Behavioural Analysis - the Silver Bullet for Law Enforcement Inefficiencies FINAL

THE IMPACT OF CRIME & INTELLIGENCE ANALYST ATTRITION

ON THE BOTTOM LAW IN LAW ENFORCEMENT

An Innovative Solution to Workplace Dissatisfaction in Law Enforcement

IT’S NOT WHAT YOU DO… It’s how you do it. Crime &

Intelligence Analysts are highly

educated, highly skilled

professionals. What is

happening to cause them to

leave their jobs? This paper

examines the causes of and

solutions for CIA attrition in law

enforcement.

Jan Whyte, CPC, MCIArb. Bachelor of Technology – Forensic Investigation

1 THE IMPACT OF CRIME & INTELLIGENCE ANALYST ATTRITION

ON THE BOTTOM LINE IN LAW ENFORCEMENT

The Impact of Crime & Intelligence Analyst Attrition

on the Bottom Line in Law Enforcement

Jan Whyte

British Columbia Institute of Technology



Table of Contents

Table of Contents .......................................................................................................................................................2

Abstract ......................................................................................................................................................................3

Introduction ................................................................................................................................................................4

Literature Review .......................................................................................................................................................6

Methodology & Analysis ...........................................................................................................................................9

Sample Group ...................................................................................................................................................... 14

Results ................................................................................................................................................................. 15

Discussion ............................................................................................................................................................... 18

Conclusions ............................................................................................................................................................. 21

References ............................................................................................................................................................... 23

Appendix A – CIA - Yield on Investment (Education) ........................................................................................... 24

Appendix B – Police Organization - Yield on Investment (Employee) .................................................................. 25

Appendix C – Spiral Dynamics Methodology and Survey Interpretation Guides .................................................. 26

Appendix D – Survey Results Respondent 1 ........................................................................................................... 27

Appendix E – Survey Results Respondent 2 ........................................................................................................... 28

Appendix F – Survey Questions ............................................................................................................................. 29



Abstract

This study qualitatively assessed the factors driving crime and intelligence analysis attrition in the

workplace by applying Spiral Dynamics Theory. A self-report survey which contained questions in four

areas relevant to the crime and intelligence analysis workplace environment, as well as personal

interviews asking open-ended questions regarding the population workplace experiences, were deployed

to two analysts. One analyst was in public law enforcement and one in private law enforcement. A

picture of each of the analysts’ professional profiles as well as the challenges in their work environments

was drawn from the qualitative survey results. The results were consistent with the literature on this

topic - there are bullying and relational problems in law enforcement environments. Significant drivers

of dissatisfaction for the crime and intelligence analysis in law enforcement agencies were supervisor

bullying in hierarchical organizational structure and analyst attitudes toward change. Analysts must

acquire leadership and self-management skills in order to positively manage these workplace factors.

Keywords: bully, change, organizational development, law enforcement, hierarchical, public

administration, private administration



Introduction

Law enforcement agency budgets are funded from two sources. In public agencies, the monies

are derived from taxpayers. In private agencies, the monies are derived from owners and investors. In

either forum there is close scrutiny on the use of the funds for the maximum benefit and return.

The benefit of ensuring efficient use of administration (overhead) budgets is that a larger portion

of the overall budget may be applied to innovative measures in crime-fighting such as the development

or implementation of new technology and/or specialized task forces. The end result is more criminals

being detected, deterred and - if appropriate - convicted. This leads to a safer world for all citizens.

The Crime and Intelligence Analyst (CIA) is an employee (administrative overhead) in either the

public or private law enforcement environment. In Canada, law enforcement agencies and private

agencies are hiring CIAs to work on cases involving radical terrorist, serial killers, arsonists, fraudsters

and bank robbers. Canadian post-secondary institutions are creating programs for the education of CIAs

and students are enthusiastically enrolling. Current postings for CIA positions with the RCMP and

Municipal policing (West Vancouver) require a post-secondary degree in social sciences plus a degree

or associate certificate in crime and intelligence analysis. The salary range set out in the current

postings for CIA is $75,000 - $100,000 per year. This seems to be an expanding profession with a

bright future for jobs.

