Justice Strategic Plan for 2018–2022, U.S. Department of Justice, last modified March 26, 2019, 1, www.justice.gov/doj/budget-and-performance/. 3. Department of Justice Strategic Plan, 17 (see note 2).

IC I TAP S T R AT E G I C P L A N F I S C A L Y E A R S 2 0 1 8 – 2 0 2 22

ICITAP’s goals, objectives, and strategies are directly aligned with DOJ’s strategic

priorities and are informed and guided by U.S. foreign policy and national security

strategies.

Strategic Goal 1. Provide key foreign countries and regions with the means to investigate

and interdict terrorism and transnational crime before these security threats reach U.S.

borders.

Strategic Goal 2. Create capacity for operational interoperability by providing U.S. law

enforcement with effective foreign partners with whom they can address terrorism and

complex crimes that impact the United States.

Strategic Goal 3. Protect the homeland by advancing global peace, security, and good

governance through the development of fair and effective foreign criminal justice systems

that serve and protect all citizens, adhere to the rule of law, and are recognized and

respected partners in the international community.

3

Mission Scope Since its creation in 1986, ICITAP has operated in more than 100 countries and has

become an internationally recognized leader in all types of law enforcement development

and training worldwide. ICITAP’s experience and expertise uniquely position the

organization to successfully manage the size and complexities of the U.S. government’s

three primary law enforcement capacity building mission sets:

1. Professionalizing the institutional capabilities of existing law enforcement institutions

in emerging democracies

2. Advancing key allies’ capacities to combat terrorism and TCOs

3. Establishing or reconstituting law enforcement institutions in the context of

post-conflict reconstruction or international peacekeeping operations. (ICITAP

engagements include Afghanistan, Bosnia and Herzegovina, East Timor, El Salvador,

Guatemala, Haiti, Iraq, Kosovo, North Macedonia, Panama, and Somalia.)

ICITAP’s history of unparalleled experience and expertise, especially in the most

challenging and dangerous environments, continues to be recognized within the

interagency as well as by independent congressionally mandated agencies. A lessons-

learned report issued by the Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction

(SIGAR) in September 2017 recommended to Congress that ICITAP be considered and

funded as the lead agency for all future U.S. police assistance activities.4 The SIGAR’s

recommendations were also highlighted in testimony before the House Oversight and

Government Reform Committee.5

4. Reconstructing the Afghan National Defense and Security Forces: Lessons from the U.S. Experience in Afghanistan (Arlington, VA: Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction, 2017), www.sigar.mil/pdf/lessonslearned/SIGAR-17-62-LL.pdf. 5. John F. Sopko, Actions Needed to Improve U.S. Security-Sector Assistance Efforts in Afghanistan, statement of Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction before the Subcommittee on National Security, Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, U.S. House of Representatives, November 1, 2017, www.sigar.mil/pdf/testimony/SIGAR-18-11-TY.pdf.

IC I TAP S T R AT E G I C P L A N F I S C A L Y E A R S 2 0 1 8 – 2 0 2 24

Bosnia & Herzegovina – Public Order Management Training

“In support of U.S. foreign policy, ICITAP’s

role is to advance peace and security and good

governance abroad.”

5

ICITAP in the U.S. Department of Justice ICITAP is situated organizationally within the Criminal Division. Since the mid-1980s,

ICITAP has become the U.S. government’s recognized leader in law enforcement

development and training. ICITAP’s engagement with foreign law enforcement is, now

more than ever, an essential tool within DOJ’s strategic arsenal—a capability that

strengthens national security and advances U.S. law enforcement operations abroad.

ICITAP leads DOJ’s efforts to build the capacity of foreign law enforcement partners to

combat corruption, TCOs, and terrorist networks.

DOJ’s efforts to protect the United States necessitate the development of effective and

invested international law enforcement partnerships. Through ICITAP, DOJ seeks to

create opportunities for interoperability and information exchange with our foreign

counterparts, which serves to strengthen the U.S. security posture abroad and contributes

to regional stability and the furtherance of the rule of law. As DOJ’s lead for these

international engagements, ICITAP ensures that DOJ’s law enforcement priorities are

represented in the foreign assistance planning process.

When DOJ leads international law enforcement assistance efforts—through ICITAP or

another DOJ entity—U.S. national security is strengthened. DOJ possesses the knowledge

of U.S. law enforcement priorities and policies critical to achieving national security

objectives. DOJ has the awareness of and responsibility for the sensitive bilateral and

multilateral law enforcement relationships that are vital to our security. As DOJ’s lead for

foreign law enforcement development, ICITAP benefits from a vast array of professional

law enforcement networks through which it is able to identify and employ the most

highly skilled and highly experienced federal, state, and local experts to design, manage,

and deliver strategic rule of law assistance programs worldwide.

Whenever possible, ICITAP and its sister agency—the Office of Overseas Prosecutorial

Development, Assistance, and Training (OPDAT)—integrate their programs and work

with other federal law enforcement agencies to develop all three pillars of the criminal

justice system: (1) police, (2) courts, and (3) corrections. ICITAP and the OPDAT serve as

vehicles through which DOJ brings to bear its entire expertise in the development

IC I TAP S T R AT E G I C P L A N F I S C A L Y E A R S 2 0 1 8 – 2 0 2 26

of foreign law enforcement capacity. ICITAP draws upon and works closely with DOJ’s

law enforcement components—including the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI); the

Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF); the Drug Enforcement

Administration (DEA), the U.S. Marshals Service (USMS); the Office of Community

Oriented Policing Services (COPS Office); and the Federal Bureau of Prisons (BOP). In

addition, ICITAP draws upon experts from other divisions within DOJ including the

National Security Division, the Civil Rights Division, and the Environment and Natural

Resources Division.

7

ICITAP in the U.S. Interagency While ICITAP is situated within DOJ, its development and training operations are funded

by DOS, DoD, and USAID. This construct is due in part to ICITAP’s distinctive mission,

which not only furthers DOJ’s key law enforcement goals but is also uniquely positioned

to assimilate and advance both the national security and foreign policy objectives of the

United States.

ICITAP works within the U.S. interagency planning process to develop effective,

professional, and transparent foreign law enforcement institutions that counter instability,

transnational crime, terrorism, and violence that threaten U.S. interests. ICITAP not

only is a key partner in interagency stateside planning but also deploys federal law

enforcement attachés to key U.S. embassies abroad. ICITAP attachés are typically

members of U.S. embassy country teams and law enforcement working groups as

they bring in-depth operational expertise combined with decades of law enforcement

development experience.

As ICITAP develops and implements its programs, it coordinates closely with regional

and functional bureaus within DOS as well as with DoD agencies and combatant

commands to ensure consistency with U.S. security and diplomatic objectives. In addition,

ICITAP focuses attention on the “seams” where the interagency’s geographic areas of

responsibility do not align, helping ensure that ICITAP’s partners have visibility and

continuity throughout the world.

ICITAP approaches its partnerships within the U.S. government and the international

community with energetic collaboration and dedication to common goals. ICITAP

actively works with its interagency funders and partners to plan and implement projects

that advance U.S. government policy and strategic objectives around the world. ICITAP

recognizes that the organization’s success depends in large measure on its ability to

develop, engage, and integrate a vast network of partners.

IC I TAP S T R AT E G I C P L A N F I S C A L Y E A R S 2 0 1 8 – 2 0 2 28

Nigeria – Bike Patrol Training

“ICITAP is committed to achieving unity of

effort and purpose both within DOJ and

with DOS, DoD, USAID, and other U.S.

stakeholders in all aspects of overseas law

enforcement reform and capacity building.”

9

Core Values ICITAP’s core values are consistent with the core values of DOJ, and they guide our work,

our individual conduct, and our aspirations as an organization.

• Respect for the worth and dignity of each human being informs our individual conduct

and our organizational ethos and permeates all aspects of our program design and

delivery. With compassion and respect for the differences in people and ideas, we work

to instill this value in the professionalization of law enforcement institutions abroad.

• Equal justice under the law reinforces all of ICITAP’s work in developing fair and

effective criminal justice systems overseas.

• Honesty and integrity ensures that we adhere to the highest standards of ethical

behavior and reminds us that our motives and actions must be beyond reproach.

• Commitment to excellence means being effective and responsible stewards of the

taxpayers’ dollars while providing the highest levels of service to our funders, U.S.

embassies, and foreign counterpart agencies.

• Leadership encourages us to seize opportunities to advance DOJ’s national security

and law enforcement mission—to be strategic, innovative, and collaborative partners

both inside and outside DOJ.

• Partnership means teaming with others who possess valuable skills, knowledge, and

authority to multiply the impact of U.S. assistance.

• Collegiality is the cultivation of a mutually respectful and productive work

community by acting professionally and being courteous.

• Learning challenges us to expand knowledge and practice within our professional

field, actively seek out alternative solutions to challenges, explore and discuss

independent views, and nurture creativity in all aspects of our work.

IC I TAP S T R AT E G I C P L A N F I S C A L Y E A R S 2 0 1 8 – 2 0 2 210

Mali – Automated Human Resources System

“ICITAP approaches its partnerships within

the U.S. government and the international

community with energetic collaboration and

dedication to common goals.”

11

Cross-Cutting Principles The following principles underpin all of ICITAP’s work. These principles keep the

organization aligned with the priority goals in DOJ’s Strategic Plan (FY 2018–2022),6

the U.S. Nation’s Security Strategy (issued December 2017),7 DOS and USAID’s Joint

Strategic Plan (FY 2018–2022),8 and the National Defense Strategy (2018)9 as well as

the National Strategy for Counterterrorism (2018).10

Unity of effort and purpose

Building the capacity of overseas law enforcement partners to combat transnational crime

and terrorism—and building relationships with those partners—advances the security

of both the United States and our partner countries. Protecting the United States from

the multiple threats stemming from international terrorism and transnational crime is a

matter of national security that concerns many U.S. departments and agencies. ICITAP

is committed to achieving unity of effort and purpose both within DOJ and with DOS,

DoD, USAID, and other U.S. stakeholders in all aspects of overseas law enforcement

reform and capacity building.

Fusion of law enforcement expertise

ICITAP possesses a comprehensive array of law enforcement expertise that equips the

organization to respond quickly and with precision to any type of mission. ICITAP

recruits and employs federal law enforcement attachés who bring in-depth operational

expertise and decades of law enforcement development experience. ICITAP also uses

carefully selected senior level state and local law enforcement advisors and trainers and

regularly enlists the professional assistance of numerous federal partners, including

experts from the ATF, BOP, DEA, FBI, U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS),

U.S. Department of the Treasury, and USMS. (Refer to appendix C for complete list of

ICITAP’s law enforcement partners).

6. Department of Justice Strategic Plan (see note 2). 7. National Security Strategy of the United States of America (Washington, DC: The White House, 2017), www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/NSS-Final-12-18-2017-0905.pdf. 8. U.S. Department of State, Joint Strategic Plan FY 2018–2022 (Washington, DC: U.S. Agency for International Development, 2018), www.usaid.gov/sites/default/files/documents/1870/JSP_ FY_2018_-_2022_FINAL.pdf. 9. Summary of the 2018 National Defense Strategy of the United States of America (Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Defense, n.d.), https://dod.defense.gov/Portals/1/Documents/pubs/2018- National-Defense-Strategy-Summary.pdf. 10. National Strategy for Counterterrorism of the United States of America (Washington, DC: The White House, 2018), www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/NSCT.pdf.

IC I TAP S T R AT E G I C P L A N F I S C A L Y E A R S 2 0 1 8 – 2 0 2 212

Comprehensive justice sector reform

ICITAP frequently joins forces with the OPDAT, whose mission is to facilitate legislative

and justice sector reform and improve the skills of foreign prosecutors, investigators,

and judges. ICITAP also collaborates with the USMS as well as with the BOP to develop

mechanisms for securing the judicial process. The goal of these strategic partnerships

is to employ a coordinated, holistic approach that enhances the integration of justice

sector institutions, prevents systemic gaps and programmatic silos, and improves

cooperation between citizens11 and government. ICITAP leads a collaborative, integrated

approach to rule-of-law assistance that helps host countries develop a culture of integrity,

professionalism, and accountability in such critical areas of the criminal justice system as

police, prosecutors, courts, corrections, and forensics.

Champion American values

ICITAP supports …

Attachment 6

I s

P a

b

a

A

K I P I S

1

a c s f o t

s g i t r m

2

t s d t s b

p

0 d

International Journal of Information Management 30 (2010) 343–349

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

International Journal of Information Management

j o u r n a l h o m e p a g e : w w w . e l s e v i e r . c o m / l o c a t e / i j i n f o m g t

nformation management in law enforcement: The case of police intelligence trategy implementation

eter Bell a, Geoff Dean a, Petter Gottschalk b,∗

School of Justice, Faculty of Law, Queensland University of Technology, GPO Box 2434, Brisbane, Qld 4001, Australia Norwegian School of Management, Nydalsveien 37, N-0442 Oslo, Norway

r t i c l e i n f o

rticle history:

a b s t r a c t

Strategy implementation is important because failure to carry out strategy can cause lost opportunities

eywords: ntelligence information olicing

and leave police officers reluctant to do strategic planning. Lack of implementation creates problems in maintaining priorities and reaching organizational goals. The strategy execution task is commonly the most complicated and time-consuming part of strategic, management. Yet, strategy implementation suffers from a general lack of academic attention. This research paper makes a contribution to police strategy implementation literature by developing a, research model to study the extent of intelligence

.

mplementation determinants trategic planning

strategy implementation

. Introduction

Strategy implementation suffers from a general lack of academic ttention. Despite the importance of the strategy execution pro- ess, much more attention is paid to strategy formulation than trategy implementation. As one of several reasons put forward or this discrepancy, Atkinson (2006) suggests that researchers ften underestimate the difficulties involved in studying such a opic.

In May 2007, the Norwegian Police Directorate concluded a trategy process with the document ‘National Strategy for Intelli- ence and Analysis’. According to the document, all police districts n Norway had to implement the strategy (POD, 2007). This is he implementation case to be studied in this research paper. Our esearch question might be formulated as follows: What are deter- inants of law enforcement strategy implementation?

. The concept of strategy implementation

There are inherent problems associated with the use of the erm strategy implementation. From a strict strategic planning per- pective, theorists would argue that there are some significant

ifferences between implementation as a strategy and implemen- ation as a plan. Any confusion over terminology used to describe trategy planning or strategy management is further compounded y the differing approaches devised to enhance understanding of

∗ Corresponding author. Tel.: +47 46410716. E-mail addresses: [email protected] (P. Bell), [email protected] (G. Dean),

[email protected] (P. Gottschalk).

268-4012/$ – see front matter © 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. oi:10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2010.01.002

© 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

competitive advantage. Four distinct schools of thought can be identified (McKiernan, 1997):

• Prescriptive (deliberate or planned approach). • Emergent (learning). • Competitive positioning. • Core competencies or resource/knowledge-based.

These approaches are often presented as contradictory and conceptually opposed. The prescriptive approach emphasises long-term planning designed to achieve a best fit between the organisations strategy and its environment. It is often regarded as a highly systematised and deterministic process (Andrews, 1987; Ansoff, 1965). This approach is in appropriate during periods of rapid or turbulent change, the setting of longer-term objectives is necessary in order to support all elements involved in the imple- mentation project.

