“Span of Control and Practical Reflection” Please respond to the following:Supervision is an important part of managing a law enforcement agency. Chapter 8 of the course textbook covers several supervision models used to effectively manage police operations. Span of Control is one of the models examined and it refers to identifying the appropriate number of employees that can be managed by any one supervisor (p. 227). Give your opinion regarding what is the appropriate span of control and explain your rationale. In most cases, careers in Criminal Justice and Law Enforcement exist, in some form of another at the Federal, State, and Local/County/City level and often in the private-sector. This week, research your selected position on USAJobs.gov, USCourts.gov(federal) or your state’s employment management system, local municipality’s employment management system, and Indeed.com (private-sector), and discuss the similarities and differences (example: salary, jurisdiction, scope of work, required skill and education, and promotion potential).Lectures are attached.


Unformatted Attachment Preview

Senior Seminar in Criminal
CRJ 499
The Role of Personnel and
Stakeholders in Decision-Making
Stojkovic, S., Kalinich, D. & Klofas, J. (2008). Criminal
Justice Organizations: Administration and Management. (4th
Ed.), Belmont, CA: Thomson Wadsworth.

Upon completion of this lesson, you will
be able to:
– Consider personnel and stakeholders and
how they influence decision making
The Impact of Leadership
on Decision-Making

Effective leadership is not the exclusive
domain of the top brass
Supervisor must lead by example
Leadership Defined

Process through which motivation occurs
– Complex

Ideas converge

A process
Accomplishes organizational goals
Group process
Inherently political and examined in the
political arena
Theories of Leadership

Three approaches
1. “Leaders are born not made”
– Oldest of the three approaches
2. Behavioral Approach
– Consistent with contemporary research
3. Contingency Approach
– Emphasizes leadership in the context of variables
The Behavioral Model

Two important characteristics:
Initiating Structures:
– Emphasizes how leaders get subordinates
to accomplish organizational tasks

Consideration for Subordinates:
– Gives attention to how employees are able
to achieve personal goals within the
organization while achieving organizational
Contingency Theory

Differs from “Born Leader” theory
Two contingency theories
– Fiedler’s model
– Path-goal theory
Fiedler’s Contingency Model

Leadership process constrained by three
– Leaders ability lead contingent upon the
leaders ability to develop trust and likeability
– Organization’s task structure and
– Ability of the leader to exercise power as
permitted by the organization
Path-Goal Theory

Different from Fiedler in that:
– Path-goal is completely situational and not
tied to the leader’s natural or given ability to
exercise power
• The situation determines the most effective
form of leadership
• Situation determined by two sets of variables

The subordinates competence level
The subordinate’s level of interest in the job (AKA
Skill and Will)
Personnel Supervision and

Gained heightened importance
Traditional tenets questioned in favor of
the “bigger picture”
More contemporary views of supervision
consider multiple organizational goals
and goal consensus
Goal Consensus

Criminal justice goals are numerous and
sometimes contradict one another
Contradictions and competing interests
give rise to inefficiencies
Two models of supervision have
emerged to reconcile inefficiencies:
– Traditional Model
– Human Services Model
The Traditional Model of
Employee Supervision


Centralized authority
Clear-cut rules and regulations
Well-developed policies and procedures
Discernable lines of authority
Clear chain of command
Composed of

Hierarchy and span of control
Unity of command
Delegation of authority
Elements of the Traditional

Span of Control

Unity of Command

clear lines of vertical authority positions

One task, one person in charge of it
Delegation of Authority

5 to 10 employees
Rules are clear and identifiable

Each employee knows his or her task and is
responsible only for those tasks
The Human Service Model
of Employee Supervision

Considers the employees needs and position
far more than the traditional model
Employee-oriented rather than organization
Gives employees a greater voice in the
organization while still endeavoring to
accomplish organizational goals
Power shared laterally despite position power
for the most part
Check Your Understanding

