15
This article was downloaded by: [UTSA Libraries] On: 06 October 2014, At: 04:06 Publisher: Routledge Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK Police Practice and Research: An International Journal Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/gppr20 Putting POP to the pavement: captains in the Charlotte–Mecklenburg Police Department share their experiences Trent Eric Ikerd a a Department of Government and Justice Studies , Appalachian State University , ASU Box 32107, Boone, NC, 28608, USA Published online: 20 Sep 2010. To cite this article: Trent Eric Ikerd (2010) Putting POP to the pavement: captains in the Charlotte–Mecklenburg Police Department share their experiences, Police Practice and Research: An International Journal, 11:6, 491-504, DOI: 10.1080/15614263.2010.497354 To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/15614263.2010.497354 PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the “Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of the Content. This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms- and-conditions

Putting POP to the pavement: captains in the Charlotte–Mecklenburg Police Department share their experiences

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

Page 1: Putting POP to the pavement: captains in the Charlotte–Mecklenburg Police Department share their experiences

This article was downloaded by: [UTSA Libraries]On: 06 October 2014, At: 04:06Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registeredoffice: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Police Practice and Research: AnInternational JournalPublication details, including instructions for authors andsubscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/gppr20

Putting POP to the pavement: captainsin the Charlotte–Mecklenburg PoliceDepartment share their experiencesTrent Eric Ikerd aa Department of Government and Justice Studies , AppalachianState University , ASU Box 32107, Boone, NC, 28608, USAPublished online: 20 Sep 2010.

To cite this article: Trent Eric Ikerd (2010) Putting POP to the pavement: captains in theCharlotte–Mecklenburg Police Department share their experiences, Police Practice and Research: AnInternational Journal, 11:6, 491-504, DOI: 10.1080/15614263.2010.497354

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/15614263.2010.497354

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the“Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis,our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as tothe accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinionsand views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors,and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Contentshould not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sourcesof information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims,proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoeveror howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to orarising out of the use of the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Anysubstantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms &Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

Page 2: Putting POP to the pavement: captains in the Charlotte–Mecklenburg Police Department share their experiences

Police Practice and ResearchVol. 11, No. 6, December 2010, 491–504

ISSN 1561-4263 print/ISSN 1477-271X online© 2010 Taylor & FrancisDOI: 10.1080/15614263.2010.497354http://www.informaworld.com

RESEARCH ARTICLE

Putting POP to the pavement: captains in the Charlotte–Mecklenburg Police Department share their experiences

Trent Eric Ikerd*

Department of Government and Justice Studies, Appalachian State University, ASU Box 32107, Boone, NC 28608, USATaylor and FrancisGPPR_A_497354.sgm10.1080/15614263.2010.497354Police Practice & Research1561-4263 (print)/1477-271X (online)Original Article2010Taylor & [email protected]

Problem-oriented policing (POP) has been in existence for approximately 30 years. Verylittle research has examined officer perceptions pertaining to their engagement in POP.This research utilizes interviews with captains in the Charlotte–Mecklenburg PoliceDepartment to explore officer behaviors and perceptions pertaining to their engagementin POP. A content themes analysis conducted on the captain interviews provides adiscussion regarding what the captains feel is necessary to successful POP projects, whatthey feel has contributed to the success/failure of their projects, what they have learnedfrom their engagement in POP efforts, how they have implemented POP and how theysupervise officers engaging in POP.

Keywords: problem-oriented policing; officer perceptions; POP; problem-solving

Introduction

Problem-oriented policing (POP) has been in existence for approximately 30 years since itwas put forward by Goldstein in 1979. Since POP evolved as a policing philosophy andstrategy, various research efforts (e.g. Braga et al., 1999; Mazerolle, Ready, Terrill, &Waring, 2000; Kennedy, Braga, Waring, & Piehl, 2001) have shown that POP is effectivein addressing crime and community problems. The Center for Problem-Oriented Policinghas also put forth approximately 60 guides to aid police departments in applying POP strat-egies to specific problems (www.popcenter.org).

While the application of POP to various problems has been demonstrated in the litera-ture, research has failed to examine officer perceptions and experiences related to theiractual engagement in POP. This research is exploratory in nature and will add to the knowl-edge in this area by outlining perceptions and experiences of the Charlotte–MecklenburgPolice Department (CMPD) captains as they have put POP into practice in Charlotte, NorthCarolina. The CMPD has been involved in problem-oriented policing efforts for approxi-mately 18 years, as the POP emphasis in the department began in the early and mid-1990s(Charlotte–Mecklenburg Police Department, 2004). During this timeframe, the CMPD hassubmitted 19 projects for consideration for the Herman Goldstein Award for Excellence inProblem-Oriented Policing. Six of the projects have achieved finalist status (1993–2007timeframe available at www.popcenter.org).

This article is part of a larger university-related research effort that examined the insti-tutionalization of POP in the CMPD and found that the CMPD has successfully institution-alized POP (Ikerd, 2007). Within this research, a brief discussion of the literature regarding

*Email: [email protected]

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

UT

SA L

ibra

ries

] at

04:

06 0

6 O

ctob

er 2

014

Page 3: Putting POP to the pavement: captains in the Charlotte–Mecklenburg Police Department share their experiences

492 T.E. Ikerd

POP will be provided. The CMPD captains’ experiences pertaining to engaging in POP willbe outlined in this article. Many lessons regarding putting POP into practice are evidentfrom the data/findings and will be discussed. Practitioners, organizations and researchersshould consider the findings/lessons/issues put forward in this article in their own applica-tion of POP.

