Introduction
I chose the article by Dean Dabney titled “Observations Regarding Key Operational Realities in a Compstat Model of Policing” for this week’s discussion board. The report presents the analysis of the problem of Compstat model implementation in practice on the example of a single agency. Evidence-based practice development is a vital approach for several spheres. The analysis of data helps to detect the areas where problems occur and to build an effective goal-oriented practice for solving them. According to Santos (2017), crime analysis is essential in policing as it serves as the foundation of effective evidence-based practice.
Although the application of data analytics tools is efficient in developing strategies based on definite problem solving, the implementation of the process, in reality, faces numerous barriers in the current policing system.
Theoretical Framework
The theoretical framework of the article concerns the management and organization of police operations. The author utilizes the concept of crime analysis techniques and crime patterns to describe the implementation of Compstat. Compstat is generally used in policing for employing statistical data to identify crime patterns in geographical areas and to track the process of combating problems.
The researcher analyzed the organization of the practice, as well as the operation command and methods of problem-solving. The main peculiarity of Compstat-based practice is that it requires the reorganization of the staff and its decentralization, giving authority to geographic commanders. The researcher notes the high level of restructuring but focuses on other significant issues that went wrong.
Methodological Approach
The research conducted by Dabney (2010) was based on the methods of observation and qualitative interview in a single agency “within a thriving open-air drug market in a large city located in the southeastern region of the USA” (p. 33). During the six months of data collection, the researcher concluded that this problem occurred due to communication deficiency, which resulted in misinterpretation of goals by line supervisors, investigators, and patrol officers (Dabney, 2010). Empirical results were collected in interviews and evaluated and interpreted utilizing qualitative analysis.
Assessment of the Findings
The evaluation of the collected data proved that the main problem of Compstat-based practice was the misunderstanding of its primary purpose. Instead of following the general aim of reducing the rates of crimes peculiar for the given area, the officers misinterpreted it as the task of arresting more people. The analyzed article has several limitations, such as the lack of comparison with other areas and the threat of the results being situation-specific.
Fortunately, many evidence-based studies in policing were conducted after the publication of the research. Pasha, Kroll, and Ash (2018) present the results of a nationwide analysis of the impact of Compstat in policing. The researchers claim that Compstat-based practices are effective in reducing crime rates to the level of previous years (Pasha et al., 2018). The Compstat strategy today is being employed beyond the area of policing and beyond the U.S. borders. Maillard (2018) provides the results of a comparative analysis of Compstat use in London and Paris, stating that European policing faces the same boundaries as presented in Dabney’s research.
The USA-based projects help to go beyond the limitations of the primary article. The research by Vito, Reed and Walsh (2016) suggests that the main problems are the lack of communication and the focus on short-term goals, thus proving that the issues discussed by Dabney are not situation-specific. The evidence and arguments presented by Dabney were logical but had serious empirical limitations. Nevertheless, they were proved valid by the subsequent researches in the given theoretical framework.
Critical Thought
Ideally, Compstat is considered a useful tool to reduce crime rates within a particular geographical area by defining the present crime trends. In addition to that, the given model has a few more significant advantages. Firstly, Compstat offers decentralization, which means that local officers can take immediate actions to prevent, track, or solve a crime without the necessity to wait for commands from higher management. Secondly, the given model restructures police into a more collaborative system that does not include many competing subgroups.
Finally, Compstat encourages responsible officers to make innovative and creative decisions to solve issues, which usually results in more positive outcomes. Thus, the given tool leads to significant advantages for police departments and their performance.
Nevertheless, the information above does not mean that Compstat is free from any disadvantages, and they are side effects of the advantages. On the one hand, the geographical focus of the given model means that it does not pay attention to the whole country. In other words, decreased crime rates in a region are helpful, but the tool fails to be useful if many crimes are committed in other areas. On the other hand, decentralization is only effective when professional and experienced officers make decisions.
In other cases, this relative freedom of action can result in severe problems when it comes to police officers with poor personal and professional qualities. However, these drawbacks do not mean that Compstat is useless and that it should not be applied. The possible adverse consequences of the model have been presented to demonstrate that it is necessary to draw attention to some of the Compstat peculiarities to make it even more effective and helpful.
Conclusion
The value of data analysis for reducing crime rates is evident, but the main problems concern its implementation. The analyzed researches prove that the lack of communication is a major barrier that causes misinterpretation of long-term goals as short-term tasks. Moreover, the statistical evaluation of the results poses pressure on the officers who perceive it as performance evaluation. The general idea of Compstat is to reduce specific crime rates, but it requires the restructuring of the system and distribution of authority and decision-making to geographical commanders.
References
Dabney, D. (2010). Observations regarding key operational realities in a Compstat model of policing. Justice Quarterly, 27(1), 28-51. Web.
Maillard, J. D. (2018). Police performance regimes and police activity: Compstat in Paris and London compared. European Journal of Criminology, 15(5), 589-608. Web.
Pasha, O., Kroll, A., & Ash, M. (2018). Assessing police performance systems: The impact of CompStat on crime. Academy of Management Proceedings, 1(2018), 15169. Web.
Santos, R. G. (2017). Police organizational change after implementing crime analysis and evidence-based strategies through stratified policing. Policing: A Journal of Policy and Practice, 12(3), 288-302. Web.
Vito, G. F., Reed, J. C., & Walsh, W. F. (2016). Police executives’ and managers’ perspectives on Compstat*. Police Practice and Research, 18(1), 15-25. Web.