Leadership and Communication Problems within Criminal Justice Organizations - Term Paper Example

?Catalin Cruz Criminal Justice Administration Research Paper Part 2 Leadership and Communication Problems within Criminal Justice Organizations 1. Introduction Criminal justice is an inevitable part of governance practiced with the sole purpose of maintaining social control, discouraging, and alleviating the increasing crime rates. Several organizations handle issues in criminal justice. These organizations include courts, police, and corrections (jails or prisons). Organizations have weaknesses and strengths, which influence service delivery. Concerning organizational challenges, communication and leadership issues often influence the effectiveness of criminal justice organizations. Leadership is vital component of an organization, which influences it ability to conduct its objective. Communication enhances information delivery in organization. Criminal justice is a sensitive area, which requires proper leadership structures and effective communication for effective service delivery. The role of criminal justice organization influence social and human development. Sociologists believe that social growth depend on the effectiveness of the criminal justice organization. This paper identifies leadership and communication problems within criminal justice organizations. 2. Importance of Leadership & Communication Leadership refers to devising a vision of the future and influencing people through communication of the vision and motivating people to overcome the hurdles (Easton 266). From the above definition, it is evident that influencing depends on a range of processes and factors, which vary with the choice of applied leadership theory. Criminal justice organization such police force face leadership challenges associated with management style. Hierarchical leadership style or bureaucratic leadership style influences service delivery in the police force. Police officers face the challenge of making moral judgment verses following orders of their bosses. Largely, this problem leads to ineffective service delivery in this department. Studies reveal that many police officers have limited authority to make moral judgment because of nature of leadership style that the organization has applied. a) Issues & Problems In hierarchal leadership style, chain of command dictates flow of information from top authority to the bottom authority. For instance, in police force, police boss passes information to the immediate junior officer who in turn does the same to his juniors. This leadership style often leads to many problems associated with criminal justice organizations. The informal relationship between criminal justice organizations and other organization pose leadership challenge to criminal justice organizations (Stojkovic.et. al. 192). Police chief gets a lot of pressure from partner authorities, which influence service delivery in the department. Largely, the society gauges the effectiveness of leadership structures through actions on the ground without considering factors that influence the outcome. For instance, police chief handling issues touching on political interest must employ different leadership tactics in handling the matter. The external influence is a serious problem that influences criminal justice leadership structures and service delivery. Officers working in courts usually get orders from their seniors to handle some court issues in a particular manner. Court leadership structures and police leadership structures are different. The difference in structure influence service delivery to the society. Leadership structures in court apply democratic leadership style, which promotes collective participation in organization decision. On the other hand, police department applies autocratic leadership style, which promotes decision making from the top management (Easton 284). Autocratic leadership style delivers good results in emergencies. On the contrary, police department conduct several activities, which do not call for emergency actions. For example, investigations require coordination of work among the officers concerned. Many cases lack proof because of the nature of investigation conducted. Criminologists attribute this problem to lack of coordination among the parties involved, poor leadership structures, and variation of interest in criminal justice organizations. This notion draws a lot of concern because the sole objective of the criminal justice organizations is to prevent crime. Justice in the system relies on the policies adopted by various criminal justice organizations. Communication breakdown is a common problem facing criminal justice organizations (Duelin). Communication refers to the relying of information from one party to another party. Communication channels define the time taken for information to reach the intended party. Long communication channels often lead to loss of information meaning. Short channel communication is effective and preserves the originality of the information. Criminal justice organizations employ various communication channels depending on the leadership style applied by the organizations. Feedback got from communication indicates the effectiveness of communication channel. Communication channels adopted by criminal justice organizations influence the role of these organizations in the society. Horizontal communication channels promote information sharing between officers in the same rank. Vertical communication channel often applied by the police force limits the contribution of junior officers in decision-making. Research in police department indicates that junior officers had no voice in decision-making (Stojkovic.et. al. 184). This fact influences the operations of the police organization because junior officers execute orders. Notably, some orders are not ethical thereby hampering service delivery in the criminal justice organizations. Many police officers are not able to express their problems because of failure in communication. Studies show that one way communication model is commonly applied in police