Leadership plays a large role on decisionmaking
Three most common theories of leadership:

Fiedler says leadership is constrained by:

Born to be a leader
Behavioral approach
Leader-member relations, organization’s task
structure, position power within the organization
Most common models of employee

Traditional model & human services model
CRJ499 Week 4, Chapter 7: The Role of Personnel and Stakeholders in DecisionMaking
Welcome to Senior Seminar in Criminal Justice. In this
lesson, we will continue to discuss the role of criminal justice
personnel and stakeholders in the decision-making process
and the impact they have on it.
Upon completion of this lesson, you will be able to:
Consider personnel and stakeholders and how they influence
decision making.
The Impact of
Leadership on
Leadership plays an important role in the way decisions are
made in criminal justice organizations. Effective leadership is
not the exclusive domain of the top brass in a criminal justice
organization, first line managers and even line and staff must
lead effectively if the criminal justice system is to accomplish
its mission.
To this end, supervisors must lead by example in sound
decision-making. This lesson will distinguish between
motivation and leadership. Although we can refer to
motivation and leadership as close cousins, there are specific
differences between the two.
Leadership is the process through which motivation occurs.
Even though the process of leadership is complex, it can be
learned and applied to the effective administration of criminal
justice organizations.
Four distinct but not separate ideas converge to give us an
appropriate understanding of leadership.
The first, leadership is a process that effectively accomplishes
organizational goals. Leadership cannot be conceptually
separated from organizational effectiveness.
Second, administrators can learn leadership skills. These
skills are a combination of science and art which can be
studied, learned and applied. All the more so as one develops
greater levels of experience.
Third, leadership is a group process. To accomplish
organizational objectives, leaders must influence a number of
people, or to put it simply: No group, no leader. Depending
on the relationship between the leader and the group as well
as the circumstances in which leadership is effectuated,
various types of influential behaviors are used to persuade
others to follow the leader.
Fourth, leadership in public bureaucracies such as criminal
justice agencies is inherently political and must be examined
in the political arena.
Theories of
Much of what we know about leadership comes from research
taking one of three approaches.
The first approach is at odds with an earlier proposition; that
leadership can be learned. Nonetheless, it is important to
understand leadership in a historical context and thus we will
give consideration to this approach for any measure of truth it
may contain.
This first approach, which is the oldest, assumes that a leader
is born and not made. This approach, which tends to
emphasize inherent personality traits, also assumes that
leadership can be evaluated on the basis of these traits. There
is much to suggest, however, that personal characteristics of
leadership are not so much genetic as they are acquired
through situations that give rise to gaining “emotional
intelligence”, which is not contemplated by the “leader-isborn-not-made” theory.
Much contemporary research done on leadership now takes
one of two other approaches. The first of these alternative
approaches is the behavioral approach, which emphasizes the
behaviors of individual leaders. This approach is the focus of
much of more recent criminal justice research on leadership.
Another approach is the contingency approach. This final
approach is a product of the 1970’s and tends to emphasize
multiple variables, particularly situational variables that
constrain leadership. These situational variables include
characteristics of subordinates, organizational context, and
style of leadership.
The latter two approaches will now be considered in greater
The behavioral model approach suggests that leadership
depends on how leaders interact with their subordinates.
The first and most import characteristic of the behavioral
approach is its emphasis on how leaders get subordinates to
accomplish organizational tasks, a process known as initiating
structures. Using a behavioral approach, for example, we
would be interested in knowing the ways in which the warden
of a prison interacts with administrative staff, treatment
specialists, and corrections officers so that the tasks essential
to the prison’s mission are completed.
The second characteristic is the model’s attention to how
employees are able to achieve personal goals within the
organization at the same time that they accomplish its central
tasks. In our example, we would be interested in what the
prison warden does to accommodate or consider staff
opinions, ideas, and feelings about the day-to-day workings of
the prison.
These two concepts, consideration for subordinates and
initiating structures, guide the behavioral approach to
Contingency theories of leadership differ from the born leader
