Performance management in police agencies: a conceptual framework

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to define a systematic management structure that helps police practitioners institutionalize performance management and analysis in more rational‐technical ways. Design/methodology/approach The design is based on Gold's “complete participant” field researcher method. Findings The findings suggest a performance management model is more rational than the traditional command‐control model and may increase consistency in police management by systematically collecting and reporting on streams of data to measure performance instead of relying on rote compliance. Research limitations/implications The model is limited because it does not account for important intangible qualities of performance (e.g. attitude, initiative, judgment); in the hands of autocratic managers it can be oppressive and cause more problems than it solves; it may constrain officer discretion; it has not been advanced as a learning instrument; and performance indicators are subject to measurement error. Practical implications Most police agencies are already capturing the necessary data elements to implement a performance management model. Police executives and policymakers can use this model to definitively measure how well police agencies and individual programs are performing. Originality/value The paper represents an opportunity for police practitioners to embrace a new management process intended to improve performance and accountability. The framework is a universal management process that can be applied to any size police agency or any police program.