The emergent or learning approach (Mintzberg, Quinn, & Ghoshal, 1995) is better suited to dynamic and hyper-competitive environment. Mintzberg et al. (1995) argues that strategy is a com- bination of deliberate plans and emergent adjustments over time.

The literature suggests that the most dominant paradigm of the 1980s was that of competitive positioning as proffered by Porter (1980). This approach centres on the premise that an organisation positions itself within its competitive environment with the aim of generating superior performance. This approach is also referred to

as ‘outside-in’ because of its focus on the environment.

The core competence approach, which emerged in the 1990s takes the opposite view of competitive positioning in that it sug- gests that competitive advantage arises from an organisations’ internally developed core competences or distinctive capabilities

3 forma

( o t r

o b t e a O P

a c i t l a i c t m

w t F p a t p

3

m a t f i p e S p t o f a (

m g a a t a t p ‘

a s i a f

44 P. Bell et al. / International Journal of In

Heene & Sanchez, 1997; Prahalad & Hamel, 1990). This ‘inside- ut’ approach assumes that competitive advantage depends upon he behaviour of the organisation, rather than its competitive envi- onment.

A more moderate view of these approaches suggest that an rganisation such as the Norwegian Police Service would be est suited to look upon these approaches as being complemen- ary. With organisations needing to develop both internal and xternal focus in order to develop knowledge-based competences nd implementation strategies to manage change (Greenley & ktemgil, 1996; Greenly & Foxall, 1997; Mintzberg et al., 1995; rahalad & Hamel, 1990).

Finally, the concept of implementation is viewed by Bronn nd Bronn (2003) as a function of the strategic planning pro- ess, one that requires broad-based stakeholder investment if it s to be successful in attaining its goals. Too often new func- ions are introduction to organisations from the top-down with ittle communication to all those affected. Bronn and Bronn (2003) rgues that part of the planning process would include stakeholder nvolvement, communicating to those that will be affected by the hange how they will be affected and discussing what can be done o manage the impact of that change in a collaborative environ-

ent. The theories and frameworks of strategic planning processes are

ell documented within the literature, but the practical evidence of heir application is in relatively short supply. A study by Glaister and alshaw (1999) examined the views of businesses towards strategic lanning and provides additional empirical evidence of the tools nd techniques used in this area and worthy of consideration by he Norwegian Police Service during the implementation of their ropose intelligence model.

. Strategy implementation issues

Strategy can simply be defined as principles, a broad-based for- ula, to be applied in order to achieve a purpose. These principles

re general guidelines guiding the daily work to reach organiza- ional goals. Strategy is both a plan for the future and pattern rom the past, it is the match an organization makes between its nternal resources and skills (sometimes collectively called com- etencies) and the opportunities and risks created by its external nvironment. Strategy is the long-term direction of an organization. trategy is the course of action for achieving an organization’s pur- ose. Strategy is the pattern of resource allocation decisions made hroughout the organization. Strategy is the direction and scope f an organization over the long-term, which achieves advantage or the organization through its configuration of resources within

changing environment and to fulfill stakeholders’ expectations Johnson & Scholes, 2002).

Strategic planning represents the extent to which decision- akers look into the future and use formal planning methodolo-

ies. Planning is something we do in advance of taking action. It is nticipatory decision-making. We make decisions before actions re required. According to Mintzberg (1994), planning is future hinking, it is about controlling the future, it is decision-making, nd it is a formalized procedure to produce an articulated result, in he form of an integrated system of decisions. The result of strategic lanning manifests itself in a strategic plan such as the document

National Strategy for Intelligence and Analysis’. The strategy execution task is commonly the most complicated

nd time-consuming part of strategic management. In contrast, trategy formulation is primarily an intellectual and creative act nvolving analysis and synthesis. Implementation is hands-on oper- tion and action-oriented human behavioral activity that calls or executive leadership and key managerial skills. In addition,

tion Management 30 (2010) 343–349

implementing a new strategy often requires a change in orga- nizational direction and frequently entails a focus on effecting strategic change. Therefore, strategic change often needs a sense of urgency and effective communication. More than half of the strategies devised by organizations are never actually implemented (Atkinson, 2006). As a consequence, discussions of whether man- agers ‘walk their talk’, ‘show word-deed alignment’ or ‘adhere to their plans’ have emerged. One approach in these discussions, is to study strategy implementation consistency, i.e. the alignment of an organization’s resource allocation decisions with their artic- ulated strategy over time (Brauer & Schmidt, 2006). Sometimes, phased implementation of police strategy is an alternative (Quinton & Olagundoye, 2004), where some police districts test out the strat- egy before it is rolled out in the whole nation.

Atkinson (2006) reports six silent killers of strategy imple- mentation: top-down senior management style, unclear strategic intentions and conflicting priorities, an ineffective management team, poor vertical communication, weak co-ordination across functions, businesses or borders, and inadequate down-the-line leadership skills development. In addition, another inhibitor to successful strategy implementation that has been receiving a con- siderable amount of attention is the impact of an organization’s existing management controls and particularly budgeting systems.

Strategic control systems ensure that the immense effort put into preparing lengthy and detailed strategic plans is in fact trans- lated into action. Strategic control systems provide the short-term targets that deliver long-term goals. Therefore, successful strategy implementation is substantially dependent on effective strategic, as well as management, control systems (Atkinson, 2006).

Along with these silent killers of strategy implementation, it is of fundamental importance that a correct Diagnosis of the issues surrounding the implementation of an intelligence strategy is undertaken. Such a diagnosis is critical to implementation success. Bolman and Deal (2003, pp. 44) contend that ‘. . . an astute diag- nosis of the organisation will ensure that potential impediments are addressed early in the life of the implementation strategy’.

Further to this, Bolman and Deal (2003) argue that successful implementation strategies will address all four frames of reference:

a. Structural frame; b. Human resource frame; c. Political frame; and the d. Symbolic frame.

Understanding the ‘structural frame’ of an organisation and its potential for structural reframing is an important aspect of the implementation of any new strategy in policing. The structural frame proposed by Bolman and Deal (2003) expands on the earlier work by Mintzberg (1990) as it relates to the structure of organi- sations. Restructuring is a challenging process that consumes time and resources with no guarantee of success. Organisations typi- cally embark on that path when they feel compelled to respond to a major problem or in this instance an opportunity. Various pressures can lead to that conclusion, for example, environment shifts; tech- nology changes; organisational growth; and /or leadership changes.

Hence, in relation to the Norwegian policing, the implementa- tion of the intelligence strategy can be regarded as an opportunity brought about by an environmental (industry) shift in recent years to an intelligence-led policing platform. The strategy is also repre- sentative of changes in leadership and technology.

In implementing the intelligence strategy, consideration will

need to be given to the impact on the existing policing structure by ensuring that all relevant changes are considered with regard to their impact and the capacity of the police service to provide lasting structural support for the initiative. The challenge of implement- ing the intelligence strategy from a structural framing perspective

forma

w e w d o r l

t ( a l t r r

m a e i t i i

s t t r p t a t i p

4

l t p a t b w i c e (

i a m

i (

P. Bell et al. / International Journal of In

ill be to ensure that the structure represents the organisation’s fforts to align internal processes with its external environment, hile simultaneously resolving and enduring set of organisational ilemmas; are the crime problems at the local level representative f the national priorities, the balancing competing priorities and esourcing and the integration of the intelligence strategy into the ocal policing context.

The ‘human resource frame’, as it suggests is concerned with he human needs associated with the implementation strategy Bolman & Deal, 2003). The human frame addresses such issues s the training and resourcing of staff assuming the role of intel- igence officers in support of the intelligence strategy. This would hen lead to questions surrounding the training and technological esourcing of personnel. The human resource frame highlights the elationship between people and the organisation.

The ‘political frame’ addresses the organisational decision- aking aspects in relation to the implementation strategy. Political

ssumptions, power and decision-making, coalitions and conflict manating from the implementation of change within the organ- sation are all elements of the political frame. The introduction of he intelligence strategy will undoubtedly have a negative and pos- tive impact on many in the organisation. The frame considers the mpact of these issues on the success of the implementation project.

Finally, the ‘symbolic frame’ endeavours to address the issues urrounding the values of those participating in the implementa- ion strategy. Intrinsic issues surrounding; ‘a noble cause’ or ‘for he betterment of the organisation and the community’ and are epresentative of a higher moral and ethical cause that lends sup- ort to implementation strategy. Further to this those involved in he implementation project are of the belief that the work they re doing has meaning and that it is symbolic of their worth to he organisation. It is therefore essential that those engaged in the mplementation project are equally supported and have a sense of urpose.

. Strategy implementation experience

The term implementation is given a variety of meanings in the iterature. Implementation is a procedure directed by management o install planned change in an organization. Implementation is the rocess of gaining targeted organizational members’ appropriate nd committed use of an innovation. Implementation is the extent o which an innovation becomes ingrained within organizational ehaviors. Some authors find implementation to be completed hen change is occurring, while others find it continues until

ntended benefits have been realized (Gottschalk, 1999). When a rime reduction strategy was implemented in the UK, the barri- rs that affected implementation were separated into three themes Harrington, Trikha, & France, 2006):

How the strategy was constructed and managed centrally: Ten- sions between high ambitions when selling the strategy and low ambitions for delivered results. The development and rollout of the strategy: Confusion locally over how the new strategy connected with existing programs. The impact of local circumstances: Competition between high priority strategies and tasks.

According to Bullock, Farrell, & Tilley (2002: 33), “. . .effective mplementation of crime reduction projects is essential if the aims

re going to be achieved. There is a long history of partial imple- entation failure in crime reduction projects”. When an earlier crime reduction strategy was implemented

n the UK, the following implementation lessons were learned Homel, Nutley, Webb, & Tilley, 2004):

tion Management 30 (2010) 343–349 345

• Invest to deliver: It requires continuous development work. It goes beyond the routine processes of basic planning and pri- ority setting. It requires a raft of preparatory work including assessments of capacity for implementation, options based on realistic risk assessments, and the development of viable and flex- ible management systems, including performance management loops.

• Organize centrally to deliver locally: To support efficient local implementation, the central agency must be an active part. This means that the center itself must be appropriately staffed with competent personnel capable of providing direct support to local initiatives.

• Separate research and evaluation from program delivery: The problem here is the different timetables for operational versus research and evaluation issues. Therefore, action to research and develop the evidence base should be undertaken as a separate but related parallel activity to the delivery of the main strategy.

• Build and maintain a knowledge management system: The man- agement and dissemination of knowledge about implementation failures and successes, and practices and policies should be in place to stimulate learning. Effective knowledge management is basic to the continuing development and evolution of strategy implementation.

• Create flexible fund management models: Often, strategy imple- mentation requires funding. The crime reduction strategy suffered from a variety of funding and budgeting problems. Many of these difficulties appear to have been the result of changes in the operations of central financial management in the Home Office.

When three different strategies for combating burglary were implemented in The Metropolitan Police, Gloucestershire Constab- ulary, and Hampshire and Isle of Wright Constabulary in the UK, the enablers that affected implementation were separated into three themes (Stockdale & Gresham, 1995):

• Publicity: A high profile named operation brings a number of advantages. It provides a unifying focus to a range of activities, and it makes police operations understandable to the public.

• Internal communication: An effective communication and consul- tation system is vital in ensuring the successful implementation of any strategy and in encouraging officers’ commitment and support.

• Training: Consideration should be given at the planning stage to training needs.

5. Police intelligence strategy

The aim of intelligence strategy is to continue to develop intelligence-led policing in all parts of a nation and in all regions of the world. An intelligence strategy provides a framework for a structured problem solving and partnership enhanced approach, based around a common model. For example, the National Intelli- gence Model (NIM) in the UK is a structured approach to improve intelligence-led policing both centrally and locally in policing dis- tricts such as the South Yorkshire Police.

As an example, the South Yorkshire Police intelligence strat- egy (SYPIS, 2007) is a combination of NIM and the South Yorkshire Policing Model (SYPM), as illustrated in Fig. 1.

Projects are created within the strategy. Action managers have

been appointed for these projects, and they report to the Intel- ligence Strategy Management Board on a quarterly basis. The Intelligence Strategy Management Board directs, sets targets and reviews progress of these actions completed ones may be dis- charged and new ones added.

346 P. Bell et al. / International Journal of Informa

F

f I m m m c

c t w m a i i

o h

ig. 1. Intelligence strategy management structure in South Yorkshire Police.

NIM is a model for policing that should ensure information is ully researched, developed and analyzed to provide intelligence. ntelligence enables senior managers to provide strategic direction,

ake tactical resource decisions about operational policing, and anage risk. The model works at three levels: (1) local/basic com- and unit, (2) force and/or regional, and (3) serious and organized

rime that is usually national or international. The organization of information within NIM starts with the

reation of a strategic assessment. The strategic assessment iden- ifies issues that are likely to affect service delivery. All partners ithin crime and disorder reduction partnerships in England com- it resources and coordinate activity to deal with those issues. An

ccurate and thorough assessment will allow managers to make

nformed decisions about service delivery, which will assist them n achieving performance targets (SYPIS, 2007).

However, before presenting our research model which is based n the NIM framework a closer examination of the nature of ow intelligence is manufactured in the first instance is nec-

Fig. 2. Model of in

tion Management 30 (2010) 343–349

essary to provide a more nuanced understanding of the how information is transformed into actionable knowledge for police intelligence implementation. Such an understanding highlights how the intelligence process is often more art and craft than science. The following Fig. 2 presents a diagrammatic represen- tation of the intelligence model used by the NIM as outlined by (Innes, Fielding, & Cope, 2005). It should be noted that the four key processes of Acquiring, Analysing, Assaying and Actioning informa- tion to turn it into intelligence knowledge is a generalist strategy that fits comfortable with other models of intelligence gathering (http://www.cops.usdoj.gov/pdf/e09042536 Chapter 05.pdf).

The intelligence model presented above is largely self- explanatory. However, a few comments about the three problem- atic issues noted on the diagram are in order as they speak to core research themes in so far as the implementation strategy of this model is concerned. Firstly, the problem of information overload is a constant issue for intelligence gathering. Users like street police input information without any real appreciation of what is valu- able or irrelevant information since such data can only take on such meaning once it is analysis and assayed by the crime analyst. More- over, what is irrelevant today may turn out to be highly relevant tomorrow. So the desire to ‘catch everything’ in a database leads to a ‘more is worse’ situation where so much information is captured that it become impossible to process it in any meaningful way in the short-term.

Secondly, the intelligence cycle operates as a black box. In that, the way intelligence is filtered down through layers of analysis and organised into various report formats becomes a ‘funnel’ as shown on the diagram. Conceptually, as Innes et al. (2005) have shown this

process of funneling involves various types of reasoning (notably, figurative and tracking) which in themselves are processes that “. . .draw upon a combination of tacit and codified knowledge about criminality and offending patterns that they (crime analysts) use to inform what information they convert into intelligence and the

telligence.

formation Management 30 (2010) 343–349 347

p I v (

i i c k

t n

e t ( e k c o k u p i o &

6

d w d p a

c a d e i

l

(

P. Bell et al. / International Journal of In

roducts that this is used to manufacture” (Innes et al., 2005:47). n the light of this conceptual funnelling which is embedded in the ery nature of intelligence work it is not surprising that Innes et al. 2005:39) adopt the position as stated:

It is argued that the sense of enhanced objectivity often attributed to the products of ‘intelligence work’ is frequently overstated. The products of crime analysis are better understood as an artifact of the data and methods used in their construction, rather than providing an accurate representation of any crime problems.

