Monthly targets set for Police - Is it fair or right?
Monthly targets set for Police - Is it fair or right?
Author
Discussion

Tonyrec

Original Poster:

3,984 posts

285 months

Thursday 23rd November 2006
quotequote all
What do you think about Police Officers being set targets to achieve every month?
Say for arrests, process etc etc or would you be satisfied that they produce a good days work whether it be arresting people, processing people or for just doing their job?

ipsg.glf

1,590 posts

248 months

Thursday 23rd November 2006
quotequote all
Personally, I'm not in favour of it.

Speeding motorist = 10 BiB points
Pulling drunk driver from a blazing wreck = probably none.

Tonyrec

Original Poster:

3,984 posts

285 months

Thursday 23rd November 2006
quotequote all
It all comes down to performance indicators and in your example you are spot on im afraid.

puggit

49,821 posts

278 months

Thursday 23rd November 2006
quotequote all
Hi Tony - long time no see wavey

It's never good - it's all part of the government obsession with targets and figures, and of course it takes away discretion (see thousands of previous threads!). Hundreds of bean counters will be sitting somewhere getting paid by tax payers' money to count these figures and produce spin rolleyes

It seems every time you log on it's a long time no see

wasted years

4,330 posts

239 months

Thursday 23rd November 2006
quotequote all
The way things are going with HATOs, VOSA, speed cameras taking over the BiB role it may be in a few years fewer of them are seen.

IT10

602 posts

245 months

Thursday 23rd November 2006
quotequote all
There are some jobs / functions where 'performance' cannot be quantified by attainment of targets - IMO policing is one of them.

Do away with targets and speed cameras and let the BiB have a freer hand to do their job properly rather than performing tasks just to hit a performance level.

Tonyrec

Original Poster:

3,984 posts

285 months

Thursday 23rd November 2006
quotequote all
puggit said:
Hi Tony - long time no see wavey

It's never good - it's all part of the government obsession with targets and figures, and of course it takes away discretion (see thousands of previous threads!). Hundreds of bean counters will be sitting somewhere getting paid by tax payers' money to count these figures and produce spin rolleyes

It seems every time you log on it's a long time no see


You are right on both counts.......time does goe very quickly nowadays.

telecat

8,528 posts

271 months

Thursday 23rd November 2006
quotequote all
By Their definition you Cannot quantify service industries and the Police, NHS and Fire service are the ultimate in these. But since the advent of Lotus 1-2-3 and Excel trying to tell that to obsessed Bean counter's only works when we in IT take their toys away!

Edited by telecat on Thursday 23 November 17:32

justinp1

13,363 posts

260 months

Thursday 23rd November 2006
quotequote all
Tonyrec said:
What do you think about Police Officers being set targets to achieve every month?
Say for arrests, process etc etc or would you be satisfied that they produce a good days work whether it be arresting people, processing people or for just doing their job?


Completely wrong.

Every work study around shows that if the target is effective then this consciously and subconsciously changes the employees attitude and the way they work.

For example, some will look for an easy way to meet their target, to the detriment to the rest of their work.

For example if catching someone doing 80 on the motorway gets 1 point and 10 mins to process, and catching a drunk driver leaving the scene of an accident is worth 5 points, but may take up 3-4 days to process in paperwork, and court time, this makes a difficult decision for the PC to make. The powers that be are pressing the PC to get 5 quick points and get 5 more.

The whole point of targets is so that people and supervisors can compare themselves to eachother. The second point would be to introduce performance related pay.

Both of these are strong incentive for emplyees to do whatever it takes to get the most points possible, which may not be doing the best job for the good of the Force and the public.

Mr_annie_vxr

9,270 posts

241 months

Thursday 23rd November 2006
quotequote all
Each force does things in a different way. I think it depends how you set those targets. For example an increase in detections of burglaries or an improvement in conviction rate of offenders are I think positive moves. I personaly think you do have to measure what people are doing to an extent so that those amongst the police (and there are some I know) who are lazy and ineffective can be dealt with. In my experience though its not right to force a certain number of arrests or some such as that takes away discretion from officers. I think forces do need some performance aims (not targets).