Despite this positive employment picture, according to Alex Tyakoff, a Crime & Intelligence

Analyst with over 25 years of experience in analysis and teaching, the tenure for a CIA is about 7 years.

Our survey results also confirmed this 7-year timeline when the analyst either changes jobs to another

agency or quits the profession. In a job posting for a crime analyst in New Westminster, BC there were



180 applicants. This statistic further informs us that there are a lot of analysts looking for a change

(although we may assume some of those analysts are new graduates of the BCIT CIA program).

The problem with the attrition after seven years is one of financial inefficiency for the analyst.

The investment yield analysis set out at Appendix A informs us that at year 6, the education investment

is beginning to yield a 100% profit (break-even point). According to the calculation, in 7 years (the time

of attrition), the CIA has recouped his investment cost and has earned a capital gain (profit) of $82,750.

All things being equal, he should now receive profits of at least $82,750 per year if he stays in the

current position.

On the other hand, from the perspective of the employer law enforcement agency, if the analyst

leaves the organization will experience a loss in their investment in the employee over the last 7 years.

According to the concept of the experience curve, the more years an employee performs the job, the

more efficient he/she becomes and therefore more productive and valuable to the organization. If the

employee increases in efficiency at 15% per year, over the 7 year period he/she has increased efficiency

of 105%. (see graph at Appendix B). While there are many ways of looking at what this 105% increase

means, for the purposes of this analysis it is sufficient to say that because the now mature employee has

become more efficient, the organization has also become more efficient.

If the analyst is leaving the job to another global policing position of equal or higher salary, this

is a positive for the employee and global policing, although a slight negative for the administration of

the entity with a CIA vacancy. However, if the employee leaves the profession and/or returns to school

for further education unrelated to law enforcement, or takes a lesser paying job to avoid the workplace

factors of the CIA position, the profit earning ability of the investment has been impaired.



Crime analyst workplace satisfaction is pivotal to efficient use of public funds. Law enforcement

administration must be able to offer solutions to those analysts who are leaving the agency.

Literature Review

The 2008 article of Daniel Wahl and Seaton Baxter (Wahl & Baxter, 2008) sets out how the

empirical data relating to biopsychosocial systems - Spiral Dynamics Theory - developed by Dr. Clare

Graves and continued by his understudy Don Beck might serve as an efficient measurement tool for

gaps in organizational and individual behaviours. The authors inform us that with the complex global

condition of dynamically interrelated factors, civilization [or the workplace] may become unsustainable.

The solution, they say, necessarily requires widespread participation from communities everywhere. The

constituents of those communities need to “begin to shape local, regional and global visions of

sustainability and offer strategies to engage human collectively in co-operative processes that will turn

visions (designs) into reality.” (page 72)

The information contained in the article is helpful in this analysis because it gives percentages of

the world population who fall into 8 distinct qualitative categories – values/modes of thought,

sometimes described as “intelligence levels”. The modes of thought are based on clusters of values that

have emerged in humans, and represents a continuum which, when applied to observed behaviours,

provides information as to what internal and external factors may trigger, stall or influence changes in

human behaviour. The article persuaded the author of this paper to use the Spiral Dynamics theory to

survey the law enforcement respondents on the question of CIA attrition. Accordingly the article is

attached as Appendix C as a further explanation of the methodology of the research.



The 2014 article Problem-solving Approaches to Police Station Conflict (Corcoran, 2014)

provides us with historic information on traditional solutions to negative forces in Federal, Municipal

and Provincial police sectors. Corcoran advises that resolution of conflicts in these environments

“demand a careful look at the interpretive relationships between opposition parties; a police supervisor

needs to help conflicting opponents to query much of what they suppose they know about the other, in

order to learn what really motivates them and why.”

In addition, Michelle Tuckey’s (2009) work is helpful in identifying one of the leading causes of

workplace dissatisfaction in hierarchical environments such as policing. Her research shows that a

prevalent variable in law enforcement is alpha, dominant or bullying behaviour. Psychosocial work

environment factors such as bullying have been in the spotlight since at least 2009 when she and her

colleagues published Workplace Bullying: The Role of Psychosocial Work Environment Factors

(Tuckey, Dollard, Hosking, & Winefield, 2009). Their study involved a sample group of 716 Australian

frontline police officers and examined the role of power in facilitating bullying. This group’s research

found evidence for moderating factors within the psychosocial environment and suggested risk

assessment of the work environment as an avenue for bullying prevention. One of the conclusions from

the analysis of psychosocial factors such as power and rank found that bullying behaviour was

significantly more likely to be perpetrated by an officer who was ranked above the target than by an

officer at same or lower rank.