Thirdly, added to this understanding of the ‘fuzzy’ objectivity nherent in intelligence work, is perhaps the most vexing issue nvolved in intelligence work and certainly a most pressing con- ern of any implementation strategy is the paradoxical problem of nowledge sharing.

As Malhotra outlines the paradox of knowledge sharing lies in he dual roles of collaboration and competition required by orga- izations of their employees. Malhotra states:

Often, individuals may not willingly share information with their departmental peers, supervisors, or with other depart- ments, because they believe that what they know provides them with an inherent advantage in bargaining and negotiation. Despite availability of most sophisticated ‘knowledge sharing’ technologies, such human concerns may often result in shar- ing of partial, inaccurate, or ambiguous information. Even more critical than the absence of information is the propensity of shar- ing inaccurate or ambiguous information because of competing interests. . .(2006:10)

As the dictum goes ‘Knowledge is Power’. Nowhere is this more vident when someone is asked to ‘share’ knowledge. In a review of he application of ‘intelligent’ knowledge in British policing, Collier 2006:114) observes, “There remain many examples of tacit knowl- dge being held by police officer not being converted into explicit nowledge that is usable by NIM (National Intelligence Model) pro- esses.” Yang and Wu (2008) in a study of knowledge sharing in rganisations found similar reluctance to share knowledge because nowledge sharing involves a conflict of interest between individ- als and work groups. In that, specific knowledge is a source of ower and competitive advantage for people who own it an organ-

sation. Consequently, “people who share their knowledge with thers would lose their unique positions in organisations” (Yang Wu, 2008:1129).

. Research model

The Norwegian National Strategy for Intelligence and Analysis eveloped by the Norwegian Police Directorate in 2007 (POD, 2007) as very much stimulated by the development of NIM in the UK. It efines three levels for intelligence and analysis in Norway: local olice districts, cooperation between police districts, and national nd international intelligence and analysis.

Therefore, in our research model, the dependent variable in this onceptual framework is the extent of strategy implementation, s illustrated in Fig. 3. Implementation might be measured in four ifferent ways (Gottschalk, 1999): completion of tasks so far, tasks xpected to be completed, completion of the overall strategy, and

mproved organizational performance from the strategy.

Specifically, implementation might be measured using the fol- owing alternative definitions (Gottschalk, 1999):

1) Implementation rate to date: Divide projects actually com- pleted to date by projects scheduled to be implemented to date.

Fig. 3. Research model to study the extent of strategy implementation.

(2) Implementation rate to end: Divide projects actually imple- mented to date by projects in the strategy and divide by percent of expired time horizon.

(3) Implementation extent: The extent to which the strategy has been completed on time, within budget, as expected, with desired results, without deviations during implementation, with satisfaction of stakeholders.

(4) Contribution to organizational performance: Reduced crime, increased success rate, reduced resource consumption, and improved knowledge sharing.

As illustrated in the figure, three independent variables are introduced in the research model. First, the national agency such as the Norwegian Police Directorate has to be an active part in the implementation based on realistic ambitions and effective com- munications. The national agency has to secure required funding for strategy implementation (Homel et al., 2004). Next, the local district should have available resource and align strategies that compete for resources (Harrington et al., 2006). Finally, the strat- egy should enjoy publicity both internally and in society, since a high profile operation brings a number of advantages (Stockdale & Gresham, 1995).

Agency operability is one of the items in the policing envi- ronment, where the mobilization of electronic information across organizations has the potential of modernizing and transforming information exchanges. High-ranking issues among the defin- ing purposes of e-government are highly agile, citizen-centric, accountable, transparent, effective, and efficient government oper- ations and services (Scholl & Klischewski, 2007).

Based on the research model, three research hypotheses can be formulated:

H1. The …

Attachment 7

The Police Chief is the o!cial publication of the International Association of Chiefs of Police.

All contents © 2003–2021 International Association of Chiefs of Police. All Rights Reserved.

Copyright and Trademark Notice | Member and Non-Member Supplied Information | Links Policy

44 Canal Center Plaza, Suite 200, Alexandria, VA USA 22314 | 703.836.6767 or 1.800.THE IACP

Designed and Built by Matrix Group International, Inc.®

LOG OUTLOG OUT ! " #

SELECT LANGUAGE ​ ▼

Police Chief Magazine | Topics | Research & Evidence-Based Policing | Is Your Agency an Integrated Strategic Management System?

Is Your Agency an Integrated Strategic Management System? Gregory A. Warren, EdD, Captain (Retired), Delaware State Police

Many law enforcement agencies from throughout the United States have long realized some degree of divergence and ine!ciency between an agency’s many administrative and operational functions. The results of this incongruence in philosophies and priorities and lack of cooperation between organizational entities —from individuals, to teams, to entire divisions—can result in a wide variety of negative in"uences on the agency. This large-scale, agency-wide dysfunctionality can result in internal competition; political maneuvering; a lack of interdepartmental cooperation; a lack of both short-term and long-range planning; a failure to execute plans and orders; the enactment of inept policies and procedures; and many other e#ects, which detract from the agency’s daily administrative functions and law enforcement operations. So as law enforcement realizes even greater internal and external competition for limited resources, particularly during these challenging economic times, all stakeholders and citizens alike will most certainly continue to expect the same levels and quality of service to which they have become accustomed. No one will accept limited $nancial resources or the further growth of the typical police bureaucracy as an excuse for less than premier law enforcement services, particularly in those jurisdictions where crime and tra!c conditions continue to worsen.

Read More

1

CURRENT ISSUE

READ ISSUEREAD ISSUE

Contact Us IACP IACP Conference Discover Policing Copyright Privacy Policy

$ % &

MAGAZINE TOPICS COLUMNS TRANSLATIONS SUBMISSIONS ADVERTISINGsearch '

Attachment 8

!

DC COURTS' LATEST CORONAVIRUS UPDATES Steps The DC Courts Have Taken to Keep You Safe Click here for information on the current status of court operations due to covid. Haga click para Español.

"#

District of Columbia Courts A A

HOME $ ABOUT $ EXECUTIVE OFFICE $ STRATEGIC MANAGEMENT DIVISION SHARE

STRATEGIC MANAGEMENT DIVISION

All individuals and organizations seeking DC Courts data or the support of DC Courts in research should complete a Data Request Form. Individuals and organizations who are not associated with the DC or Federal Government should complete the DC Courts Data and Research Request Form A (Public). Individuals and organizations who are associated with the DC or Federal Government should complete the DC Courts Data and Research Request Form B (Non-Public). This form should be completed electronically and submitted to the Strategic Management Division at: [email protected] If you have questions on completing the form, please consult the Instructions and Frequently Asked Questions.

The Strategic Management Division works to build the Courts' capacity to develop, execute, and evaluate strategy and performance to better serve the public. We provide innovative strategies and evidence-based information to develop policies, enhance the administration of justice, and improve the quality of services at the DC Courts. The division performs strategic planning, analysis, research, and performance measurement functions to enhance strategic management of the DC Courts. Our services enable judges and court administrators to make decisions based on evidence and best practices, and facilitate the Courts’ performance monitoring and accountability to the public as the District’s Judicial Branch.

The Strategic Management Division team is responsible for:

Strategic Planning and Development: leading court planning and development initiatives to set organizational goals, foster innovation and change management, and promote effective strategy execution. The Division works collaboratively with other divisions in ongoing efforts to develop strategic and performance solutions to enhance the delivery of justice. Staff works continuously with the Strategic Planning Leadership Council (SPLC) resulting in a Strategic Plan for the Courts every five years and to monitor implementation.

Research and Evaluation: designing and executing research studies, program evaluations, and data, policy, and business process analyses to evaluate court programs, services and operations. Research results are used to inform program enhancements, request funding for new services, and reengineer business operations to increase efficiency. The Division promotes collaborative partnerships and data exchanges with external research organizations and academic institutions to support evaluation initiatives that will enhance the state of knowledge about the justice system.

Organizational Performance: working with court leadership to identify organizational performance measures that align with the Strategic Plan and focus on outcomes important to the public. Division staff work closely with the Chief Judge's Performance Standards Committee to foster continuous performance improvement within Superior Court, and with divisions to develop cost-effective data collection and reporting procedures that adhere to quality standards. The Division co-leads the Courts' business intelligence program with the Information Technology Division. The Courts' ability to monitor its performance as a public institution is essential to maintaining the independence of the Judicial Branch, as well as the trust and confidence of the community.

Contact

Strategic Management Division

Gallery Place 616 H St, NW Washington, DC 20001

GET DIRECTIONS

Hours of Operation

Mondays-Fridays:

%% 8:30 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.

Telephone Numbers

Lisa VanDeVeer, Director:

&& (202) 879-2886

Representing Yourself Forms Search Cases Online E-File FAQs Legal Glossary Arranging For Child Care

Public

Forms Help Online Active Warrant List Search Files (eAccess) E-Juror Appeals E-Filing & Search Cases Online Superior Court E-Filing

Online Services

About Jury Duty Where To Report During Jury Service Grand Jury Service Petit Jury Service Payment For Your Service

Jurors

Judges-In-Chambers Getting Here Public Code Of Conduct Code of Judicial Conduct Job Opportunities Court Performance IT Strategic Plan Procurement & Contracts Court Of Appeals Superior Court

About

In The News Press Releases & Advisories Archive

Media

"Open to All, Trusted by All, Justice for All"

District of Columbia Courts | (202) 879-1010

© 2017 District of Columbia Courts

Privacy Policy | Disclaimer | Sitemap

' ( ) * +

Search DC Courts..  English ,

HOME SERVICES COURT OF APPEALS SUPERIOR COURT JURORS ABOUT VISIT US

Attachment 9

LEE BROWN

The Strategic Management ot the Police

Despite some significant differences, the most important principles of strategic management apply to the public sector as well as to the private. Managers in both sectors strive to create value for shareholders and customers, taxpayers and service users; build and

exploit the distinc- tive competencies of their organizations; and transform their organizations in the face of new chal- lenges, problems, and opportunities.

In addition, to be successful, an or- ganizational strate-

'n-aditional

"crime fighting"

neitiier reduces

crime nor

reassures citizens.

gy in the pubUc sec- tor must meet three

criteria. First, it must define a goal or purpose that, if achieved, would be worth the cost to the public. Sec- ond, it must capture and sustain the support of the elected representatives who oversee the organization's operations. Third, it must be doable. If any of these cri- teria are not met, the strategy will fail.

It is the application of these basic principles that has catapulted Lee Brown to a position of national leader- ship in policing. More than any other police executive, he has seen the limitations of the past strategy of polic- ing and envisioned and pursued a new one. To see the quality and scope of his vision, it is useful to compare the old strategy with the new.

Professional Crime Fighting In the past, police forces have been guided by a strate-

gy that could be characterized as "professional crime fighting." The central goal was to reduce crime, and some offenses were singled out for special attention: homicide, rape, robbery, and aggravated assault.

To accomplish their central goal, the police relied on three, key operational tactics: patrolling the streets, responding rapidly to calls for service, and conducting retrospective investigations to identify and apprehend criminal offenders. Over time, police departments organized and invested in their capabilities to optimize their performance in these areas.

This strategy found support among the citizens and their representatives since it seemed to promise relief from criminal victimization. The police were focused on a problem that concemed the community, and it seemed plausible tbat their tactics would deal with that problem effectively.

But the tactics had one additional advantage: they seemed to economize on the use of public authority and to protect citizen privacy. Because the tactics are reactive, they ensure that the police intrude only on those occasions where crimes have been committed and where citizens have invited them to intervene.

Taken together, these elements constitute a remark- ably coherent and successful organizational strategy - one that has endured for more than a generation throughout the country. But it is exactly this strategy that Lee Brown is now challenging, based on some increasingly apparent weaknesses of the old and some promises of the new.

The Limits of Professional Crime Fighting Three cracks have emerged in the surface appeal of

"professional crime fighting," The first is the simple fact that the strategy seems to be failing on its own terms: it neither reduces crime nor reassuires citizens that they won't become victims.

It is possible, of course, to lay this failure at the door of prosecutors who fail to convict and judges who fail to sentence. Or to claim that social forces have driven up crime rates. But the far more damaging news is that sys- tematic research and experimentation have shown that the tactics on which the police rely simply do not do the job. Increasing the level of random patrol by a factor of two has no effect on criminal activity or on commu- nity confidence: most citizens cannot even tell when the number of patrolling vehicles has been doubled. Nor does increasing the speed of response result in in- creased arrests; the time between tbe incidence of the crime and the call to the police is too long. And retro- spective investigation turns out to be a discouragingly weak tool in dealing with crimes committed among strangers. Less than 20% of robberies and less than 10% of burglaries are cleared by arrests. Usually, retrospec- tive investigations only work well wben victims or wit- nesses can tell detectives who committed the crimes.

122 HARVARD BUSINESS REVIEW May-June 1991

The second important crack has been the discovery that citizens' fears are an important problem in their own right and that they are triggered more often by instances of disorder and incivility than by serious crime. The police have assumed that fear was a lesser problem than actual criminal victimization and that fear could be reduced only by putting serious crimi- nals behind bars.

In fact, fear itself is just as costly as criminal victim- ization. It impoverishes the quality of life in urban areas, and it undermines the economic and social activ- ities that hold neighborhoods together. Moreover, fear is more commonly triggered by noisy teenagers, minor vandalism, dark streets, and littered hallways than by serious crimes. Police tactics such as foot patrol can reduce fear even if these tactics do not reduce serious criminal victimization. Traditional police tactics, in contrast, tend to miss an important part of the problem for which the police are responsible - the promotion of community security.

The third important crack is less widely noted but potentially far more significant: public policing is los- ing market share to various forms of private security. There are now more uniformed private security guards in the United States than public police officers. Public police officers are increasingly selling their off-duty time to private interests. And many citizens who can- not afford to buy private guards have bought guns, dogs, and locks to supplement police protection.

This trend toward private over public security reveals the failure of the police to answer citizens' growing demands for security. Even worse, it creates the prospect of an uneven distribution of protection. The public police could become an institution that only poor people value.

The Promise of Community Policing These limits of professional crime fighting indicate

the need for a change in strategy. They also point in a particular direction: toward a close engagement between the police and the citizens. That goal is the principal aim of the strategy of community policing.

Community policing aims not simply to reduce crime and criminal victimization, though that remains the core objective. Added to that are the goals of pre-

Fearisjust

as costly to the

quality ot lite

as crlminai

victimization.

venting crime by discovering and acting on the imme- diate conditions that seem to precipitate crime, reduc- ing fear and promoting a sense of security by increasing the felt presence of police in local areas, and dealing more effectively with the variety of social emergencies that stimulate calls to the police, thus strengthening the relationship to the community. Beyond the politi- cal appeal of crime control, community policing makes the police more responsive to the concerns of citizens. The police will also offer to help with community problems.

The operational methods of policing change from the reactive methods of patrol, rapid re- sponse, and criminal investigation to pro- active m e t h o d s of problem solving. In- stead of treating each call as a separate inci- dent, the police will look for the problems that underlie recur- rent calls. They will also look for situa- tions that can be mediated or where other public agen- cies can help.

There are lots of reasons to believe that the new strat- egy of community policing will be successful in enhancing security and reducing crime. But there are also many uncertainties. Indeed, as one police chief said when he committed his organization to communi- ty policing, "I felt like I was jumping off a cliff." In this respect too, managing in the public sector is not much different from managing in the private sector.