and behavioral models in emphasizing the situation or context
within which the leadership relationship exists.
We will examine two contingency theories in this segment:
Fiedler’s contingency model and path-goal theory. Both have
distinctive elements that contribute to our understanding of
leadership in criminal justice organizations. In addition, we
can draw different implications from each model for the
management and administration of criminal justice systems.
According to Fiedler, the leadership process is constrained by
three major situational dimensions.
First, leader-member relations are the level of trust and the
degree of likeability the leader enjoys with subordinate
groups. According to Fiedler, how well a leader is able to
guide immediate subordinates is contingent on the
relationship he or she has with them.
Second, the task structure of the organization is, in Fiedler’s
words, “the degree to which the task structure has clearly
defined procedures for accomplishing organizational
objectives.” The challenge here is that most of the activities
of criminal justice organizations have uncertain task structures
even though these agencies have relatively stable policies and
procedures simply because it is not all that certain that the
tasks accomplish the goals professed. It is one thing to say,
for example, that officers patrol the streets of the city as a
task, and another to say that this task accomplishes the goals
of the crime prevention and societal protection. This
uncertainty about the relationship between task performance
and goal accomplishment produces agencies that, more often
than not, are unstructured and loosely coupled. As a result,
effective leadership becomes problematic for both
administrators and immediate supervisors.
Third, position power is the leader’s ability to exercise power
in the organization. Fiedler’s test of position power is the
ability to hire and fire subordinates. A leader with high
position power is able to hire and fire at will. A leader with
low position power has limited authority in this area.
Given the situational dimensions of leader-member relations,
task structure, and position power, we can match the proper
leadership styles with the right situations to produce the most
effective form of leadership.
Where Fiedler’s theory attempts to identify how a situation
and a leader’s behavior work together to create leadership, the
path-goal theory is completely situational and not particular
tied to a leader’s characteristics as much as it is to the situation
and the leader’s proper choice of leadership style for that
This is most closely aligned with a theory proposed by Ken
Blanchard called situational leadership wherein he posits that
good leadership is based on two variables on the part of the
subordinate which ultimately lead to four possible leadership
The variables are competence and interest in the job,
alternately known as skill and will. Skill and will combine to
create four possible situations which a leader, if he has his
finger on the pulse of the situation and the subordinate, will
use to select to proper leadership approach.
As seen in the graph, when a leader works with an employee
who is highly motivated but lacks the level of experience to
be sufficiently competent, he or she should apply a directive
style of leadership. When both skill and will are lacking, then
an achievement-oriented or coaching style is best. When a
subordinate is competent but lacks motivation for some
reason, a supportive style of leadership will likely be the best
Finally, if the subordinate exhibits a high degree of
competence while also displaying a very positive attitude
toward his work, there is no need to overly direct the
behavior, rather, a participative style of leadership is best
where many of the decision-making tasks are delegated
directly to the subordinate.
Another critical issue facing criminal justice administrators is
personnel supervision and evaluation. As an organizational
and Evaluation issue, employee supervision and evaluation has gained
heightened importance among criminal justice administrators.
In fact, scholars have called into question the basic tenets of
personnel supervision and evaluation that have dominated
criminal justice organizations for many years. Most of these
traditional efforts focused on “hard measures” of performance
with very little concern over how these measures in any way
related to the bigger picture. An example of hard measures is
the arrests made by police organizations.
For the next several slides, we will examine contemporary
methods of employee supervision and evaluation.
We will begin by considering the idea of how multiple goals
and goal consensus play a part, thereafter we will explore
models of employee supervision and thereafter move on to a
discussion on issues pertaining to employee performance
evaluation and supervision within criminal justice
It is a common and widely held belief that criminal justice
organizations are expected to provide multiple services to the
community. All components of the criminal justice system
have multiple goals and functions. In some cases, these goals