POP defined

Problem-oriented policing is a method of policing that focuses on the ‘ends’ of policingrather than the ‘means’. This framework is designed to refocus police attention to theirintended job in society (Goldstein, 1990). The focus of policing becomes addressing anddealing with the problems the public expects the police to handle and the outcomes of theefforts to handle these problems (Goldstein, 1979).

When utilizing POP to focus on the substantive issues of policing, Goldstein (2003)recommends that police departments utilize a systematic strategy to address specific prob-lems. Goldstein (1990) asserts that the systematic strategy utilized in POP should utilizeresearch, analysis and assessments in dealing with police business. The problem-solvingprocess in POP is often referred to as the SARA model, which stands for scanning (i.e.identifying problems), analysis (i.e. gathering information on problems), response (i.e.implementing solutions to problems) and assessment (i.e. evaluating the responses) (Eck &Spelman, 1987). When engaging in POP, police departments should be open to utilizingcommunity resources along with using their own departmental personnel more effectivelyto address community problems (Goldstein, 1990). POP is designed to help move policeaway from the traditional incident-driven policing in which officers merely respond to callsfor service. Goldstein (1990) contends that police departments should rather take a proactivestance to figure out why incidents may be occurring before they become larger problems.By utilizing this new framework, the goal is to make the police more effective and profes-sional at fulfilling their function of handling community problems (Goldstein, 1990).

Studies of POP efforts

Numerous projects have been implemented that utilize problem-oriented policing. Clarke(2002) asserts that many police departments across the country have adopted some form ofproblem-oriented policing. The prevalence of departments using POP to deal with commu-nity issues is evident from searching the list of POP projects on the Center for Problem-Oriented Policing webpage (www.popcenter.org). There have also been various projectsthat have been submitted for the Herman Goldstein Award for Excellence in POP (Rojek,2003). As Clarke (2004) notes, some of the POP efforts enacted in various areas moreclosely resemble the ‘ideal’ form of problem-oriented policing. Sampson and Scott’s(2000) national survey research of police departments also demonstrates that POP is beingpracticed to some extent in various police departments. Sampson and Scott (2000) outlinehow POP has been used to deal with problems such as drugs, domestic violence, falsealarms, alcohol-related crime, gangs, graffiti and cruising. Research by Read and Tilley(2000) has also shown that POP is being practiced on a widespread basis in England andWales.

Several more detailed studies have also demonstrated how POP projects have beenimplemented in various police departments. For example, Clarke and Goldstein (2003)helped implement a POP effort aimed at larcenies from automobiles in the CMPD in thelate 1990s. When implementing this project, special attention was given to each step of

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

UT

SA L

ibra

ries

] at

04:

06 0

6 O

ctob

er 2

014

Page 4: Putting POP to the pavement: captains in the Charlotte–Mecklenburg Police Department share their experiences

Police Practice and Research: An International Journal 493

scanning, analysis, response and assessments (i.e. SARA). Clarke and Goldstein (2003)contend that much was learned about implementing POP in this effort.

Cordner and Biebel (2003) examined how patrol officers in San Diego engaged inproblem-oriented policing efforts in their daily routines. For this research, 320 officers weregiven surveys regarding their participation in problem-oriented policing activities and theirattitudes towards POP (Cordner and Biebel, 2003). Approximately 71% of the police offic-ers surveyed indicated that they had been involved in a POP project that progressed toimplementing a response. Most of these POP efforts (i.e. approximately 50%) were rela-tively small projects (i.e. dealing with one person, one house, one parking lot) that wereconducted by line-level officers. The use of the SARA model was very elementary, as mostofficers’ efforts required little true research and analysis (Cordner and Biebel, 2003).

Scientific research has also evaluated the effectiveness of POP in dealing with crime andcommunity issues. Braga et al. (1999) evaluated the effectiveness of problem-orientedpolicing with respect to violent crime at problem places in Jersey City, New Jersey. Thisresearch found that all crime categories were reduced in the problem-oriented policing areaswhen compared with the control group (Braga et al., 1999). Similar research on POP effortsaimed at drug and violent crime problems in public housing in New Jersey found that therewas a reduction for calls for service in robberies, assaults, domestic assaults, burglaries andauto thefts due to the POP efforts (Mazerolle et al., 2000).

Research has also demonstrated that POP is effective in dealing with gun-related crimes.For example, a problem-oriented policing approach was utilized in the cities of Kansas Cityand Boston to deal with gun-related crimes. In Boston, project Operation Cease Fire’s strat-egies of targeting illegal gun transfers to youths and gang members were associated with a63% reduction in the monthly number of homicides (Kennedy et al., 2001). Similar resultsof POP efforts aimed at reducing gun-related crimes in Kansas City found that gun crimesfell in the targeted area by 49% when compared with the 29 weeks before the POP effortstook place (Sherman, Shaw, & Rogan, 1995).

