Unit Assessment Questions:
What are the differences and similarities between community-oriented policing services and problem-oriented policing?
Your response must be at least 500 words in length.
What are some methods to getting the community involved in neighborhood issues and problem identification?
What are the benefits and disadvantages to having the community involved in problem identification?
Your response must be at least 500 words in length.
Community-oriented policing services (COPS) rely on supervisors who live by values and strong ethics. They
believe the organization’s mission is to serve and help the community. They exercise self-discipline and work
hard, leading from the front. They know how and where to allocate their time. They value individual
contributions as the entire organization gains success. Problem-oriented policing (POP) can only be
successful when police leadership turns the COPS philosophical approach into an operational reality
(Whisenand & McCain, 2015). They can take the goals of a mission statement and shape them into attainable
projects and objectives. Problem-oriented policing (POP) is the accomplishment of community-oriented
Community-oriented policing services (COPS) benefit the community and the police. The benefit for the
community is that there is a commitment to crime prevention. There is a public scrutiny of police operations
and an increased accountability to the public and customized police services. The community is organized to
work together with the police. No one side carries the weight or responsibility without the cooperation of the
other. The benefit for the police is that they realize greater citizen support. There is a mutual, shared
responsibility for confronting crime in the community. The police receive greater job satisfaction, and better
internal relationships are built as units and teams work together instead of independently. Finally, there is a
greater acceptance and support for organizational changes. COPS require a massive restructuring of the
department to ensure the mix of all different functions are retooled to support the new systems (Whisenand &
Problem-oriented policing (POP) highlights the worth of being able to systematically analyze the continuing
issues that exist in incidents reported to the police, and then design and implement tailored solutions to the
problems. We see that a police agency is utilizing problem-oriented policing (POP) strategies when it
recognizes fundamental community problems, probes methodically into their nature, analyzes community
interest and distinct interest in each problem, assesses current responses, conducts an uninhibited search for
ideal solutions, takes enterprise in executing solutions, and evaluates the effectiveness of solutions.
For a problem-oriented policing (POP) program to be effective, the following must be accomplished: it must
involve all department members, it must promise the use of a wide assortment of information sources, it must
inspire police employees to collaborate with members of the public and private agencies to design action
plans, it must be an essential part of police operations without generating special units or necessitating
additional resources, and it must be capable of being transferred to other law enforcement agencies
(Whisenand & McCain, 2015).
UNIT VIII STUDY GUIDE
Community Oriented Policing/Problem
Oriented Policing and Results
BCJ 4301, Management and Supervision in Criminal Justice 2
UNIT x STUDY GUIDE
The problem analysis guide SARA stands for scanning analysis response assessment. Here, we identify the
problem by scanning, then learn the problem’s origins and effects through analysis. There is a response to
lessen the problem, and finally, the assessment to determine if the response was effective.
There are eleven interconnected steps that encompass a problem-oriented policing (POP) program. Each
step falls into one of three phases: problem identification, problem analysis, and approaches (Whisenand &
McCain, 2015). Problem-oriented policing (POP) works with specific responses. Problems are unique to an
agency, so addressing them should be goal specific. A problem-oriented policing (POP) program should be
viewed as a way to resolve community problems.
Chapter 15 examines the pros and cons of measurement. This chapter studies the essentials of performance
measurement as well as the measurable, measuring, and what really counts. Chapter 15 will review what is
acceptable, strengths based success, and how it equals outstanding performance.
Data collection alone will not improve police operations. The spirit behind improvement is the analysis,
conversations, and questions created therein by supervisors. Also necessary is the follow-up actions when
data does become available for review. The pros and cons of measuring performance vary. Some pros of
measurement are performance improvement, what gets measured gets supervised, it becomes workable,
resource justification, and transparency. Some cons to performance measurement are that it is considered a
threat, it has been done before, there are no cause-effect outcomes, there are unfair comparisons, it is used a
political tool, what is done is not measured effectively, and pay is attached to performance (Whisenand &
We see in reporting that there are four words that are considered performance measures. The four words are
inputs, activities, outputs, and outcomes. Why do we measure performance? Three groups must know how
effective the police are functioning for different reasons. The community wants and deserves to understand
what they are receiving for their tax dollar. Police leadership is responsible and expected to know the level of
service and value the community is receiving. Police personnel should be informed of what the expectations
are and exactly what they can do to improve the quality and quantity of their work.
Modern management has emphasized pushing performance outcomes and strengths. Organizations are
pairing performance quantities to budget considerations that will affect community values and service results.
In 1966, Peter Drucker wrote, “The effective executive builds on strengths-their own strengths, the strengths
of superiors, colleagues, subordinates and on the strengths of the situation” (as cited in Whisenand &
McCain, 2015, p. 245). Measuring performance outcomes and strengths enables us to lead police agencies
on their way to success instead of spending time repairing the failures.
Whisenand, P. M., & McCain, E. D. (2015). Supervising police personnel: Strengths-based leadership
(8th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Ha