Cheryl Regher and her team tell us about acute stress and performance in police recruits (Reiger,

LeBlank, Blake, & Barath, 2008). The results found that neither physiological nor psychological

responses impaired the performance of police recruits in a simulated acutely stressful policing situation.

The significance of this find with respect to CIAs in the police environment is that because according to



the Regher paper, if high stress doesn’t really affect the performance of a supervisor, then, there will

likely be a lack of understanding by those supervisors when and if their subordinates do feel the stress of

policing. This is a significant finding with respect to the within project as the survey group reports

significant dissatisfaction with superiors.

Finally, Frank Walter and Heike Bruch in the Journal of Organizational Behaviour (Walter &

Bruch, 2008) both examine and design a model of the emergence of positive collective affect. This paper

and its method shed light on the diminishing or strengthening powers of charismatic leadership and

individuals or group members’ positive effect on the organization and quality of interpersonal

relationships. While this closely resembles the Beck/Wilbur work of Spiral Dynamics and Integral

Theories, this paper was helpful to our study because it frames variables in an organizational context.

Social Construction and Policy Design: A Review of Past Applications (Siddiki, 2014) is an

essential element to this study. The theory of social construction is what informs the public policy

groups regarding causal mechanisms leading to changes in the positioning of target populations among

advantaged, contender, dependent and deviant population categories. While the traditional application is

to help design an administrative framework for public policy, the application of the social construction

theory to internal work environments may help us understand relationships between different factions in

an organization. This information is critical to the proper administration of a private or public law

enforcement agency.



Methodology & Analysis

The Corcoran challenge to police supervisors to look into workplace dissatisfaction has been

adopted by this research project. The methodology uses Spiral Dynamics Theory in three ways: (1) to

survey respondents; (2) to explain the application of drivers to workplace dissatisfaction; and (3) to

design a solution to the problem.

As set out in the Wahl (2008) paper (Appendix C), the foundation of Spiral Dynamics Theory is

the eight levels of psychosocial behaviour which are reflective of global empirical values research from

the 1950’s to present day. The clusters of behaviour are visually depicted in Figure 1:

Figure 1

The descriptive behaviour summary contained in the Wahl (2008) paper (Appendix C) as well as

a diagram of the corresponding organizational structure are set out below:

Level 1 Beige [lowest level] Automatic, autistic, reflexive

Centers around satisfaction

Driven by deep brain programs, instincts and

genetics

Little awareness of self as a distinct being

(undifferentiated)

Lives "off the land" much as other animals

Minimal impact on or control over environment

Figure 2

Survival Tribal Empire Rules Money Equality Flex Global

Individual Income

Beaurocracy



Level 2 Purple

Obey desires of the mystical spirit beings

Show allegiance to elders, custom, clan

Preserve sacred places, objects, rituals

Bond together to endure and find safety

Live in an enchanted, magical village

Seek harmony with nature's power

Business Type 2: Power Type: Singular; One Boss

Example: Self-Employed

Figure 3

Level 3 Red

In a world of haves and have-nots, it's good to be a have

Avoid shame, defend reputation, be respected

Gratify impulses and sense immediately

Fight remorselessly and without guilt to break constraints

Don't worry about consequences that may not come

Business Type 2: Power Type: Totalitarianism

Example: Army, Paramilitary

Figure 4

COO

Specialist A

Specialist B

Employee

Suppliers

Superior

Subordinate Subordinate



Level 4 Blue

Find meaning and purpose in living

Sacrifice self to the Way for deferred reward

Bring order and stability to all things

Control impulsivity and respond to guilt

Enforce principles of righteous living

Divine plan assigns people to their places

Business Type 4: Hierarchical

Example: Public Law Enforcement Agencies

Figure 5

Level 5 Orange

Strive for autonomy and independence

Seek out "the good life" and material abundance

Progress through searching out the best solutions

Enhance living for many through science and

technology

Play to win and enjoy competition

Learning through tried-and-true experience

Business Type 5: Power Type: Hierarchical

Example: Private Law Enforcement Agencies

Figure 6

Rank 1

Rank 2

Rank 3

Rank 4

Rank 4

Rank 3

Rank 4

Rank 2

Rank 3

Rank 4

Rank 4

Rank 4

Rank 3

Rank 4

Rank 4

Rank 4

Owners (Board of Directors)

