Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
This paper examines how Edmonton Police Service has built on the foundation of
10curtisc@athabascau.ca
Dr00000March
CurtisClarke
Police
10.1080/15614260600579508
GPPR_A_157933.sgm
1561-4263
Original
Taylor
72006 Practice
and
& 2006
Article
Francis
(print)/1477-271X
Francis
& Research
Ltd (online)
Introduction
Recently, police policymakers and strategists have begun to build on the foundation of
community-based policing and problem solving in an effort to achieve greater levels of
efficiency and effectiveness. These proposed operational strategies are closely aligned
with the conceptual framework of proactive policing. Here, proactive policing, in its
original formulation, ‘refers to the strategic deployment of resources in order to target
criminally active individuals’ (Stockdale, Whitehead, & Gresham, 1999, p. 5). Interest-
ingly, proactive policing has a number of implications for police management in that,
it sets in place an environment that requires management of demand. These demands
are succinctly stated in the following passage:
Curtis Clarke is an Associate Professor and Coordinator of the Criminal Justice Program at Athabasca University
(Alberta, Canada). He has carried out empirical studies on the implementation of community-based policing,
police organizational/managerial change, intelligence-led policing, and the shifting boundaries between private
and public policing. Correspondence to: Dr Curtis Clarke, 10-26312 Twp. Rd., 514 Spruce Grove, Alberta, Canada
T7Y 1C8. Email: curtisc@athabascau.ca
Previous evaluations of proactive policing have articulated clear criteria for success-
ful implementation based upon a police service’s ability to achieve key crime manage-
ment concepts (Amey et al., 1996; Read & Tilley, 2000; Stockdale et al., 1999; Tilley &
Laycock, 2002). These concepts are outlined in Table 1.
While it is essential to define what is meant by Proactive or Intelligence-Led
Policing it is also important to evaluate both the effectiveness and the degree to
which these concepts are in fact operationalized. With this objective in mind the
remainder of this paper analyses Edmonton Police Service’s (EPS’s) efforts to imple-
ment a model of proactive policing. The following sections offer first a brief over-
view of the socio-political drivers guiding the EPS’s operational shift toward
proactive policing and secondly an examination of the current implementation
process, best practices, and efforts EPS has undertaken to ensure proactive policing
strategies are effective.
The underlying premise of this process was the objective of implementing a decentral-
ized service structure, whereby the responsibility for service could be downloaded to
the Division and thus to the community.
The operational premise of the Police Plan corresponded to Osborne and Gaebler’s
(1993) concept of steering and rowing in which the executive sets the objective or goal
for the organization (steering) and empowers those who are most capable of deliver-
ing the service (rowing). Similarly Edmonton’s Police Plan outlined a process of
service delivery that required a bottom-up process wherein frontline officers, supervi-
sors, and managers synthesized service-wide plans into actions and standards. These
Divisional actions and standards would be ‘negotiated with the Chief’s Committee for
the purpose of planning, performance evaluation and accountability’ (Memorandum
from Chief Lindsay, April 8, 1997, cited in Edmonton Police Service, 1997e). The
criteria by which these would be measured were based on whether or not they
supported the goals of the EPS. By way of comparison one can readily note the simi-
larity between the Police Plans’ underlying managerial thrust and a key concept of
Police Practice and Research: An International Journal 7
proactive policing which states: Divisional management teams direct all operational
work and manage resources according to force and divisional priorities. And yet, the
Police Plan would serve only as a skeletal framework for future strategic and tactical
steps in Edmonton’s effort to implement a solid proactive policing model.
In this context, ‘the intelligence unit is central to any proactive model … and that it is
responsible not only for generating intelligence itself but also for developing strategies
and tactics for other teams within the Division’ (Amey et al., 1996, p. 4). Others have
suggested that the intelligence units are the linchpin in ensuring that resources are
effectively allocated and that problem-solving initiatives are directed in the most
efficient manner.
Police Practice and Research: An International Journal 11
Management of intelligence is central to facilitating the effective dissemination and
use of the knowledge resident in different units of EPS. As a concept, intelligence
management is complex and goes beyond the mere management of information.
