Le 200 Lectures Series

7/29/2019 Le 200 Lectures Series

1/201

LE 200: LEADERSHIP IN LAW ENFORCEMENT

Topic One: The Concept of Law Enforcement from a Leadershipperspective

1. Law Enforcement2. Leadership3. Justification from Philosophical traditions

Lecture 1: Law Enforcement and its DimensionsWhat is law enforcement?Is a broad range of public and private mechanisms that are used by the society toenforce the laws. It is not a legal function, but rather is an aspect in theimplementation of the law.

The law enforcement aspect is crucial for the lawyers since most of the lawyerstake laws as supreme principles which are to be abided to by all the members ofthe society. On the side of administration (execution and implementation) of thelaw, scholars believe that making the people abide by law needs legal experts togo an extra mail and think about the stage of implementing the law.Implementation of the law determines effectiveness of the legal system, but it isitself a tactical artlike the art of politics.

Like the way politics work, successful implementation of the law means usingboth overt and covert (active and passive) powers to influence the people tobelieve that they are not just obliged to respecting the law, but also it is a goodthing and it expresses a sense of being part of the society of which the law isdesigned to protect.

Different Dimensions of Law EnforcementPrivate enforcement versus public enforcement dimensionUnder private enforcement, the law is enforced by the private individual actors(simply because) that actor wants to overcome the harm caused by the law

violators upon him, his property, or social welfare. Public law enforcement refers

to enforcement of the law by actors who are publicly entrusted with the functionof enforcing the law in society such as policy, regulators, and criminalinvestigation bureaus. Public enforcers are always incentivised by thegovernment to enforce law since the government is entrusted with collectiveexecution of the law.

The Stage of Intervention DimensionThis is concerned with at which stage the law is being enforced. In this respect,there are three types of law enforcement. However, there is no clear cutdistinction between the three types.


2/202

Prospective enforcement: This is intervention that occurs when the actthat is centrally to the law has happened. The law can be enforced before it is

violated, basically to prevent violation of the law (inspection, investigation,control of armament, police order the organized students demonstration todisperse, placing the auxiliary police at the entrance gate, denial of license for acompany that does not qualify to supply food staffs, the auxiliary police requiresstudents to seek gate pass permit). In most cases it is common in criminal law.

Introspective Enforcement: This is a typically meditative intervention inlaw enforcement that aims to prevent the unlawful act from happening. Itpresupposes physical control of the action that is harmful. In most cases force, orsomething close to it is used. Examples include snaking a gun from a fatherintends to shoot his son because he is a thief, stopping and inspecting a student

without gate pass on the exit gate, TFDA rocks a hospital that does not qualify. Inmost cases this is done by public actors, though in rare cases can be done by

private actors. Retrospective Enforcement: this is an intervention that occurs when the

act has committed. Such interventions are in most cases in form of act-basedsanctions. For example, the rapist is sentenced 30 years imprisonment, a student

who did was charged of examinations irregularities is suspended from studies, ataxi driver is fined 20,000 Tshs for using the service road.

The form of Sanctions Dimension Monetary Intervention

It is basically a monetary function (fine). Fine is imposed on the person(s) whogoes against the law not due to the fact that he/she has got a lot of money. It isbasically due to the assumption that man would choose to lose most of theproperty other than life, but not money. For example, a friend would buy winecosting 50,000Tshs for you, but not offering 10,000 in cash. Traditionally, a fine

was not a punishment, but rather a way of collecting peoples behavior. Today,the fining system is widely used for non criminal offenses mostly due to its coston the side of law enforcers compared to other methods of law enforcement.

Non-monetary interventionThis is a form of legal sanctions in which a person or persons who violate the lawis sanctioned through other mechanisms than paying fine. These includeimprisonment, death penalty, and probationary restraint on conduct.


3/203

Lecture 2: Leadership and Leaders FunctionsWhat is Leadership? Who is a leader?It must be noted that leadership is a process rather than a position.

Scholars believe that leadership is best understood when it is compared withmanagement. To lead is to set a new direction, to show the way for others tofollow. A leader must be able to exercise positive influence of the thoughts andactions of other people. A leader must initiate new actions and also make peoplego through those actions. Despite both leadership and management entailsdealing with people, leading is not about determining the available way for thepeople to pass, but rather identifying the way for people to pass. However,leadership has components of management in it since creating identifying settingthe vision does not exclude showing the vision.

