1. After reading Case Study 4, “Gaining outside Commitment in Lowell, Massachusetts,” Case Study 5, “Leading Change in Riverside California,” identify and contrast the police executive styles used by Chiefs Davis and Fortier…. Sarver and Miller (2014) argued that police executive styles differ depending on how they accomplish both the external and internal and roles. Different factors determine which police executive style that will be applied when handling security matters. For instance, as the authors note, some police executive varies depending based on time allocated when making significant decisions and when handling all sorts of encountered problems. As discussed by Cordner (2016 p. 486), some police executives assume different styles depending on the demands and the duties of their profession. Chief Davis Fortier, presented in the study case 4, applies the statesman police executive style in leading the law enforcement agency in Lowell, Massachusetts. He successfully uses the style to provide leadership to both the police department and the community in general. He exploits his leadership skills to delegate the management responsibilities to trusted individuals in the department in handling various problems. The Chief uses the staff in dealing with all sorts of threats from the public while offering management and much-needed tolerance. The finally resolve, as presented by Cordner (2016 p. 486), on coming up with a new effective operation strategy and general improvement and better management of the department. He resolved to engage the public in developing reasonable solutions to the challenges within the policing community in Lowell. Chief Davis ensured that he had implemented adequate and operating strategies that would rally the right police department’s public reputation. He was driven by the desire to improve the relationship and the association between the community and the police department. It is clear that the previous link had declined and dwindled because of the last management of the police. Cordner (2016 p. 486) state that Chief Davis had an assignment of ensuring that police and the community merge because that way, they would easily handle various community problems in Lowell. He implemented a proactive tactic which was an improved strategy compared to the reactive method that was used in the former management. He involved the public in discussions concerning policies of useful community policing. He, therefore, required an external professional’s aid in recovering control of the community’s trust and reputation. Chief Fortier once wanted to apply community policing in Riverside, California, after taking control of the police department. He, therefore, resolved on embracing new ideas and a more effective executive style called administrator police executive style. As discussed by Cordner (2016 p. 204), an administrator police executive style focuses more on the administration role and internal roles. It strictly focuses on management, organization, planning, and other responsibilities under the central part. The Chief wanted to effectively make changes starting from the inside of the police department. Chief Fortier wanted to first deal with internal administration for better community policing. According to Cordner (2016 p. 490), Chief Fortier was prepared to face various challenges while implementing recommendations in the report that he received to modernize community policing policies. He established a core affairs division within the department and initiated training for police officers. He was determined to be the man who would change the department for the better of the community. He, therefore, established standards that would boost him to achieve his objectives of having an active community policing. However, while planning on various issues, he failed to involve other essential stakeholders, including his Deputy. This rendered his efforts fruitless. Reference Cordner, G. W. (2016). Police Administration (9th Ed.). Routledge Sarver, M. B., & Miller, H. (2014). Police chief leadership: Styles and effectiveness. Policing, 37(1), 126-143. doi:http://dx.doi.org.bethelu.idm.oclc.org/10.1108/PIJPSM-03-2013-0028