Intelligence consists of two basic components: data and information. Data are identi-
fiable, objective facts about events, while knowledge is created by adding context,
providing analysis, ensuring accuracy, and summarizing data into concise and under-
standable forms. There is no shortage of data and information at EPS—crime statistics,
response times, hot spots, crime mapping, etc. However, it is only when they are inter-
preted, analysed, and used as a tool to proactively guide tactical manoeuvres leading to
crime prevention and other goals of EPS, that data and information become intelli-
gence. The task, then, becomes one of empowering officers at all levels of EPS to
identify what data and information are most useful and effective to develop into intel-
ligence. Certainly Edmonton had recognized these very issues and as the following
examples suggest the Service had indeed acknowledged the proactive value of intelli-
gence in its efforts to implement a model of proactive policing.
Reactive
Fragmented Fragmented
Network Network
Fragmented Fragmented
Network Network
Prevention
Figure 1 Tactical Structure and Identifying Gaps.
Police Practice and Research: An International Journal 13
has been effective is its successful application elsewhere.’ While there is a sense that
intelligence-led policing is solely concerned with crime-related data, it is important to
note that the evaluation of project outcomes is a form of intelligence that informs
future allocation of resources and operational practices. For Edmonton the importance
of evaluation was recognized in its earlier shift to community-based and problem-
oriented policing. As the following ‘Problem Files’ Management process suggests within
EPS there is indeed an institutionalized expectation of how problem files (problem-
solving initiatives) are identified, tracked, and managed.
While this analysis suggests the existence of a strong foundation for ILP there are a
number of opportunities and practices the Service must evaluate as it moves forward.
Edmonton must ensure that its model of ILP continues to refine the concepts of proac-
tive policing. Moreover, it must ensure that intelligence supports both proactive and
reactive policing activities.
14 C. Clarke
Points of Concern
The model of ILP proposed by EPS certainly offers an opportunity to propel the service
into a proactive stance wherein resources can be utilized in a strategic and effective
manner. And yet, it is not as simple as it may appear on the surface. It does require a
strategic orientation whereby activities are guided and evaluated in terms of broad
service objectives. Moreover, it is a process that implies a multi-layered linkage of
information, tactical initiatives, resource allocation, etc. As one can note from Figure
2, there are numerous points in which the process can break down.
Therefore, the evaluation process must remain dynamic in order to address
Figure 2 The Key Elements of the EPS Intelligence-Led Policing Model. Source: Veitch, Warden, Alston, & Thue (2004).
dysfunctional elements within the model. In the case of Edmonton, early analysis
suggested that both tactical and strategic elements of the service required attention.
For example:
Tactical:
● Develop IT capacity that will enable DIOs to quickly cross-reference divisional intel-
ligence, share analysis and trends.
● Utilize Community Stations in a more effective manner (Community Station
personnel should be more active in coordinating problem-solving initiatives,
funnelling information from the community, serve as a clearing house of informa-
tion for patrol, beat, and community officers, etc.
Figure 2 The Key Elements of the EPS Intelligence-Led Policing Model. Source: Veitch,
Warden, Alston, & Thue (2004).
Police Practice and Research: An International Journal 15
● Insure that middle management play an active role in informing frontline officers
about why it is important to both input and access intelligence data.
● Encourage community members to take a more active role in the dissemination of
intelligence.
Strategic:
● Adopt a fully integrated business planning process for the purpose of improving:
operational performance, strategic decision making, and resource allocation and
accountability for the achievement of stated outcomes.
● Implement a quarterly Crime Management Conference in which Divisions share
information on operational objectives, best practices, performance measurement,
etc.
● Develop a process for community involvement in identifying priority areas and
outcomes (Clarke et al., 2002).
Recognition of these shortcomings is only a first step. The operational and organiza-
tional response to these would require both the coordination and support of internal
and external stakeholders. As with the earlier examples of Community-Based Policing
one of the key challenges will be to ensure there is a continued inclusion of key stake-
holders. All stakeholders must understand both the concepts of proactive policing and
their role in the successful implementation of proactive initiatives.
Conclusion
As this case study indicates, prior organizational practices of community-based policing
have underlined current strategic and operational efforts to implement an effective
model of proactive policing. More importantly, these examples suggest that community
policing continues to be a central vehicle for the development of future operational and
strategic policing initiatives. This is not to say that future trends will be confined by the
concept of community policing but that community policing offers a foundation by
which innovation can evolve. Edmonton’s operational shift to proactive policing repre-
sents a logical transition from the earlier operationalization of community policing and
problem-oriented policing. More succinctly, proactive policing is a maturing or refine-
ment of these. Furthermore, returning to the basic definition of proactive policing,
‘making use of data to establish the existence and extent of a problem, to analyse its
nature and source, to plan intervention measures to reduce it, and to monitor and eval-
uate the effectiveness of the selected responses’ one can easily see how this concept
parallels the central theme of problem-solving models such as SARA, CAPRA, and
PARE (Read & Tilley, 2000, p. 3). Perhaps the central difference is that proactive polic-
ing is a broad strategic application which guides service-wide operations.