Research design/methodology

In reviewing the previous literature, it is apparent that the majority of the POP research isevaluation, based on which the effectiveness of POP is demonstrated. Officer perceptionsand experiences pertaining to POP have been relatively ignored. The data presented in thisarticle is part of a larger university-related research effort that examined the institutionaliza-tion of problem-oriented policing in the CMPD (Ikerd, 2007). As a part of this researcheffort, all 33 captains in the CMPD were interviewed regarding their behaviors, attitudesand knowledge pertaining to problem-oriented policing. All 33 captains agreed to take partin the interviews.1 The face-to-face interviews were completed in September and Octoberof 2006.

The research presented in this article is exploratory and primarily qualitative in natureand this helps to compensate for the smaller sample size. Interview techniques were utilizedfor this research as they provide the researcher with the ability to determine how the inter-viewee/participants view the research subject (Marshall & Rossman, 2006). Specifically,this article discusses the information the author obtained from the interviews pertaining tothe CMPD captains’ involvement in problem-oriented policing projects and the perceptionsthey have developed through engagement in POP.

Following methodologies and guidelines for conducting and analyzing qualitativeresearch put forth by various authors (e.g. Marshall & Rossman, 2006; Holiday, 2002),a content themes analysis was conducted on the detailed written records of the captains’

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

UT

SA L

ibra

ries

] at

04:

06 0

6 O

ctob

er 2

014

Page 5: Putting POP to the pavement: captains in the Charlotte–Mecklenburg Police Department share their experiences

494 T.E. Ikerd

interview answers. Immersion strategies (i.e. detailed examination and re-examination of thedata) were utilized in dealing with the interview data. Specifically, the interview answersprovided by the captains were examined, coded and labeled by utilizing key word abbrevi-ations to extract the thematic content from the interview data. Representative quotes fromthe captains’ answers are used to demonstrate the thematic content. Descriptive statistics arealso used to demonstrate the frequency and percentages of captains that fall under eachtheme from the content themes analysis. This research explores the following questions:

(1) What are some of the types of projects/problems the CMPD captains have addressedwith POP?

(2) What do the captains in the CMPD attribute their successful or failed POP projectsto based upon their engagement in these projects?

(3) What do the CMPD captains feel are some of the general keys or general obstaclesto successfully engaging in POP efforts?

(4) What have the CMPD captains learned from actually engaging in POP?(5) How do the captains in the CMPD emphasize POP to officers under their command?

The purpose in examining these questions is to outline how practitioners in the CMPDhave engaged in POP, what they have learned, and what appears to be needed for POP toreally work. The discussion of the perceptions that practitioners have developed throughengagement in POP (i.e. what is related to their successful or unsuccessful POP efforts,what they have learned through engagement in POP) is especially important since this areahas been ignored in previous research. In discussing these areas, many key lessons/consid-erations are present that other researchers and practitioners should consider applying in theirown application of POP.

Data analysis: findings

POP project analysis

To determine how the CMPD captains have utilized POP to deal with various problems,they were asked about their prior experiences in POP efforts. All of the captains indicatedthat they had engaged in problem-oriented policing projects during their time with theCMPD, so the captains were asked to discuss their POP projects. Some of the projects thecaptains discussed included: general public nuisance issues; motor vehicle-related thefts;alcohol/bar related issues; juvenile-based problems; motel-related issues; apartment crime/issues; robbery related issues; burglaries; drug-related issues; prostitution; loitering (home-less and juveniles); and larcenies. When analyzing the projects, it is apparent the projectsconsist of both simple and complex efforts. The following sections will outline some of thetypes of POP efforts discussed by the captains.

Simple POP projects

An example of a simple project described by a captain dealt with homeless individuals congre-gating around a convenience store and the surrounding community. Repeat calls for servicewere made to the police in which members of the community indicated that the homelessindividuals were causing disorder in the community. For the analysis, the officers involvedwith the project interviewed the homeless individuals to find out why they were congregatingaround this particular store. The interviews revealed that the homeless individuals liked this

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

UT

SA L

ibra

ries

] at

04:

06 0

6 O

ctob

er 2

014

Page 6: Putting POP to the pavement: captains in the Charlotte–Mecklenburg Police Department share their experiences

Police Practice and Research: An International Journal 495

particular store because it was the only store that sold cold cheap wine (the rest of the storesdid not refrigerate the cheap wine). The officers working on the project partnered with thestore and convinced them to stop refrigerating the wine. According to the captain, the responsewas an immediate success as the homeless individuals stopped congregating around the area.

Complex projects

Some of the more complex POP projects described by the captains involved various avenues/responses to address the underlying problem. The captains indicated that these projectsrequired more time spent utilizing the SARA model. For example, a captain described aproject that was related to Hispanic robberies. The captain mentions that, through the anal-ysis, the officers involved in the project learned that there was a pattern of Hispanic peoplebeing robbed. Hispanic individuals were carrying their cash on them, and the robbers knewthat this was a pattern among the Hispanic population. Other races/ethnicities were not beingtargeted. After going through the analysis steps, the captain involved in this project indicatedthat a couple of responses were formulated. One element of the response was an educationelement in which the victims were provided with educational materials regarding the dangersof carrying larger amounts of cash and congregating outside after dark. The officers involvedin this project also got the owners and management of the apartments and properties todistribute educational materials to the Hispanic tenants. The other element had some preven-tion elements as officers worked with the property owners to get better lighting installed.The banks in the area were also utilized to develop trust with the Hispanic population in orderfor them to have bank accounts. According to the captain, these responses showed greatsuccess in the assessment as robberies were dramatically reduced.

