Reference no: EM13997034

Case Study: Officer Robert Barton

Officer Barton joined a big city police department six years ago. He was a high school graduate from a middle-class family in a small town. His parents spoke French, English, and Spanish, and he was fluent in all three languages. His first six months in the department (after the academy) was an eye-opener and somewhat of a cultural shock. At first he was lost, and he had some difficulty in adjusting to the lifestyles of a big city. It soon became apparent that the police had bonds of loyalty and secrecy and that there was a general feeling of "us against them." He found that he was part of a subculture that demanded a high level of esprit de corps and solidarity. It was soon apparent that the officers he worked with viewed themselves as the "thin blue line." His fellow officers that were in his academy class came from varying backgrounds, and most of them had lived in metropolitan areas all of their lives. They shared diverse values, attitudes, and perspectives. Slowly but surely the officers felt the need to belong and assimilated the new subculture, and in relatively short time, they became comfortable interacting with one another. They became a source of mutual support to each other.

Robert Barton, like most of his peers, started out slowly and was somewhat overawed by the total process, but in time he began to think, act, and feel like a cop. He wanted to be a good cop. His goals were to preserve the peace and to protect people and society from criminals. Barton placed a relatively high value on individual rights and due process of law. He really wanted to protect and serve, but with the reality of the street and the social status that he sought, within the group, he quickly accepted the norms and values of his peers and of his field training officers (FTO). Barton was a good candidate for the socialization process and quickly learned the importance of going along with the flow. The taboos were readily apparent such as failure to back up an officer who is in danger and above all exhibit bravery in the face of danger or suffer the consequences and be ostracized by the group. Barton also learned that his immediate sergeant would be the most important in his life while working. This proved to be especially true during the two-year probationary period.

After three years in the patrol division, Officer Barton was reassigned. He was placed in a Joint Gang Task Force, which consisted of 26 investigators and 1 supervisor from 6 jurisdictions who formed a tightly knit work group. This was a group that was just organized, and he wanted to become a full-fledged member of the group.

It consisted of a homogeneous and cohesive group of bilingual people who identified with each other and shared a unique set of values, attitudes, and beliefs related to their job. Based on continual face-to face interaction among themselves and with gang members, they soon became a viable component in the effort to control gang activities. It was immediately apparent that the task force rewarded loyalty, secrecy, and conformity to group-shared expectations. Their highest priority was to suppress gang activity to reduce the occurrence of gang-related crimes. Some of the activities the task force performed skirted the law, and it was not uncommon that they conducted illegal searches and stopped many individuals who were not known to have a gang affiliation. In other instances, arrests were made without probable cause, and many suspected gang members were booked and then released. In other words, get them off of the street. Although Bob Barton tried to remain neutral and adhere to his set of personal values, he needed recognition, support, and approval from the group. Subconsciously, he wanted to be a "stand-up guy," and he felt compelled to sacrifice his standards to achieve acceptance and status from the work group. Membership in the group became an end in itself. Abstract notions of right and wrong became irrelevant to him. Integrity consisted of loyalty to and protection of the group. The rationalization was that no one really got hurt, and there was a real need to preserve peace in the communities.

Using concepts related to groups and group dynamics, explain what happened in this situation. When does group cohesiveness cease to be positive and become pathological? Are subcultures in police work inevitable? Explain. What steps might you take, as a police administrator, to prevent this from occurring?

Summary

Human beings are social animals that live, work, and find varying degrees of psychosocial validation in groups. Groups, as the basic unit of social organization, provide people with a cultural milieu in which to satisfy their personality needs as well as their social need for interaction with significant others. Each person develops a social identity, a unique sense of self, and an internalized set of normative controls through meaningful interaction with other people during the socialization process.

Most people belong to and participate in a wide variety of formal organizations and informal cliques. Some groups are task oriented and highly structured. Other groups are much more casual and coalesce around vague (loosely defined) common interests. These groups tend to emphasize the importance of meaningful interpersonal relationships as opposed to the task itself.