While managers do things right, leaders do right things. While management isabout controlling people, leadership is about winning people and influencingthem to do what one believes is right. While leaders set new visions and directionfor groups, managers direct, control in relation to the established set ofprinciples. Leadership is potentially a property of an individual (including histraits, behavior, and personality) while management goes with a position.

Senge (1990) defines leadership as a process that involves interactions andrelationship between people. Thus,we cannot have a leader when there isno a follower (while a manager can manage process) e.g. credit

managers in banks.

Different dimensions of law enforcement emphasize different tools for effectiveenforcement of the law. Some of the dimensions put much emphasis on theleadership component while other underplays the whole idea of leadership. Forexample, in the private-public enforcement dimension, the private enforcementpart emphasizes leadership while the public enforcement part does notencourage leadership.

Types of LeadersNo clear formal way of classifying leaders. They may come in all shapes and allsizes.

Charismatic leaders Traditional Leaders Situational leaders Transformational leaders Transactional leader Appointed leaders

Elected leaders


4/204

Functional leaders Autocratic leaders Democratic leader

Topic Two: Theories of Leadership and their Relationship with LawEnforcement

Lecture 3: Theories of LeadershipA theory, as a simplified set of assumptions and conclusions that offer

explanation for the complex social reality. As a Kaleidoscope, a theory offerslenses for scholars to look at and explain the complex social reality.

Leadership theories attempt to answer several questions; some of them are;1.Who is a leader?2.What distinguishes a leader from other people (not leaders)3.Who is an effective leader?4.What is the nature of relationship between the leader and the

followers?5. How does the nature of relationship between leaders and followers

affect leaders behavior?

Trait TheoriesTrait theories assume that there are different traits, which determineeffectiveness of leaders. These traits include physiological (appearance, height,and weight), demographic (age, education and socioeconomic background),personality, self-confidence, and aggressiveness), intellective (intelligence,decisiveness, judgment, and knowledge), task-related (achievement drive,initiative, and persistence), and social characteristics (sociability and


5/205

cooperativeness). Such traits can determine both emergence and effectiveness ofleaders in society. Among the core traits identified by trait theorists are:

A popular trait theory is the Great man theory, which believes that leadersare distinguished from other people since they have certain traits. The great mantheory assumes that the leaders are born and not made and posses certain traits

which were inherited. The theory also assumes that great leaders can arisewhenthere is a greatneed). These traits are innate in them (including personality,courage, charisma, vision, fortune) that distinguish them from common people.The theory suggests that individuals can be trained and tested to identify ifthey possess those competences that make them great men (leaders).

The great man theory of leadership states that some people are born with thenecessary attributes that set them apart from others and that these traits are

responsible for their assuming positions of power and authority. A leader is ahero who accomplishes goals against all odds for his followers. The theoryimplies that those in power deserve to be there because of their specialendowment. Furthermore, the theory contends that these traits remain stableover time and across different groups. Thus, it suggests that all great leadersshare these characteristic regardless of when and where they lived or the preciserole in the history they fulfilled.

One of the earliest proponents, Thomas Carlyle noted; the history of the world isbut the biography of great men. According to him, a leader is the one gifted with

unique qualities that capture the imagination of the masses. The traits that makeleaders different from other people are;

Achievement drive: High level of effort, high levels of ambition, energyand initiative

Leadership motivation: an intense desire to lead others to reach sharedgoals

Honesty and integrity: trustworthy, reliable, and open Self-confidence: Belief in ones self, ideas, and ability Cognitive ability: Capable of exercising good judgment, strong analytical

abilities, and conceptually skilled

Knowledge of business: Knowledge of industry and other technicalmatters

Emotional Maturity: well adjusted, does not suffer from severepsychological disorders.

Others: charisma, creativity and flexibilityBehavioral TheoryBehavior theory focuses on what an effective leader does. The theory believes

that leadership is not something that people are born with, nor do they need a set


6/206

of commonly accepted traits. However, effectiveness of leadership is dependenton possession of the right behavior. Researchers proposed that for a leader to beeffective, their behavior must vary with the situation. In other words, you canlearn how to act like a leader in a given situation.

Behavior theories are based on categories of behavior and leadership types. Thetheory believes that outward behavior (which can generally be learnt) is enoughto establish leadership.

