Driving innovation and building trust in law enforcement

ISJ hears from Andrew Masterson, Lead for EMEA Partnerships, IP House.

The ever-evolving landscape within law enforcement has had some consistent themes in recent years. These have had many guises under the forces’ code of ethics and vision statements.

The approach to engagement and problem-solving is not one of these areas. The framing of these areas has developed to meet the demands and, in many places (not all), lead in innovation.

These changes in approach have become crucial for addressing complex challenges, evolving to meet demand, using technology and building public trust.

Law enforcement is one area where not only the leaders shape thinking, inspire action and drive meaningful change – but rank and file officers are given sway on the methods they use to interact and adapt to local changes.

Frustration comes when changes do not spread to the broader force, so institutional attitudes remain an undertone.

I am fortunate to have experienced the strong backbone of UK law enforcement, best demonstrated in Public Order training (although this differs hugely depending on where it is completed).

The best team building and bonding there is top down management; being given a structure of objectives, with free range to decide the implementation of tactics to achieve overall outcomes with one, two or six other teams (25 people in each team or PSU).

The pressure of petrol bombs, bricks and a physically demanding environment highlights the effectiveness of teamwork and clear direction.

Although great lessons are learned, once out of the environment, the mentality soon dilutes until called upon in an actual life deployment, when dormant mindsets come to the forefront to deliver.

In contrast, most officers are left to their decision-making, supported by direct management and assisted by the experience of others.

Engagement with problem-solving has typically remained consistent: “To fix this concern you raised, you should do what I recommend – on to the next question.”

Thankfully, this was not the attitude supported in primary units, where developing an approach to work and integrating understanding was encouraged. We focused on seeking the engagement of those concerned and understanding the impact to that business area and the wider narrative.

From this, I developed an approach to invert the problem triangle, placing an emphasis on community engagement and understanding.

The problem triangle is best demonstrated as a percentage. When presented with a problem, the majority will take 1% of the time to review, listen and understand it, and 99% of the time working on the solution, gaining support to deliver the solution and explaining why the solution presented is the right one.

When you invert this, you spend 99% of your time reviewing the problem presented, breaking down to its working parts and examining the areas impacted by it.

You can see and understand the requirement, review it to engage with it and understand the needs of those coming up with the problem.

As a result, the remaining 1% of time the solution (in most cases) would have not only presented itself but been implemented along the route to finding it.

As the landscape for law enforcement changes, it must be about envisioning a future that embraces the very core of the new and not forgetting the knowledge gained along the way.

Thought leadership in law enforcement

Law enforcement operates at the intersection of societal needs and governmental authority, uniquely positioned to influence public perceptions of justice and safety.

UK law enforcement ensures a delicate balance – since policing occurs through consent, there are provisions in laws that explicitly take this away when the safety of others is in the balance. There is also legal structure to ensure power is not overstepped. There are several areas that guide this balance:

Responding to emerging challenges – the 21^st century has introduced new challenges for law enforcement, including cyber-crime, terrorism and societal polarisation. In some cases, until recently, the crime type was investigated using a manual designed at the introduction of computers. Discourse rules and guidance still refer to seizing documents in filing cabinets, ignoring those that can be stored in a device carried in your pocket. Having an open approach to better support investigations and victims of crime is essential to anticipating trends, devising proactive strategies to address them effectively and also learning from past errors and not repeating them.

Enhancing community relations – in light of serious offences committed by those in a position of trust, all who serve must see the impact to the public and work to rebuild the trust broken. Not all police are bad, but all carry the burden of those who are. The public should hold the police accountable for building trust between law enforcement and the public – not in everyday actions, but as a whole. An increase in auditors is more about clickbait than it is about having a meaningful impact, and both the public and the police should not take all in these clips as a mark of everyone. We must prioritise transparency, empathy, integrity and community engagement to rebuild relationships and foster collaboration. The police are the public, and the public the police.

Innovate, innovate, innovate – too often, good and bad historical ideas are rehashed without learning lessons from their passing. We must embrace advanced technology like AI and body-worn cameras to rethink training programs. Innovation that improves law enforcement outcomes is key while not trying to reinvent that which did not work and ignoring that which does. On average, it takes three-year cycles to implement a successful plan and see the results of a negative one. In the current climate, all involved have moved on before the results can be seen.

Shape policy through training – effective leadership is critical in designing policies and training protocols that reflect current realities while preparing officers for future challenges. These actions ensure that law enforcement professionals have the skills and knowledge to serve diverse communities effectively. To achieve this, leadership has to listen. I’ll say that again – leaders have to listen. Too often, decisions are made too quickly. Active listening, hearing what victims, officers, staff and the public are actually saying, would have improved the situation. Very rarely does an opinion or advice come from a place of malice in respect of protecting people and having them feel safe.

Advocate for systemic change – it is not enough to only improve in the short term or in one part of law enforcement. Positive change must be supported and assured that it is implemented across the whole system. These reforms address systemic issues such as racial disparities, excessive use of force and disproportionate policing. These are not short changes and must be embedded and supported for real change. We must all drive conversations about justice reform and help create frameworks for equitable law enforcement practices. In doing so, we should listen to opposing views, test our own and find balance in these discussions.

Considering all this, I would sum up three key characteristics for others:

• Visionary thinking: Look beyond immediate concerns to envision long-term solutions that align with societal values and technological advancements
• Collaboration: Seek to work across sectors, engaging with policymakers, academics, community leaders, technologists to develop comprehensive approaches to complex issues
• Adaptability: The dynamic nature of law enforcement requires leaders who can pivot and adapt to changing circumstances while maintaining focus on their overarching goals. Assess a situation and look for the method that can work, not centre on what does not work