Each group develops a distinctive social orientation, or collective persona. New members are socialized to behave in certain ways. They are expected to learn and internalize appropriate roles, norms, values, and cultural perspectives. All members are rewarded forconformity to group-shared expectations and punished if they deviate. Consciousness of kind and internalized self-control reduce conflict and promote collaboration.

Groups that become functional entities are defined, as viewed by social interactionist, when two or more officers interact with other members. Another prerequisite is to share one or more goals. Involvement in this definition is the key, and members allow themselves to be governed by a normative system of attitudes, values, and behavior that lead to a stable relationship. Additionally, it is found that officers will form subgroups based on interpersonal attraction or rejection.

Work groups are mechanisms through which goal-oriented human beings learn relevant knowledge, technical skills, and job-related behaviors. Groups have life cycles just like all other living organisms. Group dynamics have an effect on individual performance. Group dynamics also influence the efficiency, effectiveness, and productivity of the organization. Whether these effects are good or bad will depend on member needs and the complexity of the task; the size, composition, norms, and cohesiveness of the group; and the prevailing reward structure.

Stages in the group developmental process include the following steps: orientation, conflict and challenge, cohesion, delusion, disillusion, and acceptance. Teamwork that will result in a winning team comes to pass because of the hard work involved in understanding the behavior of team members and the leader. The team leader must strive to create a team wherein each officer accepts and promotes the four Cs of team membership: collaboration, conform, contribute, and cooperate.

Experienced police administrators accept that groups, subgroups, and cliques exist within the police department. They understand that groups are inevitable and ubiquitous. They also know that groups unleash powerful synergistic forces that can have either good or bad consequences, depending on the situation. The police administrator's principal job is to manage the department's human resources in such a way as to increase its overall efficiency, effectiveness, and productivity. In order to accomplish this objective, he or she must do the following: (1) accept the group phenomenon as a fact of organizational life; (2) identify and seek cooperation from informal group leaders; (3) prevent dysfunctional competition and the development of win-lose situations; (4) avoid forcing members to choose between allegiance to management and to their group; (5) adopt a coach's attitude toward groups, subgroups, and cliques within the organization; (6) motivate work groups by appealing to their sense of competence; and (7) utilize traditional and nontraditional methods to encourage individual effort as well as group collaboration.

The police subculture is viable and has a strong influence on police agencies. These norms exert a strong influence over the individual conduct of officers, and it does not take long for a new officer to learn what acceptable behavior is. Norms come into existence as the result of group interaction. It is readily apparent that police departments meticulously demand a strong degree of loyalty.
Effective team leaders have proven to be those who can recognize and contribute to a decisive group process. Research suggests that a team leader is an individual who has developed the capacity to persuade and motivate others to achieve objectives and goals. This type of team leader is easily identifiable because they have demonstrated the capacity to work with a group of officers and transform them into a cohesive, dynamic, and hard-charging productive work group. A positive team climate comes into existence because the leader demonstrates clear-cut skills, presents a convincing attitude, provides guidance in establishing priorities, and secures goal attainment.

In order to be successful in working with groups, police administrators must have knowledge, good interpersonal skills, and a positive attitude concerning subgroup participation in the organization's decision-making process. This will enable them to channel the energy, effort, and expertise of group members in such a way as to achieve the mission, goals, and objectives of the police department. Truly, knowledge is power, and skill is the ability to translate knowledge into action.

Discussion Topics and Questions

1. List and discuss the distinct social functions that groups perform for their members.

2. What are the characteristics of formal work groups, and how do they differ from informal groups within law enforcement agencies?

3. How do social interactionists define a group, and why do they place such an emphasis on action?

4. What are the principal psychosocial needs that motivate human beings to join and remain active in informal as well as formal groups?

5. Name and discuss four categories commonly used to classify groups in terms of their function. Which are most often associated with the division of labor?

6. Identify and describe the primary structural components that are common to both formal and informal groups.

7. The police are referred to as a subculture. What is a subculture? What are values and norms, and how are they passed on to new members?

8. How does the prevailing reward structure influence individual performance and work-group productivity?

9. Identify, list, and discuss the characteristics of work groups that have a direct effect on individual performance and organizational productivity.