Notes
[1] This management structure characterizes Divisional governance throughout the Service.
1
2
16 C. Clarke
[2] It should be noted that while the above examples focus on North and Downtown Divisions,
there are new operational models being implemented in the remaining two divisions. As of
May 1, 2002, South Division had implemented a team-policing model that would support
greater sharing of resources, linkage of events, and continuity. Recently, West Division has
undergone a structural reorganization implementing a change from nine squads to 12. The
objective of this model is to allow greater overlap of manpower, enabling the Division to
implement a priorities-based management model. Moreover, this model will support an
operational shift currently focused on crime-related issues to one that is inclusive of all
disorder issues.
References
Alberta Justice, Annual Report 1994–1995.
Alberta Justice, Annual Report 1995–1996.
Alberta Justice, Annual Report 1996–1997.
Alberta Justice, Annual Report 1997–1998.
Amey, P., Hale, C., & Uglow, S. (1996). Development and evaluation of a crime management model
(Police Research Series Paper 18). London: Home Office.
Barker-McCardle, J. (2001). An international perspective on performance measurement: Intelligence-
led policing a Kent constabulary, organizational performance measurement. Ontario Police
College.
Clarke, C., Weissling, L., & Montgomerie, I. (2002). Intelligence led policing: A tactical management
tool for Edmonton Police Service. Edmonton Police Service.
Edmonton Police Service. (1996). The Edmonton Police Plan 1996/1998.
Edmonton Police Service. (1997a). Community based policing in Edmonton.
Edmonton Police Service. (1997b). Community policing in Edmonton: The vision continues.
Edmonton Police Service. (1997c). Policy and procedures manual.
Edmonton Police Service. (1997d, December). Statistical report.
Edmonton Police Service. (1997e). The Police Plan: Policing for results.
Edmonton Police Service. (1998). Benefits of the patrol staffing forecast.
Edmonton Police Service. (2002) Service Memorandum, April 3.
Fahlman, R. (2002). Intelligence led policing and the key role of criminal intelligence analysis:
Preparing for the 21st century. Interpol. Retrieved from www.interpol.int/public/cia/
fahlmamn.asp
Gill, P. (2000). Rounding up the usual suspects: Developments in contemporary law enforcement
intelligence. Aldershot: Ashgate.
Heaton, R. (2000). The prospects for Intelligence-Led Policing: Some historical and quantitative
considerations. Policing and Society, 9(4), 337.
Lisac, M. (1995). The Klein revolution (Edmonton: New West Press).
Maguire, M. (2000). Policing by risks and targets: Some dimensions and implications of intelligence
led crime control. Policing and Society, 9(4), 315.
Osborne, D., & Gaebler, T. (1993). Reinventing government: How the entrepreneurial spirit is
transforming the public sector. Middlesex: Plume.
RCMP. (2002). Criminal Intelligence Program. Retrieved from www.rcmp-grc.gc.ca/crim_int/
intelligence.htm
Read, T., & Tilley, N. (2000). Not rocket science/problem-solving and crime reduction (Crime
Reduction Research Series Paper 6). London: Home Office.
Savage, S., & Charman, S. (1996). Managing change. In F. Leishman, B. Loveday, & S. Savage (Eds.),
Core issues in policing. Harlow, Essex: Longman.
Stockdale, J. E., Whitehead, C., & Gresham, P. (1999). Applying economic evaluation to policing activ-
ity (Police Research Series Paper 103). London: Home Office.
Police Practice and Research: An International Journal 17
Thue, L., & Alston, J. (2002). Project Archimedes: Developing an intelligence led policing model for
Edmonton Police Service. Edmonton Police Service.
Tilley, N., & Laycock, G. (2002). Working out what to do: Evidence-based crime reduction (Crime
Reduction Research Series Paper 11). London: Home Office.
Veitch, D., Warden, J., Alston, J., & Thue, L. (2004). Maximizing impact: The Edmonton Police
Service’s Intelligence-Led Policing (ILP) model. The Canadian Review of Policing Research,
(1), 136.
Walsh, W. (2001). Compstat: An analysis of an emerging police managerial paradigm. Policing: An
International Journal of Police Strategies and Management, 24(3), 347.