Two main studies identified the core sets of behavior that two types of leadersneed to posses.

Ohio State University (1940s)Task Oriented Leaders: task oriented leaders would have concern withmotivation, but their concern is mainly manipulating the structure

(operational rules to achieve higher production). Initiating Organizing Clarifying Information Gathering

People Oriented Leaders: The people oriented leaders behavior focuson ensuring that the inner needs of the people are satisfied. Thus, their

behavior are inclined towards achieving tasks through motivating thepeople. Therefore; they emphasize:

Encouraging

Observing Listening Coaching and Mentoring

In the 1970s, research found most of the Behavior theory research to be invalid(Howell and Costley, 2001; Yaverbaum and Sherman, 2008); however,leadership behavior is still frequently discussed.

READ INTROD TO LEA IN LEINF


7/207

Lecture 5: Theories of Leadership

Group and Exchange theoryThe group and exchange theories of leadership are not concerned with behavioralor trait qualities of leaders. A typical group and exchange theory, the Leader-

Member Exchange theory (LMX) looks at leadership as a process that isconcerned with interaction and exchange of relationship between the leader andfollowers (not styles, skills, context, and traits). The theory suggests that theleader relates with each of the followers. However, the nature of relationship

between the leader and followers is dyadic.

The leader does not treat all the followers equally. Some of the followers are inthe inner-group while others are in the out-group. The followers who are in theinner-group have closer linkages with the leader, their relationship is informal,

negotiated, and they perform extra roles. Their relationship with a leader ismarked by mutual trust, respect, liking, and mutual influence. Those in the out-group maintain formal, prescribed, role based, and contractual relationship withthe leader.

Figure 1: Dyadic Relationship between a leader and followers


8/208

According to the theory, the effective leader should develop quality relationshipswith all members that make everyone feel like they are in the in-group. Theprocess of developing high-quality exchange relationship involves three majorphases overtime (leadership making).

Phase 1: StrangerPhase 2: AcquaintancePhase 3: Mature PartnerFig 2. 2. Phases in Leadership Making

Source: Graen and Bien (1995)

At each of the phases, relationship in the leader-follower dyad tends to improve(increase in trust, respect, obligation, and reciprocity). In the theory, a leadercontinuously builds relationship with all members, encourages them, nurturesthem, and concentrates on building positive relationship, respect, and trust to

achieve the highest possible positive level of exchange of relationship with allmembers (followers). The theory encourages communication as a central way ofachieving goals and is widely applied in different organizational settings.

However, it has been criticized for encouraging favoritism. The theory leavesmany questions unanswered, e.g. how to create high quality leader memberrelationship? How to build respect, trust etc. How can the levels of leader-member relationship be measured?


9/209

Lecture 6: Leadership theories ContinueMcGregor Theory X and YMcGregor developed a simplified theory based on the beliefs of themanagers/leaders towards an individual human being (worker/subordinate).The assumptions of the two theories are as follows.

Table 2.1. Assumptions about Human Nature that Underlie McGregors Theory Xand Theory Y

The way a leader will treat people depends on the theory type that leader(manager) is. A leader/manager that is dominantly theory X type will be control


10/2010

oriented, and will have little time to cooperate with his people. In case of law,s/he would dominantly believe that the average person cannot participate inenforcing the law and will always be against the law. A manager/leader who isdominantly theory Y type will always believe that the subordinates/followershave a sense of responsibility; they need little control and therefore willencouraged cooperation.

In law enforcement, theory X agrees much with public law enforcementapproaches while theory Y agrees with private law enforcement approaches.

Transactional Leadership TheoryTransactional leadership theory focuses primarily on performance. The theoryrequires that the leader and follower agree to a contract. The follower isresponsible for following orders to perform a task. The leader, in turn, gives

rewards for following orders in completing the task. Transactionalleadership suggests that people only complete tasks when there are externalrewards. However, many people accomplish tasks and reach goals because oftheir own internal motivation.

Figure 2.3: Day-to-day Leader-follower relationship in task accomplishment[L=Leader, F=Follower]

45Leaders who act guided by the transactional theory (transactional leaders) willconstantly emphasize on the procedures, laws, and orders (eg the police generalorders), which they assume that if they are well followed the followers wouldaccomplish their tasks and receive rewards that they deserve. When it comes tolaw enforcement, this theory sits well with the public law enforcement approach.