COO

Manager

Employee

Employee

Manager

Employee

CFO

Manager

Employee

Employee

Employee

Manager

Employee

Employee

Employee



Level 6 Green

Explore the inner beings of self and others

Promote a sense of community and unity

Share society's resources among all

Liberate humans from greed and dogma

Reach decisions through consensus

Refresh spirituality and bring harmony

Business Type 6: Power Type: Graduated; Integrated Systems

Example: Specialist Agencies – IHIT

Figure 7

Level 7 Yellow

Accept the inevitability of nature's flows and forms

Focus on functionality, competence, flexibility, and spontaneity

Find natural mix of conflicting "truths" and "uncertainties"

Discovering personal freedom without harm to others or

excesses of self-interest

Experience fullness of living on an Earth of such diversity in

multiple dimensions

Demand integrative and open systems

Business Type 7: Power Type: Equal; Social Network

Example: Crime & Intelligence Analysts and Police Departments

Figure 8

Committee A

Committee B

Committee C

External Integrator

Internal Integrator

COO

Managers

Employees



Level 8 Turquoise [highest level]

Blending and harmonizing a strong collective of individuals

Focus on the good of all living entities as integrated systems

Expanded use of human brain/mind tools and competencies

Self is part of larger, conscious, spiritual whole that also serves self

Global networking seen as routine

Acts for minimalist living so less actually is more

Business Type 8: Power Type: Non-Existent; Specialists

Example: International Policing Task Force

Figure 9

The first step in our research was to use the Spiral Dynamics Theory survey tool to measure

workplace satisfaction (dependent variable) and explore the significance of possible significant driving

factors (independent variables) in the following categories:

1. Attitudes Toward Change

2. Readiness for Change

3. 8 Levels of Values Memes

4. Acceptance of Digital Technology Processes

The variables measured were located in a pre-prepared survey designed by the Spiral Dynamics

Theory psychologists. This commercial survey was delivered to the sample group of crime analysts.

The specific surveys titles were the Values Scan and CultureScan. Appendix C sets out the Customer

Interpretation Guides for these surveys which explain more information on the questions posed and

interpretation of results. Appendix F sets out the questions asked in each of the surveys.

The second step was to perform a personal interview of the members of the sample group. The

questions asked were:

The

Cause

Most Experien

ced in Area A

Most Experien

ced in Area B



1. What is your current employment status?

2. What factors are impacting your current state of workplace satisfaction?

3. If you are dissatisfied at your workplace, do you have a plan to improve your level of

workplace satisfaction?

Unfortunately, our survey did not address whether or not the law enforcement environments of

our respondents applied social construction theory. It is therefore unknown whether the organization is

currently attempting to understand the problems between its departments and employees and whether

any internal programs are reducing the administrative inefficiencies due to workplace dissatisfaction of

the CIAs. This is an area which could be further developed.

Sample Group

Respondent #1, female, evidence analyst in the private sector of law enforcement, had quit her

law enforcement job and was looking for employment in a profession other than law enforcement. She

had a two-year post-secondary diploma in law and evidence analysis. She had been employed in the law

enforcement field for 25 years, the last 7 years in her most recent position.

Respondent #2, male, evidence analyst in the public sector of law enforcement, was in a state of

dissatisfaction at his place of employment. He had a four-year post-secondary degree in law and

evidence analysis. He had been employed in the law enforcement field for 30 years, the last 7 years in

his most recent role.



Results

The qualitative interview and Spiral Dynamics survey results showing driving variables and our

individual respondent scores in the areas of inquiry are set out at Appendices D and E respectively and

summarized below.