- Mark H. Moore

Mark H. Moore is the Guggenheim Professor of Crimi- nal Justice Policy and Management at Harvard's Kennedy School of Government. For the last five years, he has led the school's "Executive Session on PoUcing," which brings together the nation's leading poUce exec- utives, mayors, and police labor officials to discuss improved policing strategies. Along with Malcolm K. Sparrow and David M. Kennedy, he is the author of Beyond 911: A New Era for Pohcing (Basic Books, 1990).

HARVARD BUSINESS REVIEW May-June 1991 123

Copyright 1991 Harvard Business Publishing. All Rights Reserved. Additional restrictions may apply including the use of this content as assigned course material. Please consult your institution's librarian about any restrictions that might apply under the license with your institution. For more information and teaching resources from Harvard Business Publishing including Harvard Business School Cases, eLearning products, and business simulations please visit hbsp.harvard.edu.

Attachment 10

What is a Hero?: The American

Heroes Press Short Story Anthology

Hi Tech Criminal Justice More Info

Leadership: Texas Hold 'Em Style

Andrew J. Harvey More Info

$0.99

A Concise History of...

Shop now

Management of Organizational Behavior (9th

Edition) Paul H Hersey More Info

The Talent Management Handbook: Creating

Organizational Excellence by Identifying,

Developing, and Promoting Your

Best People Lance A. Berger More Info

Organizational Crisis

Management: The Human Factor

Gerald Lewis More Info

Organizational Behavior and

Public Management

(Public Administration and

Public Policy) CRC More Info

Building Organizational

Fitness: Management

Methodology for Transformation and Strategic

Advantage (Corporate Leadership)

Ryuji Fukuda More Info

Organizational Project

Management Maturity Model,

(Opm3®) Knowledge Foundation: Knowledge Foundation

Project Management Institute More Info

Performance Management:

Changing Behavior that Drives

Organizational Effectiveness

Aubrey C. Daniels More Info

Change Management 100 Success Secrets -

The Complete Guide to Process, Tools, Software and Training in Organizational

Change Management

Gerard Blokdijk More Info

Cases in Management and

Organizational Behavior, Vol. 2 Teri C. Tompkins More

Info

Making Change Stick: Twelve Principles for Transforming Organizations

Richard C. Reale More Info

Making Sense of Change

Management: A Complete Guide to the Models, Tools & Techniques of Organizational

Change Esther Cameron More Info

Quality Management for Organizational

Excellence: Introduction to

Total Quality (6th Edition)

David L. Goetsch More Info

Criminal Justice Online Building an Organizational Foundation for the Future

Home | Student Resources | Police Consulting | Police Leadership | Military Leadership | Criminal Justice Resource Directory | Contact Us | Site Map

31

by Andrew J. Harvey, Ed.D.

The modern world has become a place of constant change and

transformation. In this environment, success depends on how well

organizations recognize and adapt to change. Management theorist Tom

Peters put it very well when he said that the most successful organizations

in the future will be the ones that "thrive on chaos."(1) Those that cannot

identify and act on emerging issues are doomed to, at least, inefficiency

and ineffectiveness and, at most, disaster and possibly even destruction.

What does this trend mean to law enforcement? With its traditional,

paramilitary structure, law enforcement has proven slow to adapt to

change. While traditional methods have brought success in the past,

relying on these techniques in the future may be dangerous.

To achieve success in the next century, law enforcement agencies must

recognize and welcome emerging trends. Part of this means changing the

way they operate, from their organizational structures to their

management of human resources.

This article discusses the strategies that law enforcement agencies need to

implement in order to build an organizational foundation for the future.

ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE AND OPERATION

In order to deal with the rapidly changing environment in the 21st century,

law enforcement's paramilitary hierarchy, with rigid controls and strict

chains of command, must give way to a structure that emphasizes

network-type communication and flexibility. The traditional organizational

pyramid, with the chief at the top and line officers at the bottom, must

become inverted. Instead, the community must sit at the top of the

pyramid, followed by line police officers, then supervisors, and finally the

chief.

Late 20th-century belt tightening has put the squeeze on middle

management, and in the 21st century, those middle managers who remain

may disappear from the picture entirely. Better-educated employees who

require less supervision and technological advancements that make

information management easier will allow supervisors to increase their

spans of control and supervise more employees at one time.

Organizational efficiency will become critical, as the privatization of law

enforcement services increases. Currently, private security firms employ

2½ times more people than law enforcement agencies; this number will

increase substantially by the year 2000.(2) As a result, the police will find

themselves increasingly in competition with private firms for law

enforcement services. Without proper preparation, agencies will have

difficulty dealing with this newly found competition.

In addition, police departments will acquire new specialized functions in

response to both emerging issues and those that continue to require law

enforcement attention. These new roles will affect the organizational

structure of the department.

For example, the plight of the homeless likely will continue to be a

pressing issue in the coming decade.(3) Departments will need to create

units that deal specifically with the homeless. Additionally, as the

population ages, police departments increasingly will be called upon to

respond to the unique needs of the elderly. As a result, departments will

require specialists in gerontology. Departments in the future also are likely

to change their organizational structures to incorporate more formal

partnerships with schools, community groups, and the media.

The most effective leaders In these new organizational structures will be

situational leaders. They will be flexible in their approaches, adapting

their leadership styles to the situation at hand and the individuals

involved. They will rise to the challenge presented by well-educated

employees who do not submit to authority as workers have in the past.

These leaders will be consensus builders and agents of change. They will

empower their employees and accept the attendant risks. They will be the

bearers of ethical standards and will devote themselves to training and

developing their staffs. Finally, these leaders will look to the future,

anticipating trends while they perform day-to-day tasks.

HUMAN RESOURCE CONSIDERATIONS

Determining Future Staffing Levels

Business experts advise companies to work smarter, not harder. In the

coming years, many organizations will see this concept come to fruition,

as technological advances allow them to achieve the same or better

results with fewer employees devoted to the task.

Technological advances will help law enforcement officers fight crime.

Smart cars will allow officers to complete such tasks as checking criminal

databases, storing and retrieving offender profiles, writing reports, and

communicating with other officers, all from their police cars. Smart

houses will help prevent break-ins by recognizing and admitting only

authorized occupants. A single smart card will replace the numerous cards

people carry now for identification, banking, and credit purposes.

Biological advances, such as the "sober up" pill, will decrease crimes

fueled by alcohol, which, according to futurist Gene Stephens, is linked in

some way to 50 percent of all street crime.(4)

Perhaps the most significant changes for law enforcement will result from

the move toward a cashless society. In such an environment, criminals

could no longer rob citizens and banks of their cash. Cash-only criminal

enterprises would disappear. At the same time, many lawbreakers will

adapt and employ increasingly sophisticated strategies to ply their trades.

While technological breakthroughs will decrease the number of officers

needed, other factors will cause exactly the opposite effect. First,

changes in demographics have altered the nature of the nation's once-

predominantly homogeneous communities. U.S. Census Bureau statistics

indicate that between 1980 and 1990, the United States experienced a

13.2 percent increase in the number of African American residents, a 53

percent increase in Hispanics, and a 108 percent increase in Asians.(5)

Unfortunately, a rise in crime has accompanied this diversification, as

cultures and values have clashed.(6) In addition, a predicted 14 percent

increase in the 15 to 24-year-old population between 1995 and 2005 will

raise crime rates, as the individuals in this age group are most likely to

commit or fall victim to crimes.(7)

In essence, the demographic trends that will increase crime may cancel

out the technological advances that will reduce it. As a result, in order to

provide adequate service to the community in the next century, law

enforcement probably will need to maintain current staffing levels.

Attracting and Selecting Personnel

In the 21st century, employee recruitment will remain the cornerstone of

organizational success, just as it is today. In order to attract the best

candidates, law enforcement agencies will need to continue to offer

competitive salaries and benefits; however, these financial rewards will

become less important. Employees will be less motivated by financial

incentives and will look more for an organization with concern for

employees. Future job candidates will seek out employers who offer such

perks as flexible working hours, housing assistance, alternate work

schedules, employer sponsored child care, and telecommuting options.

Police departments also will recruit a different type of employee. In the

past, agencies have sought aggressive, "hook and book"-type officers. This

one-dimensional approach to law enforcement will not suit the community

and service oriented agency of the future. Thus, recruiters will seek

candidates who understand the total concept of how they fit into the

organization and the community.

Although some of today's testing methods still may have some relevance,

personnel officers will need to study and employ testing procedures that

identify the type of individual best suited to deal with the broad array of

community issues that will exist. For example, departments might

consider including community members on their employee selection

committees.

More than likely, tomorrow's officers will have college degrees, not only in

criminal justice but also in the social sciences. As a result, these officers

will have a better understanding of how to serve their communities.

In addition, police departments will need to recruit employees who can

help them understand and use the police technology resources available in

the years ahead. Finally, police agencies will hire according to the needs

of the community, and their employees will reflect the diversity of the

citizens they serve.

Making a Good First Impression

As they concentrate on selecting new employees, agency recruiters often

forget that the reverse is true: new employees select the organizations

where they work. The orientation process represents the first step in

helping employees see that they have made the right choice.

Chances are, even the most senior employees remember their first days on

the job. Truly, first impressions can last a career. As a result, employees

must be exposed to organizational values right from the start, and

agencies must treat orientation programs that instill these values as a

priority, not an afterthought.

Placing New Employees

By the year 2000, employee placement may be quite different. In the

future, law enforcement agencies will place greater emphasis on

determining the individual skill levels and potential their police officers

possess. Employee placement will become more of a science, with

agencies matching officers to positions that take advantage of their unique

abilities.

Training Employees

In a knowledge-based society, lifelong learning is a necessity,(8) and in the

future, continuing education and training will become mandatory. In order

to cultivate employees who can adapt to the ever-changing environment

of the future, agencies will need to make a commitment to staff training

and development.

Such training will take many forms. Although specialized expertise will

remain important, cross-training will receive added emphasis.(9) Cross-

training will help agencies deal with decreasing budgets and the call to do

more with less. Employees trained in this way will benefit not only by

becoming more versatile but also by broadening their overall perspective

of the organization.

Furthermore, in order to benefit from new technology, agencies will need

to implement training programs that teach employees how to use their

new tools. In fact, managers must involve employees in the process from

the very beginning, perhaps even before choosing the new procedure or

equipment. As futurist John Naisbett has pointed out, high-tech

approaches must be tempered with equal amounts of "high touch."(10)

Employees control the destiny of new technology; unless they feel

comfortable with it, they will abandon it.

Measuring Performance

Traditionally, evaluations have measured officers' performance in

quantitative terms-the number of tickets written and arrests and field

contacts made. In today's era of community policing, police departments

find that they have a difficult time evaluating their officers. This will

remain true in the future, as agencies ask even more of their staff

members. Officers will become problem solvers and caretakers of the

communities where they patrol. As such, their performances will be

difficult to measure.

Management theorist Tom Peters says that what gets measured gets done.

(11) If this theory is correct, then police departments will need to develop

effective measurement systems that quantify patrol officers' achievements

in tangible ways. Allowing community residents to evaluate officers with

whom they have had contact may represent a viable evaluation method.

In addition, the annual evaluations that most employees now receive must

give way to a process that generates continual feedback. Although once a

year may suffice for a formal performance appraisal report, too often,

employees hear nothing all year long, then get surprised by their

supervisors' assessments of the quality of their work. If something in an

employee's yearly evaluation comes as a surprise, then perhaps the boss

needs a performance review.

Supervisors need to use the evaluation process to create a road map for

employees that not only will assist them in their current roles but also will

guide them into areas in which they express interest. This means that

supervisors will be responsible for providing career development assistance

to their employees on almost a daily basis.

Rewarding Achievement

Today's leaner budgets limit the monetary rewards available for deserving

employees. In fact, in some departments, even yearly cost-of-living raises

have become a distant memory. Furthermore, in the future, one of the

most sought-after rewards will be praise and recognition from the boss for

a job well done.

Although monetary incentives, educational bonuses, and specialized

assignment pay will remain viable rewards, they will not take the place of

sincere praise. As a result, department administrators will need to develop

innovative ways to reward employees.

Some departments already are experimenting with unusual bonuses. The

City of Helper, Utah, has a system in place that allows officers to receive

up to 25 percent of the money they seize in drug forfeiture cases.(12)

Although some may contend that this type of incentive is improper, it

represents "outside the lines" thinking, something police departments

should strive to achieve.

Retaining Quality Employees

Employees have become less inclined to spend their entire careers with

one agency. They will expect and demand certain things, or they will

leave. In order to retain the best employees, agencies will need to go

beyond the traditional enticements of salary, benefits, and retirement

plans. This may mean allowing officers to serve part time and providing or

supplementing day-care services.

Matching employees to positions, providing them with state-of-the-art

tools and training, including them in the decision-making process, helping

them grow within the organization, measuring performance regularly, and

rewarding good work all help to keep employees satisfied and productive.

In addition, department managers will need to develop creative ways to

deal with employee burnout to help those who have lost their zest for

their jobs.

Redesigning Job Descriptions

In the 21st century, jobs will need to be redesigned continually, as job

descriptions become obsolete.(13) New events and emerging issues will

come so fast that the nature of individuals' jobs will change on a regular

basis.

As part of the job design/redesign mechanism, law enforcement agencies

must involve line-level employees, who will have firsthand information on

how their jobs are evolving. The key to success will be a system where

employees can give honest feedback without fear of reprisal. This should

not be difficult in an organization where job enhancement, enrichment,

and cross-training have become the cultural norms.

Maintaining Ethical Standards

In recent years, ethical concerns have come to the forefront in law

enforcement. Now, ethical issues loom even larger as advances in

technology place tremendous amounts of information literally at the

fingertips of police officers, thus increasing the potential for abuse.

With every technological step forward, police departments must enact

commensurate mechanisms to ensure that employees properly use their

new tools. Still, the controls must not impede employees unnecessarily.

This will require a delicate balancing act.

CONCLUSION

The Nordstom Company has a one-page policy manual that instructs

employees, "Use your own best judgment at all times."(14) If only law

enforcement could adopt this as its own policy manual. With the United

States' possessing 5 percent of the world's population and 66 percent of its

lawyers,(15) law enforcement agencies no doubt will arm themselves

against litigation with more detailed and complex policies.

Yet, while law enforcement will be held accountable as never before for

both departmental actions and use of resources, agencies can do more to

prepare for the future than write voluminous policy manuals. Instead, they

can properly select, place, and train employees and ensure their success

through appropriate job design, good organizational structure, and an

emphasis on strong ethical values.

Finally, law enforcement leaders must recognize and act upon emerging

issues. By doing so, law enforcement agencies can control their own

destinies, rather than merely react to forces that have spun beyond their

control.

Endnotes

(1) - Tom Peter, Thriving on Chaos (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1987;

HarperPerennial, 1991), XIV.

(2) - Hallcrest Systems, Inc., in "Defining the Future," California State POST

Command College Training Manual, January, 1995.

(3) - The U.S. Census Bureau reported a total of 228,621 homeless people

as part of the 1990 census, but due to the inherent difficulties in counting

the homeless, this number most likely is very low. In Universal Almanac

(New York: Universal Press, 1992), 215.