IT10

602 posts

245 months

Thursday 23rd November 2006
quotequote all
Mr_annie_vxr said:
Each force does things in a different way. I think it depends how you set those targets. For example an increase in detections of burglaries or an improvement in conviction rate of offenders are I think positive moves. I personaly think you do have to measure what people are doing to an extent so that those amongst the police (and there are some I know) who are lazy and ineffective can be dealt with. In my experience though its not right to force a certain number of arrests or some such as that takes away discretion from officers. I think forces do need some performance aims (not targets).


I would agree and add that there is a world of difference between targets and targeting resources to counter a spate of distraction burglaries etc

If that makes sense

cliffe_mafia

1,739 posts

268 months

Thursday 23rd November 2006
quotequote all
Personally I'm against the use of targets because I think they discourage proactive policing. They encourage making arrests after a crime, instead of trying to stop the crime happening in the first place - as this can't be shown in a league table.

Edited by cliffe_mafia on Thursday 23 November 18:11

chrispy porker

17,730 posts

258 months

Thursday 23rd November 2006
quotequote all
what gets measured gets done.

flemke

23,506 posts

267 months

Thursday 23rd November 2006
quotequote all
It's indefensible.

Look at the NHS farce, in which A&E patients are kept in ambulances in a car park, rather than being admitted, so that the hospital's average time-until-examination can be held down. Other patients who are effectively thrown out of hospital before they're well, so that new patients can take their place and waiting times be nominally shortened.


Let police professionals decide who ought to be apprehended, why and when.

Reliance on numbers distorts natural behaviour and makes a mockery of common sense.

It's the same as when a government hires an outside, for-profit business to run a public function that requires maturity, reasoned judgment and fairness - all those requirements are trampled over in pursuit of self-interest.
Bailiffs who get their facts wrong and threaten and intimidate innocent people? Meter maids who falsify their records in order to get their numbers up? Buffoons who tear up the roads in order to lay down yet another superfluous run of optical cable?

It's not acceptable, although it's entirely predictable for a Government whose policies are based on spin, sleight-of-hand and populist cant.

flemke

23,506 posts

267 months

Thursday 23rd November 2006
quotequote all
chrispy porker said:
what gets measured gets done.

Exactly, and, as you cannot measure fairness, justice and common sense, they don't happen.

7db

6,060 posts

260 months

Thursday 23rd November 2006
quotequote all
I thought the targets were set so low (one FPN per day) that frankly the only people not achieving them were genuinely lazy...

Of course there are objectives that people have. They are either explicit and measured or they are not. The discussion is not about whether having objectives is a good thing -- it's about what they are.

Mr_annie_vxr

9,270 posts

241 months

Thursday 23rd November 2006
quotequote all
Speaking as being one who has performance awareness rather than set targets and it having given me the evidence to kick a lazy officer in the arse I do see the use they can have but they are not the be all and end all. Its not possible to measure how effective your night duty activities were as you never get a report on what crimes were due to happen last night. Many things that we do cannot be measured with spreadsheets.

I also know how they can be played and I for one do not agree with saying to an officer you shall make four arrests as that will impact upon discretion.

jasandjules

72,630 posts

259 months

Thursday 23rd November 2006
quotequote all
All that will happen is, as with all these Govt bul**t targets, the stats will be frigged to claim success.

Shall I look surprised now, or later?

chrispy porker

17,730 posts

258 months

Thursday 23rd November 2006
quotequote all
lies, damned lies and statistics.
I work in performance improvement and some of the detection rates claimed by some forces is down to smoke and mirrors.......not mine of course.

vonhosen

40,597 posts

247 months

Thursday 23rd November 2006
quotequote all
I've been hearing about this officer *points system* for over 20 years.
I've never been told how many points I am supposed to get, whether I reached the required amount or whether I hadn't.




Edited by vonhosen on Thursday 23 November 18:54