Respondent #1

During the in-person interview, it was confirmed that the respondent had experienced a

personality conflict with a superior, which involved her being subjected to bullying behaviours by the

supervisor. The attitude of the superior had made the respondent feel inadequate in her job, and she had

lost confidence that she would be competent in the profession.

Her plan to improve workplace satisfaction was to leave the profession and start a different

career, perhaps in marketing or general business. When prompted for more information on the decision

to leave the profession, the respondent advised that she would always be a subordinate to law

enforcement professional, whose personality traits profession-wide included the bullying behaviours.

She conceded that that if she could be guaranteed that her superior would treat her with more respect,

she would remain in the profession and might consider returning to the job she had recently quit.

The survey report (Appendix D) revealed significant findings with respect to the variables of

attitudes toward change and tolerance for chaos and order. This respondent’s scores were high in both of

these categories, which according to the Spiral Dynamics theory indicates this Respondent is tolerant of

change and as a result we may forecast that she will most likely make a successful change in her career.

The survey results with respect to this Respondent’s level on the values spiral indicated that she

was operating at a Level 4, which is the same level as her hierarchical organization structure. This



indicates a good fit for this workplace. This values score is also significant because it is a higher level

of operation than the level of bullies, Level 3. The non-bullying operating level of the law enforcement

professional, her superior, was Level 4, which again indicates a good fit with the organization and with

the Respondent.

The good workplace fit criteria is lost when the superior reverts to Level 3 behaviour. This is the

root cause of this Respondent’s workplace dissatisfaction. Here is the series of events: when the analyst

is satisfied, she is operating at the same intelligence/values level as her supervisor (Level 4). When the

supervisor starts operating at Level 3, the analyst is actually operating at a higher intelligence/values

level than her supervisor. However, once the effect of bullying hits her, the bully triggers a movement or

“pushes down” the victim’s mindset to a level lower than the bully’s Level 3 (the bullying level) –

something at Level 2 or Level 1. The result is that the Respondent becomes victimized and feels she

needs to retreat to another environment where she is accepted (Level 2; change jobs) and feels she must

make a change to ensure her survival (Level 1; change careers).

This CIA’s experience is an example of the inefficiencies in law enforcement administration set

out in the introduction.

Respondent #2

Upon interviewing this Respondent, it was revealed that he was suffering psychologically to such

an extent that he was on temporary medical leave until he could resolve the issues in the workplace. His

experiences in the workplace were that he had been assigned a new manager who was requiring him to

perform duties in a certain way. The Respondent was experiencing a professional crisis in that the duties

assigned were in contravention of current legislation. Although he had tried to explain this to the



superior, the Respondent had been advised that he needed to follow the direction or leave the position.

At the time of the survey, neither the Respondent, his Union nor the employer had any plan to bring

about change at the workplace that may return this Respondent to a state of satisfaction in the

workplace.

The survey report (Appendix E) revealed significant findings with respect to the variables of

attitudes toward change. Unlike Respondent #1, this Respondent’s scores for tolerance of change these

variables were low, meaning he was intolerant of change. His change indicator variable score was

showed a crisis, or “gamma trap” as the Spiral Dynamics jargon describes it. This is consistent with the

Respondent’s reported state of affairs that there was no plan by anyone involved to bring about a change

in the workplace which would increase this employee’s satisfaction. He was “stuck” in his situation.

The survey scores with respect to tolerance for change variable were in the lower range, which

might mean that his level of workplace satisfaction could be improved if he were to acquire skills which

helped him become more tolerant of change. In his specific workplace circumstances, the change he

might have managed better was the new manager and new (controversial) duties assigned.

The scores for digital abilities for this Respondent were also high. This means that the evidence

analyst is particularly suited for his job, which involves processing of digital evidence, research and

digital presentation of evidence such as flow charts, and use of various pieces of hardware and software.

It is another indicator that he is valuable employee and should be supported to stay with the

organization.