(4) - Gene Stephens, "Drugs and Crime in the 21st Century," The Futurist,

May-June 1992, 19-20.

(5) - In Universal Almanac (New York: Universal Press, 1992), 199.

(6) - Gene Stephens, "The Global Crime Wave," The Futurist, July-August

1994, 23.

(7) - Cheryl Russell, "True Crime," American Demographics, August 1995,

30.

(8) - Tom Peters, Liberation Management (New York: Alfred A. Knopf,

1992), 757.

(9) - James R. Metts, "Supercops, The Police Force of Tomorrow," The

Futurist, October, 1985, 31.

(10) - John Naisbett, Megatrends (New York: Warner Books, 1984), 35.

(11) - Supra note 1,605.

(12) - Newsbrief, USA Today, February 1, 1995, 3.

(13) - Supra note 1, 605.

(14) - Supra note 1, 454.

(15) - Marvin Cetron, "An American Renaissance in the Year 2000,"

pamphlet, World Future Society, 1994, 11.

© HiTech Criminal Justice 2003-2020

Attachment 11

Membership Member Login Contact Us Search Site

Home About Events Issues & Policy Investing Byrne JAG Training State Agencies Members

Guide to Effective Strategic Planning To contact the strategic planning team, email us. A strategic plan is a road map for accomplishing a goal in an effective and timely manner. Strategic planning is a continuous analytic process used

1. Create a focus for activities and resources to achieve specific results, and 2. Develop shared responsibility for achieving those results.

The process provides a systematic way for an organization or system to express its vision, describe its values, state or update its mission, identify strengths and weaknesses, and develop and accomplish short- and long-term goals.

While there are many strategic planning models, and no single model or process is the perfect fit for every situation, effective strategic planning processes are designed to address the following questions:

Where are we now? Where do we want to be? What specific policies, practices, programs or other activities will be implemented to get us there? Are we following our designated road map and achieving our expected results?

One of the core features of an effective strategic planning process is its ongoing and cyclical nature. A sound strategic plan is dynamic rather than static; it incorporates ongoing learning and continuous quality improvement. For example, sustainable strategic planning requires: (1) ongoing monitoring of progress in achieving expected results, (2) an assessment of problems, needs, internal and external conditions, and (3) ensuring effective solutions on a routine and ongoing basis. Knowledge of implementation progress and problems, and new or emerging conditions, informs the planning process and maximizes effectiveness.

Incorporate Data into Planning An effective strategic planning process uses data and analysis in several important ways. Research, statistical analysis, and other background materials are relied upon to help define the current environment from an objective standpoint and to better understand and prioritize problems and needs (i.e. crime problems, system inefficiencies, gaps in services, targets for reforms, etc.).

Data is also important for monitoring progress in implementing the plan, and to document how well the plan mitigates identified problems and needs. Monitoring implementation in a systematic, data-driven fashion is critical—as deviations from the plan are likely to occur. Identifying problems before they become intractable, so that corrective action can be taken, is the key to maximizing success.

In order to determine the effects of constituent programs and the overall impact of the plan, outcome evaluation is equally important. Evaluation conducted during and after the development of programs should be a core feature of the plan, and investments to build evaluation capacity should be made when existing capabilities are insufficient for the plan’s assessment needs.

Stakeholder Engagement At the state level, effective strategic planning means that state agencies work with one another across traditional boundaries to foster meaningful relationships at the state level, and with stakeholders at the local level. Comprehensive strategic plans must provide a policy and programming blueprint not only for multiple state and local criminal justice agencies, but for other organizations outside of the justice system that nonetheless provide services to criminal justice system involved clients. Strategic planning initiatives require inclusion of stakeholders early in the process.

The stakeholders should include widespread representation in order to build support and commitment to the effort. It also creates connections among diverse groups that might not otherwise interact, thereby increasing the probability the plan will produce desired results.

Capacity-Building Capacity building facilitates successful implementation of the strategic plan and institutionalizes system improvements—even when other external forces (e.g. available resources and political climates) change. Building lasting capacity in areas such as data development, information sharing, evidence-based programming, evaluation, and interdisciplinary collaboration provides a host of benefits, many of which can transcend the planning process through long-term institutionalization.

Effective Leadership Involvement of high ranking officials is critical. Strategic plans should be developed by individuals with the authority and responsibility to carry out the plan and achieve its intended results. Effective leaders cultivate a collaborative and inclusive culture, establish ground rules, hold stakeholders accountable for their roles and responsibilities, and value and effectively use data, performance metrics, and other information. [1]

The Role of the Governor and their Criminal Justice Policy Advisor As the state’s chief executive, governors play a critical role in ensuring public safety. Governors set the public safety priorities for their administration and oversee the state agencies responsible for implementing those policies and programs. To help them define and achieve their priorities, governors rely on criminal justice policy advisors (CJPA) as a primary source of information and their integral role in forming state criminal justice policy. CJPAs should work with the Director of the State’s Administering Agency to develop a policy agenda and assess the public safety agencies that are best aligned to achieve the administration’s goals.

The Role of the State Administering Agencies State Administering Agencies (SAAs) have been a locus of statewide criminal justice strategic planning since the mid-1980s under the federal Byrne Justice Assistance Grant (JAG) and its predecessor block grant programs. [2] For more than 30 years, SAAs have been engaged in coordinated and transparent strategic planning to analyze crime trends, evaluate the priorities of all segments of the criminal justice system, set out a plan for reducing crime and victimization, and guide the use of the grant funds that guides the implementation of structural reforms. [3]

The most effective strategic planning processes within SAAs have been based upon input from a core planning team that consists of the SAA director, executive staff, and a wide range of stakeholders representing all components of the criminal justice system, the behavioral health system, and other important constituency groups. These include: municipal, county, and state level law enforcement, including jail administrators; prosecution; public defense; the judiciary, including court clerks; community corrections, including pretrial services, probation and parole; the state prison system; reentry; state- and local-level substance abuse and mental health agencies; the faith community; victim advocates; and members of the public. Geographic diversity is important so that both urban and rural perspectives and issues are represented.

The Role of the State Statistical Analysis Centers State Statistical Analysis Centers (SACs) frequently have played a role in supporting the planning process carried out by SAAs through the provision of data and analysis, the translation of scientific research findings for application in policy and practice, and the assessment of strategy and program results. Many SACs are located within an SAA, so their relationships with SAAs coupled with their expertise makes them valuable assets at virtually every stage of the planning process, from needs assessment through evaluation. There are currently SACs in 51 states and territories. [4]

Conclusion A strategic plan is an important tool that should be used to guide efforts with the intent of accomplishing a specific goal in an effective and timely manner. When informed by data and designed to build capacity in the justice system through collaboration, a strategic plan will maximize impact and ensure long-term sustainability.

[1] Keegan, M. (2016). Leading a Network Doesn’t Have To Be Like Herding Cats. Government Executive Media Group. Washington, DC. [2] The Byrne Justice Assistance Grant program (Byrne JAG) is the nation’s cornerstone crime-fighting program, supporting the federal government’s role in spurring innovation, as well as testing and replicating evidence-based practices in crime control and prevention nationwide. [3] The leadership and staff of state administering agencies (SAAs) are as varied in their makeup and talent mix as the size, shape, weather, geography, and demographics of the states and territories where they are located. Each SAA has unique local legislative requirements, local expectations, and ways of doing business. [4] Statistical Analysis Centers (SACs) perform a variety of activities including collecting, analyzing, and distributing criminal justice data, conducting policy- relevant research, and designing and implementing automated information systems. Supported in part by the U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics, SACs play an important role in development of criminal and juvenile justice policy at the state and local levels. Their research provides evidence that policymakers can use to guide their decision-making. By furthering the use of evidence-based practices in their states', SACs promote the effective and efficient administration of criminal and juvenile justice.

NCJA | 720 7th St. NW, Third Floor, Washington, DC 20001 | www.ncja.org. © 2020

Attachment 12

Home » Components » Incorporate Strategic Planning

Incorporate Strategic Planning Printer-friendly version

Definition Strategic Planning is the cornerstone of implementing and sustaining the Correctional Industries Best Practices Model. Strategic planning is an organization 's process of defining its direction, goals, and strategies , and making decisions on allocating resources pursuant to those strategies. Strategic plans identify what an organization is striving to achieve and map out the necessary steps needed to be successful. Developing a strategic plan is a multi-step process with one step building off of another.

In Correctional Industries (CI), having a strategic plan is vital. A strategic plan shouldclearly define goals and measurements to assess both the internal and external situations. Formulating a strategic plan, implementing the strategies, evaluating progress and making adjustments as necessary will keep the CI’s purpose and direction on the right track.

A strategic plan includes having vision and mission statements that describe what you are doing and where you want to go. The vision and mission of a CI organization should include a focus on training and reentry, as well as the business aspects of the organization.

Rationale/Benefits Strategic planning is a very important business activity that can be highly effective when incorporated in CI. No matter where your organization is in its development, it is always important to evaluate where it is currently, where you want it to be, and when. Strategic Planning is the process used in setting goals that will help lead the organization to success.

A strategic plan is dynamic, yet practical, and serves as a guide to implementing programs, evaluating how these programs are doing and making adjustments when necessary. A strategic plan reflects the needs of the organization and customers, and will integrate them with the organization's

purpose, mission, and vision into a single document. The development of a plan requires much probing, discussion, and examination of the views of the leaders who are responsible for the plan's preparation. It is an excellent process in evaluating an organization and will provide a plan for incorporating best practices into daily processes.

The purpose of strategic planning is to assist CI in establishing priorities that will better serve the needs of incarcerated individuals, employees and stakeholders.

Practices 1. Determine the current state of your Correctional Industry

In order to determine the future direction of the organization, it is necessary to understand its current position and the possible avenues through which it can pursue particular courses of action. This is harder than it looks. Some leaders see their organization how they want it to be, not how it actually appears to others.

Generally, the strategic planning process starts with at least one of four key questions:

What do we do? For whom do we do it? What do we want to look like? How do we excel?

For an accurate picture of your Correctional Industry, conduct external and internal analysis to get a clear understanding of your organization’s competencies. Reviews may include conducting a SWOT (Strengths, Weakness, Opportunities, Threats) analysis, as well as reviewing departmental goals/strategies, legislation, core values, stakeholder and customer feedback, etc. The review should include an analysis of the focus of each industry and its culture.

2. Identify what’s important

Focus on where you want to take your organization over time. This sets the direction of the CI program over the long term and clearly defines the vision and mission of what your future organization should look like. From this analysis, you can determine the priority issues—those issues so significant to the overall well-being of your CI program that they require the full and immediate attention of the entire management team. The strategic plan should focus on three to five key goals. Remember to include safety and security within CI operations, as they are critical to the sustainability of the CI program.

3. Define what you must achieve

Define the expected goals that clearly state what the organization must achieve to address the identified priority issues. Review validated research and proven programs to help define objectives, strategies and performance measures. Define the what, how and when of data collection. Reach out to other agencies, universities and research institutes to determine data availability.

4. Evaluate long-term sustainability

Define the resources and budget necessary to continually fund efforts to achieve the goals. Evaluate revenue, reserve fund balance, future capital investments, and ability to obtain grant funds.

5. Determine who is accountable

This is how to get to where you want to go. The strategies, action plans, and budgets are all steps in the process that effectively communicate how you will allocate time, human capital, and funding to address the priority issues and achieve the defined goals and objectives. It is recommended that each goal is assigned to an individual or group to champion its progression.

6. Obtain Buy-In

Involve staff, incarcerated individuals and stakeholders in the creation, implementation and progress of the strategic plan. Success towards goals will be difficult to achieve without the cooperation of these core groups.

7. Review, Review, Review

To ensure the plan performs as designed, regularly scheduled formal reviews of performance measures must be completed. Review the process and refine as necessary. Champions should meet regularly, at least quarterly, to report on progress, barriers and successes. Progress should be reported to key stakeholders continually, but not less than annually. Clear and concise reporting can be accomplished through the use of dashboards, providing textual and visual summaries of key indicators.

Measurements Identify key data sets to track, report and gauge success. Sample measurements include:

Incarcerated individual jobs available Recidivism rate for CI-trained workers at one and three years after release Certifications awarded to incarcerated individuals Portfolio of accomplishments for incarcerated individuals Incarcerated individuals trained in soft-skill training programs Incarcerated individuals receiving job readiness training Job readiness assessments conducted CI worker referrals to business community Incarcerated individuals securing employment within 90 days of release. Incarcerated individuals retaining employment at 6 months Earnings received at 6 months after entry into employment Post-release employment services Letters of reference issued Collection of restitution, room and board, victim’s funds, family support, etc. Employee satisfaction Community and State partnerships Customer satisfaction rates Customer complaints Sales On-time deliveries Safety violations Employee training hours CI worker training hours

Resources Publications

Antonowicz, D.H., Ross, R. R. (1994). Essential Components of Successful Rehabilitation Programs for Offenders. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 38 (2), 97-104.

Blanchard, K. (2009). Leading at a Higher Level: Blanchard on Leadership and Creating High Performing Organizations . Upper Saddle River, NJ: FT Press

Bradford, R., Duncan, P., Tarcy, B. (2000). Simplified Strategic Planning: A No-nonsense Guide for Busy People Who Want Results Fast! Worcester, MA: Chandler House Press.

Collins, J., Porras, J. (1994). Built to Last. New York: HarperCollins Publishers.

David, F. R. (2009) Strategic Management (14 Ed.). New York: Macmillan Publishing Company. (Dr. David also maintains a strategic planning web site, Checkmate Plan)

Flaherty, Carol and Zonis Associates. (2007). Building Culture Strategically: A Team Approach for Corrections. Available at https://s3.amazonaws.com/static.nicic.gov/Library/021749.pdf

Waal, A. A. (2010). The characteristics of a high performing organization. Business Strategy Series, 8 (3) 2010. Available at https://www.hpocenter.nl/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/Business-Strategy-Series-2007-HPO.pdf

Washington State Institute for Public Policy. (2006). Evidence-Based Public Policy Options to Reduce Future Prison Construction, Criminal Justice Costs, and Crime Rates. Available at http://www.wsipp.wa.gov/ReportFile/952/Wsipp_Evidence-Based-Public-Policy-Options-to-Reduce-Future-Prison- Construction-Criminal-Justice-Costs-and-Crime-Rates_Full-Report.pdf

Workforce Investment Act (WIA) Performance Measures

Websites https://www.nist.gov/baldrige/

Baldrige Performance Excellence Program website

https://nicic.gov/apex-building-model-and-beginning-journey

https://nicic.gov/applying-apex-tools-organizational-assessment

https://nicic.gov/achieving-performance-excellence-influence-leadership-organizational-performance

Achieving Performance Excellence (APEX)

https://www.ncja.org/strategic-planning/planning-guide

U.S. Department of Justice Strategic Planning

Tools https://ctb.ku.edu/en/table-of-contents/assessment/assessing-community-needs-and-resources/swot-analysis/main

SWOT analysis (Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, and Threats) is used to analyze internal strategic factors, strengths and weaknesses attributed to the organization, and external factors beyond control of the organization.

http://www.aca.org/ACA_Prod_IMIS/ACA_Member/Standards___Accreditation/ACA_Member/Standards_and_Accreditation/SAC_AboutUs.aspx? hkey=7f4cf7bf-2b27-4a6b-b124-36e5bd90b93d

ACA Standards, an additional tool used in organizational analysis

https://www.bain.com/publications/articles/management-tools-balanced-scorecard.aspx

Balanced Scorecards create a systematic framework for strategic planning.

https://chandoo.org/wp/excel-dashboards/

Dashboards, or visual web graphics, are tools to display progress towards goals.

