The Problem Analysis Triangle develops its facts from the routine activity approach in the field of environmental criminology. The problem analysis triangle offers a channel for thinking and solving persistent problems concerning crime and disorder issues. The problem analysis triangle plays a role in criminal activity analysis hence has crime triangle as an alternative name. The theory argues that the occurrence of an offence relies on the presence of three things: the availability of an appropriate target, the absence of a guardian to safeguard the target, and the existence of an enthused offender. Mui and Mailley (2015) argue that the Problem Analysis Triangle draws its facts from the routine activity method that explains the reasons behind crimes. Problems description and comprehension is definite. Hence, the description should occur in ways that lead to understanding and interventions.
The modern design of the triangle shows an outer section of the triangle comprising of controllers governing the three components of the inner triangle. For instance, the offender requires a handler who understands his or her actions, for example, a spouse, sibling, or parent. The target has a proficient guardian capable of issuing the target with the necessary care and safeguard whereas the place needs a manager with the authority to govern behaviour within certain premises. Besides, the problem analysis triangle is convenient in recognizing problems that challenge the police and the root of these problems. These include habitual offenders, who invade different targets at different periods, constant attacks on victims by many victimizers, and routine location problems, which comprise of criminals and victims operating in a similar area. For a crime to occur, the inner elements are fundamental. Clarke and E Eck (2016) argue that the Problem Analysis Triangle helps identify the opportunities that lead to the occurrence of offences to safeguard targets, prevent reoffending by victimizers, and adjust places that problems ensue.
Figure 1: Problem Analysis Triangle (Clarke & E Eck, 2016)
On the other hand, upward communication represents a form of formal communication whereby information moves from subordinates to the managers Bisel, Messersmith, & Kelley, 2012). The messages relayed include job problems, employee problems, and perceptions towards organizational policies. Upward communication boosts the morale of workers. Nonetheless, most superiors discourage upward communication. Conversely, horizontal communication represents the flow of information between employees of the same rank in an organization. Examples of messages conveyed include problem-solving techniques, information sharing, and task coordination. Horizontal communication is essential since it promotes equality among employees of the same rank. Besides, horizontal communication reduces the problem brought about by management since employees can harmonise activities in groups (Bisel, Messersmith & Kelley, 2012). However, some organizations discourage horizontal communication because some of the methods employed during training and indoctrination are faulty.
References
Bisel, R. S., Messersmith, A. S., & Kelley, K. M. (2012). Supervisor-Subordinate Communication: Hierarchical Mum Effect Meets Organizational Learning. Journal Of Business Communication, 49(2), 128-147. doi:10.1177/0021943612436972.
Mui, G., & Mailley, J. (2015). A tale of two triangles: comparing the Fraud Triangle with criminology’s Crime Triangle. Accounting Research Journal, 28(1), 45-58. doi:10.1108/ARJ-10-2014-0092V.
Clarke, R., & E Eck, J. (2016). Use the Problem Analysis Triangle. Crime Analysis For Problem Solvers In 60 Small Steps.
Dăneci-Pătrău, D. (2011). Formal Communication In Organisation. Economics, Management & Financial Markets, 6(1), 487-497.