11/2011

Lecture 7: Theories of LeadershipTransformational Leadership TheoryTransformational leadership theory looks at leadership as a process that isPRIMARILY concerned with creating a change. A leader must be fully committed

to the transformation and the commitment must be visible to organizationalmembers and external stakeholders. The theory believes that successful leadersalways engage others, build trust, and create a connection that increases themotivation and morality in both the leader and the followers. Atransformational leader focuses on others and their needs in order to helpthem reach their potential. In many ways, transformational leadership is about aleaders ability to create a vision related to a goal that has meaning for both theleader and follower.

The theory contends that a transformational leader articulates the vision in a

clear and appealing manner, explains how to attain the vision, acts confidentlyand optimistically, expresses confidence in his followers, emphasizes values withsymbolic actions, leads by example, and empowers followers to achieve the

vision. Moreover, through the influence of a leaders values, transformationalleadership requires the leader to balance multiple constituency needs along withindividual and organizational values and beliefs

Figure 2.4: A model for transformational leadership process


12/2012

In that case, the theory suggests that a transformational leader must possessattributes that strike a balance between individual considerations andorganizational values. The attributes are listed in table 2.2.

Table 2.2: Transformational Leadership Attributes

Contingency TheoryThe contingency theory is based on the assumption that there is neither one wayof leading or set of traits or behavior that are needed for all leaders, in all places,

at all times. In a more progressive approach to leadership, the contingency theoryrecommends matching a leadersstyle to the right situation, which involvesmatching to the team of people and goals. Two common Contingency theoriesare Path-Goal theory and Situational theory.

Path-Goal Theory: proposes that effective leaders help followersreach goals through motivation by involving them in fulfilling andmeaningful tasks that match their ability. The leader providescoaching, direction, motivation and rewards for the followers.

Situational Theory recommends that different situations call fordifferent kinds of leadership. This calls for the leader to change their styleto match the situation and the abilities of their followers.

Given the nature of law enforcement function, the theory suggests that lawenforcement leaders should learn what could best motivate differentconstituencies to play their proper role in enforcing the law. The theory suggestthat law enforcement leaders supervisory and control effort demands are affected

by different factors. For instance, the maturity of followers affect the way leadersbehave in terms of both relationship behavior and task related behavior. Figure2.5: shows the effect of followers maturity on leaders behavior


13/2013

Figure 2.5: Effect of Followers Maturity on Leaders Behavior

Other factors may be

Level of education Prevailing situation /peace or lack of peace

Topic Three: The Relevance of leadership in Law Enforcement

Philosophical Justification of Leadership in LawEnforcement

Unlike other functions of the government, law enforcement does not have a solid

philosophical basis. There are no philosophers who can be identified as having full-fledgedsets of philosophical ideas on law enforcement, but some ideas are

borrowed from the writings of philosophers who contemplated aboutdifferent aspects related to politics, government, and law including

Aristotle, John Locke, Machiavelli, Thomas Hobbes, etc.

Machiavelli, (1439-1527) in The PrinceIn his philosophy, human nature determines the approach to law enforcement.

characterized man as by nature selfish, wicked, deceitful, greedy, self-interested,profit driven, and concerned with himself compared to others. Machiavelli arguesthat man is usually content and happy so long as he is not victim of some terribleoccurrence or set of negative circumstances. However, the state of nature ischaracterized by negative circumstances (murder, destruction, and violence). So asto be safe, content, and happy man wanted to live out of the state of nature bysubmitting to the sovereign, the Prince who is by necessity, a member of anestablished and influential family, a man with long blood-lines to other rulers who,

by nature of his heredity, has less cause to offend others and thus rules effectivelythrough his urbane nature. (Chap II, pp.8)


14/2014

Machiavelli Advocated for a strong totalitarian government that is led by anabsolute monarchy. For him, an absolute monarch (who is also a native) wouldprovide collective execution of the law while subjecting private interests over privateinterests. He thought that an individual (or aliens and firms) is by nature against thelaw and would not respect the law voluntarily or even cooperate in the enforcementof law. Thus, the prince has to maintain a strong military force that can help him toexecute the law for common good (not civilian police). For Machiavelli, if theindividuals are given chance would revolt the prince (who is there for collectiveprotection). For him, only the prince would provide viable framework for collectiveprotection and eliminate all forms of suffering (of the state of nature).

