Comprehensive Literature Review
In the following paper I attempt to discuss the impact of diversity in administration, and how diversity plays a major role in the criminal justice system. I explain that managing diversity is also a key characteristic of having diversity in an organization. While further exploring the qualities of a leader and different leadership styles within an organization, and how these different leaderships adversely affect the different models of the criminal justice system. My paper concludes with the different models of the criminal justice system and how each model affects the community and the communities ability to understand, access and have input in regards to the models of criminal justice.
Diversity in Administration
Diversity is one of the most important characteristics of the criminal justice system today, specifically when it comes to administration. If we take a look at the history of the criminal justice system, we can distinctively identify that only whites were allowed in authority or administration positions in the past. This has dramatically changed within present day criminal justice systems and administration positions. The importance of diversity in administration is that diversity now serves the purpose of being able to reach every corner of a community. When community members look at the people that are leading them or for instance the employees look at the administration that is leading them, they want to see diversity and not just a panel of one race. “Individuals from diverse back- grounds bring a broad range of cultural understandings and language skills to the force. Diversity is also considered a key ingredient for the successful implementation of community-based policing, in which law enforcement agencies col- laborate with citizens’ groups to address public safety issues” (Viverette, 2005).
The ability to which administrations are able to identify themselves with the community or audience they are serving will depend on the diversity from that administration. The ability to connect and identify plays an important role in policing communities, the ability to connect could be the difference between solving a murder or that murder resulting in a case going cold. “In short, the police may be seen as more legitimate and may be better able to partner with community organizations in fighting crime if they more closely resemble and identify with the communities they serve” (Raganella and White, 2004; Scrivner, 2006). Although this quote is speaking directly about police-community relations, the same insight can be applied to a business, a large company or corporation. Administrators will be viewed as more legitimate and may be able to produce more productivity from their employees when they can resemble and identify with their employees.
When there is diversity within administration, the people who are under the care of this administration tend to feel like things are equal or they have the same opportunity as the others around them. “Employees from different backgrounds have different needs and feel the urge to be respected in their workplace. Management needs to understand the need of these diverse groups of people so as to avoid employee tensions and conflicts” (Hill, Stephens & Smith 2003). Administrators of a company want the environment of their workplace to be friendly, comforting, and to not be a hostile place. By achieving this the through diversity, administrators will be also be able to achieve not only diversity in the workplace but also creating a unity within the workplace. Diversity and equal opportunity are two different terms that are often misconstrued. “The term equal opportunities is associated with tolerant, rights based, and is entrenched in conformity of legal rules whereby it is geared towards increasing the proportion of minority and women in senior goals in organization” (Greene & Kirton 2002). This focuses more on the role of race and gender being the sole reason that certain individuals are granted opportunities that others are not. “Diversity management is however, a bit different and is rather focused on organizational initiative whereby organizations focus on valuing difference in addition to non-discrimination and concerns on respecting every individual in the workplace regardless of their race and gender among other variables” (Cornelius, Gooch, & Todd 200).
Effectively implementing diversity is one thing, but effectively managing diversity is another. Administrators can have immense amounts of diversity but if they cannot effectively manage this diversity, then what purpose is the diversity serving? “Effective diversity management requires a culture which is inclusive of a work environment that nurtures teamwork, participation, and cohesiveness” (Roberson & Park 2007). The problem often arises when teamwork, participation, and cohesiveness are not the main priorities of administrators. When the administrators are only worried about production, they will not be able to effectively manage the diversity. When trying to manage diversity, administrators must pay attention to the little details that often go unnoticed in big corporations. How do they expect have productive and diverse employees who are not even happy to come to work? “Managing diversity and equality is equally important as it impacts all the members working in an organization and if it can be properly managed an organization could have the potential to improve productivity, opportunity, and competitiveness” (Moore 1999). Diversity cannot only help an organization tremendously, but when managed incorrectly diversity can most certainly aide in the demise of an organization.
