Public administrators need to be able to ensure high level of productivity from the people who work under them. This can be achieved easily if they perceive good leadership skills and traits in order to bring about positive change especially in difficult situation. There several renowned leaders in the world who exhibited significant leadership skills which enabled them to cub social, economic or political problems. One of such leaders is the New York Police Department Commissioner Bill Bratton in the New York City (NYC, 2014). Bill Bratton positively influenced the state of security in the New York City by significantly reducing the crime rate. This research paper explores on his Leadership in the New York Department of defence. The paper begins by describing the department of defence which was under the leadership of Bill Bratton, then a brief history of the leader before embarking on evaluating his performance as the commissioner.
New York Police Department (NYPD) is a security agency which is committed to enhance the quality of life in the New York city by enforcing laws while respecting the constitutional rights in order to preserve peace, reduce the fear as well as provide for a safe environment (NYC, 2014). The agency is headed by the Commissioner under who there is a First Deputy Commissioner, Deputy Commissioners, Chief of Department, Chiefs and Bureaus. NYPD endeavours to partner with members of community to enforce the law impartially in order to protect lives and property and aggressively pursue those who violate the law. Integrity in service delivery is as a key emphasis of the administrators both to the department personnel and the community at large.
William J. Bratton popularly known as Bill Bratton is a U.S Army veteran who played a major role in the Vietnam War. He began his career as a beat cop in 1979 and served in the Boston. In 1976, he faced down a robber in a bank and rescued a hostage earning him a top award for bravery in the department. He eventually progressed to the highest sworn position, the Superintendent of police in the Boston Police Department by the year 1980 (Silverman, 1999). He was then appointed to become a chief responsible of overseeing a progressive change in other five police departments. The commissioner Bratton is a holder of a bachelor degree conferred by Boston State College. He is also an FBI National Institute graduate. Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II rewarded his cooperative efforts in working with both the British police forces and the U.S. with a CBE (Commander of the Most Excellent Order of the British Empire) (Bratton, & Knobler, 1998). His commitment to duty and determination to reduce crime while maintaining law and order has made him scale high in the hierarchy of police to his current position of a Commissioner.
The NYPD had a hectic time in New York especially in the before19 90 when the crime rate was at its peak. Before 1990, New York City had almost the highest rate of crime in America and was ranked among the most unsafe cities in America. According to the NYPD crimes in New York were numerous and were classified as violation, misdemeanour and felony. They were then categorised into other small subdivisions such as Grand Larceny, Felonious Assault, and Misdemeanour Criminal Mischief to make it easy for the NYPD to keep consistent records of crimes. In the 1980s, New York City was the home for notorious gangs which fearlessly terrorised people and their property. The street gangs were composed of both the black and Hispanic youth and in 1970s and 1980s such gangs were part of the youth identity. This became as a culture making it difficult for the police departments to deal with crime. Such gangs included the Gangsta Killa Bloods and the Bounty Hunters at the Bronx, Little Boys Crew (LBC) and Gangster Crips in Brooklyn, Blood Stone Gangsters and the flying Dragons in Manhattan, 93 Bloods and G-Shine from Staten Island just to name a few (Bowling, 1999).
The presence of gangs represented an advanced level of crime at New York but this does not mean that other small kinds of clime were not present. Generally, crime was the order of the day. It was part of the culture and it is obvious that citizens in New York thought that restoring law and order was almost impossible. The spread of such mind-set in the community just made the NYPD work even more difficult and there was a need of an overhaul in leadership of the department to arrest the situation (Bratton, & Knobler, 1998). The crime reduction strategy was completely different from that was which was initiated by NYPD Commissioner in 1990s. Prisons maintained a less number of prisoners since most of them were released before the end of the sentence period on some condition in a strategy known as Parole. This made kept most of the criminals at large. From NYPD crime statistics, there was a constant increase in rate of crime. This is enough evidence that Parole was not effective.
Crime in New York has been a great threat to social economic development. According to a research conducted by the New York University (2005) security is a key factor in the development of a community. Public safety must be ensured so that other development activities such as investment in housing may become successful (Bratton et.al, 1998). Most families in New York families worry too much about safety in their environment. Since there is high likelihood that those people who live in crime prone areas are likely to be victims of crime, those who economically stable prefer moving to safer places where they stimulate development living the poor behind. This phenomenon also applied to New York stalling development projects and increased the poverty level of the region.
The rampant incidences of crime in New York formed part of the culture of the people and they adapted and developed tactics to persevere lawlessness. This means that as the NYPD was busy doing its best to reduce crime, people were not responsive. They were living for sufferance. This was retrogressive to the economic development of New York City. The existence of high level crimes made those crimes which were perceived to be less fatal ignored. The “small crimes” were never taken seriously neither by the community nor by the NYPD. This formed the breeding field for criminals thus increasing the crime rate (Bowling, 1999). The organised crime was also another challenge to the NYPD. There was need for intelligence to arrest the criminals. This required collaboration with detective units who could supply helpful information. The NYPD needed also to join hand with the legislative arms to ensure that laws directed to zero tolerance to crime were formulated. The police on the ground also required to be motivated to heighten their commitment in fighting the crime. Consequently there was need to propagate a team spirit within and without the NYPD. The best leadership approach therefore needed to be adopted to reduce the crime rate in New York.