Perceptions: success or failure in POP efforts

Since all of the CMPD captains indicated they had engaged in POP efforts, they were askedwhat they had learned from their POP experiences. One question asked the captains if theyfelt the projects they had been involved in were successful. Eighty-two per cent of thecaptains (N = 27) indicated rather emphatically that their projects had been a success. Ininterviewing these captains, it was very clear that they had realized that POP works throughtheir participation in POP. These captains often made references to the projects theydescribed to demonstrate how POP dealt with various community issues. This practitioner-based evidence provides further support that POP is effective. Police officers and policymakers should review this evidence and consider implementing POP to handle their owncommunity problems.

The remaining 18% of the captains (N = 6) indicated that the majority of their projectshad been successful, but some were more successful than others. These captains made sureto emphasize that POP does work, but they also indicated that they had been involved inefforts that did not go smoothly. These captains explained why these projects were not assuccessful in another question (discussed below).

Community involvement

For the captains indicating that their projects were a success (N = 27), they were asked whatthey related the success of their project to. When discussing their reasons for projectsuccess, several themes emerged from the data. One theme is that community involvementplayed a role in the success of their POP projects. Thirty-three per cent of the captains felt

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

UT

SA L

ibra

ries

] at

04:

06 0

6 O

ctob

er 2

014

Page 7: Putting POP to the pavement: captains in the Charlotte–Mecklenburg Police Department share their experiences

496 T.E. Ikerd

that their success was due to the fact that the community and stakeholders took an activerole in the projects. A captain conveyed this theme as follows: ‘Getting the communityinvolved in the POP efforts was an important reason for the success of the projects thatI have engaged in. Community buy-in helped us better define and address the projects as thecitizens played an active role in the project’. Another captain mentioned the same idearegarding community involvement, but used slightly different terms, stating that: ‘Thesuccess of the projects I engaged in was because we thought outside of the box and got thecommunity and stakeholders involved to utilize non-traditional responses that were nottraditional law enforcement responses’.

Clearly, a significant portion of the captains felt that community involvement played animportant role in whether or not their projects were successful. The CMPD captains’responses indicated that there is a relationship between community involvement and thesuccess of POP efforts. These findings demonstrate that police practitioners and researchersshould give consideration to getting the community truly involved in POP efforts.

Officer involvement

Twelve per cent of captains (N = 4) indicated that the reasons for success in their projectswas that the projects allowed other officers to really get involved. These captains indicatedthat the officers learned more about POP and the problem(s) at hand, and this allowed theofficers to take a vested interest in working on the project. One captain specifically stated:‘The success of the projects that I have been involved in were due to the fact that officerstook interest/stakes in the project(s). Officers were able to obtain satisfaction from beinginvolved with the project(s)’. These captains really conveyed that officer involvement wasrelated to the success of their projects. It seems rather evident that POP lends itself to team-work strategies, thus consideration should be given to getting officers involved in a collab-orative manner in POP efforts.

Good POP process

The final theme presented by three captains as reasons for success in their POP projects isrelated to more specific functions regarding the POP process. These captains reallyconveyed the idea that detail and attention during their POP projects were the reasons whytheir project succeeded. For example, one captain indicated that: ‘Good research, assess-ments, and analysis were keys to the successful projects’. Another captain indicated: ‘Clearrealistic goals also played an important part in the success of projects that I have beeninvolved in’. Based on this data, there appears to be a relationship between detail during theproblem-solving process and the outcome of the project.

Unsuccessful POP projects

Eighteen per cent of the captains (N = 6) indicate that most of their projects were successful,but some were not. These captains reported that these failures in their projects were due toinsufficient analysis or lack of community involvement.

Insufficient POP process

Two captains indicated that their projects failed because not enough attention was paid toengaging in the POP process (i.e. SARA elements). These captains attributed the failures

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

UT

SA L

ibra

ries

] at

04:

06 0

6 O

ctob

er 2

014

Page 8: Putting POP to the pavement: captains in the Charlotte–Mecklenburg Police Department share their experiences

Police Practice and Research: An International Journal 497

to not really doing a sufficient analysis of the problem. One of these captains indicatedthat: ‘The failures were related to not getting deep enough into the problem. In these situ-ations, there was not enough analysis to determine what the real problem was’. It is appar-ent that these captains realized that their successful projects paid closer attention to theanalysis phase, whereas their unsuccessful projects did not entail sufficient analysis. Thisfinding indicates that care should be taken to ensure sound problem-solving strategies areused.

Lack of community involvement

Another theme that was mentioned by two captains as a reason for failure in their POPprojects relates to community involvement. Two of the captains indicated that the failurewas due to the fact that the community did not get involved in the projects. They contendedthat, in their successful projects, they had good community involvement. One captain indi-cated that even though these projects might have ‘failed’, lessons were still learned, so thiscaptain used the term ‘failure’ loosely as he felt something was still learned.

Perceptions: general keys to a successful POP project

Officer involvement

Another interview question dealt with the captains’ perceptions pertaining to what they feltwere general keys to having a successful POP project. An emergent theme was that 36% ofthe captains (N = 12) mentioned that really getting the officers involved in the projects wasa key to success. One captain asserted that: ‘To have a successful POP project, you have tohave officer buy-in and commitment’. This finding reflects the idea that officers need towork together on POP efforts. In some of the complex projects mentioned by the captains,it is obvious that numerous officers would have to engage in the effort for the project to bea success.