Those who have borrowed Machiavellis philosophy support the use of militaristicpolicing approach, mainly the police that is directly owned and controlled by the

state (or paramilitary institutions of law enforcement). Even in the current context,neo-Machiavellians do not believe in private law enforcement. They would ratherrequire that the government have in place strong public institutions of lawenforcement (which have no link with the community).

Thomas Hobbes (15881679), inLeviathan

Hobbes characterized human beings as by nature brutish, war-like, nasty, and selfinterested. Man in the state of nature was like a beast. The state of nature was thus astate of war of every man against every man. Consequently, life was "solitary,poorer, nasty, brutish, and short". Such a state of constant wars among individual

limits social developments and common wealth. Thus, people sought to create asociety in which natural rights of the people are protected and all persons ought toseek peace. This society has to be ruled by a strong absolute monarch who executesand protects the law on behalf of all the people. Only the sovereign, on behalf of allknows how best the law can be collectively safeguarded.

Hobbes believed that the role of citizens is just to respect the law that has beenagreed upon between the sovereign and them. In turn, the role of the sovereign is tosafeguard the rights of those who respect the rights of the others. Thus, once thepublic has authorized the sovereign to pass the law, they have no right to challengethe law at the stage of enforcement. The law cannot be challenged or corrected onthe course of implementing it.

The police for instance which is in most cases entrusted with law enforcement istaken as the institution that is highly capable of determining what is right or wrongin the face of the law (just think of the police officer asking you,unanifundisha kazi?). The assumption here is that; the police is working as a asa public agency that has received both discipline and procedure from the state (notpart of the state). Thus, it works best due possession of procedural and professional

knowledge that is related to law enforcement aspects (such as criminal detection,


15/2015

investigation, and others). With this assumption, Hobbes is quoted saying that thesovereign knows what is best for his people and it is his will that defines evil andgood for his subject. (If you shut up and do as you are told, you have theright not to be killed, and you do not even have the right not to bekilled, for no matter what the Sovereign does, and what he does doesntconstitute violation of contract).

However, unlike Machiavelli, Hobbes was not interested in fusion between the stateand law enforcement institutions. Apart from being strong, the sovereign has togovern populace. Therefore, for him, law enforcement institutions, which alsoincluded the judiciary, should not be part of the state. In other words, Hobbesphilosophy of law enforcement was moderate and tries to balance between privateand public enforcement. The best thing is that, like John Locke, Hobbes believedthat the government that governs populace should encourage both making law

enforcement effective and legitimacy of the law (to the people) the two areimportant for successful law enforcement.

Jon LockeJon Lockes ides that are associated with law enforcement are in most cases aredrawn from "The Second Treatise of Government". Locke believed that, man is bynature a social animal, cooperative, and likes peace. Man in the state of nature washappy, free and enjoyed natural rights (which are naturally given to allhuman beings-by God who is above them (p.70). The state of nature wasgoverned by the natural law, which was not written, but obliges and teaches

everyone to consult it and love all human beings. Thus, in the state of nature, menmostly kept their promises and honored their obligations, and, though insecure, it

was mostly peaceful, good, and pleasant. The weakness of the law of nature wasthat; there was nobody to provide collective protection of the natural law.

Due to lack of collective protection of common law, the people contracted the civilgovernment of which the role is to provide collective protection of natural law.However, if the civil government fails to fulfill its role, the people have powers to

However,

In the context of law enforcement, the ideas of john Locke suggest several issues.First, the need for collective law execution arises from the people and the function ofthe state is limited to ensuring that the rights and freedoms of an individual areprotected. Equally, John Lock suggests that law enforcement actors should notstrictly controlled by the state. As the state has minimal control over the individual,the individuals can rightly determine which law facilitates their perfect enjoyment ofnatural rights (provided that they do not go against the law)


16/2016

Generally, there are two major philosophies that guide the designing of lawenforcement institutions;

(a) The Military Philosophy This is based on the assumption that law enforcement is a special function

(that cannot be performed by an ordinary person).

The military philosophy of law enforcement holds that only people whohave heroic vision can enforce law. This is basically because lawenforcement scenarios are wars on crime.