Bill Bratton is a leader who has proved to be suitable to the great role put upon him after he was appointed as the 42nd Commissioner of NYPD. The reputed Commissioner has managed to re-engineer the police department especially in the fight against crime in New York through several programs he launched. During his first term as a commissioner in New York he achieved a notable decline in crime in 1990s which made headlines in the books of history in New York. His leadership is made unique by the two unique programs he initiated, that is, the COMPSTAT and the Broken Window in the early 1990s. The popularity of these programs is derived from their association with the drastic decline in crime rate in New York.
Broken Window Theory implemented by Commissioner Bratton was initially articulated by George L. Kelling and James Q. Willson (1982) in one of the magazines in Atlantic. This theory is based on an argument that if a window is not repaired there is tendency of those with the habit of breaking windows to assume that there is no one is responsible of taking care of the building and they will be motivated to break more windows. Eventually, the whole building will be full of broken windows. Having this in mind, Bratton came up with a crime deterrence strategy which aimed at reducing laxity in law enforcement. Bratton focussed his attention on subways in New York and bolstered the subway police. Commissioner Bratton made acquisition for new weapons and equipment for the police officers who were working beneath the streets (Bowling, 1999). He also sanctioned thorough security checks in the subway trains and confirmed later to the citizens that they had been recaptured and was safe for them. This displaced all homeless people who had inhabited the subways. The war on minor crimes extended into the streets from subways to truant child and prostitutes. It was extended further to public drunkards and other minor crimes committed mostly by the unemployed group in the society who were less careful.
CompStat on the other hand was a program which was introduced by Bill Bratton to change the form of crime management in the New York City Police Department into a data driven model of management in 1994 (Henry, 2003). This model has been accredited for its effectiveness in crime rate reduction which increased the quality of life of citizens in New York from 1990 onwards. CompStat is an acronym for Computer Statistics. This model generates crime related data using computers and comes up with organised data which can be used by the police department in making decisions on crime. The CompStat as model inside the framework of performance management also synthesises crime analysis and disorder data, solves strategic problem and make the accountability structure clear accurately and timely (Henry, 2003). The information derived there from is then used to identify crime problems and patterns. The management can then come up with an action plan in response to the analysis and implement is by committing the necessary resources and personnel. According to Weisburd et al. (2003), the accountability structure helps to ensure that results produced by CompStat are acted upon. They are also important in evaluating whether the right action plan is adopted and is effective in crime and disorder reduction.
Bill Bratton based the CompStat model on four principles which make it flexible and effective. Firstly, the model should produce accurate, timely and intelligence data which can aid in identifying crime problems (Chesbrough, 2003). Secondly, the command staff should make use of appropriate resources to come up with effective tactics which to ensure full response to the floated problem. Thirdly, the CompStat model requires rapid deployment of resources to the areas of need and finally, the model requires constant assessment and follow-up. Owing to the effectiveness and flexibility of the model, many agencies have adopted it or similar models and are implementing them in their areas of jurisdiction (Weisburd & Braga, 2006). For instance, the model was adopted by Baltimore Mayor who developed a similar model named StateStat aid in overseeing and managing agencies in the government (Fenton, 2007). Due to complexity of the model, Bratton had to involve all the stakeholders in the police department and it emerged successful.
William Bratton’s leadership traits can be likened to those of a transformational leader. Bratton in implementation of the CompStat and Broken Widow program involves the police, the command team and the community through constant communication to ensure all the goals and objectives are met. The Commissioner provided the officer with tools of work to facilitate them perform their duties. This motivated the officers and they really helped in implementing the broken windows program. Bratton and the command team formed the management in the NYPD and are seen actively involved in the CompStat program especially in deliberating the results and deciding on the best response to the problem. Commissioner Bratton as a leader is also involved in the evaluation and assessment of the model in crime reduction to ensure it becomes a success. The Commissioner is creative and an innovator. This is evidenced by the programs he initiates and the impact they make on the crime levels in New York.He seems to be ready with information on how to transform NYPD and restore security in New York. The integration of police services and crime detection and arrest with technology in the CompStat idea is an original and progressive idea which exhibits a high level of capability as a leader. This brings about a positive change in the police department to the citizen as it made the City safer (Chan & Mauborgne, 2003). With a safe place for residents, social development is possible hence improved standard of living in the city. This makes the Commissioner a good example of a transformational leader.
Commissioner Bratton leadership is both influenced by the knowledge and traits he possesses. The knowledge he has impacts directly on his leadership. Being a holder of a bachelor degree and a having graduated from the FBI National Institute, Bill Bratton was armed with the relevant knowledge and skills. This complemented his leadership in that he was able to comprehend the security status of New York City and devise appropriate strategy to combat crime. The knowledge acquired in the FBI National Institute enables him to realize the important of crime data analysis. As a result, he was able to advice on the development of CompStat which became a successful breakthrough in the New York Police Department (Chan & Mauborgne, 2003). The commissioner exhibits a high level of skill in fighting crime. His skills enable him to identify what his officers needed to execute the strategies and provide them accordingly. This enables him to allocate the resources appropriately to ensure the constraints do not stall the fight against crime.