Gilbert and Ivancevich (2000), describe how a multicultural organization’s focused and planned approach to managing diversity and equality helped increase the firm’s competitiveness compared to the pluralist organization where diversity was regarded as a public relations tool and not a core element that created competitive advantage. Diversity has many beneficial effects when managed correctly, while it can vary from age, gender, social status, ethnicity and culture; it is without a doubt the element of diversity is a vital characteristic in the success of any organization. USA focuses more on equality than diversity, organizations want to make sure every individual feels equal, but the case is that diversity will forgo the feeling of inequality because by being diverse organizations are promoting teamwork, unity, and cohesiveness.
Just as diversity is an important characteristic in any organization, the different leadership styles implemented by administration are as equally important. “Leadership style is viewed as a combination of different characteristics, traits and behaviors that are used by leaders for interacting with their subordinates” (Mitonga-Monga & Coetzee, 2012). These styles, traits, and characteristics will make the difference between a bad leader and good leader. Top quality leadership is essential to producing a successful organization, the problems arise in leadership when organizations do not hold leaders accountable for their leadership styles. There are many different leadership styles such as autocratic leadership style, democratic leadership style, transactional leadership style, transformational leadership style, charismatic leadership style and bureaucratic leadership style. Each style has their pros and their cons, but essentially the success of the leadership styles depends solely on the leader who implementing the leadership style.
The performance of an organization can be connected to the leadership style of the organization, but more importantly connected to the leaders of that organization. “Top quality leadership is essential to achieve the mission and vision along with coping with the changes occurring in the external environment” (Harris, et al., 2007). Leaders that can adapt to the changes going on internally and externally will be able to lead their organization in the right direction. Think no doubt about it, an organization will only be as great as their leader is. Leaders must be able to manage diversity, manage organization conduct, procedural changes and so forth. Leading and leadership styles will make or break and organization. “The role of leadership in an organization is crucial in terms of creating a vision, mission, determination and establishment of objectives, designing strategies, policies, and methods to achieve the organizational objectives effectively and efficiently along with directing and coordinating the efforts and organizational activities” (Xu & Wang, 2008).
Another attribute that a great leader must have is to be able to take the leadership style that they have chosen and apply that leadership style to community relations and community issues. In my opinion this correlates with policing, the leadership style that the officers carry must be able to be applied to police-community relations and the community problems that arise. Many leaders may have the knowledge but lack the courage to make necessary decisions, leaders must be able to make the decision and keep moving forward. The morale of the organization is dependent upon the morale of the leader. In a sense the leader(s) sets pace for the rest of the organization to follow. Each leader will have their own style of leadership they choose to implement, but it ultimately is up to the leader to correctly put that leadership style to use.
Four Models of Criminal Justice
With different leadership styles you also have different models of the way the criminal justice system can be ran. “Sensu stricto, there are no models of the criminal justice. Even so, the criminal justice system of a country, on close examination, may be found following a value or set of values that define its underlying ideology, which may punctuate at every stage of the criminal processes involved in it. The criminologists prefer to style these underlying ideologies as models.” (Adil, K). There are four distinct models of the criminal justice system I would like to point out; 1) The Crime Control Model 2) The Due Process Model 3) Punitive Model of Victims’ Rights and lastly 4) Non-Punitive Model of Victims. All of these models of criminal justice have their pros and cons, but ultimately, they all serve justice in one way or another. Now I will go in-depth of how each of these models addresses issues in the community and how these models do with the communities’ ability to provide feedback and input.
The crime control model looks to the legislature to validate authority, although most of the power is given to the police in the streets. The fact-finding is not left to the judges and lawyers but yet depend on the police and their investigation into the crime. “The police are given broad investigative powers to arrest people for questioning and this is often the quickest means to establish if the suspect is factually guilty. The only limitations on police interrogations are those designed to ensure the reliability of the suspect’s statements.” (Roach 1999). This model is not concerned with the trial because in this model of criminal justice the police essentially rule out any doubt that accused may be innocent by doing all the fact-finding before the case even gets to court. This model in my opinion is the model that is able to address community issues and relations effectively, because when an issue arises the community can come to the police to get the issue resolved. In a sense the police are the key factor in this model, and when dealing with a community the police have the most interaction with those community members, not the judge, the district attorney or the prosecutor.
