Org Chart Leadership

Organizational Leadership:   

“What’s” in the Box versus “Who’s” in the Box?

Each police organization has an organizational chart. It starts off at the top with a Chief and then lines of communication and authority are drawn between each member of that organization until the entire police department is diagrammed. The casual observer will see lots of boxes, lines and text within those boxes. We reserve power and authority for those at the top of the organization chart and then progress downward, until we list even the most junior patrol officer or civilian member of the department.

The most critical question of that organization chart is: What’s in the Box?

Some organizational charts will have a title or rank within each box. That title may say, “Chief of Police” or “Assistant Chief of Police”. That tells the reader much about the function or authority of that text box within the overall department operation. Some Chief’s only view the title or rank inside that box, but fail to account for the “name” also listed inside that box. They make decisions on transfers, promotions or specialty assignments only based on the title that resides in that box. They view the titles as interchangeable pieces that can be moved around into whatever fashion that Chief believes is most efficient, without regard to the person represented by that title or rank. All text boxes, which are labeled the same, are “plug and play” in any other text box with the same label in the mind of some Chiefs.

I saw that concept disastrously play out when a Records Clerk from out of state applied for an Office Assistant position at our department. I initially wondered why we would recruit out of state for a position that normally would be held by someone who already lived in the community. This applicant was successful and was hired to fill the duties of an office assistant at one of the precincts. As an office assistant, they had routine tasks to keep the supplies replenished in the precinct, as well as other vital support services. That office assistant also served as the court coordinator and managed the court subpoena and court calendaring function for the entire department of 200 sworn personnel. This was a critical function that relied on her position to perform.

After she had been here for a while, the Department elected to create our own Records Division instead of paying the County Sheriff’s office to perform that function. Our Department had disbanded our Records Unit about 20 years earlier and transferred that function to the Sheriff’s Department to gain efficiencies. When the cost benefit analysis was recently done, it was determined we would be better off with our own Records Unit again.

As we recruited for the position of Records Clerks, the Chief decided that if he converted all the current Office Assistants to Records Clerks, he could have a “plug and play” work resource that would allow him to keep the Records Unit fully staffed at all times. He believed their “title in the box” could be interchangeable and informed the office assistant doing the court coordination that she was going to be reclassified as a Records clerk. The Chief thought since she was a Records Clerk before she came to our Department, it would be a natural fit. The Office Assistant did not want to be a Records clerk. In looking at the work schedule, she noted an office assistant worked a Mon –Fri, 8 – 5 schedule while the Records unit is a 24/7 operation and Records Clerks work Swing shift and Graveyard. The slight increase in salary was not worth the cost of shift work in her eyes.  That Office Assistant found another position within the City.

The “title” in the text box will describe what the responsibilities are of that box within the organization, but that is only half of the story. There is also a “name” in that box, and that name tells the rest of the story. While each title represents authority or rank, the name represents a human being who is tasked with carrying out specific responsibilities utilizing the associated rank. While ranks are interchangeable, human beings are not.

The name inside the box comes with all the complexity that goes along with the human condition. Some have a family. Family commitments may influence their assignment choices, promotion goals or career paths. In looking at the rank of Sergeant across an organization, only a few will choose the SWAT supervisor assignment. While all of the Sergeants are qualified by rank, some will decide that the unpredictable nature of SWAT callouts is not something conducive to a stable home life, and they pass on that assignment.  While all Captains have equal rank, only some will be chosen to head an Investigations Division or Administration Division based on their unique capabilities as a person.

When considering employee transfers within an organization, a wise Chief will consider not only the title or rank within the “box” but will consider the “name” that can also be found in that box. If a Chief only considers “what” is in the box and fails to consider “who” is in the box, they could make fundamentally unsound personnel decisions that could cost the Department efficiencies and lower employee morale. Every movement within an organization should be made to improve the overall health and efficiency of that organization. This cannot be done without considering “who” is in the box.