The survey results also revealed a significant factor with respect to Respondent #2’s overall

values operating level on the 8-tier spiral. The Respondent is operating at Level 7, the second most



developed level of intelligences on the spiral. According to the Spiral Dynamics theory, this indicates

that his attitudes are generally more evolved than others in the world, and his capabilities include

flexibility and the ability to perform well in a variety of environments, including those at lower levels

(including his organization’s hierarchical Level 4). This is a significant finding. The employee is

operating at a higher intelligence level than both his immediate supervisor and the organization. Spiral

Dynamics tells us that the higher intelligence transcends and includes the lower intelligences, but those

at the lower levels must evolve up to the higher levels. Therefore the employee can understand the

employer, but the employer cannot understand the employee. Because the employer (supervisor) has

more power, she does not need to learn the information the employee has acquired, she can deliver an

order that must be followed. When the consequence of that order is serious, as in breaking the law for

this Respondent, there is a stand-off until someone moves off their position. This is the root cause of

this workplace dissatisfaction situation.

This CIA’s experience is an example of the inefficiencies in law enforcement administration set

out in the introduction.

Discussion

Because this survey results were consistent with the findings of Corcoran and Tuckey (2009)

discussed in the literature review section of this report, it can now be said that the “further

consideration” called for in their papers has been accomplished. As a result of this survey and analysis

(subject to its limitations as previously disclosed), we now are certain that there are problems with

bullying and relationships in the policing environment which cause inefficiencies in policing and affect

at least the CIA workplace satisfaction. We also know, or may deduce, that that these problems are



plaguing other subordinate roles in the same organizations. It is now time to make recommendations on

how to solve this problem.

Behaviour analysis tools such as the Spiral Dynamics theory which supported our survey

questions are useful to increase efficiencies in policing in both the private and public sectors of law

enforcement. They measure current employee drivers as well as organizational drivers, and the

relationship between the two.

A review of our two case scenarios is helpful in showing how Spiral Dynamics could solve the

bullying and relationship problems in public and private law enforcement by creating psychological

flexibility, which is a characteristic of the higher functioning intelligences in the 8-tier values spiral. In

the case of the workplace dissatisfaction of Respondent #1, if the law enforcement administrator were to

have deployed the Spiral Dynamics survey used in this analysis, she could have identified that the

employee would embrace change, and could have recommended a move either internally or externally

before the employee became so affected that she would leave the profession. This would have mitigated

the analyst’s own personal losses and the losses to the profession.

In support of the hypothetical internal change option, the survey would have informed the

administrator that the values level of the respondent was exactly at the same level as the hierarchical

structure. This could have been used to interpret the employee as a good fit to the organization, and to

support a decision by administration that an investment in improving the skillset of the supervisor to

eliminate the bullying behavior, or an investment in training the employee to cope with the behaviours

would have been an efficient use of administrative funds (ie in order to avoid attrition of this employee).



In the case of the workplace dissatisfaction of Respondent #2, if the law enforcement

administrator were to have deployed the Spiral Dynamics survey, she would have immediately seen that

the employee was resistant to change and, coincidentally or not, in crisis in the “gamma trap”. She could

have made it a priority to look into the problems before the employee was in a state requiring medical

leave. She would have seen the low score in tolerance to change, and might have arranged change

management training for the employee in order that he may better understand how to bring about the

organizational change that was required to increase his satisfaction (ie find a way to resolve the

difference of opinion between he and the manager with respect to following the law in the workplace).

If justification for the hypothetical financial investment in change management training for the

employee were required, the administrator could use the survey variables of “highly flexible” and

“highly digital” thought processing as these indicators confirm the employee is suited for the modern

CIA job and thus an asset to the organization.

If the organizational structure of the public or private law enforcement agency is hierarchical,

employees will be dealing with supervisors. All levels of an organization can benefit from leadership

training – not just the supervisor. Specifically with respect to the CIA, self-leadership training will

increase their ability to cope with job stresses without a supervisor, which would lead to less need for

supervisor attachment and an independent work environment. Coping skills in leadership training

include communication skills, which would have benefitted our Respondent #2 who is stuck in a non-

communicative environment with no solution in sight.



Conclusions

Due to time constraints on this project, the sample group surveyed was quite small. This fact,

coupled with the absence of data on the social construction theory in police agency administration, result

in the inability to comment on trends in policing and workplace satisfaction of the CIA.

Despite the noted deficiencies, the following significant findings regarding workplace

satisfaction of the CIA were identified:

1. Both Respondents had intelligence levels, attitudes and skills which made them a good fit for the

organization with respect to their job as an intelligence analyst and they were satisfied with their

career choice for over 20 years.