Community/stakeholder involvement

Thirty-three per cent of the captains (N = 11) indicated that they felt that community andstakeholder buy-in was also key to a successful POP project. For example, one captainexplained: ‘Community involvement is a key to a successful POP project’. Another captainelaborates more on this idea and stated: ‘The key to a successful POP project is developinggood partnerships with the stakeholders that are dealing with the issues as they have themost to gain from resolving those issues’. These responses indicate that the police need thecommunity’s assistance for them to really impact the problem. Having community involve-ment appears to be related to the successful outcome of POP efforts. Practitioners shouldconsider taking steps and developing ways to get the community involved in their POPefforts.

Project management issues

Thirty-six per cent of the captains (N = 12) felt that a key to a successful POP project relatedto effective project process/management issues. These captains discussed the processesincurred during a POP project that need to be handled efficiently. For example, a captainstated: ‘The key to having a successful POP project is relentless, steady attention to the

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

UT

SA L

ibra

ries

] at

04:

06 0

6 O

ctob

er 2

014

Page 9: Putting POP to the pavement: captains in the Charlotte–Mecklenburg Police Department share their experiences

498 T.E. Ikerd

process of problem-solving’. Three of the captains in this category went into more detailabout the process and indicated that having good data/information was an important key toa successful POP project. Four of the captains talked about the process elements withgreater elaboration and mentioned having good assessments or good scanning and analysisas being key. For example, a captain elaborated these ideas and indicated that: ‘The key toa successful POP project is that officers need good scanning/analysis to determine what theproblem is, and then assessments to determine how the efforts affected the problem’.Another captain used slightly different terms to describe the scanning and analysis steps:‘The key to a successful POP project is listening and finding out what the problem really isand not just merely looking at some of the symptoms of the problem’. As can be seen, thecaptains that emphasize the project process/management issues feel that attention needs tobe given to the problem-solving process for a successful project outcome. Practitionersshould ensure they effectively manage the SARA/problem-solving elements during theirPOP projects.

Beyond the SARA model concepts, four of the captains mentioned more general projectprocess/management issues. For example, one captain stated: ‘A key to a successful POPproject is strong project management and delegation with certain deadlines’. Anothercaptain reinforced this idea as the captain mentioned that support from the department anddepartmental command staff is also a key to a successful POP project. In addition to theseelements, two captains indicated that there needs to be some flexibility for those involvedwith the project in order for it to be successful. All of these elements relate to the manage-ment of POP projects. Since POP uses a research-driven approach in dealing with crime, itseems rather clear that good management techniques should be utilized to keep the projectrunning smoothly.

Perceptions: obstacles to a successful POP project

Lack of officer involvement

The captains were also asked what they feel are the major obstacles to a successful POPproject. Twenty-seven per cent of the captains (N = 9) indicated that they felt obtainingofficer buy-in was an obstacle. One captain elaborated on the officer buy-in concept, andmade a statement that summarizes this idea rather clearly: ‘I think a major obstacle to asuccessful project is that sometimes it is difficult to get officer buy-in. Some of the officersand people are just resistant to change’. When discussing the lack of officer involvement asan obstacle, these officers emphasized that a team effort in which officers are involved inthe projects is what they try to accomplish.

Lack of community involvement

Another theme mentioned by 33% of the captains (N = 11) was that obtaining community/stakeholder involvement oftentimes is an obstacle to a successful POP project. Thesecaptains are conveying the message that at times it is hard to get the community and variousstakeholders to do their part in a project in which they are needed. For example, a captainillustrates this idea and indicates: ‘Sometimes members of the community can take anapathetic role when it comes to POP efforts’. Another captain reinforced this: ‘A majorobstacle to a successful project is oftentimes getting stakeholders (non-police agencies, etc.)to take a role in the effort’. When discussing these elements, it is apparent that the captainsfelt and voiced some frustration regarding lack of community involvement.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

UT

SA L

ibra

ries

] at

04:

06 0

6 O

ctob

er 2

014

Page 10: Putting POP to the pavement: captains in the Charlotte–Mecklenburg Police Department share their experiences

Police Practice and Research: An International Journal 499

Time constraints

Twelve per cent of the captains (N = 4) mentioned that a major obstacle to a successful POPproject was time-related issues. Specifically, these captains indicated that they felt that itcan be difficult for officers to sometimes devote the time that may be necessary for POPefforts. A captain’s statement summarizes this: ‘A major obstacle to a successful POPproject is that sometimes officers don’t have enough time to devote to the POP efforts. Theyhave both the problem-solving elements in addition to the calls of service they have tohandle. It takes a certain amount of time they must devote to the POP process’. As can beseen, these captains indicate that officers need to have the time to be successful in their POPefforts. Police executives wishing to get their officers involved in POP efforts shouldconsider this finding and provide officers with sufficient time for their POP endeavors.

