Toxic Leadership in Law Enforcement Essay

Effective leadership is the root of many organizational issues across sectors, and in the case of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), lack of effective leadership is the cause of low morale, particularly among employees. Furthermore, the lack of sustained, effective leadership has worked to create a host of communication and organizational culture issues which has lowered moral at DHS far below the average of any other federal agency. To further compound the problem, there has been a serious lack of sustained leadership within DHS which has led to the vacancy of many executive positions at various agencies within DHS. These vacancies have had serious ramifications in that they have led to many employees feeling as though “the organization

To begin, I shall summarize the major issue regarding the case study shown on page 103, in the 7th edition book Titled, Effective Police Supervision, written by Harry More and Larry Miller in 2015. Sergeant Lou Maynard recently got promoted to the evening supervisor for the Craigview Police Department. Six months had then passed. While leading his team, Maynard came to the realization that two of his officers did not seem motivated as the rest of them were. The other officers, that were doing their jobs, started to complain about the two non-motivated officers. They began stating that the two officers did not their carry their weight when it came to the team. The two officers are noticed working as if they do not wish to be there and are just waiting to retire in the next year. They have even distanced themselves when it comes to socializing with fellow officers on duty and off.

People in organizations are tempted to sabotage the organization due to their ego, self-interest and the incentive of becoming higher in the organization’s hierarchy (JJCOB1964, 2012). Furthermore, people in these organizations can create small groups within the organization that can destroy the organization (JJCOB1964, 2012). According to O’Hara organizations must be quick to stop environmental challenges (JJCOB1964, 2012). Only a few organizations can keep up with these challenges and that is another reason why organizations fail (JJCOB1964, 2012). To illuminate, we can look at Robert Hanssen who betrayed the FBI by giving Russian U.S secrets (O'Hara, 2012, p. 5). Hanssen who was described as an arrogant loner was reported by his FBI agent brother for being a security risk (O'Hara, 2012, p. 5). Despite being reported, Hanssen was able to climb the hierarchy in the organization, which increased his ability to spy (O'Hara, 2012, p. 5). Here we see a slow response from the FBI to rid the organization of a threat. Although the FBI has many downturns the people of the United States still heavily supports the organization (O'Hara, 2012, p. 6).

This qualitative research study explored poor leadership styles of the U.S. Border Patrol a department within the Department of Homeland Security. In this chapter I will discuss my research methodology.

Why does bad leadership exist? Bad leadership indeed exists in the US Border Patrol is a question that I have wondered about for many years. What has been done to fix the problem and if any programs have been created to develop good and efficient leaders for the future. This paper sought a definition of bad leadership, and compiled a taxonomy of eighteen types of poor leaders. This research serves as a review of poor leadership in the US Border Patrol. Why does it exists, why it is tolerated and what impact positive leadership may have on this problem.

The department has many excellent officers who, despite poor leadership, conduct themselves in exemplary fashion. (Cordner, 2016). A small minority of six, however, causes some severe problems. These six officers, 17 percent

The Romano Pitesti case is an example of how great influence a disruptive behavior may have to the whole company and how lack of leadership can deteriorate the

The case study by Hasson et al. (2007) advises that employees could contact their supervisor or manager without censor or retaliation (p.3). The additions of the hotline and ethics officer were supposed to be encouraged. However, employees bypassing the hotline and reporting process showed evidence of passive group traits. Engleberg and Wynn state that when group members lack confidence, they will follow directions regardless of whether they go against their own judgment, and they also experience high stress levels with group communication (p. 68). Harry Mart, Galvatrens COO who was first informed about the possible misconducts, didn’t act as a responsible leader. Instead of taking Mike Fields message seriously, he ignored his message. According to Engleberg and Wynn (2007), effective leaders who are proactive listeners “don’t wait for disputes to escalate into destructive conflict; they intervene at the slightest hint of hostility” (p.195). Harry Mart’s reaction to Mike Fields message also indicates that the changes brought under new management to advance the company’s procedures and to prevent misconducts and conflicts didn’t transmit effectively to the company’s leadership. the new leadership, the company was transforming to adopt an open door system that encouraged employees to raise their concerns to their superiors. However, Harry Mart’s disregard for Mike Fields’ concern indicates that the

In this case study Chip uses a leadership style of forcing and competing in order to meet his desired needs. This gives him the delusion of power and superiority both by using intimidation and condescending remarks coupled with situational abuse. These characteristics are the shark style of conflict and never questioning a leaders’ authority. If an opinion is desired it will be formulated and given to the other party. Chip manages his employees and associates with ridicule, put downs, and threats to obtain the desired objectives. An immediate reaction might be to fight fire with fire but there may be more to this case than the initial burn of a shark bite.

All organizations, especially law enforcement agencies, require leadership. Maintaining a dependable leadership structure is key to the success of any organization. The philosophy of the modern style of police leadership involves a leader who is strong, competitive and unreceptive to change. Police leadership is based from an autocratic style which is founded on integrity and courage, embracing teamwork, involvement and shared leadership (Cordner & Scarborough, 2010). This style of leadership works well in an emergency situation in which rapid decision making and strict control is needed. The negative aspect to this style of leadership is the inability of the organization to function with the absence of leadership.

Perry is being rewarded for his disrupted, distrustful, and disrespectful behaviors. Subordinates are frustrated with this action of this supervisor (Douglas Madagan) and employee (Ricardo Perry). Morale is down when he’s here and uplift when he’s away. Gilbert Borland and I, Jeffery Littleton as material handler leaders was not informed nor was a meeting held to select the induvial to perform this

Corporate environments and up-to-the-minute organizations are breeding grounds for bossy administration. Org charts and denomination skew power toward the top and bake in incentives for sullenness-level staffers to shut down and comply. The result is straitjacketed thinking—with little flow of knowledge from followers to leaders. In this sort of civilization, diminishers may turn tyrants, heaping on anxiety. So when they ask for, or even imposition, employees’ boldest thinking, they hardly receive it: The more treacherous nine members feel, the safer their ideas

Leadership is that process in which one person sets the purpose or direction for one or more other persons and gets them to move along together with him or her and with each other in that direction with competence and full commitment (Elliott, 2009). Leadership is supposed to guide people to attain a particular set vision. Motivation is fundamental in the process of leadership as if there is no motivation there will be laxity among the people involved. It is also a critical scenario for leadership to have followers; this will infer a relationship between leaders and followers (Frank, 2003).

In the past few years, the relationship between employees and leaders has continued to disintegrate because of negative behaviors by organizational leaders. This is despite of the need for these leaders to use appropriate strategies in the way they monitor the workplace and contribute to employee citizenship to enable employees effectively perform duties that are considered as extra.

This, however, differs in large organisations, where personal contact between management and the employees are sacrificed. In many cases the supervisor or foreman knows all the people in his department, but in large organisations he is merely a transmitter of upper management’s orders. Red tape in bureaucratic organisations tends to hinder the process of resolvement of an employee’s grievances, and this fosters even more tension within the employee. Consequently, production decreases and the organisation suffers.