Intelligence Led Policing, Managerialism and Community Engagement: Competing Priorities and the Role of the National Intelligence Model in the UK

This paper revisits the earlier claim of one of its authors that a fundamental shift is taking place in policing towards a strategic, future-oriented and targeted approach to crime control—broadly represented in the concept of “intelligence led policing” (ILP)—built around analysis and management of problems and risks, rather than reactive responses to individual crimes. Some doubt may be cast on this view by recent government promotion in the UK of “reassurance” and “neighbourhood” policing, which prioritise responses to community fears and perceptions (rather than analysis of “objective” crime data), and through drives to improve detection rates in reactive investigations. However, ILP need not be understood narrowly in terms of proactive operational methods based on police intelligence, and is not necessarily incompatible with these new concerns. The National Intelligence Model (NIM), now adopted by all police forces in England and Wales, offers a framework of business processes for the management of policing priorities of all kinds: it can incorporate the perspectives of partner agencies and local communities, and can set parameters for reactive as well as proactive responses to crime. The structured use of analysis within the Model potentially takes full account of these factors, yet retains an essentially evidence based process of decision making and prioritisation, as well as a “forward looking” focus on threats to community safety. It may also in time facilitate closer integration of police and Community Safety Partnership processes. This represents an ideal rather than a present reality, and there are major risks to its realisation, including police cultural attitudes and misunderstanding, over-dominance of centrally set targets, and “silo thinking”.