Police officer performance appraisal and overall satisfaction
Introduction
Appraisal of employee performance is among the most controversial of management practices. Although many organizations have implemented formal procedures for evaluating their employees, the level of dissatisfaction with this process among both managers and employees has remained high (Murphy and Cleveland, 1995, Padgett, 1988). Nevertheless, one recent survey of six hundred police agencies indicated that supervisors in community policing agencies reported significantly higher levels of perceived appraisal accuracy, usefulness, and overall satisfaction than supervisors in other police agencies (Lilley, 2002). Performance researchers have suggested that satisfaction with the appraisal process is important because it may affect future performance and job satisfaction (Daily and Kirk, 1992, Deming, 1986). Furthermore, there is evidence that perceptions of ineffective performance appraisal may be associated with job turnover (Daily & Kirk, 1992). Thus, increases in the perception of appraisal accuracy and usefulness may lead to improvements in policing and retention of quality personnel.
The purpose of this analysis was to further examine overall performance appraisal satisfaction in an effort to explain why respondents from agencies with a high level of community policing implementation reported greater satisfaction with the appraisal process than their more traditional counterparts. At present, it is unclear whether agencies that are more oriented toward community policing are somehow inherently different, resulting in increased satisfaction. Alternatively, higher satisfaction in these agencies may be related to procedural differences. Previous analyses of these data, for example, suggested that agencies with a high level of community policing implementation might be more likely to have updated or revised their evaluation formats within the past five years (Lilley, 2002). Performance literature suggests that the use of appraisal for officer development, broadening of evaluation criteria and improved rater training, as well differences in organizational context and measurement approach may be associated with satisfaction with the performance appraisal process (Arvey and Murphy, 1998, Cawley et al., 1998, Murphy, 1990). Consequently, this analysis examined whether differences in organizational context, appraisal purpose, rater training, or use of anchored measures in the evaluation format explained higher satisfaction by respondents from agencies with a high level of community policing implementation.
The current work improved upon prior research in that it allowed comparison of both evaluation process and measures across agencies from all regions of the United States. Most prior research regarding police officer and employee performance appraisal had focused on rating instrument content (often excluding differences in process) (Bradley and Pursley, 1987, Falkenberg et al., 1991, Landy and Farr, 1980), and was limited to case studies or regional samples (Breci and Erickson, 1998, Hughes, 1990, Oettmeier and Wycoff, 1994).
Section snippets
General factors affecting the appraisal process
Most performance appraisal research efforts prior to the 1980s concentrated on improving the rating instrument, under the assumption that the design of the written evaluation form was the central determinant of evaluation accuracy (Landy & Farr, 1980). A number of recent studies, however, had refuted that assumption, indicating that organizational context, appraisal purpose, and rater motivation could be more influential than instrument format in determining evaluation outcomes (Kozlowski et
Data and methods
Data were obtained from a nationwide survey of six hundred law enforcement agencies regarding their formal officer evaluation procedures between September 2000 and January 2001. The initial sampling list for this study was comprised of a total of 1,133 municipal and county agencies with at least fifty sworn officers that responded to the 1997 Law Enforcement Management and Administrative Statistics (LEMAS) survey, conducted by the United States Census Bureau approximately every three years.
Analyses
As illustrated by Table 1, the overall level of supervisor satisfaction with the performance appraisal process as indicated by the means was near the middle of the scale. Supervisors from agencies with the greatest level of community policing, however, reported the highest perception of accuracy (3.8) and usefulness (3.7) of the appraisal process. More traditional agencies and those with mid-range levels of community policing practices reported similar (lower) levels of satisfaction with regard
Hypotheses
Not withstanding, it was hypothesized that: Hypothesis 1 More rater training, broader evaluation criteria, and emphasis on officer development as an appraisal purpose will explain higher overall reported satisfaction among community policing supervisors. Hypothesis 2 The level of community policing implementation and other measures of organizational context (i.e., department size and region) will not explain significant differences in satisfaction.
Thus, significant direct path coefficients from level of community policing
Results
Recent literature suggests that when the performance evaluation criteria are broadened to include community policing concepts, improvements to rater training are made, and organizational purpose for appraisal is shifted toward officer development, the perception of accuracy, usefulness and fairness should be enhanced (resulting in increased overall satisfaction). Results from these data were supportive of those assertions (χ2 = 29.89, df = 22, p = .12, RMSEA = .03, AGFI = .96, NNFI = .99, CFI =
Discussion
The preceding analyses indicated that the increased overall satisfaction as reported by supervisors from agencies with a high level of community policing implementation did not result from differences in policing approach, agency size, or region. More specifically, these data did not suggest that there was any inherent difference in community policing agencies that directly led to appraisal satisfaction. Rather, evaluation procedures among agencies with a high level of community policing
Limitations
Due to funding restrictions, a single supervisor was selected to respond to the questionnaire by the chief executive of each agency. Consequently, it was possible that the perceptions of a single individual might have resulted in measurement error at the individual agency level with regard to organization-wide satisfaction. It bears mentioning that all analyses in the current study were conducted at group or aggregate levels (i.e., data were aggregated from 102 more traditional, 95 mid-range,
Policy recommendations
Supervisors from agencies with a high level of community policing implementation rated their overall satisfaction with performance appraisal more highly than others. This relationship could not be explained by simple differences in organizational context or policing approach, and clearly suggests that there are affirmative steps that can be taken among both traditional and community policing agencies to increase satisfaction with the evaluation process. In order to obtain substantive
References (38)
- et al.
Performance evaluation in work settings
Annual Review of Psychology
(1998) Police for the future
(1994)- et al.
Expanding the criterion domain to include elements of contextual performance
- et al.
Employee satisfaction with performance appraisals and appraisers: The role of perceived appraisal use
Human Resources Development Quarterly
(2000) - et al.
Behaviorally anchored rating scale for patrol officer performance appraisal: Development and evaluation
Journal of Police Science and Administration
(1987) - et al.
Community policing: The process of transitional change
FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin
(1998) - et al.
Psychology and policing
(1995) - et al.
Participation in the performance appraisal process and employee reactions: A meta-analytic review of field investigations
Journal of Applied Psychology
(1998) - et al.
Distributive and procedural justice as antecedents of job dissatisfaction and intent to turnover
Human Relations
(1992) Out of the crisis
(1986)
Cognitive approach to performance appraisal: A program of research
Guidelines for police performance appraisal, promotion and placement procedures
An examination of the constructs underlying police performance appraisals
Journal of Criminal Justice
Training as a performance appraisal improvement strategy
Career Development International
Making and using industrial service ratings
Supervision of police personnel
Games raters play: Politics, strategies and impression management in performance appraisal
Performance rating
Psychological Bulletin
Cited by (18)
Statistical Methods
2021, Statistical MethodsPolice Leadership and Administration: A 21st-Century Strategic Approach
2018, Police Leadership and Administration: A 21st-Century Strategic ApproachAppraising the appraisal process: Manager and patrol officer perspectives
2015, Police JournalResearch on appraisal system of procurator performance by using high-order CFA model
2014, Mathematical Problems in Engineering