Procedural/process issues

The remaining theme pertaining to obstacles to a successful POP project deals with proce-dural/process issues/obstacles (i.e. lack of skills, training, etc.) related to POP. Fifteen percent of captains (N = 5) with this belief mentioned specific things often encountered duringengagement in POP efforts, e.g. ‘An obstacle to a successful POP project is that officersmay not have the knowledge and skills necessary to really get involved using the SARAmodel and engaging in problem-oriented policing’. Another captain reinforced this sameidea: ‘An obstacle to a successful POP project can be that officers don’t have the organiza-tional support and training to really get involved in POP efforts’. In general, the remainingcaptains (N = 3) in this category felt that the obstacles were related to not really understand-ing the steps that are often necessary for a successful POP project. Two captains mentionedthat officers may not take the time to really find out or understand what the problem is, andthis relates to the officers’ ability to really get involved in the POP process. It is evident thatthese captains felt that an obstacle to successful POP efforts was that officers do notcorrectly apply problem-solving techniques to the problem at hand. To overcome this prob-lem, police departments should ensure their officers have training in problem-solving tech-niques.

Learned experiences

POP works

The captains were also asked a question that delt with what they had learned from the POPprojects they had been involved in. Thirty-six per cent of the captains (N = 12) stated ratherstrongly that they learned that POP works. For example, one captain states: ‘If you truly getpeople involved with POP, it does work’. Another captain reinforced this idea: ‘From thePOP projects I have been involved with, I learned that you can make a difference and havean impact on problems’. Another captain used slightly different terms, but conveyed thesame message: ‘POP is a good way for police to do business. POP is better than just thereactive approach’. The captains in this category talked about POP in a very positivemanner, and this shows that they valued problem-oriented policing.

Better process and management

Twenty-four per cent of the captains (N = 8) talked about what they had learned from theirexperiences related to POP. These captains focused on process- and management-related

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

UT

SA L

ibra

ries

] at

04:

06 0

6 O

ctob

er 2

014

Page 11: Putting POP to the pavement: captains in the Charlotte–Mecklenburg Police Department share their experiences

500 T.E. Ikerd

issues incurred when engaging in POP. For example, one of the captains in this categorystated that he ‘learned how to do it (i.e. POP) right’ from his engagement in POP efforts.Three of the captains provided more specifics and indicated that they had learned that apatient/continual effort is oftentimes needed in POP efforts. Two of these captains specifi-cally mentioned that patience is needed in utilizing various steps related to the SARAmodel. For example, one of the captains indicated that: ‘I learned that we needed to slowdown. We can’t just automatically fix the problem as we try to be good and just jump to theresponse. We need to take the time for the scanning and analysis before we formulate aresponse’. Another captain asserted: ‘You need continual assessments and evaluations whenin the response mode’. It is evident that even these captains did not have anything negativeto say about POP, but rather simply mentioned that they had learned how to better apply theprocess from their experiences. This evidence lends support to the notion that actual expe-rience with POP may be one of the best learning tools regarding the concept.

Importance of community involvement

Thirty per cent of the captains (N = 10) indicated that they had learned that collaborationand involvement from stakeholders and the community is often a necessary component ofPOP. One captain provided a statement that illustrates this idea: ‘I have learned that themost successful POP projects involve collaboration from various stakeholders and thecommunity as they can often provide additional resources’. Another captain emphasizedthis same point: ‘I learned how important it is to network and develop partnerships withstakeholders and the community. Collaboration is an important element’. Another captainreinforced these ideas: ‘Sometimes we have to look at other places than the criminal justicesystem to develop a response. We sometimes need to get various stakeholders and otheragencies involved to formulate a response to the problem’. It is apparent these captains havelearned that collaboration is important.

Ways of emphasizing POP

All of the CMPD captains indicate that they had emphasized POP to officers under theircommand, so they were also asked how they did this. Two common themes emerged regard-ing how they emphasized POP to officers under their command. For example, 12 captainsindicated that they emphasized POP to their officers by making it a requirement of their jobfunction. Fourteen of the captains indicated that they used more of a coaching role whenemphasizing POP.

Make POP a requirement

The 12 captains that made POP a requirement for officers under their command used twostrategies. These captains either directly assigned projects to officers, or they created anexpectation that their officers look at crime trends regarding key issues in the community.A captain illustrated these points: ‘POP is a requirement for my units. It is not optional, andthey must apply POP tactics. I create this expectation and hold them accountable for theirbehaviors’. Another captain asserted: ‘I make it an expectation for my officers to look attrends pertaining to problems and crimes. They must contribute to identifying what iscausing these problems’. As demonstrated, these captains used more of a command style ofleadership and created an expectation that their officers engage in POP efforts.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

UT

SA L

ibra

ries

] at

04:

06 0

6 O

ctob

er 2

014

Page 12: Putting POP to the pavement: captains in the Charlotte–Mecklenburg Police Department share their experiences

Police Practice and Research: An International Journal 501

Coach and facilitate POP

The other approach that 14 of the captains utilized in emphasizing POP to their officers wasthat they took a coaching and facilitator role. Two common subthemes emerged dealingwith how the coaching/facilitating captains emphasized POP. The first was that eight of thecaptains that coached their officers indicated that they encouraged officers under theircommand to look deeper into problems and issues. For example, one captain illustrated this:‘I constantly ask my officers to think about why things are occurring’. Another captain rein-forced this idea: ‘I reinforce that my officers should look deeper into the issues they areencountering’.