2. In both cases the effects of the supervisor influence was a potential destruction of long-serving

analysts’ careers.

3. In both cases, the driving factor of the analyst dissatisfaction was the hierarchical structure of the

organization which defines the power of a supervisor over a subordinate.

4. In both cases, driving factor of the analyst attrition was attitude toward change. For the

respondent with a positive attitude toward change, she quit her CIA job and changed careers. For

the respondent with a negative attitude toward change, he stayed in his job in an unhealthy and

unproductive state.

Crime and intelligence analysts are becoming dissatisfied in their workplaces and may leave

their jobs, which causes inefficiencies in management of administrative monies as well as management

of the investment the CIA has made in his career.



The driving factor of dissatisfaction in both the public and private law enforcement agencies was

the hierarchical nature of the organization, which produced bullying by supervisors of the subordinate

analysts. The driving factor of attrition (the choice to leave or stay) was the analyst’s attitude toward

change.

Chiefs of Police and law enforcement agency administrators could improve efficiencies by

resolving the CIA attrition problems. This could be accomplished by using Spiral Dynamics Theory as a

foundation for leadership and change management training programs for all law enforcement agency

personnel.

There is a vision for a bright future for the profession of crime and intelligence analysts and

efficiencies in law enforcement which can be realized through education and change.



References

Biggs, A., Brough, P., & Barbour, J. (2014). Exposure to Extraorganizational Stressors: Impact on

Mental Health and Organizational Perceptions for Police Officers. International Journal of

Stress Management, 255-282.

Corcoran, D. P. (2014). How useful is a problem-solving approach to police station conflict

management: keepig the peace among police officers. International Journal of Police Science

and Management, 113-123.

Reiger, C., LeBlank, V., Blake, J., & Barath, I. (2008). Acute stress and performance in police recruits.

Stress & Health: Journal of the International Society for the Investigation of Stress, p. 295-303.

Siddiki, P. (2014). Social Construction and Policy Design: A Review of Past Applications. Policy

Studies Journal, 1-29.

Tuckey, M., Dollard, M., Hosking, P., & Winefield, P. (2009). Workplace Bullying: The Role of

Psychosocial Work Environment FActors. International Journal of Stress Management, 216-

232.

Wahl, D., & Baxter, S. (2008). The Designer's Role in Facilitating Sustainable Solutions. MIT Press

Journals, 72.

Walter, F., & Bruch, H. (2008). The positive group affect spiral: a dynamic model of the emergence of

positive affective similarity in work groups. Journal of Organizational Behaviour, 239-261.



Appendix A – CIA - Yield on Investment (Education)

Cost

Living Expenses, Tuition & Books

(7 years post-secondary) 70,000

Lost Wages @ Entry Level Job 210,000

7 years x 8/12 x $45,000

Compound Interest on Student loans 36,250

7 years, $70,000, 6%, $120 pmt* ________

TOTAL INVESTMENT EDUCATION: $316,250

* This assumes the student would take the lowest possible payment option in the loan repayment terms.

If the student set a loan repayment schedule to pay off the loan in 7 years, the payment per year would

need to be $12,500, or $1,000 per month.

Benefit

Annual Salary

Year 1: 75,000

Year 2: 77,000

Year 3: 80,000

Year 4: 82,000

Year 5: 84,000

Year 6: 86,000

Year 7: 88,000

Average 81,700

Average Gross Earnings over 7 years: 570,000

Total Earnings Net over 7 years: $399,000

(Conservative 30% Tax Rate)



Appendix B – Police Organization - Yield on Investment (Employee)

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

120%

CIA 1 CIA 2 CIA 3 CIA 4 CIA 5 CIA 6

CIA EFFICIENCY LEVEL - FIRST SIX YEARS OF EMPLOYMENT



Appendix C – Spiral Dynamics Methodology and Survey Interpretation Guides



Appendix D – Survey Results Respondent 1



Appendix E – Survey Results Respondent 2



Appendix F – Survey Questions

Documents

Behavioural Analysis - the Silver Bullet for Law Enforcement Inefficiencies FINAL