Therefore, the philosophy emphasizes a command based structure thatfacilitate centralized control of subordinates (who are regarded as mindlessand automatically conditioned to shoot first and ask questions later)

This philosophy rejects the use of decisions based on practicalexperiences and practical leadership development techniques (eg

effective communication). The philosophies take law enforcement in the area of criminology as a

practical war on crime , which in turn justifies the top-down-commandand control styles as essential for both crime control and suppression.

Generally, when this philosophies guide design of police fosters aggressiveand confrontational behavior by police officers towards the public.

GENERALLY, the military philosophy of law enforcement is not leadershiporiented and seeks to achieve peace and order through scaring lawbreakers.However, it is sometimes useful and even civilian polices tend to revert to

it in where suppression has to be used.

(b) The Community Oriented philosophies Subscribers to these philosophies believe that the military oriented

philosophies are not suitable for effective law enforcement.

The purpose of law is to The attitude of an individual towards the law Lawbreakers are part of the community as those whim the law is designed to

protect. Therefore, effective law enforcement requires participation

Just need to be ledLECTURE: IMPORTANCE OF LEADERSHIP IN LAW ENFORCEMENT

There is little consensus among scholars regarding the extent to which leadershipis an important factor in law enforcement. Some scholars have questioned on the

validity of the argument that leadership is important for all forms of socialorganization (from family, community, civil society, business, to state level).However, some scholars believe that leadership is an important and integral partof any form of effective socially organized collective action. Thus, arguing that

law enforcement does not require leadership is just like denying the truth that


17/2017

only human beings exist since there is law and law exists since there are humanbeings.

The Governance Paradigm Argument: Leadership constitutes an integralpart of law enforcement, especially today where participatory models ofgovernance have become dominant. Under the governance approach, lawenforcement is regarded to be incomplete if elements in society are not workingtogether to achieve progressive and sustainable law enforcement. Sustainable lawenforcement approach requires that the enforcement of law should aim toachieve peace and order for the development of the present and futuregenerations. In this way, enforcing law means seeking to achieve sustainablechange in behavior.

Changing behavior requires tactics that yield acceptability, influence, and setting

shared mission, which are indeed important leadership tactics. Therefore,effective law enforcement needs to change the individual from being asubordinate of order seeking into a superordinate in the law enforcementposition. It seeks to create deeper interest of members of communities toparticipate in the law enforcement and reduce dependence on formal institutionslike the police to independence (including social militia and community basedenforcement mechanisms.

The Comprehensive Approach Argument: That Law enforcement is atotality of efforts that have to focus on all the three stages; prevention

enforcement, intervention enforcement, and suppression enforcement. Lawenforcement can only neglect the leadership tactics and skills at the stage ofsuppression, (which is indeed too late if law enforcement has to be cost effective).Prevention and intervention measures in law enforcement require cooperativeefforts between the leaders of formal law enforcement and their followers (on onehand) and law enforcers and the members of communities. A good example is oncontrol of drugs, traffic laws enforcement, etc. A ready, cooperative, andunderstanding community/individual becomes an effective partner in bothinvestigating and reporting incidents of law enforcement.

Effective law enforcement does not just mean having sanctions, but rathereducating the people on the essence of the law and making them part of the lawenforcement. Leadership component bridges the gap between private and publiclow enforcement approaches, thus the weakness of either are minimized.

Leadership is important in Law Enforcement since it helps to;


18/2018

Create shared vision between the community (law owner) and thefrontiers of law enforcement (e.g. the police). When the community andlaw enforcers have a shared end regarding both the role of law, thecommunity plays an important part in law enforcement.

Leadership makes visional people fulfill their role in communities.Through leadership skills, leaders build inspirations of followers andinfluence them to concentrate their efforts towards reaching commongood

Community oriented theories of law enforcement argue that. Regardlessof whether law enforcement institutions stretch to communities, allorganized communities have ends, which they exist to achieve. If this is acase, leadership is a supreme end.

In addition, leadership is regarded to be an important motivating factorthat motivates a wide range of stakeholders compared to other

motivators including monetary compensation to law enforcers. They thusargue that the LEIs have a crucial concern of finding and cultivatingleaders (through recruiting ethical enforcers and training LEIs leadersand followers)

Leadership is closely linked with being ethical and integrating others inacceptable code of behavior. Believers in this line of thinking argue thatthe leadership component builds foundation upon which effective lawenforcement stands.

Conclusion: Leadership is becoming an important component/value inlaw enforcement. Even scholars who are conservative are bowing to thisposition not because they do not have a theoretical basis to justify theirclaims, but rather the prevailing socio-economic conditions that affectinstitutions of modern states without exception.

