Human Resource Management Issues and Law Enforcement - Coursework Example

Human Resource Management Issues and Law Enforcement As a part of organizational behavior, human resource management is a key issue for law enforcement agencies since they continually deal with human issues both within the organization and in connection with those who they interact with. Therefore, an understanding of some of the recent issues which have come up with regard to human resources and law enforcement is important for all students of business, organizational behavior as well as those connected with the business of law enforcement. In this regard, there are four important aspects of human resource management that can be discussed. The first is recruitment and hiring since that is where human resource management begins in actuality. The second is the issue of personality profiling and profiling in general for law enforcement which is also an ethical issue. The third is the issue of reward and performance management which can be taken jointly since good performance in any organization has to be rewarded as a matter of course. Recruitment and Hiring Since human resource management begins with recruitment and hiring, the two central issues for a law enforcement agency undergoing a drive for recruitment and hiring process can be understood as the need to follow anti-discrimination practices and equal opportunity guidelines (Lockwood, 2005). Simply put, all candidates must be viewed and hired based on their strengths and weaknesses as applicants without giving any weight to their race, gender, age, physical abilities except in situations where such requirements are an intrinsic part of the job (Alleyne, 2005). As reported by Clarke (2005), a lot remains to be done in this particular field since law enforcement agencies as well as other organizations have been questioned on their ability to ensure good recruitment practices. Given that the nature of the job in modern law enforcement often includes guidelines for inclusion for officers who may have a disability and makes accessibility a mandatory requirement, there are very few exceptions to the ethical guidelines as well as the legal requirements which can be obtained by an agency. Without exception, recruiters for the law should follow ethical principles and it should be assumed by them that the ethical hiring rules apply in the fullest sense during the hiring process. Even before a person is hired, there are can be professional requirements which must be followed in the selection and interview process which mainly deal with ensuring confidentiality and the privacy of all candidates seeking positions with the agency. While making the application for the job, candidates may give out information which is considered to be private information in the eyes of the law and that must be kept secure. Personality Profiling With the information provided by the individual a personality profile can be created and HR experts can use principles from the areas of economics, sociology, political science and most importantly psychology to predict, control and explain the behavior of certain individuals in the agency. In terms of psychology, it is understood that certain personality types are better at handling certain positions than others. While we may say that person X has a cheerful personality, scientists prefer to classify personality in three different models including Factorial models, typologies and circumplexes which are directly connected with how they perform in given situations (Clarke & Robertson, 2005). This process can be used to profile candidates but modern discussions of ethics in HR also question if such a process would be valid in ethical terms. There is a significant amount of research and information which shows that there is a definite link between personality and certain job roles. Of course much of the common evidence presented is based on anecdotes and observations by individuals but scientific research into the field also supports this position. For example, on an individual level, it has been shown that having a proactive personality can be positive for on a person’s career (Erdogan, 2005). As research continues both in terms of organizational behavior and personality studies, we might have to consider additions or alterations to the ethics of human resource management particularly when it comes to law enforcement. There is a newly discovered higher order personality trait called Honesty-Humility which impacts the tendency towards antisocial behavior at work (Lee, et. al. 2005). It is therefore logical to say that further research into personality and personality traits will certainly open more criteria for performance assessment and personality evaluations even if they are implicit evaluations and not explicit tests for performance. This evaluation could be essential for law enforcement agencies if they are permitted under their bylaws to do so. The Psychological Contract Once a person has been recruited and employed with the agency, there can be an explicit contract of employment. However, there are also psychological contracts which Emott (2006) suggests are the implicit concepts and understandings between the agency and the officers as they relate to both the expectations of the agency and the obligations of the agents. While there may be no legal obligations to uphold a psychological contract, there is certainly an ethical obligation and