contradict one another, and it is difficult to discern the
primary direction of the organization.
Despite the best efforts of police to apprehend and remove
criminals from the street, political and other factors make
successful prosecution difficult. When criminals are jailed,
overcrowding and economic factors play a role in their early
releases, leading to a frustrating cycle which thwarts the
overall goals of the criminal justice system.
These inefficiencies influence criminal justice system
employee evaluation and supervision. Efforts have been made
at identifying and applying the most effective models of
employee supervision and evaluation to counteract these
Two models most widely applied to the supervision of
criminal justice personnel are the traditional model and the
human services model.
Model of
The traditional model of employee supervision stresses
centralized authority, clear-cut rules and regulations, welldeveloped policies and procedures, and discernable lines of
authority operationally through the chain of command. In
short, high degrees of centralization, formalization, and
The traditional model is made up of the following elements:
A hierarchy that stresses an identifiable span of control;
A precise unity of command;
A clear delegation of authority ;
Rulification; and
Specialization of services and activities of employees.
Elements of
the Traditional
Span of Control refers to the appropriate number of
employees that can be managed by any one supervisor. What
this magic number should be has been part of debates among
scholars and practitioners alike. Generally the range often
cited is five to ten employees for optimal span of control.
Unity of Command refers to the placement of one person in
charge of a situation and an employee. The importance of this
concept of traditional supervision revolves around multiple
and conflicting orders from supervisors. It would thwart
organizational objectives if one employee reported to two or
more supervisors with different missions.
Delegation of Authority maintains the integrity of the
organization by clearly defining tasks and responsibilities of
employees, as well as delegating power and authority to
complete required tasks. For police organizations, this means
providing employees clear direction on what their
responsibilities are, the necessary skills to accomplish tasks,
and the requisite authority to achieve objectives. Each
employee understands his or her role in the accomplishment
of tasks and where they fit into the larger goals of the
Rulification emphasizes the importance of rules and
regulations of the organization. Every policy, procedure, and
directive must have some specific written referent. This is
true throughout the criminal justice system and is directly
related to its paramilitary nature.
Specialization involves the division of labor in criminal
justice organizations. Each employee knows his or her tasks
and is held accountable for those tasks. Specialization
enhances employee supervision because it is through exact
job definition that employees can be evaluated, disciplined,
promoted, and dismissed.
Through these concepts, supervisors are presumed to enhance
their supervisory capabilities. For decades training within
police departments and correctional organizations has stressed
these important concepts for effective employee supervision.
There is, however, an alternate model of employee
supervision that is winning support among scholars and
practitioners alike.
The Human
Service Model
of Employee
Unlike the traditional model of employee supervision, which
emphasizes monitoring through tight organizational controls,
the human service model views the supervision process within
the context of both individual employee goals and larger
organizational goals.
The Human Service Model is as much employee-oriented as it
is organization-oriented. In other words, this model must be
able to integrate the overall goals and needs of the employee
with those of the agency he or she works for. This requires a
dramatic shift from the traditional model with respect to the
allocation of power leading to employee ownership and
sharing of organizational power.
Employee ownership refers to gaining a greater voice in the
creation of institutional policy. For example, according to one
organizational expert, correctional employees who are able to
express their concerns with the context of decision making are
more productive employees and experience less stress. This
ownership is structured within the concept of delegation,
which was discussed earlier.
The sharing of power follows nicely from the concept of
delegation. Sharing of power assumes that power is not a
finite entity. Instead power is viewed as “energy, potential,
and competence.” Power is given to employees in such a way
that they are able to enhance their performance levels and
adjust to contingencies of the institutional environment.
Under such a view, the correctional worker is viewed as an
active contributor to the organization, not simply a reactive
automaton to institutional policies and procedures.
Whether or not the human service model is viable in a
criminal …
Purchase answer to see full