Bratton’s leadership can be explained using the Trait and the Great Event Theories (Northouse, 2009). The Trait Theory indicates that some traits f a person can naturally propel people to leadership positions. The Great Event theory on the other hand states that an important event or a crisis may cause people to rise to the occasion and consequently surfacing outstanding leadership qualities in just an ordinary person. The Commissioner exhibits personal traits which are paramount in his type of leadership. He is a good communicator. This is evidenced by the fact that in spite of individual conceptualization of strategies which are unique, the rest of the members of the team understand clearly the benefits and their role in the execution of strategies. He sets a good example to the rest of the team members deterring them from performing against his will. This is because he manages to build a good relationship between him and his followers. Bratton’s objective nature also complements his leadership (Northouse, 2009). He is determined to realize a constant reduction of crime rate during the years of his leadership. The commissioner adopts a leadership style that is the best for the situation on the ground. He assumes leadership at a time when New York was toiling with insecurity and tremendous increase in crime rate. This situation accentuates his leadership bringing out the leader in himself. On his broken window strategy, he provides the resources required and then orders his officers to clear the under ways. Although this goes to the junior officers as a command, the order becomes effective since everything is facilitated. According to Bass (1990) it is most likely that Bill Bratton would have remained an ordinary leader were it not for the situation in New York
One of the challenges Bratton faced in his leadership approach is creating a compelling need for change. There arose conflicts with underpass dwellers during the clearing by the NYPD. The community was not prepared for this abrupt break of norms and his officers really experienced problems (BJA, 2009). Forming a team in the NYPD and motivating the team players was also a challenge. However, these challenges were never worsened by the few weaknesses Bratton had. He was a Commander. This is a weakness especially where role playing and teamwork is required in leadership. Another weakness is that he was not fully oriented to the culture of New York City by the time he became a Commissioner. Nevertheless, the approach strengths overshadowed the weaknesses in that he developed the required charisma and was able to develop an inspiring vision which led to achievement of the NYPD objectives (BJA, 2009).
In conclusion, Bill Bratton is an outright transformational leader who will always be remembered for his ambitious efforts of reducing the crime rate in New York. Stogdill (1989) also describes process leadership in a manner that suits William Bratton. He seems to have chosen to be a leader and acquired all the necessary skills through trainings in the aforementioned institutions. This is the best form of leadership especially in a police department.
References
Bass B. M & Stogdill R. M., (1990). Bass and Stogdill Hardbook of Leadership. New York, Free Press.
Bratton, W. J., & Knobler, P. (1998). Turnaround: How America's top cop reversed the crime epidemic. New York: Random House.
Barak, G. (2007). Battleground: Criminal justice. Westport, Conn: Greenwood Press.
Bratton W. J., Mallon R., Orr J. & Pollard C., (1998). Zero Tolerance: Policing a Free Society. Retrieved on 8th March 2014 from http://www.civitas.org.uk/pdf/cw35.pdf
BJA (2009). Transcript: Perspectives in Law Enforcement. The Concept of Predictive Policing: An Interview With Chief William Bratton. Retrieved on 8th March 2014 from https://www.bja.gov/publications/podcasts/multimedia/transcript/Transcripts_Predictive_508.pdf
Bowling, B. (1999). The Rise and Fall of New York Murder: Zero Torelance or Crack’s Decline? British Journal of Criminology 39 (4) 531-554 531-554.
Chesbrough, H. (2003). Open innovation: The new imperative for creating and profiting from technology. Boston, Mass: Harvard Business School Press.
Chan, W. & Mauborgne K. R. (2003). Tipping Point leadership. Retrieved on 8th March 2014 from http://johntomsett.files.wordpress.com/2012/10/tipping-point-leadership.pdf
Henry, V. E. (2003). The COMPSTAT paradigm: Management accountability in policing, business, and the public sector. Flushing, NY: Loose leaf Law Publications.
Kelling, G. and Wilson, J. (1982). Broken Window: The Police and Neighborhood Safety. The Atrantic Magazine, March, 1982.
Northouse, P. G. (2009). Introduction to leadership: Concepts and practice. Los Angeles: Sage Publications.
NYC (2014). NYPD Police Commissioner William J. Bratton. Retrieved on 8th March 2014 from http://www.nyc.gov/html/nypd/html/administration/headquarters_co.shtml
NYC (2014). NYPD Administration. Retrieved on 8th March 2014 from http://www.nyc.gov/html/nypd/html/administration/administration.shtml
Silverman, E. B. (1999). NYPD battles crime: Innovative strategies in policing. Boston: Northeastern University Press.
Weisburd, D., & Braga, A. A. (2006). Police innovation: Contrasting perspectives. Cambridge [etc.: Cambridge University Press.
