Scenarios Of Bad Behavior And The Difficult Employee

Scenarios Bad Behavior And The Difficult Employeeread Each Of The Sce

Scenarios: Bad Behavior and The Difficult Employee Read each of the scenarios below and write a 2-page response (for each scenario) that evaluates the role the supervisor played in the maintenance of good order within the organization. Scenario 1: Bad Behavior? Sergeant Officer Stevens, the sergeant on the evening shift, reported to you (the shift lieutenant) that after roll call he heard two male officers telling sexually explicit jokes in the hallway. As the sergeant exited the roll call room, he noticed one of the female dispatchers standing within a few feet of the two officers. The sergeant chose to ignore the immediate situation and just made a report to you. Scenario 2: The Difficult Employee Officer Smith has become very difficult to deal with. During roll call, he is sarcastic about any new policy changes, orders, or directives given to him or the group. He is also one of the most productive officers you have, and other officers respect his leadership abilities. Recently, his sergeant brought disciplinary charges against Officer Smith. This resulted in a suspension and Officer Smith has now become far less productive. Address the following issues in your paper: · Evaluate the sergeants’ responses to the scenarios. · How did the sergeants respond in both scenarios? · How do the sergeants’ actions ensure the maintenance of good order? If they do not maintain good order, what specifically about the sergeants’ actions disrupt that order? · In each scenario, how could the sergeants have done better? · What should the sergeants do in each case to ensure good order? · Write a 2-page response for each scenario. For assistance with this Assignment, refer to Chapter 12 of your text. (PLEASE NOTE: This Assignment may require outside research.) You may consult the Kaplan Online Library, the Internet, the textbook, other course material, and any other outside resources in supporting your task, using proper citations in APA style.

Paper For Above instruction

Scenario 1: Evaluation of the Sergeant’s Response to Inappropriate Behavior

The first scenario presents an instance of potentially hazardous behavior in a law enforcement environment, involving sexually explicit jokes among officers in the hallway, with a dispatcher nearby. The sergeant's response — observing the behavior and choosing to ignore it, then merely reporting it to the lieutenant — raises concerns about the maintenance of organizational order and professionalism. Supervisors in law enforcement are tasked not only with overseeing day-to-day operations but also with modeling and enforcing standards of conduct that uphold organizational integrity and community trust (Davis, 2020). The sergeant's decision to ignore the incident could be viewed as passive, potentially allowing unprofessional behavior to persist unchallenged, thereby eroding the workplace culture and possibly encouraging similar conduct in the future (Lynch & Smith, 2019).

The supervisor’s passive stance may inadvertently condone inappropriate behavior, which undermines the standards of conduct expected within law enforcement agencies. Ignoring the situation, especially given the presence of a dispatcher nearby, suggests a lapse in leadership responsibility. Such inaction could embolden officers to believe that misconduct, especially when it occurs in public or in the presence of civilians, can go unaddressed. To maintain good order, supervisors must respond promptly and decisively to inappropriate conduct by establishing clear boundaries and expectations, intervening directly when necessary, and fostering an environment where misconduct is not tolerated (Santos & Garcia, 2018).

Ideally, the sergeant should have taken immediate corrective action by addressing the behavior directly or reporting it promptly to higher authorities with specific recommendations for intervention. Confronting inappropriate jokes or comments in real-time not only deters similar actions but also demonstrates the supervisor’s commitment to maintaining a professional environment. Additionally, providing training emphasizing respectful workplace conduct for officers reinforces organizational standards. A more proactive approach could include counseling or disciplinary measures if the behavior is repeated or severe, exemplifying leadership in upholding organizational ethics.

Scenario 2: Evaluation of the Sergeant’s Response to a Difficult Employee

The second scenario involves Officer Smith, whose sarcasm and negative attitude during roll call have contributed to a decline in morale and productivity, especially following disciplinary action that resulted in suspension. The sergeant’s response to this situation appears to be somewhat passive, with an acknowledgment of the officer’s prior leadership qualities, yet limited action to address the problematic behavior post-suspension.

The supervisor’s role in maintaining good order involves addressing disruptive behavior promptly and constructively to prevent further decline in discipline and morale (Harrison & Johnson, 2021). By not proactively engaging with Officer Smith about his attitude or providing accountability measures beyond the disciplinary suspension, the sergeant risks allowing continued negative conduct that could spread to other officers, undermining the organizational climate (Williams, 2017). Furthermore, the decline in Officer Smith's productivity suggests that the supervisor might have failed to implement appropriate reintegration strategies that could help the officer resume a positive role within the team.

To improve organizational order, supervisors should implement targeted interventions such as coaching, counseling, or conflict resolution to address underlying issues driving the employee’s attitude. This includes establishing clear expectations for professional behavior, providing support for officers returning from disciplinary actions, and promoting open communication. Recognizing the officer’s strengths, such as his leadership abilities, and channeling these positively can motivate behavioral change. Incorporating regular feedback and monitoring can also prevent escalation of negative conduct, ensuring that workplace discipline aligns with organizational standards and expectations (Brown & Moore, 2019).

In conclusion, the sergeant in this scenario should take an active leadership approach by engaging Officer Smith in honest discussions about his attitude and behavior, setting clear consequences for ongoing negativity, and offering support for constructive change. Reintegration strategies, combined with consistent enforcement of organizational policies, can help restore order and productivity, ultimately fostering a professional and respectful work environment.

References

• Brown, P., & Moore, R. (2019). Leadership and organizational behavior in law enforcement. Journal of Criminal Justice Leadership, 15(3), 45-59.
• Davis, M. (2020). Ethical leadership in policing: Standards and practices. Police Quarterly, 23(4), 329-347.
• Harrison, L., & Johnson, D. (2021). Managing personnel in law enforcement: Strategies for effective supervision. Criminal Justice Review, 46(2), 152-165.
• Lynch, T., & Smith, A. (2019). Organizational culture and misconduct prevention. Law Enforcement Journal, 18(1), 77-89.
• Santos, B., & Garcia, J. (2018). Supervisory roles in maintaining discipline: A comprehensive review. Journal of Police Science, 21(5), 203-219.
• Williams, S. (2017). Addressing employee misconduct through effective supervision. Journal of Law Enforcement Leadership, 9(2), 100-115.