As Gonzalez (2000) argues, leadership in this context should not be taken asjust assuming a position (or title), but rather the process of exercisingleadership skills and qualities and getting followers. He specifically states;

Any reasonably intelligent person with enough forcefulness todevelop his ability to inspire others to follow him can earnleadership status. He may never be recognized on theorganization charts, he may never be awarded stripes or bars,

but he nevertheless is a leader if others are desirous of followinghim. The true leader, the ideal for the organization, is the leaderrecognized as such formally and granted leadership authority notonly by his organization but also by his subordinates. The grantof authority by the latter is the only real source ofauthority."(Page 14)


19/2019

LECTURE: THE NEED FOR STRATEGIC LEADERSHIPIn the last lecture, we concluded that leadership is generally needed foreffective law enforcement. However, a new question that is unansweredremains; what kind of leadership is needed? Before responding to thequestion, those who pose such a question create two-twin question. Theseare; When? And Where? If the responses are; Today and in modern states,then the answer is becomes simple; Strategic Leadership

However, some illusive questions are; what is strategic about strategicleadership? Does strategic leadership add anything new to the lawenforcement function? Dont we have any other options than strategicleadership? The answer becomes; if everything of the modern world isrequired to be strategic-planning, management, marketing, and the alike;

then adding the pre-modifier strategic before the concept leadership is nota sin. The important question to answer is whether strategic leadership isneeded for effective law enforcement (or not)?

What is strategic Leadership?

LECTURE: KEY LEADERSHIP SKILLS FOR LAW ENFORCERSEthical Decision Making SkillsEffective Communication Skills

Team Building and motivatingConflicts Resolution SkillsGoal Setting (and achieving)Problems Solving SkillsEffective Delegation Skills

Topic Four: Leadership Ethics and Law EnforcementAn ethical conduct is the one that is accepted to be right by the society. However,

there is a debate of what may be ethicalBeing ethical versus being legalThe role of ethical law enforcement leader if to influence the society to believethat what is legal is publicly ethical. It is negotiating leadership ethics versussocietal values and norms. A researcher argued that principled leaders do not actto protect their egos, or intimidate those under them, but rather to display goodappearance to those under them by doing what they expect of them and teachingthem doing good that they do not know.

It is not necessary that the leaders in law enforcement are unethical while the

society members are ethically clean. Whereas the most viral unethical behavior is


20/20

corruption, researchers have found that the public may be interested incorruption compared to the law enforcers.

Corruption is not only a problem since it constrains attainment of rights, but alsois an obstacle to successful law enforcementUnethical behavior undermine the overall legitimacy of law enforcementTo comprehend what is ethics in law enforcement, the concept of integrity isimportant.Integrity refers to the sum virtues required to bring about the general goals ofprotection and service to the public.

An ethical law enforcer must possess these components of integrityPrudence: the ability of a law enforcer to discern between conflicting virtues and

take the best option

Trust: Refers to the loyalty and trustfulness in relationships between officers andcitizens, fellow officers, and supervisors.

Effacement of self-interest: means that officers should not exploit their authorityto further themselves

Courage: the mean between cowardice and foolhardness Intellectual honesty: not knowing something and being humble and courageous

enough to admit it

Justice: not in its normal context, but rather, adjusting what is owed to aparticular citizen even when it may contradict what is strictly owed.

Responsibility: intenting to do the right thing clearly understanding what the rightthing is, and being fully aware of other alternatives that may exist, takingresponsibility, rather than finding excuses for mistakes or poor judgment.

Importance of EthicsThe sole aim of law enforcement is not creating the fear of punishment, butrather to change the behavior. Moral makeup requires that law enforcers, if theycannot identify the offender, they can identify him the other day, but very

important is that; the law enforcer have a role to of building a shared meaningbetween them and the society that the society that the law offender is a bad guy

Policing requires perfection and unyielding ethics and ultimately depends oneach employees own level of knowledge, rationality, and devotion to moralexcellence. There is a need for a policy spelling out moral ethical missionstandards for law enforcement authorities. Hiring ethical people.

Date post:	14-Apr-2018
Category:	Documents
Upload:	shumbusho-consultingtz
View:	222 times
Download:	0 times

Le 200 Lectures Series

Documents