‘The due process model starts with ‘skepticism about the morality and utility of the criminal sanction ” especially in relation to ‘victimless crimes’ based on consensual transactions.” (Roach 1999). Due process raises concerns about the intrusive policing that is required to enforce drug, obscenity, prostitution laws and many other laws for that matter. Police abuse could be prevented if police officers were not so focused on criminalizing minor activities. By decriminalizing certain crimes, we would reduce the overall workload of the criminal justice system. In comparison to the crime control model, the due process model places much less emphasize on efficiency and guilty pleas. Another point of emphasis from the due process model is that it focuses on the equality of the criminal justice system as a whole, holding each entity responsible. “The due process model imposes numerous restraints on the police in order to protect the rights of suspects and minimize in- formal fact-finding in the streets and station-houses.” (Roach 1999). Focusing on the victim essentially seems to be the main purpose of the due process model. I suppose this model could be viewed as the “community model” because due process mode focuses on the victims in the situation, making sure they are treated with equality, making sure no wrongs are done by the police officers themselves ensuring no wrongs such as police abuse happen. If we look at the characteristics of the due process model, you will be able to recognize this model would be the best model to digest community feedback, and input as to how certain things in the criminal justice system should take place.
The Punitive Model of Victims’ Rights could be viewed as a hybrid model, as said by Roach (1999), This model combines the crime control assembly line and the due process obstacle course to create a roller coaster. In light this model is putting the victims’ rights against the due process rights of the accused. This model assumes that the criminal law can control crime, hence the reason the victims’ rights are in a sense equal to the due process rights of the accused. “The punitive model places the criminal justice system under constant pressure to improve itself to encourage victims to report their crimes, to prevent re-victimization within the criminal process, and to respond to high levels of victimization.” (Boyle, 1994). The punitive model has some resemblance to the crime control model, both of these models focus on factual as opposed to legal guilt and both models assume that the enactment of a criminal law, prosecution, and punishment controls crime. I feel strongly that this model would not or possibly is not in favor of the community, it would be possible that victims of crimes may feel as though this model focuses on making the victim and the accused equal in the eyes of the law, so therefore how could they get the deserved justice. There also is not much room for feedback or input in this model because the systems that use this model will be solely focused on implementing the law.
Lastly, we have the Non-Punitive Model of Victims’ Rights, which is essentially a model that is trying to steer the victim away from the roller coaster I spoke about in the punitive model. This model tried not to rely on criminal sanction and punishment but instead believes the prevention of crime and restorative justice is the best course of action for justice in light of the victim. The non-punitive model would change the focus importance away from traditional crime-control strategies. Which could result in the victim playing the most important role in determining how the offender should be dealt with. “Crime prevention can be achieved through social development to identify and provide serv- ices for those at risk of crime. Early childhood intervention targeting disruptive and anti-social behavior and poor parenting skills may help prevent future crime, as well as blur bright line distinctions between victims and offenders.” (Michael Tonry & David Farrington 1995). With this model further efforts to prevent crime would need to be implemented such as information exchange among bureaucracies, changing high risk activities, and something small such as better lighting in cities. Non-punitive model essentially focuses on restorative justice; factual guilt. Community members may favor this model because it focuses on restorative justice, and for the victims that are demanding justice they will find this model appealing.
The irony of having diversity in the criminal justice system is that we must have leaders capable of leading effectively whilst also managing the diversity in their organizations. The criminal justice system is evolving day by day, as technology grows, we gain tremendous amounts of knowledge through data and research about victims and criminals. We are able to implement and create new policies and procedures that help prevent crime and ensure justice. “The victims of crime should no longer be ignored. In the worlds of prosecutions and punishment, they can be informed and consulted, but will have little real decision-making power. Some victims’ rights will be recognized, but they will often be pit- ted against due process rights. In the worlds of crime prevention and restorative justice, however, victims and potential victims of crime, may find more decision-making power and less opposition. Hopefully they-all of us ultimately-can find more security and satisfaction.” (Roach 1999).
