Measuring Police Performance Appraisal System

Measuring police performance is a concept that many departments still have trouble perfecting. The problem is that the agencies do not know how to properly measure what is good police work, or what makes a police officer a successful one. Most agencies use a performance appraisal system that looks at various traits of the officer, not their quality of job performance. Larry Coutts and Frank Schneider discuss the shortcomings of Police officer performance appraisal systems from their article from the journal Policing. They conducted a research study of 15 municipal Canadian police departments, asking about their performance appraisal practices. The results showed that majority of these department’s employees were unhappy with the way their
“Even less surprising and especially disconcerting is the fact that fully two thirds of the police officers reported that the appraisal system has, at best, only a negligible impact on their subsequent job performance” (Coutts, Schneider,2004, p.77). Any doubts concerning performance appraisal systems is affirmed by that statistic. The point of any job evaluation is to show the employee their strengths and weaknesses, and to hopefully get them to improve in those areas. If two thirds of officers are not changing the ways of their jobs due to their evaluations, then they are deemed useless. The attitudes towards these evaluations will cause officers to disregard their appraisals every year, and continue to do their job the same exact way. They will fail to adapt to new department policies or visions, and overall effectiveness of the department will suffer. One of the key components for a successful appraisal system was for the opportunity to sit down with the supervisor before their evaluation is complete. It helps create a positive relationship between the supervisor and the officer, and also eliminates any miscommunication in any of the job related areas. Currently, most officers receive their appraisal; sit down with the supervisor to review it, and that is the end of it until next year. Coutts and Schneider believe that there should be a negotiation before hand, and
There is no clear-cut way to perfect them, however, these authors provided their concepts to greatly improve the ways performance appraisals are handled. They should be performance based opposed to character traits. Officers must believe they have meaningful input in their evaluation. A continuous performance-based feedback process should take form between the officer and their supervisor. The appraisal should provide the opportunity for the supervisor and officer to promote achievement of the department and the individual. And the supervisors should be well trained and prepared in the art of evaluating the officers (Coutts, Schneider, 2004). Their research also confirmed my beliefs on the performance appraisals, as it revealed what aspects were wrong, and how the officers viewed the appraisals. If officers do not take the appraisals seriously, and change the way they work, there is no point conducting the evaluation. Different departments should view this article and alter the ways they handle their officer performance appraisals to save time and