Sample Dashboard

https://www.businessballs.com/pestanalysisfreetemplate.htm

PEST analysis (Political, Economic, S ocial, and Technological)

https://asq.org/learn-about-quality/root-cause-analysis/overview/overview.html

Root Cause Analysis (RCA): Used to understand the threats, barriers, and challenges to achieving the end state.

https://sloanreview.mit.edu/article/scenario-planning-a-tool-for-strategic-thinking/

Scenario planning : originally used in the military and recently used by large corporations to analyze future scenarios

Search

Quick Links

The links below are provided for more information.

The National Correctional Industries Association (NCIA) website

The National Institute of Corrections (NIC) website

NIC Micro-sites

Navigation

Login

Copyright © 2021, Correctional Industries

Success Stories

“The Strategic Planning Process allowed us to take a good hard look at our organization, focusing on what we do well and where we needed to improve to move NC Correction Enterprises forward. Since the inception of our five year strategic plan we have remained focused on our goals, resulting in the delivery of specific, measurable results for our organization. I am always excited to review the quarterly results to see what we have accomplished.” —Karen A. Brown, Director NC Correction Enterprises

“The Maryland Correctional Enterprises Strategic Business Plan has been a driving force of our organization since its implementation in September of 2000. Like our industry, our strategic plan is constantly evolving so that we can better serve our customers, our employees, and our inmate workforce. Considering the diverse range of activities in our business, our strategic plan helps to increase communication and understanding throughout our organization so that we are working to accomplish a unified mission. By assessing our successes and shortcomings we are able to take pride in our accomplishments while making changes to promote success in our future.” —Steve Shiloh, CEO Maryland Correctional Enterprises

Correctional Industries A Guide to Reentry-Focused Performance Excellence

th

HOME ABOUT THIS GUIDE COMPONENTS RESOURCES HELP

Attachment 13

Review of General Management, Volume 30, Issue 2, Year 2019 55

COMPLEXITY AND FLEXIBILITY IN STRATEGIC MANAGEMENT

Oriana Helena NEGULESCU�� Abstract: In today's economic environment, characterized by complexity and vola- tility, the organization's management must continually adapt its strategy, even if it is designed according to the strategic mission and vision of the organization. How- ever, organizations themselves are complex organisms. In an external and internal environment characterized by complexity, the management of the organization faces the difficulty of designing the strategies, which, related to the environment and the organization, become complex. Practical reality demonstrates that the primary tool that can be used by management in the exposed conditions is flexibil- ity. In this context, the paper focuses on these four challenges of strategic man- agement: the complexity of the environment, the complexity of the organization, the complexity of the strategies, and the flexibility in elaborating and adapting the strategies of the organization. The research methodology is based on the study of references, observation, and own opinion on the treated subject. Key words: Environment complexity, organizations’ complexity, strategies com- plexity, flexibility, strategic management JEL Classification: L10, L20, M10

1. Introduction

The word “complex” can be defined as “consisting of interconnected and interwoven parts” (Van Dijke & Scheele, 2019). The entire world is complex. It may be seen as a sandwich between a view that the world works

like a machine and a belief that the world is chaotic, unpredictable, and

without structure (Boulton et al., 2015).

There is the explicit recognition that a complexity perspective entails

the rejection of assumptions of predictability and control in management,

� Spiru Haret University, Faculty of Legal Sciences and Economic Sciences, Brasov,

Romania, bellatrix360yahoo.fr

56 Volume 30, Issue 2, Year 2019 Review of General Management

and the adoption of assumptions of multiple, interacting self-organizing en-

tities that learn and change over time. While there are periods of stable be-

haviour and features of the system that function as constraints on elements

of the system, the diversity and adaptation of entities creates the possibility

for both evolutionary and unpredictable, sudden changes (Eppel & Rodes,

2018).

Nevertheless, complexity is found in any of the activities of an organi-

zation. Some authors have addressed complexity in business: in sales and

market (Swait & Adamowicz, 2001), in production (Azadegan et al., 2013),

in decision making (Gorzeń-Mitka & Okręglicka, 2014). But complexity is also present in other areas, such as medicine, education, or in public organi-

zations.

In strategic management, the most critical challenges are related to the

complexity of the environment (Andelman et al., 2004; Cannon & St. John,

2007; Kirschke & Newig, 2017; Tsitaire Arrive & Feng, 2018; Collier et al.,

2019), complexity of organization, structure and social aspects (Liu et al.,

2015; Kaplan, 2018; Van Dijke & Scheele, 2019) and the complexity of

strategies (Stacey, 1993; Williamson, 1999; Boulton et al., 2015).

In complex environments, there is no correct answer, and no one can

know the whole environment. The most valuable insight is not the correct

one – because no one has such a solution – it is the one that is best able to synthesize many different perspectives on a situation (Leadership in Com-

plex Environments, 2017). The environment provides the fuel for innova-

tion, evolution, and learning (Boulton at al. 2015).

Laroux (2014) emphasised some principles for fundamental shifts in

organizational architecture to manage complexity:

� From short term profit maximization to shared purpose and value creation;

� From hierarchy and bureaucracy to distributed and autonomous teams;

� From command-and-control management to enabling leadership; � From rigid planning to safe-to-try experiments; � From information and communication secrecy to transparency. The author also introduced a framework for these emergent structures,

labelling it “Teal.” The Teal model has three core characteristics: � Self-management based on peer relationships rather than hierarchy;

Review of General Management, Volume 30, Issue 2, Year 2019 57

� Wholeness based on bringing the whole person to work; � The evolutionary purpose at the core of work and emergence

amidst complex systems.

To face complexity, managers need to use flexibility to solve prob-

lems regarding adaptation and change in strategies.

The cognitive flexibility is a required quality within individuals and

organizational cultures, due to the urgency of global problems and the diffi-

culty in making sense of security environment complexity. Any approach

needs to be flexible and non-assumptive, developing a continuously grow-

ing and deepening understanding. (Lummack, 2017).

Complexity and uncertainty, which characterize the environment in

which enterprises are functioning, force them to continuously improve and

search for new, often unconventional solutions for shaping decision making

processes. It refers both to organizational, technological, and managerial

solutions (Gorzeń-Mitka & Okręglicka, 2014). In this context, this paper is aiming to discuss and analyse how the

business organization management is dealing with the environment, organi-

zational, and strategy complexity and, also, to find the answer to the ques-

tion of why flexibility is the primary tool to face the chaotic elements?

2. Environment complexity

The increasing volatility of the environment due to the acceleration of

changes in information and communication technology requires organiza-

tions to cooperate with the increasingly complex external environment.

Organizational management, according to Hamel and Prahalad (1994),

has to consider four specific areas of the volatile and complex environment

to make effective decisions that will lead to competitive success in the fu-

ture:

� to focus on opportunities and less on the market share gained by developing the skills that capture these opportunities. For example:

to invest in new products, brands, e-business, etc.;

� to focus on creating integrated systems and collaborative compe- tences throughout the organization. For example: setting up alli-

ances, mergers and joint ventures;

� to persistently pursue the development of sustainable responsibility and skills appropriate to the new technological achievements of

58 Volume 30, Issue 2, Year 2019 Review of General Management

managers at any hierarchical level. For example, the Internet, digi-

tal systems, biotechnologies, etc., even if for a period the profits of

the company do not increase;

� to accept the lack of organizational structure or a simple structure. When the competition’s nature is going to change in the complex and

volatile environment, as well as the quality of competitiveness, the recon-

figuration of new organizational structures in strategic decisions-making of

the management is required. Management also needs to consider the skills

and abilities of workforce, its flexibility, and adaptability.

3. Organizations’ complexity

Organizations are complex systems that cannot be actually defined

because there are no precise accepted criteria, but several characteristics that

make them different from other systems in nature, such as mathematics,

physics, etc. can be highlighted, namely:

� they are social systems, where individuals are connected through informal networks;

� they generate levels of structure: sometimes they have a complex structure, sometimes they are multidimensional;

� they have no borders and are continually moving in new fields, in- dustries, markets;

� it changes over time as organizations learn; � is based on a system of nonlinear relationships; � the decisions taken have side effects and tertiary effects that cannot

be anticipated;

� they exist in the external environment compete and interact with the outputs of other organizations.

According to Mathews et al. (1999), organizations exist in two forms

(figure 1):

� in a stable equilibrium determined by negative feedback and � in a sustainable imbalance caused by positive feedback.

The negative feedback adjusts the actions of the organization. For ex-

ample: if the budget of a company is flexible through negative feedback, the

management needs to make necessary corrections. The analysis of the re-

sults against the budget is carried out under real conditions so that the man-

agerial decisions are made aware in a stable environment.

Review of General Management, Volume 30, Issue 2, Year 2019 59

Figure no.1. The organization forms according to the type of feed-back

Source: upon Mathews, 1999

Positive feedback amplifies the effect of changes and changes their di-

rection by placing them in a vicious circle. For example, an increase in wag-

es by 20% without being found in the growth of turnover leads to a rise in

costs. In turn, these costs lead to the continuous diminution of profit and

bankruptcy.

In reality, organizations never reach a stable balance because the or-

ganizational behaviour and management bring limitations. Through strategic

managerial decisions (for example, investments, prices), organizations tem-

porarily attain apparent stability. As complex organizations operate in a vol-

atile environment, management cannot use forecasts but scenarios based on

vague or subtle sets. Sometimes, however, some phenomena can be fore-

seen, as instability is restricted by the organization itself or by market

boundaries (for example, antitrust rules, legal regulations to put barriers to

new competitors in the market).

60 Volume 30, Issue 2, Year 2019 Review of General Management

To survive and thrive in the complex and volatile external environ-

ment (under conditions of globalization, the European Union, other regional

blocs, etc.), organizations must "adopt adaptive behaviour, with some struc-

ture, but not too much" (Brown & Eisenhardt, 1998). The key to success in

managing an organization operating in a volatile environment is self-

organization. The management must focus on hierarchical control systems

and procedures, lead through formal meetings with the managers empow-

ered to decide at their level of action, analyse the results, impose actions for

efficient allocation of resources through plans, budgets, and targets to be

achieved. The time allocated by managers to strategic issues must increase,

and conditions must be created to encourage self-organization.

Adaptive organizations (self-organizing) have, considering Pascale’s (1999) ideas, four characteristic features:

� they have many actors who act probabilistically, not hierarchically; � generates many organizational levels or structures; � have the ability to recognize patterns and patterns and use them to

learn and anticipate the future;

� they shake and die. Complex Adaptive Systems evolve and change with experience as

they “change and reorganize their parts to adapt themselves to the problems posed by their surroundings” (Holland, 1992, p.18).

Organizations operating in a complex environment must face the chal-

lenges of constrained instability, which is manifested when an isolated vari-

ation of the environment can produce enormous effects (positive or

negative). These variations cannot be controlled, but only redirected. For

example, rising oil prices cause increasing prices of raw materials, and as a

result of products, or lowering prices for vacuum cleaners by one producer

causes lower prices for all producers with significant effects on costs and

profit, which returns like a boomerang to the initiating organization.

4. Strategies complexity

The dynamic nature of complex systems requires adaptable strategies

(structures, guides, and procedures, rules in the context of an external envi-

ronment that cannot be predicted).

Review of General Management, Volume 30, Issue 2, Year 2019 61

Under these conditions, management must develop skills that enable

them to identify valid opportunities and adapt their decisions to market

changes.

Amram and Kutilaka (1999) consider that the management of organi-

zations operating in the complex and volatile external environment must

follow eight rules to establish the strategic options:

� not to elaborate assumptions about market boundaries, but to per- manently rethink these borders;

� to identify strategic opportunities (through flexibility); � to develop options by continuously identifying the resources en-

trusted;

� to become more and more flexible (even cancel projects started, if any);

� to design and follow a schedule of actions based on work steps; � to create options, by changing the direction of abandoning some

decisions;

� to establish priorities, focusing on strategic capabilities; � be ready to conclude contracts through a transparent selection. Strategy definition focuses on building a portfolio of strategic options.

“While companies can focus on executing a single strategy at any time, they must also build and maintain a portfolio of strategic options for the future. Investments in developing new capabilities and learning about new potential markets are required. A new way of thinking about how planning and op- portunism interact in determining strategy is needed” (Williamson, 1999).

Starting from the basic idea outlined by Williamson, the author pro- poses four practical steps for elaborating strategies in the complex and vola- tile environment: discovering hidden constraints, establishing the right process, optimizing the portfolio, and combining planning with opportun- ism, comment below.

Discovering hidden constraints

In general, the organization has a stock of strategic resources and ca-

pabilities (such as technologies, product and or service palette, process man-

agement, after-sales customer services, supply channels, etc.). The seller, if

the sale is made through dealers, intermediaries, or final sellers, has a wealth

of knowledge in the field of marketing-sales.

62 Volume 30, Issue 2, Year 2019 Review of General Management

Referring to the market, the organization does not have sufficient

knowledge in the field of marketing-sales, and the seller has no production

capabilities. In this situation, according to Williamson (1999), two types of

constraints are identified: the producer (who becomes a prisoner of his ca-

pabilities) and the seller (fig. 2).

Figure no.2. Hidden constraints matrix Source: Williamson, 1999

These constraints do not have to be hidden, and management must

scan the continuous environment to identify all weaknesses and gaps in the

level of knowledge about potential markets and not let the "myopia of the

market served" develop (Hamel and Prahalad, 1994).

Establishing the right strategic process

All the weaknesses identified and continuously invented should be the

basis for the development of methods for creating missing capabilities, es-

pecially for accumulating knowledge about market requirements. For this

purpose, the management of the organization must consider:

� the information obtained and the experiences gained from its rela- tions with the suppliers and beneficiaries;

� the information received from the beneficiaries regarding the quali- ty of the products and other complaints, to be treated seriously;

Review of General Management, Volume 30, Issue 2, Year 2019 63

� the information collected about the behaviour of competitors; � the lessons about organizations that have unconventional behaviour

in the same industry and other sectors of activity (problems en-

countered, how to solve them, experiments on new methods and

techniques);

� building and sustaining quality management as a source of devel- opment of the capabilities in the system, of creating the values and

norms specific to a thriving organizational culture.

Optimization of the portfolio of strategic options

Strategic scenarios are developed, taking into account: � the cost of creating and maintaining the options; � the probability that the option will be put into practice; � the likelihood that the option will develop alternatives in the future. With these options, you build a portfolio that is continuously moni-

tored and updated.

Combining planning with opportunism

The organization needs a "strategic space" (Williamson, 1999) to de- velop in the future. Because the environment is complex and volatile, strate- gic forecasts and plans cannot be accurately elaborated, so the organization will not know clearly what products, markets, and beneficiaries it will have in the future.

The portfolio of options, elaborated taking into account the strategic opportunities that emerge and are identified or intuited, comes to complete these strategic plans, but under restrictions on the strategic directions and mission of the organization, considering the so-called "restricted opportun- ism" (Williamson, 1999).

Dynamic adjustments allow the management of the organization to redirect resources to a high potential of the activity (business) and to create value through a continuous process of change.