The other subtheme present is that six of the captains that utilized the coaching approachindicated that they emphasized POP by participating and taking an active role in theprojects. For example, one captain indicated: ‘POP is how I lead folks. I don’t try to ram itdown their throats, but rather ask them to think about why they are dealing with certainrecurring issues, and to think about how to apply POP techniques to these issues. I getinvolved with my officers and sergeants with regards to POP to come to an understandingof how to best address the issues that we are dealing with’. Another captain reinforced thisidea: ‘I emphasize POP through practice and emphasis. I do projects with the officers in mypatrol districts’.

Discussion/implications

Effectiveness of POP

One implication that can be drawn from this research is that this research provides furtherself-report evidence that POP works. The responses of the CMPD captains provide furtherevidence of POP’s effectiveness. All of the captains were able to describe numerousprojects they had engaged in to deal with a variety of community issues. The interestingfinding is that the captains overwhelmingly felt their projects had been successful inhandling community issues. The majority of the captains (82%) indicated rather emphati-cally that their POP projects were successful. In addition, many of the captains (36%) indi-cated that they had learned that POP works during their experiences with POP. Theseresearch findings coincide with the previous self-report literature demonstrating the effec-tiveness of POP (e.g. Sampson & Scott, 2000). Police executives should seriously considerthe data presented in this research as the evidence comes directly from other police practi-tioners that have experienced POP’s effectiveness firsthand. POP efforts do work if they arewell thought-out and managed.

Lesson 1: POP works.

Keys to POP efforts

Beyond further demonstrating the effectiveness of POP, the CMPD captains also discussedwhat was related to successful POP projects based on their experiences. The common elementsmentioned by captains for success in their own POP projects were: (1) community involvementin POP efforts; (2) officer buy-in/involvement in the POP efforts; (3) good project manage-ment (i.e. goals and effective research/analysis). Many of these themes were also commonwhen the captains stated what they felt was key to a successful POP project. These researchfindings are some of the first to really examine what may be needed or related to successfulPOP efforts beyond the traditional problem-solving process (i.e. SARA elements). Police

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

UT

SA L

ibra

ries

] at

04:

06 0

6 O

ctob

er 2

014

Page 13: Putting POP to the pavement: captains in the Charlotte–Mecklenburg Police Department share their experiences

502 T.E. Ikerd

practitioners and researchers should consider addressing each of these elements in their ownPOP efforts as the CMPD captains have shared the lessons of the department’s sustainedcommitment to POP. Practitioners can also reflect on past POP efforts to see if their projectsdid not go smoothly due to failure to address these elements in their projects.

Lesson 2: Community involvement in POP efforts, officer buy-in/involvement in the POPefforts, and good project management (i.e. goals and effective research/analysis) need to beserious considerations for successful POP projects.

Obstacles to POP efforts

There are also many apparent lessons from the captains’ discussion of some of their failedPOP projects and their discussions of what they felt were the obstacles to POP projects.Lack of community/stakeholder involvement, insufficient analysis, lack of skills relating toPOP, lack of officer buy-in and lack of time were common elements discussed by thecaptains as obstacles to successful POP efforts. Both the community involvement elementand officer buy-in elements were also prevalent responses in the captains responses regard-ing why they felt their own projects were a success. The themes pertaining to the obstaclesdiscussed in this research are valuable lessons to police practitioners and researchers as theyimplement POP. The elements put forth are especially valuable to departments that are justbeginning to embark on POP efforts as they may be able to avoid making mistakes whenimplementing POP projects.

Lesson 3: Lack of community/stakeholder involvement in projects, an insufficient analysis, alack of skills relating to POP, a lack of officer buy-in, and lack of time for POP efforts maylead to unsuccessful POP efforts.

Emphasizing POP

Based upon the captains’ responses to questions regarding their emphasis of POP, it is clearthat the CMPD captains expected officers under their command to use POP. This is a veryimportant finding as leadership in a law enforcement agency can potentially play a key rolein the success of POP efforts. The CMPD captains explained the ways in which they empha-sized POP to their officers. The two common approaches that were utilized by the captainswere to make POP a requirement and to coach and facilitate POP efforts. Regardless of theleadership style utilized by the captains, they were creating an environment in which POPwas either required or facilitated. This is important as many captains mentioned that notobtaining officer buy-in can be an obstacle to successful POP efforts. Future research mightalso examine relationships between supervisory styles of POP and officer buy-in regardingPOP. It is clear that the management of a department can take steps to help ensure officerbuy-in is obtained. Police executives should ensure their management is involved in depart-mental POP efforts.

Lesson 4: Supervisors in a department can create an environment that is conducive for POP.

Conclusions

This article has outlined the experiences of the CMPD captains as they have put POP intopractice on the streets of Charlotte, North Carolina. It is clear that the CMPD captains indi-cated that POP has successfully handled problems and issues in the Charlotte community.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

UT

SA L

ibra

ries

] at

04:

06 0

6 O

ctob

er 2

014

Page 14: Putting POP to the pavement: captains in the Charlotte–Mecklenburg Police Department share their experiences

Police Practice and Research: An International Journal 503

While the captains demonstrated how they used POP to handle a variety of communityissues, it is evident that they had learned how to use POP more effectively from their actualexperiences. The captains outlined various elements of importance for engaging in POPwhich have been discussed within this article. Other officers and agencies can learn fromthe wisdom/lessons offered by the captains as to what they felt affected their implementa-tion of problem-oriented policing efforts.