force thus locking important contribution from other departments. Communication breakdown between senior and junior officers often result into errors committed by criminal justice organizations. Further, criminal justice organizations decision-making process is non-consultative. Consultative decision-making process leads to appropriate measures. Research in criminal justice organizations reveled that a consultative decision making process led to tangible evidence adduced against criminals and job satisfaction among the officers. Professional identity is another problem facing criminal justice organizations. Many officers fail to acknowledge the boundary defined by powers vested on them. Questions about whose should take responsibility when prisoners face deplorable conditions in jails attract different reactions across the divide. The legality of police behavior among other issues influences the leadership roles in the police department. Abuse of power by police officers is a common problem that police organizations face. Research reveals that police supervisors abuse the powers they have by giving unlawful commands to their junior officers (Hess & Orthmann 318). Leadership style applied by police department promotes this vice. In addition, the behavior of the senior officers is illegal, but it is quite difficult to challenge the legality of his behavior because he is in authority. Many junior officers face this challenge and in turn abuse their subjects in their line of duty. Excuse and responsibility, limit of constitutional rights, use of force, discretion are major hurdles that leadership and communication role of the criminal justice organizations must address. b) Solutions Arguably, the solution to the above problems in criminal justice organizations depends on leadership styles applied by these organizations. Education and essential skills in this field does not give moral conviction in exercising duties and responsibilities. Concerning this notion, leaderships of the organization must aspire to practice accountability and responsibility, commitment, responsiveness, and practice professional ethics (Pollock 176). Knowledge and skills are essential in accomplishing the objective of the organization. In addition, addressing issues of conflict of interest should promote the independence between organizations needs and personal needs. This paper recommends further research on effects of leadership style in criminal justice organization. Further, embracing of ethical practices in communication and leadership would reduce the above problems. 3. The effects The consequences of leadership and communication problems in criminal justice organizations include poor service delivery, deaths in prison cells, abuse of human rights, domestic problems, and excessive use of force by the officers (Hess & Orthmann 314). Although the leadership structures in the criminal justice organizations promote bureaucratic agendas, criminal justice goals should ring of the mind of the leaders. Citizen protection depends on effective measures that the criminal justice department adopts. It is important for the criminal justice organizations enhance professionalism. Debate about competence of the organizations arises due to the consequences that the society faces because of failed leadership. Besides, the society does not wish to know the root cause of problems, but the consequence of the problem to the community. When a prisoner dies because of excessive use of force by prison warden, the society does not want to know factors that instigated the reaction. 4. Leadership and communication as a problem today Leadership and communication problems continue to be a problem today because of lack of moral will in service delivery. Individual attributes is very essential in stumping communication breakdown and leadership wrangles. Another key issue is the conflict of interest that exists between the criminal justice organizations .i.e. police, prisons, and courts. Conflict of power is a factor that would continue affecting criminal justice organizations. For instance, political interest in these institutions is difficult to stump. In conclusion, leadership and communication problems influence service delivery by criminal justice organizations. Leadership style is a major hindrance to junior officers in the criminal justice organizations. Open communication channels promote responsiveness in these organizations. Professionalism in criminal justice organizations is crucial solutions of the above problems. This is because through criminal justice in government institutions, individuals accused of crime are protected from any kind of abuse through investigation and prosecution powers. In conclusion, leadership and communication are two inseparable aspects to humankind. In fact, the success of every organization and government is primarily determined by the effectiveness of leadership and efficiency in communication. Therefore, to achieve efficiency in the criminal justice, it is advisable to uphold the best ethics in leadership and communication. Work cited Duelin, Dylan. What Are the Challenges With Leading Groups in Criminal Justice Organizations? Retrieved on 9 Dec. 2011 from: What Are the Challenges With Leading Groups in Criminal Justice Organizations? | eHow.com http://www.ehow.com/list_6883806_challenges-groups-criminal-justice-organizations_.html#ixzz1g3bYirkV Easton, Marleen. Readings on criminal justice, criminal law & policing. Maklu. 2009. 266-281. Print. Hess, M. Karen & Orthmann, H. Christine. Introduction to Law Enforcement and Criminal Justice. Mason, OH: Cengage Learning. 2008. 314-320. Print. Mccallum, W. David. Leadership within the Florida Department of Corrections. Retrieved on 9 Dec. 2011 From http://www.fdle.state.fl.us/Content/getdoc/5ca27f87-d4c4-4a79-b01f-11cc95e24af9/McCallum-David-paper-pdf.aspx Pollock, M. Joycelyn. Ethical dilemmas and decisions in criminal justice. Mason, OH: Cengage Learning. 2007. 176-181. Print. Stojkovic, Stan.et. al. Criminal justice organizations: administration and management. Mason, OH: Cengage Learning. 2007. 184-193. Print. Read More