5. Flexibility in strategic management

Change requires flexibility and vice versa, and this virtuous circle cre-

ates management problems. The fundamental question for any management

64 Volume 30, Issue 2, Year 2019 Review of General Management

is: "How to apply the management of a discontinuous change without aban-

doning the capabilities that have led the organization to success?" A right

answer is: "Learn to develop additional capabilities to cooperate with

change by creating an organizational space" (Christensen and Overldorf,

2000).

These additional capabilities can be achieved through a series of stra- tegic actions, such as: cooperating with another organization that already

has these capabilities, developing within the organization these new capabil-

ities, or acquiring an organization that has the additional capabilities needed.

Also, in an extremely competitive market and an IT development environ-

ment, companies are trying to reduce or save costs, balancing their strategies

between internalization and externalization (Doval, 2016).

In the creation of additional capabilities, the organization structure is

of particular importance. A strong hierarchical structure leads to efficient

control of the changes, but also to the diminishing of the flexibility that is

necessary to adapt the organization to the changes of the environment (the

market).

The structure of the organization is an essential source of inefficiency

(an increase of administrative salaries, an increase of indirect costs, etc.);

therefore, the management must orient itself towards dynamic and flexible

structures. A flexible structure allows the organization to adapt to changes

in the environment without losing its flexibility.

Markides (1999) considers the following three capabilities required to

create flexible structures:

� ability to identify change early enough; � the existence of a culture that embraces and responds to change; � skills and competences for the competition. An increase in flexibility is usually offset by a decrease in efficiency,

as "increasing flexibility is a zero-sum game" (Volberta, 1998). To increase

flexibility without being followed by the reduction of the effectiveness and

the quality, it is necessary to consider two determinants: changes in the pro-

duction of technology and changes in the structure of the labour market

(Volberta, 1998).

The changes in the production of technology are aimed at the imple-

mentation of the new conquests of science in the field of information and

communications that allow the development of customized mass production.

Review of General Management, Volume 30, Issue 2, Year 2019 65

At the same time, in the labour market, there have been profound changes in

the structure of the workforce and the approach of the importance of skills

and competences. The value of the highly specialized workforce increases

continuously, and as a result, individual autonomy increases.

A more appropriate approach to the correlation between technology,

environment, and human resources involves "facilitating the organization to

participate in creating its environment as an ecosystem" (Henessy and Rob-

ins, 1991) and this, of course, aims to reintegrate the organization into the

global sustainable development strategy by maintaining flexibility.

Conclusions

Changing the environment makes markets more individualized, more

integrated, or global. In this complex environment, organizations focus on mass production, on

customer-oriented market segments, on specialized products and services, con- tributing to increasing complexity and uncertainty of strategies. As the envi- ronment becomes more complex and requires changes in the organization, management creates structures, functions, and activities, which increase inter- nal complexity, slow down decisions, and reduce flexibility.

For the organization to fit in with its complex and turbulent environment, management must use flexibility in a controlled manner; they must optimally seek strategic options by implementing new technologies, decentralizing organ- izational structures, establishing the autonomy of working groups, and estab- lishing interactive relationships with its beneficiaries and clients.

This paper presents only a few aspects regarding the four challenges of strategic management, i.e., the complexity of the environment, of the or- ganizations, and of the strategies that find a solution through flexibility. These issues may be subject to further studies.

References

Amram, M. and Kutilaka, N., (1999). Uncertainty: the new rules for manag- ers. Journal of Business Strategy. Vol. 1, May-June, 25-29.

Andelman, S.J., Bowles, C.M, Willig, M.R. & Waide, R.B., (2004). Under- standing Environmental Complexity through a Distributed Knowledge Network. BioScience. 54 (3). 240–246. https://doi.org/10.1641/0006- 3568(2004)054[0240:UECTAD]2.0.CO;2.

66 Volume 30, Issue 2, Year 2019 Review of General Management

Azadegan, A., Patel, P.C., Zangoueinezhad, A. & Linderman, K., (2013). The Effect of Environmental Complexity and Environmental Dynamism on Lean Practices. Journal of Operations Management. 31(4), 193–212.

Boulton, J., G., P. M. Allen & C. Bowman, C., (2015). Embracing Complexity: Strategic Perspectives for an Age of Turbulence. Oxford: Oxford Univer- sity Press.

Brown, S. L. & Eisenhardt, K. M., (1998). Competing on the Edge. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.

Cannon, A.R. & St.John, C.H., (2007). Measuring Environmental Complexity: A Theoretical and Empirical Assessment. Organizational Research Methods (ORM) Journal. 10(2), 296-321, https://doi.org/10.1177/ 1094428106291058.

Collier, Z.A., Lambert, K.H. & Linkov, I., (2018). Resilience, sustainability, and complexity in social, environmental, and technical systems. Envi- ronment Systems and Decisions. 38(1), 1–2.

Christensen, C.M. and Overldorf, M., (2000). Meeting the challenge of disrup- tive change. Harvard Business Review. March-April, 67-76.

Doval, E., (2016). Is outsourcing a strategic tool to enhance the competitive advantage? Review of General Management. ISSN 1841-818X, 23(1), 78-87.

Eppel, E.A. & Rhodes, M.L., (2018). Complexity theory and public manage- ment: a ‘becoming’ field. Public Management Review. 20(7), 949-959

Gorzeń-Mitka, I. & Okręglicka, M., (2014). Improving Decision Making in Complexity Environment. Procedia Economics and Finance. 16, 402-409.

Hamel, G.P. & Prahalad, C.K., (1994). Competing for the Future. Boston: Har- vard Business School Press.

Hennessy, J.E. & Robins, S., (1991). Managing towards the Millennium. New York: Fordham University Press.

Holland, J., (1991). Complex Adaptive Systems. Daedalus. 121(1), p. 17-30. Retrieved April 9, 2016, from http://www-personal.umich.edu/ ~samoore/bit885w2012/ ComplexAdaptiveSystemsHolland.pdf.

Kaplan, M.J., (2018). Complexity Demands New Approaches to Work. Stand- ford Social Inovation Review. https://ssir.org/articles/entry/ complexi- ty_demands_new_approaches_to_work.

Kirschke, S. & Newig, J., (2017). Addressing Complexity in Environmental Management and Governance. Sustainability. 9(6), 983; https://doi. org/10.3390/su9060983.

Review of General Management, Volume 30, Issue 2, Year 2019 67

Laroux, F., (2014). Reinventing organizations. A guide to creating organiza- tions inspired by the next stage of human consciousness, translated into Romanian “Organizatia reinventata”. 2017, Vellant, Bucuresti, 230-232.

Leadership in Complex Environments. (2017) Peaceportal.org, Retrieved 4 July 2017, from https://www.peaceportal.org/documents/130617663/0/Mo- dule+1+Leadership+in+Complex+Environments/7745647f-3ca8-4b83- b3f3-f8dcb4abc8c5.

Liu, H., Ma, L. & Huang, P., (2015). When organizational complexity helps corporation improve its performance. Journal of Management Develop- ment. 34(3), 340-351, https://doi.org/10.1108/JMD-05-2013-0071.

Lummack, R., (2017). Expecting Uncertainty: Approaching security environ- ment complexity with humility and conceptual flexibility. Royal Military College Saint-Jean.

https://www.cmrsj-rmcsj.forces.gc.ca/cb-bk/art-art/2017/art-art-2017-1-eng.asp Markides, C. (1999) Six principles of breakthrough strategy, Business Strategy

Review, 10(2), p.1-10. Mathews, K. M., White, M.C., Long, R.G., (1999). The problem of prediction

and control in theoretical diversity and the promise of the complexity sci- ences. Journal of Management Inquiry. 8(1), p.17-31.

Pascale, R.T., (1999). Surfing the edge of chaos. Sloan Management Review. Spring, 83-94.

Stacey, R. D., (1993). Strategic Management and Organisational Dynamics: The Challenge of Complexity. London: Prentice Hall.

Swait, J. & Adamowicz, W., (2001). Choice Environment, Market Complexity, and Consumer Behavior: A Theoretical and Empirical Approach for In- corporating Decision Complexity into Models of Consumer Choice. Or- ganizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes. 86 (2), 141-167.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0749597800929418. Tsitaire Arrive, J. & Feng, M., (2018). The complexity of the environment,

management control and firm performance. Business management and environment. 27(8), 1347-1354.

Van Dijke, A.A. & Scheele, R., (2019). A structured approach to reducing sap complexity, Compact. online article accessed Oct. 15, 2019, https://www. compact.nl/articles/a-structured-approach-to-reducing-sap-complexity/.

Volberda, H., W., (1998), Building the flexible firm. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Williamson, P.J., (1999). Strategy as options on the future. Sloan Management Review. Spring, 117-126.

Copyright of Review of General Management is the property of Spiru Haret University, Faculty of Management and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.

Attachment 14

Criminal Justice Information Systems Strategic Plan

2 of 33

Table of Contents Page

Vision 3

Mission 3

Objective 3

Executive Summary 4

Current State 5

High Level Strategy 6-7

Action Plan 8-18

Appendix 20-29

Criminal Justice Information Systems Strategic Plan

3 of 33

Mecklenburg County will have technologically advanced information systems for administering criminal justice services effectively and efficiently.

Vision Statement

Mission Statement

To create, integrate, and operate automated systems that support accurate and timely information exchange among criminal justice agencies in Mecklenburg County

To provide a comprehensive strategy for improving the quality, accuracy, accessibility and timeliness of information generated, updated, managed and disseminated by Mecklenburg County criminal justice agencies. This will enhance the overall quality of information related to criminal justice for Mecklenburg County and the State of North Carolina.

Objective

We recognize criminal justice agencies as independent; however, no one organization can operate effectively without cooperation.

Guiding Principles

We value collaboration and communication among all levels of government. We realize the necessity of protecting shared information and equipment from misuse to ensure the integrity of justice information. We believe implementing innovative technology within the criminal justice system improves the delivery of services to the community and makes the best use of taxpayer dollars.

Criminal Justice Information Systems Strategic Plan

Executive Summary

PMO/BPM Team 4 of 33

This strategic plan exists to pursue, develop, and implement an integrated justice information system for Mecklenburg County. Integrated justice planning is concerned with architecture, infrastructure, and interfaces. It is not about software applications, which is decided by the agencies that use them. The purpose of creating an integrated justice information system is to provide quality, accurate, and timely information to criminal justice personnel so they may conduct their work efficiently and effectively, and make informed decisions regarding public safety. Currently in Mecklenburg County, there are barriers to exchanging information electronically between criminal justice agencies. These barriers, whether technical or institutional, are wasting resources unnecessarily by limiting productivity and causing significant delays in case processing. Alternatively, information should flow automatically from agency to agency so that key data about a defendant or case is available in real time to those that need it. Linking information systems together will make it possible to eliminate redundant data entry, reduce wasteful paper files, and improve the quality of justice. This plan outlines a course for achieving integrated justice information systems. The plan begins with an over-arching strategy of understanding the current state, developing a management or governance structure, identifying solutions, and, ultimately, deploying technology. Each of these strategies is then broken down into action items that outline tactics and timeline goals. The first year of the plan is critical, as it sets the tone and boundaries for the entire initiative. During the early months, a great deal of time will be dedicated to taking what exists and shaping it into a collaborative vision of what can be. In particular, top agency stakeholders will be required to develop standards, address legal issues, evaluate risk, and direct technology staff. Groundwork from the first year will then transition into a multi-year architecture and infrastructure building agenda. In many ways, this document simply represents a starting point. Over time, things will inevitably change in technology and funding opportunities, for example, which will require adjustments and re-tooling. Moreover, as the process moves forward, the plan will need to be updated to expand the vision beyond the relative short term.

Criminal Justice Information Systems Strategic Plan

Current State

5 of 33

The Mecklenburg County criminal justice system has struggled to implement technology that will improve the ability of agencies to communicate electronically. Many agencies rely on outdated technology that binds them to a paper-driven process, and even where robust technology exists, it is often isolated and fragmented. As a result, agencies have difficulty sharing information and encounter reoccurring issues that are troublesome. These issues include: a) the slow exchange of critical information, b) the duplicate collection of information and redundant data entry, c) the linear direction of information flow, and d) the inability to produce key reports on system operation. The impact on the criminal justice system is more congestion, escalating costs, and challenges to the quality of work. Indeed, a Public Safety Task Force in 2008 deemed the current state of technology as a critical problem that adversely affects the efficiency and effectiveness of the criminal justice system. Complicating the implementation of integrated information systems is the multiple layers of government that oversee the various criminal justice agencies. For example, law enforcement is primarily a service provided by the cities, while jail operations are the responsibility of the county, and the court system the state. While protecting public safety is a mutually shared goal by all, each layer of government and their agencies typically work independently. Thus, a unified vision for the development of connected information systems is lacking across the system. Even the level of resources varies, in terms of investment dollars and staff, and technological gains made by one agency may be easily mitigated by the limitations of another agency. The ideal state is to have a system whereby digital information is captured at the point of origination, automatically checked whenever possible, and then transmitted to other agencies that need it. The receiving agency should have the ability to accept the information for the purposes of viewing, editing, and adding. Ultimately, information should flow through the criminal justice system, with each agency contributing, in a path that replicates the processing of a case. Just as important, however, is that information should flow in multiple directions, including backwards. For instance, an individual’s arrest and booking should trigger auto- generated information to the prosecution, defense, courts, and probation. After the individual’s court hearing, information on the case should then bounce back to all parties. Such an approach would immensely improve the productivity of the criminal justice system while greatly enhancing the safety of the community. To pursue this ideal model, the IJIS Institute was engaged to provide a technical review of the Mecklenburg County criminal justice system. IJIS produced a report that recommended focus on three strategic areas: Policy and Governance, Business Process and Operations, and Systems and Technology. These areas are captured in the conceptual framework of this strategic plan.

Criminal Justice Information Systems Strategic Plan

High Level Strategy

PMO/BPM Team 6 of 33

IST took the lead in creating a strategy to effect change within the Criminal Justice Information arena. A high-level strategy was developed:

I - Strategy: Define, Document, and Disseminate our Current State

Ta ct

ic s

a. Assess and Define Current State (systems, technology interfaces & business process)

b. Examine Best Practices c. Develop the Business Case

II - Strategy: Establish Criminal Justice Governance Structure

Ta ct

ic s

a. Develop Governance Concept and get Executive Approval b. Propose committee members consisting of the Criminal Justice Advisory

Group (CJAG) c. Propose Governance Charter d. Create a Collaborative Environment for the Sharing of Intelligence and

Information e. Develop Standards and Rules of Engagement between Criminal Justice

Agencies f. Develop Project Ranking and Priority Strategy

III - Strategy: Identify, develop and recommend solutions to improve information sharing

Ta ct

ic s

a. Standards Development b. Privacy and Civil Liberties Policy Development c. Security Plan Development d. Risk, Communication & Training Plan Development e. Articulate and document needs/requirements

Criminal Justice Information Systems Strategic Plan

High Level Strategy

PMO/BPM Team 7 of 33

IV - Strategy: Improve information sharing through plan implementation and technology deployment

Ta ct

ic s

a. Enterprise Architecture Development b. Leverage the Databases, Systems, and Networks available c. Create an Environment to Allow for Future Connectivity to Other Systems d. Recommend Technical Solutions to Business Information Needs

Criminal Justice Information Systems Strategic Plan

Action Plan

8 of 33

Several Key concepts were considered when putting together an action plan:

Action Plan

Data Custodianship Criminal Justice agencies are really caretakers of data as directed by law, policies, and institutional practices and are ultimately responsible to the public. These agencies recognize the need to challenge conventional ways of thinking about data collection, handling and ownership. The CJAG Committee has identified three general types of criminal justice information; core data, shared data and restricted data. Integration The CJAG Committee should view an integrated justice system as a way of thinking, a way of conducting the business of the criminal justice system and a constantly evolving process. Three (3) prominent themes emerge when considering the need for an integrated criminal justice information system in Mecklenburg County: 1) the need to improve operational efficiencies; 2) the need for standardization to capture and share enterprise data; and 3) the need for improved access to core and shared data.