There is a need for further research to examine practitioner experiences pertaining toPOP. For example, more research needs to outline what is related to successful POP projectsbeyond the traditional problem-solving elements, how officers view POP and how officershave implemented POP in police departments. This exploratory and descriptive research hasexamined some of these issues and provided a framework for future research in these areas.

Finally, this research has provided additional evidence that POP is effective and becom-ing an accepted way of handling community problems at the practitioner level. The numer-ous departmental-initiated POP projects submitted to the POP Center also show that morepractitioners are utilizing POP. Even though research has demonstrated the effectiveness ofPOP, officers and departments must actually put POP into practice for the community bene-fits to be realized.

AcknowledgmentsI would like to thank the Charlotte–Mecklenburg Police Department for taking part in research thatexamined the institutionalization of POP in the CMPD. Specifically, I would like to thank ChiefDarrel Stephens (retired 2008) for his continued commitment to policing research. I would also liketo thank Paul Paskoff (director of CMPD RPA) and the other members of research, planning andanalysis for their assistance in coordinating the CMPD research effort. I would also like to thank DrSam Walker for his encouragement and support during my dissertation/academic pursuits (fromwhich this article is a product) at the University of Nebraska Omaha. I would also like to thank GlennRoseman for editorial comments he made on an early draft of this article. Finally, I would like tothank the anonymous reviewers and the editor for their comments that improved this paper.

Notes1. There were no key findings or relationships regarding captain demographic characteristics and

this research; thus there is no discussion regarding these elements in this article.

Notes on contributorTrent Eric lkerd is currently an Assistant Professor of Criminal Justice at Appalachian State University.He received his PhD in criminal justice from the University of Nebraska at Omaha in 2007. His primaryresearch interests revolve around organizational change in policing, police culture, problem-orientedpolicing, and police reforms.

ReferencesBraga, A., Weisburd, D., Waring, E., Mazerolle, L., Spelman, W., & Gajewski, F. (1999). Violent

crime places: A randomized controlled experiment. Criminology, 37(3), 541–575.Charlotte–Mecklenburg Police Department. (2004). CMPD CPOP retreat presentation.Clarke, R. (2002). Problem-oriented policing, case studies (NCJ193801). Washington, DC: US

Department of Justice.Clarke, R. (2004). Defining police strategies: Problem-solving, problem-oriented policing, and

community-oriented policing. In: Q. Thurman & J. Zhao (Ed.), Contemporary policing:Controversies, challenges, and solutions: An anthology. Los Angles, CA: Roxbury.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

UT

SA L

ibra

ries

] at

04:

06 0

6 O

ctob

er 2

014

Page 15: Putting POP to the pavement: captains in the Charlotte–Mecklenburg Police Department share their experiences

504 T.E. Ikerd

Clarke, R., & Goldstein, H. (2003). Theft from cars in center city parking facilities: A case study inimplementing problem-oriented policing. In: J. Knutsson (Ed.), Problem-oriented policing frominnovation to mainstream (Crime Prevention Studies, Vol. 15.) Monsey, NY: Criminal JusticePress.

Cordner, G., & Biebel, E. (2003). Research for practice: Problem-oriented policing in practice(NIJ200518). Washington, DC: US Department of Justice.

Eck, J., & Spelman, W. (1987). Problem-solving: Problem-oriented policing in Newport News.Washington, DC: Police Executive Research Forum.

Goldstein, H. (1979). Improving policing: A problem-oriented approach. Crime and Delinquency,25, 236–258.

Goldstein, H. (1990). Problem-oriented policing. Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press.Goldstein, H. (2003). On further developing problem-oriented policing: The most critical needs,

the major impediments, and a proposal. In J. Knutsson (Ed.), Problem-oriented policing frominnovation to mainstream (Crime Prevention Studies, Vol. 15). Monsey, NJ: Criminal JusticePress.

Holiday, A. (2002). Doing and writing qualitative research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Ikerd, T. (2007). Examining the institutionalization of problem-oriented policing: The Charlotte–

Mecklenburg Police Department as a case study. (Doctoral dissertation). Omaha, NE: Univer-sity of Nebraska Omaha.

Kennedy, D.M., Braga, A., Waring, E., & Piehl, A. (2001). Problem-oriented policing, deterrence,and youth violence: An evaluation of Boston’s operation ceasefire. Journal of Research inCrime and Delinquency, 38(3), 195–225.

Marshall, C, & Rossman, G. (2006). Designing qualitative research (4th ed.) Thousand Oaks, CA:Sage.

Mazerolle, L., Ready, J., Terrill, W., & Waring, E. (2000). Problem-solving in public housing: TheJersey City evaluation. Justice Quarterly, 17(1), 129–155.

Read, T., & Tilley, N. (2000). Not rocket science? Problem solving and crime reduction. Crimereduction research series paper 6. Retrieved from: www.popcenter.org

Rojek, J. (2003). A decade of excellence in problem-oriented policing: Characteristics of theHerman Goldstein award winners. Police Quarterly, 64(4), 492–515.

Sampson, R., & Scott, M. (2000). Tackling crime and other public safety problems: Case studies inproblem-solving. Washington, DC: US Department of Justice, Office of Community OrientedPolicing Services.

Sherman, L., Shaw, J., & Rogan, D. (1995). The Kansas City Gun Experiment (NCJ 150855).Washington, DC: US Department of Justice.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

UT

SA L

ibra

ries

] at

04:

06 0

6 O

ctob

er 2

014