AVOIDING THE AVOIDABLE: A LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER’S GUIDE TO PROBLEM SOLVING

By Dennis M. Marlock

    That this occurs is a fact, but what usually escapes us are the reasons for those failures. With that in mind, below is a list of the most common mistakes and a few suggestions on how to correct and avoid repeating them.

Mistake #1: Uncertainty

If you cannot properly define exactly what you hope to do, then you shall do nothing; being vague leads to disaster.

If you want to solve a problem within your department, then you should be able to cite in specific terms what the problem is.  Not close to – or almost – but exactly what do you hope to change or eliminate?

Mistake #2:  Misidentifying the Problem

Closely related to Mistake #1 is misidentifying the problem.  Make certain you’re not treating the effects of the problem rather than the cause.  In considering the problem of cause in any situation, it is essential to distinguish between necessary factors, conditions, and incidental factors.

All factors which are necessary for an event to occur are called a condition.  Incidental factors are those which may have existed during a particular event, but have no direct bearing on it.  Two rules of thumb to apply when separating conditions and incidental factors are:

1. “A” cannot be the cause of “B” if “A” is ever absent when “B” is present; and

2. “A” cannot be the cause of “B” if “B” is ever absent when “A” is present.

Here’s a classic example of what it looks like when you confuse these factors:

Every morning when the neighbor’s rooster crows, the sun appears on the horizon; therefore, it is the rooster who makes the sun rise.

This appears silly, but I’m certain you could cite real-life examples which are just as ridiculous.

Mistake #3: Ignoring Valuable Resources

Failing to make use of available resources has become the hallmark of most every bureaucracy. Traveling throughout the country conducting police training seminars has always been an enjoyable experience for me, but, with few exceptions, there are usually officers within the host agency who know as much, or more, than I do about the topics covered. Perhaps it doesn’t appear that you’ve conducted adequate research unless you go outside your department or agency, or some other obscure rationale. In either case, the best place to start looking for help is within your own department or community.

For as many years as I can remember, the Milwaukee Police Department had some of the most knowledgeable and skillful arson and auto theft investigators in the nation. These officers were constantly traveling around the world helping other departments duplicate our success. For reasons which remain a mystery, our administrators often brought in various arson and auto theft experts from other states to train our officers on how to conduct proper investigations. Not only did this insult our own experts, but it soon became obvious that the outside authorities were trained by our department’s experts.

Mistake #4:  Failure to Set Goals

All too often, we confuse our values with our goals. Values are something you believe in, feel, or think. Goals are something you intend to change or accomplish. Once you have identified a problem, create a list of specific goals which are to be achieved within a set time frame. With this, you need to establish a list of steps to be taken for achieving each goal.

Mistake #5: Duplicating Other’s Mistakes

Trying to copy a program created by another department usually leads to trouble. Other than a swell vacation, all those fact gathering junkets are a waste of time. To put it another way, my problems aren’t necessarily your problems. Crime is crime, but the why, when, where, how, or who commits those crimes in any given community is unique to each location. That any given program was a huge success in San Francisco does not necessarily mean the same will work in Dubuque, Iowa. Social values, population density, unemployment, and all those other wonderful topics which criminologists love to study, affect what will and will not work.

This does not mean you should fail to look at another department’s successes. You must take from them what will work in your town and avoid using what won’t. No one knows your community better than you do, so don’t sell yourself short.

Mistake #6:  Being Unrealistic

Just because you want to accomplish something does not insure success, unless you have both the ability and resources to make it all happen. In other words, don’t bite off more than you can chew. Okay, I’m allowed at least one hackneyed expression.

The only advice here: Don’t get too ambitious. Keep your goals in line with your department’s ability to produce the desired results. And, while on the topic of results, here’s something else to consider. Just because you are trying to solve a complicated problem does not mean that you must create a complicated solution.

How many times have you had to work with a policy or program which was so complex that no one, including its creator, could explain how it worked?  If your solutions to anything even remotely resemble the standard government tax forms, use it as a good sign that your program is doomed unless it’s brought under control.

Real-Life Example

Here’s a true story which demonstrates the mistakes we’ve just looked at:

Some years ago, the New York City Police Department set out to solve the problem they were having with slow response to calls for help from their citizens. A very ambitious and expensive research project was conducted by outside experts. The experts concluded that the NYPD needed to invest millions of dollars in the latest hi-tech computer aided dispatch systems. This wonderful technology would assure that all calls for police service were handled in a most proficient fashion. No more would callers have to wait for the police to respond; criminals would be caught in the act and crime would be significantly reduced.

The wonderful equipment was installed. Soon afterwards, administrators from around the planet were flocking to the NYPD to study this law enforcement miracle. With few exceptions, most who observed this state-of-the-art equipment were impressed – so impressed that they duplicated this miracle in their respective cities.   

All might have lived happily ever after were it not for one minor research flaw. Although there did exist a real problem with the time which elapsed between the offense and the time the police arrived, the cause of that problem was not the cops. Conversely, it was the citizens who were the problem. A reexamination disclosed that most crime victims, for various reasons, waited 30 to 60 minutes before calling for assistance.  Add this to the time it took to dispatch a squad and you get criminals and witnesses who are no longer on the scene and a very low clearance rate.

In this classic case of false starts to wrong conclusions, the NYPD failed to interview their own officers and elected to use an outside agency not familiar with the department or city residents. The agency, in turn, misinterpreted the problem and ultimately cost the taxpayers a lot of money which might have been used to educate the public about how to report a crime. Then, too, let us not forget all the other departments who hastily duplicated New York’s mistake. What these department administrators failed to consider was human nature.

What, you ask, does human nature have to do with any of this? It has a lot to do with it. People who spend a few dollars on a foolish item eventually discover their mistake and readily tell others how foolish they were. The opposite occurs when the same people waste a lot of money on a foolish item. Rather then admit to the mistake, they instead feign satisfaction with the purchase and encourage others to follow their lead. There is a lot of psychology behind this and you won’t have a difficult time finding information on the topic. But, for now, all you need to know is that such exists and that you should use caution when conducting your research.

One for the Road

One last pitfall involved with many programs involves a failure to reevaluate what you have put into place. The adage which says, “If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it,” sounds reasonable, but is nevertheless untrue. All programs need occasional adjustments and, in some instances, elimination.  Far too often we see well-intentioned programs and services which do little more than exist.

Again, know what the real problem is before taking action. Use all the tools available to you during your research, including people within your own organization. Do not trust people who speak for others. If, for example, you’re creating a senior citizen program, don’t ask teenagers what seniors want or need.  A wiser choice would be to speak with the seniors you hope to serve. Use what you can from outside sources, but tailor everything to your particular community. Do this and you will indeed be the creator of programs and services which work as advertised.

About the Author:  Dennis Marlock is a retired lieutenant of detectives with the Milwaukee Police Department where he served 31 years as a fraud and organized crimes investigator. He is cofounder of Professionals Against Confidence Crime, an international law enforcement organization specializing in the investigation and prevention of fraud.  Dennis has authored countless articles for various publications and is a member of Sterling Speakers International. His latest books include How to Become a Professional Con Artist and License to Steal (which provides in-depth information about criminal Gypsy clans).  The two Web sites maintained by Dennis are Fraudtech at www.fraudtech.bizland.com and PACC at www.pac-c.org.