After Reading Case Study 4: Gaining Outside Commitment In Lo

1 After Reading Case Study 4 Gaining Outside Commitment In Lowell

After reading Case Study 4, "Gaining outside Commitment in Lowell, Massachusetts," and Case Study 5, "Leading Change in Riverside California," it is essential to analyze and contrast the police executive styles utilized by Chiefs Davis and Fortier. Sarver and Miller (2014) emphasizes that police executive styles vary depending on how leaders approach both external and internal roles within their departments. The choice of style is influenced by several factors, including decision-making timeframes and problem-solving strategies encountered in law enforcement contexts. Additionally, Cordner (2016) highlights that police executives adapt their styles based on the specific demands and duties of their roles, which can fluctuate according to situational needs.

Chief Davis in Lowell exemplifies the statesman police executive style, characterized by strategic leadership that fosters collaboration between the police department and the community. This style involves a high degree of delegation, whereby Davis trusted senior officers and staff to manage various operational challenges efficiently. His leadership focused on establishing trustworthiness, transparency, and community engagement, recognizing that the relationship between police and residents was deteriorated previously due to mismanagement. Davis adopted proactive strategies, emphasizing community policing initiatives that aimed to involve residents in problem-solving processes. This approach was instrumental in restoring public confidence and improving the department’s reputation, demonstrating a leadership style that balances managerial competence with community-oriented principles.

Conversely, Chief Fortier’s approach aligns more closely with the administrator police executive style, which emphasizes internal management, organization, and administrative restructuring. According to Cordner (2016), the administrator style prioritizes effective management practices, including planning, policy formulation, and internal training programs. Fortier's strategy was to initiate internal reforms, such as establishing a dedicated core affairs division and improving officer training, with the goal of fostering a more modern, efficient department capable of supporting community policing efforts. His focus was inward-looking—aimed at improving departmental functions first to lay the groundwork for external community engagement.

While both chiefs sought to improve their respective departments and communities, their distinct styles reflect different priorities and methods. Chief Davis’s stakeholder engagement and community-centric leadership exemplify a transformational leadership approach, fostering external trust and collaboration. In contrast, Chief Fortier's emphasis on internal management underscores a more transactional, administrative style focused on structural reforms to enable future external engagement. Despite these differences, both styles recognize that internal department health and external community relations are interconnected, highlighting the importance of adaptable leadership in law enforcement.

The contrast also reveals contextual differences: Davis operated in Lowell, where community trust was eroded and required rebuilding through external engagement. Fortier, in Riverside, prioritized internal reforms first, perhaps due to organizational needs or different community dynamics, before attempting broader community relations. The success of these leadership styles depends on understanding situational demands; Davis’s community-focused approach was effective in rebuilding trust, while Fortier’s internal reforms aimed to create a solid foundation for sustainable change.

In summary, Chiefs Davis and Fortier employed differing police executive styles aligned with their immediate objectives and contextual demands. Davis’s statesman style leveraged community engagement and trust-building, whereas Fortier’s administrator style concentrated on internal management and organizational efficiency. Both approaches underscore the importance of flexibility and situational awareness in police leadership, and their outcomes highlight the varied pathways to effective law enforcement leadership and community relations.

Paper For Above instruction

The leadership styles of police chiefs significantly influence the effectiveness and community relations of law enforcement agencies. Chief Davis of Lowell exemplifies the statesman police executive style, emphasizing community engagement, trust-building, and proactive problem-solving. His leadership involved delegating responsibilities, fostering collaboration with community stakeholders, and implementing initiatives that aimed to repair and strengthen the relationship between the police and residents. Such a style promotes transparency, accountability, and community involvement, which are essential for modern policing (Cordner, 2016). Davis believed that improving community trust was fundamental to addressing the root causes of crime and social disorder, thus adopting a strategy that prioritized external engagement over internal administrative focus.

In contrast, Chief Fortier’s leadership reflects the administrator police executive style, which centers on internal departmental management, organization, and operational efficiency. Fortier aimed to modernize the Riverside police department by establishing communication and training standards, as well as restructuring internal divisions to better serve community needs in the long run (Cordner, 2016). His approach was inward-looking, focusing on building a strong internal foundation before extensively engaging with the community. While he initiated multiple reforms to improve departmental performance, he faced challenges in stakeholder involvement, notably neglecting key personnel such as his deputy, which hindered the success of his reforms (Sarver & Miller, 2014). This exemplifies the limitations of an inward-focused leadership style if not complemented with effective stakeholder engagement.

Analyzing these styles reveals that the effectiveness of police leadership is context-dependent. Chief Davis’s community-oriented approach succeeded in Lowell, where rebuilding community trust was paramount. His style aligns with transformational leadership principles, motivating personnel and community members towards shared goals (Bass & Avolio, 1994). Conversely, Fortier’s internal management approach was necessary to address organizational inefficiencies in Riverside, but it lacked the crucial element of stakeholder engagement, which is vital for sustainable reform. This illustrates how internal and external leadership styles must be balanced according to situational demands and organizational culture.

Furthermore, research indicates that the best police leaders employ adaptable styles, switching between internal management and external engagement as circumstances require (Stout et al., 2011). Chief Davis’s community-focused leadership helped restore public confidence, critical in contemporary policing where community trust is fundamental to effective law enforcement (Nix et al., 2017). Fortier’s emphasis on internal improvement reflects an understanding that organizational capacity underpins external community relations; however, neglecting stakeholder involvement can undermine reform efforts, as observed in his case.

Both leadership approaches demonstrate the importance of understanding organizational dynamics and community context. Davis’s style fosters community trust, which enhances cooperation and legitimacy. Fortier’s style emphasizes building internal capacity, ensuring that the department is well-positioned to serve its community effectively in the future (Cordner, 2016). Successful police leadership, therefore, requires a nuanced view that considers when to emphasize community engagement and when to concentrate on internal improvements.

Conclusively, the contrasting leadership styles of Chiefs Davis and Fortier offer valuable insights into effective police management. Davis’s statesman approach underscores the importance of external stakeholder engagement in community policing, while Fortier’s administrator style highlights the significance of internal organizational health. Future police leaders should strive to develop adaptable leadership skills that enable them to switch between these styles appropriately, ensuring both internal efficiency and external legitimacy in their communities. Such adaptability is essential for the evolving challenges in contemporary law enforcement, where community trust and organizational effectiveness are equally vital for success.

References

• Bass, B. M., & Avolio, B. J. (1994). Improving organizational effectiveness through transformational leadership. Sage Publications.
• Cordner, G. W. (2016). Police Administration (9th ed.). Routledge.
• Nix, J., Wolfe, S. E., Mastrorilli, M., & Gawronski, B. (2017). Trust and legitimacy in policing. Criminology & Public Policy, 16(1), 99–124.
• Sarver, M. B., & Miller, H. (2014). Police chief leadership: Styles and effectiveness. Policing, 37(1), 144–158. doi:10.1108/PIJPSM-05-2014-0051
• Stout, B., DeJong, C., & Roberts, K. (2011). Organizational change in policing: A leadership perspective. Police Quarterly, 14(4), 347–370.
• Cordner, G. W. (2016). Police Administration (9th ed.). Routledge.