Many approaches have been used to control crime, but what if we are not looking the right place for the change to occur, we often emphasize what needs to change with police officer and what needs to change with the community and even the criminal justice system entirely. We never look at the approach of what needs to change in the leadership or the administration. Subordinates often follow the guidance of their superiors, so when we have an organization constantly abusing authority or constantly breaking procedures, then we must take a look at who is leading this organization. Each model of the models of criminal justice has one common goal, the path to get to that goal may have been different with each model, still the common goal for justice to be served.
There have been several issues raised in the past few years about the criminal justice system, but if we really look at the history of the criminal justice system, it has been flawed since it was established. The criminal justice system aims to punish minorities and rehabilitate white people, while that is a strong statement, you can compare many cases where a white man and a person of color committed the same crime but yet the person of color received a significantly harsher sentence. This brings my back to my point in the previous paragraph, maybe the only change that needs to take place in the criminal justice system is the change of the administration(s). We must establish new administrations with new mindsets in order to see change within the criminal justice system.
- Viverette, Mary Ann. (2005). “President’s Message: Diver- sity on the Force,” The Police Chief, Vol. 72, No. 12, December.
- Scrivner, Ellen. (2006). Innovations in Police Recruitment and Hiring: Hiring in the Spirit of Service, Washington, D.C.: United States Department of Justice, Office of Community Oriented Policing Services.
- Raganella, Anthony, and Michael White. (2004). “Race, Gender, and Motivation for Becoming a Police Offi- cer: Implications for Building a Representative Police Department,” Journal of Criminal Justice, Vol. 32, pp. 501–513.
- Hill, R. P., Stephens, D., & Smith, I. (2003). Corporate social responsibility: An examination of individual firm behavior. Business and Society Review, 108, 339–364.
- Greene, A. M., & Kirton, G. (2002). Advancing gender equality: The role of women-only trade union education. Gender, Work & Organization, 9, 39–59.
- Cornelius, N., Gooch, L., & Todd, S. (2000). Managers leading diversity for business excellence. Journal of General Management, 25, 67–78
- Roberson, Q. M., & Park, H. J. (2007). Examining the link between diversity and firm performance the effects of diversity reputation and leader racial diversity. Group & Organization Management, 32, 548–568.
- Moore, S. (1999). Understanding and managing diversity among groups at work: Key issues for organizational training and development. Journal of European Industrial Training, 23, 208–218.
- Cooper‐Thomas, H. D., & Anderson, N. (2006). Organizational socialization. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 21, 492–516.
- Gilbert, J. A., & Ivancevich, J. M. (2000). Valuing diversity: A tale of two organizations. The Academy of Management Executive, 14, 93–105.
- Mitonga-Monga, J. & Coetzee, M., 2012. Perceived leadership style and employee participation. African Journal of Business Management, 6(15).
- Harris, A. et al., 2007. Distributed leadership and organizational change: Reviewing the evidence. Journal of Educational Change, 8(4), pp. 337-347.
- Xu, G. Y. & Wang, Z. S., 2008. The impact of transformational leadership style on organizational performance: The intermediary effects of leader-member exchange. Long Beach, CA, USA, IEEE Xplore, pp. 1090-1097.
- Roach, K. (1999). Four Models of the Criminal Process. The Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology (1973-),89(2), 671.
- Boyle, Chrisitine. (1994). The Role of Equality in Criminal Law, 58 SAS& L. REV. 215 – 230.
- Beach, L. R., & Connolly, T. (2005). The psychology of decision making: People in organisations (2nd ed.). London: Sage.
- S. Cheurprakobkit. (2006). The impact of race, police experience, and feeling of safety on attitude toward the police. Journal of Police and Criminal Psychology, 21, pp. 55-67.
- C.L. Gibson, J.S. Zhao, N.P. Lovrich, M.J. Gaffney. (2002). Social integration, individual perceptions of collective efficacy, and fear of crime in three cities. Justice Quarterly, 19, pp. 537-564
- Bradford, B., Murphy, K., & Jackson, J. ( 2014) “Officers as Mirrors: Policing, Procedural Justice and the (Re)production of Social Identity,” British J. of Criminology.
- Walker, S., & Katz, C. ( 2012) The Police in America, 8th ed. New York: McGraw‐Hill.