an organizational reason. For example, when any individuals are being selected for rewards or promotions, the psychological contract is bound to come into play. Emott (2006) takes a wide view of the contract in such situations where new bonds are being formed and firmly recommends that the full understanding of the psychological contract should be based on ethics and fairness to both parties. This may be difficult to achieve in some case because the senior officers and the rank and file may not have enough time to give and take their position on an ethereal contract. As the contract is implicit, it is difficult to judge how it will be impacted when changes come to the law, the functioning of the agency or even in the organizational structure of the agency. For example, if a certain group of high performers are to be rewarded and if those individuals thought they deserved the reward then the psychological contract is merely reinforced. For some reason, the employees thought themselves capable and deserving enough to be rewarded and the law enforcement agency thought the same therefore there is no conflict between them. It does not come as a surprise to the officer; rather it comes as a reward or even as expected entitlement. This situation would validate the belief of the officer in his or her own abilities as well as improve the strength of the psychological contract. Reward & Performance Management This brings us to the discussion of reward and performance management as another important element of human resource management in law enforcement. The process seems simple enough because it is supposed to select and give rewards to the best performers. However, it is very difficult as well as time consuming to see which individuals have actually performed above and beyond the call of duty and which have merely coasted by. Law enforcement agencies can certainly take inspiration from the best example for ethical reward management which comes from GE that uses a forced ranking system that places individuals in absolute terms with which reward management can be handled. This certainly appears to be a good method since no two individuals can be absolutely equal therefore they can be ranked in one way or the other. With the ranking in performance, rewards at GE are linked to the mission of the company which is certainly an ethical way to reward good performance. Welch (2005, Pg. 16) says that “Every decision or initiative was linked to the mission. We publicly rewarded people who drove the mission and let go of people who couldn’t deal with it for whatever reason.” Of course every agency might have their own rules as to what constitutes good performance but the nature of the appraisal should have these elements at the minimum. Appraisal Factor Reason Effect Timely (Quarterly Appraisals) Continual and rapid feedback to all agent/officers on their output and work done for the agency Officers/agents know where they stand and those who are going to be let go are not blind sided by the decision when it comes Honest (Open discussion on all points) It lets an individual know exactly where s/he stands and what s/he can do to improve the situation Officers can be motivated and can also suggest ways on their own to bring up their performance levels Broad ranged Covers a variety of methods by which an officer can give input to the agency and all aspects of performance are analyzed for improvements or rewards Individuals know that they can work on all aspects of their job to improve their relationship with the agency as well as their superiors as per the given values which are important to the agency Directly connected to rewards Performance connected to rewards ensures that the same performance would be more likely in the future Officers are motivated to work towards a goal and seek further rewards. Conclusion I feel that other than several additional restrictions placed on as well as liberties given to HR management; there are few differences between managing human resources at a for profit company or at a law enforcement agency. The business world does not seem to be very different from the world of law enforcement and it is not because the business world has taken the same environment as law enforcement. In fact, the reverse might be quite true since the business of law enforcement comes with nearly the same clients and operational principles which a nation wide company would have. Works Cited Alleyne, S. (2005). But Can You Walk the Walk. Journal of Black Enterprise, 36(2) Pg. 100-105. Clarke, R. D. (2005). Workplace Bias Abounds. Journal of Black Enterprise, 36(2) Pg. 38-39. Clarke, S. and Robertson, I. T. (2005). A meta-analytic review of the Big Five personality factors and accident involvement in occupational and non-occupational settings. Journal of Occupational & Organizational Psychology, 78(3), Pg. 355-376. Emott, M. 2006, ‘A review of research into the making and breaking of psychological contracts’, People Management, vol. 12 no. 1, pp. 47-48. Erdogan, B. (2005). Enhancing Career Benefits of Employee’s Proactive Personality. Personnel Psychology, 58(4). Pg. 859-891 Lee, K. et. al. (2005). Personality Correlates of Workplace Anti-Social Behavior. Journal of Applied Psychology, 54(1), Pg. 81-98. Lockwood, N. R. (2005). Workplace Diversity: Leveraging the Power of Difference for Competitive Advantage. HR Magazine, 50(6) Pg. 1-14. Welch, J. 2005. Winning. HarperCollins: New York. Read More