Privacy The amount of electronically stored criminal justice information has expanded rapidly as justice agencies build extensive systems to collect, store and process data. The emergence of extensive, easily accessed information on private citizens begs the question, “how does the criminal justice enterprise balance the need to collect and process information efficiently to ensure public safety, against the need to maintain individual privacy?” Standards and Regulations for Data Sharing Mecklenburg County leadership must develop a standardized method of capturing and sharing core and shared data. Information sharing standards enable different information systems to exchange information irrespective of the technology being used. National information sharing standards, such as the National Information Exchange Model (NIEM), are actively being developed and implemented in federal, state, and local jurisdictions throughout the nation. These standards leverage current information technology investments, facilitate improved and expanded information sharing, and provide the operational agility to respond to the evolving needs of a changing world. Development and Maintenance of Federal, State, and Local Interfaces Mecklenburg County must provide data exchanges and systems that are systematically becoming the preferred method and source for exchanging critical criminal justice information with external agencies, promoting the timely, efficient, accurate, and secure exchange of criminal justice information.

Criminal Justice Information Systems Strategic Plan

Action Plan

PMO/BPM Team 9 of 33

Funding In order to accomplish the goal of an integrated criminal justice enterprise for Mecklenburg County, adequate funding must be provided to all criminal justice agencies in the enterprise. The challenge ahead is for Mecklenburg County to manage the continuum of great need against scarce financial resources and to identify the cost-savings that the criminal justice enterprise will generate. Service Level Agreements and Maintenance CJIS developed, maintained, and upgraded systems need to be maintained via detailed service level agreements (SLA). To this extent, IST will provide the greatest benefit, continuous operation, best use, and least downtime of Criminal Justice systems. Project/Program management involvement is critical to the successful ongoing operation and integration of the Criminal Justice systems. Success Measurements Measuring Success of the Action Plans and Integration Efforts is critical in determining directional efficiency. A survey will be developed to help determine the success of the Strategic Plan Actions. The survey will be broken into 9 major categories: MEASURE 1: Collaboration (How well are the CJ Agencies working together?) MEASURE 2: Data Quality (How complete and standard-driven is the data?) MEASURE 3: Data Accessibility (How available is data across CJ Agencies?) MEASURE 4: Technical Equity (Can all Agencies utilize full capability of technology?) MEASURE 5: Cost Savings MEASURE 6: Project Success Measures (Taken from IST PMO project ending surveys) MEASURE 7: Process Improvement MEASURE 8: Risk Mitigation MEASURE 9: Customer Satisfaction Project/Enhancement Tie-In to Strategic Plan As new projects are initiated, there should be a direct correlation between the desired result of the project and the Strategic Plan. Partnership with the State of North Carolina As Mecklenburg County develops technologies and processes, there needs to be a collaboration with the State of North Carolina to assure the two entities are moving in the same direction.

Criminal Justice Information Systems Strategic Plan

Action Plan

PMO/BPM Team 10 of 33

The Action Plan is broken down into target timelines based on the fiscal year in place within Mecklenburg County. Each tactic under every strategy is broken out into action items.

Existing/Baseline (completed prior to July 2010)

IST and the criminal justice agencies have been working together and have completed some of the recommended strategies and tactics, notably in the Governance strategy. The remaining tactics will build upon the base of technology infrastructure and processes in place today.

Year One (July 2010 – June 2011)

The primary focus during the first twelve months will be to initiate the following key strategies: Enable the appropriate management of enterprise CJIS initiatives, Define roles and responsibilities between the PMO Team and departments, Create a Framework for Future Technology Activities, and roll out projects to support the vision, such as NCAWARE and Justice Data Warehouse.

Year Two (July 2011 – June 2012)

The primary focus during the second twelve months will be to initiate the following key strategies: Create an Efficient, Robust Methodology building on the Framework Created in Year One, Build upon Roles and Functions established for Governance Committee, Implement efficient and effective processes, and Continue rolling out Critical Projects.

Year Three and Beyond (July 2012 – future)

The primary focus entering the third year is to continue to utilize the momentum generated in the first two years, roll out effective technology solutions, and scale a methodology that is understood and agreed upon by all

To execute each strategy successfully, an action plan has been developed for each of the strategies and tactics outline above:

Criminal Justice Information Systems Strategic Plan

Action Plan

PMO/BPM Team 11 of 33

I - STRATEGY: Define, Document, and Disseminate our Current State

MEASURES: M1 - Collaboration, M9 - Customer Satisfaction

MEASURES: M7 – Process Improvement, M5 – Cost Savings

a. TACTIC: Assess and Define Current State (systems, technology interfaces & business process)

A ct

io n

0 - 6 Months (July 2010 – December 2010)

• Finalization of a Heat Map showing all CJ systems • Completion of an Information Exchange Overview

6 – 12 Months (January 2011 – June 2011)

• Complete Standard Operating Procedure Assessments for CJ groups. Specific groups and timelines to be determined

12 - 24 Months (Jul 2011 – June 2012)

• Complete Standard Operating Procedure Assessments for CJ groups. Specific groups and timelines to be determined

b. TACTIC: Examine Best Practices

A ct

io n

0 - 6 Months (July 2010 – December 2010)

• Formalize a process to review best practices of similar-size counties when beginning new initiatives

6 – 12 Months (January 2011 – June 2011)

• Determine primary/critical operations for review versus best practices of similar-size counties.

Criminal Justice Information Systems Strategic Plan

Action Plan

PMO/BPM Team 12 of 33

MEASURES: M1 – Collaboration, M5 – Cost Savings, M7 – Process Improvement, M9 – Customer Satisfaction

II - STRATEGY: Establish Criminal Justice Governance Structure

MEASURES: M1 - Collaboration

MEASURES: M1 - Collaboration

c. TACTIC: Develop The Business Case

A ct

io n

0 - 6 Months (July 2010 – December 2010)

• Create a Business Case Template to be completed along with the PPR to define Benefit Analysis, Return on Investment, and Process Improvement Savings

6 – 12 Months (January 2011 – June 2011)

• Train on and implement the Business Case Template within each agency in the Criminal Justice Organization

a. TACTIC: Develop Governance Concept and get Executive Approval

A ct

io n

Baseline / Existing (completed prior to July 2010)

• Create and get sign-off on a CJAG IT Governance Team Charter defining purpose and focus areas (completed February 24, 2010 - defined in Appendix)

• Create a CJAG IT Governance Organizational Chart defining how each of the teams interact (completed January 19, 2010 - defined in Appendix)

b. TACTIC: Propose committee members consisting of the Criminal Justice Advisory Group (CJAG)

A ct

io n

Baseline / Existing (completed prior to July 2010)

• Committee member selection and communication of roles (completed January 19, 2010 - defined in Appendix)

Criminal Justice Information Systems Strategic Plan

Action Plan

PMO/BPM Team 13 of 33

MEASURES: M1 – Collaboration, M4 – Technical Equity

MEASURES: M1 – Collaboration, M9 – Customer Satisfaction, M3 – Data Accessibility

c. TACTIC: Create a Collaborative Environment for the Sharing of Intelligence and Information

A ct

io n

0 - 6 Months (July 2010 – December 2010)

• Adopt strategic plan at Governance Committee level and presents to CJAG • Identify strategic issues and begin business model plan at Governance Committee • Collaborate with the State of North Carolina on new technologies and strategies

6 – 12 Months (January 2011 – June 2011)

• Develop a better understanding of funding across agencies • Build a business case and link to funding opportunities

12 - 24 Months (Jul 2011 – June 2012)

• Create a funding model for utilization across agencies • Create a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) across agencies

d. TACTIC: Develop Standards and Rules of Engagement between Criminal Justice Agencies

A ct

io n

0 - 6 Months (July 2010 – December 2010)

• Develop communication methodology to apprise entire organization of initiatives and/or enhancements that could impact more than the requesting agency

• Outline parameters of data exchange limitations, legal and technical • Utilize CJAG Tech Workgroup to leverage knowledge about functional and

operational requirements • Create a survey to provide feedback and measurements of strategic plan success

Criminal Justice Information Systems Strategic Plan

Action Plan

PMO/BPM Team 14 of 33

MEASURES: M1 – Collaboration, M7 – Process Improvement

e. TACTIC: Develop Project Ranking and Priority Process

A ct

io n

Baseline / Existing (completed prior to July 2010)

• Create a Project Dashboard for Projects in Process • Share Project Prioritization methodologies utilized in other areas of the county

with Criminal Justice Organizations

6 – 12 Months (January 2011 – June 2011)

• Adopt a Project Prioritization Methodology that crosses all Criminal Justice Agencies

Criminal Justice Information Systems Strategic Plan

Action Plan

PMO/BPM Team 15 of 33

III – Strategy: Identify, Develop, and Recommend Solutions to Improve Information Sharing

** A fusion center is an effective and efficient mechanism to exchange information and intelligence, maximize resources, streamline operations, and improve the ability to fight crime and terrorism by merging data from a variety of sources. In addition, fusion centers are a conduit for implementing portions of the National Criminal Intelligence Sharing Plan(NCISP). MEASURES: M2 – Data Quality, M3 – Data Accessibility, M8 – Risk Mitigation, M1 - Collaboration

a. TACTIC: Standards Development.

A ct

io n

Baseline / Existing (completed prior to July 2010)

• Commit to utilization of NIEM Standards (National Information Exchange Model) for all projects moving forward

6 – 12 Months (January 2011 – June 2011)

• Begin documenting standards for core data, shared data, and restricted data, defining all fields by organization that fall into each category

12 - 24 Months (Jul 2011 – June 2012)

• Continue documenting standards for core data, shared data, and restricted data, defining all fields by organization that fall into each category

24 + Months (July 2012 – future)

• Retrofit NIEM standards into existing applications

• Explore utilizing a Fusion Center** approach to leverage current information technology investments, facilitate improved and expanded information sharing, and provide the operational agility to respond to the evolving needs

Criminal Justice Information Systems Strategic Plan

Action Plan

PMO/BPM Team 16 of 33

MEASURES: M7 – Process Improvement, M9 – Customer Satisfaction, M8 – Risk Mitigation

MEASURES: M7 – Process Improvement, M9 – Customer Satisfaction, M8 – Risk Mitigation

b. TACTIC: Privacy and Civil Liberties Policy Development

A ct

io n

6 – 12 Months (January 2011 – June 2011)

• Gather all documentation and knowledge regarding Client Privacy policies and laws

• Create a Centralized repository of information for easy access by all organizations

12 - 24 Months (Jul 2011 – June 2012)

• Review Mecklenburg policies in relation to other Counties, State, and Federal policies and laws

c. TACTIC: Security Plan Development

A ct

io n

12 - 24 Months (Jul 2011 – June 2012)

• Gather all documentation and knowledge regarding Criminal Justice Information Security

• Create a Centralized repository of information for easy access by all organizations

24 + Months (July 2012 – future)

• Review Security Set-ups to assure compliance with acceptable standards

• Create Action Plans where appropriate

Criminal Justice Information Systems Strategic Plan

Action Plan

PMO/BPM Team 17 of 33

MEASURES: M9 – Customer Satisfaction, M8- Risk Mitigation

MEASURES: M3 – Data Accessibility, M7 – Process Improvement

d. TACTIC: Risk, Communication, and Training Plan Development

A ct

io n

6 – 12 Months (January 2011 – June 2011)

• Define/Discuss the approach to create Risk, Communication, and Training Plans

12 - 24 Months (Jul 2011 – June 2012)

• Create a Risk Mitigation Plan for information sharing across agencies

• Create a Communication Plan for inter-agency information sharing

• Create a Training Plan for implementation of cross-agency information utilization

e. TACTIC: Articulate and Document Needs/Requirements

A ct

io n

6 – 12 Months (January 2011 – June 2011)

• Creation of Master List of Data Needs for each Agency from all other CJ agencies

12 - 24 Months (Jul 2011 – June 2012)

• Utilization of Business Case Document to Articulate Project Needs

Criminal Justice Information Systems Strategic Plan

Action Plan

PMO/BPM Team 18 of 33

IV – Strategy: Improve information sharing through plan implementation and technology deployment

MEASURES: M5 – Cost Savings, M4 - Technical Equity

MEASURES: M3 – Data Accessibility, M2 – Data Quality, M5 – Cost Savings, M6 – Project Success Measures

a. TACTIC: Enterprise Architecture Development

A ct

io n

24 + Months (July 2012 – future)

• Leverage Standard Operating Procedures to finalize a Enterprise Architecture Plan

• Finalize an enterprise framework of business architecture and application interaction

b. TACTIC: Leverage the Databases, Systems, and Networks available

A ct

io n

6 – 12 Months (January 2011 – June 2011)

• Leverage ACIS to supply data to complete PD Case Management project

• Leverage Daptiv to improve resource management and project performance communication/reporting

• Leverage ACIS to supply data to complete Felony File Tracking and Justice Data Warehouse

• Leverage OMS for Justice Data Warehouse

• Leverage Q-Flow to complete workflow processes within Juvenile and Trial Court

12 - 24 Months (Jul 2011 – June 2012)

• Leverage existing SBI AFIS interface to build new Arrest Process

24 + Months (July 2012 – future)

• Utilize Enterprise Architecture to make decisions on future projects, technology, and needs

Criminal Justice Information Systems Strategic Plan

Action Plan

PMO/BPM Team 19 of 33

MEASURES: M6 – Project Success Measures, M4 – Technical Equity, M3 – Data Accessibility, M9 – Customer Satisfaction

MEASURES: M5 - Cost Savings, M7 – Process Improvement

c. TACTIC: Create an Environment to Allow for Future Connectivity to Other Systems

A ct

io n

0 - 6 Months (July 2010 – December 2010)

• Utilize Biz Talk for improved intra-application communication

• Complete NCAWARE project

6 – 12 Months (January 2011 – June 2011)

• Complete Justice Data Warehouse phase 1, providing dashboard level intelligence pulling together court and jail data

• Complete the Arrest Process Project

• Complete the Public Defender Case Management project

24 + Months (July 2012 – future)

• Analyze the project potential of a Justice Data Warehouse phase 2, providing business intelligence across several law enforcement agencies and interface with city and regional justice data warehouses to increase/improve information sharing

d. TACTIC: Recommend Technical Solutions to Business Information Needs

A ct

io n

0 - 6 Months (July 2010 – December 2010)

• Employ BPM methodology, reviewing business process and making recommendations on technology needs

6 – 12 Months (January 2011 – June 2011)

• Develop a strategy for recommending solutions to the business when new needs are defined

• Refine and enhance BPM methodology within the Criminal Justice Organizations

Criminal Justice Information Systems Strategic Plan

Conclusion

20 of 33

In closing, the strategic action plan should drive the following key objectives:

Customer …