1. 1
HOW WILL MIDSIZE CALIFORNIA LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES
ADAPT TO GENERATION X EXECUTIVE LEADERSHIP
BY THE YEAR 2019?
A futures project presented to the
California Commission on
Peace Officer Standards and Training
by
Deputy Police Chief Philip J. Penko
Monterey Police Department
Command College Class XXXXVII
Sacramento, California
September 2010

2. 2
This Command College Project is a FUTURES study of a particular emerging issue in
law enforcement. Its purpose is NOT to predict the future, but rather to project a number of
possible scenarios for strategic planning consideration.
Defining the future differs from analyzing the past because the future has not yet
happened. In this project, useful alternatives have been formulated systematically so that the
planner can respond to a range of possible future environments.
Managing the future means influencing the future; creating it, constraining it, adapting to
it. A futures study points the way.
The view and conclusions expressed in this Command College project are those of the
author and are not necessarily those of the Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training
(POST).
Copyright 2010
California Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training

3. 3
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
Chapter I
ISSUE IDENTIFICATION
Introduction 6
Statement of Issue 8
Issue Foundation and Development 9
Conclusion 19
Chapter II
FUTURES STUDY
Introduction 21
Nominal Group Technique 21
Trends 23
Events 35
Cross Impact Analysis 45
Alternative Scenarios 51
Normative Scenario 51
Optimistic Scenario 53
Pessimistic Scenario 55
Conclusion 57
Chapter III
STRATEGIC PLAN
Introduction 59
Organizational Description 60
Vision/Goals/Objectives 62
Organizational Analysis 63
Stakeholder Analysis 63
Strategy Development 64
Implementation Plan 67
Conclusion 70

4. 4
Chapter IV
TRANSITION MANAGEMENT
Introduction 72
Selection of an Appropriate Change Model 73
Commitment Planning 78
Responsibility 83
Evaluation 84
Conclusion 86
Chapter V
IMPLICATIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS AND CONSIDERATIONS
Summary of the Futures Project 88
Implications on the Future of Policing 89
Recommendations 92
Conclusion 93
Appendix A
Nominal Group Technique Panel
Appendix B
List of Trends
Appendix C
List of Events
References

5. 5
CHAPTER ONE
ISSUE IDENTIFICATION
Introduction
Imagine a California law agency employing flexible schedules to accommodate its
employees’ desire to maintain a balance between work and their life outside the department.
Imagine the paramilitary hierarchical structure so common in today’s law enforcement
environment giving way to a more egalitarian approach, where the employee that contributes the
most is considered the leader and leadership is transitory. How about replacing the career ladder
with one that allows for flexible careers, horizontal movements where the title specialist replaces
rank title? What about a shift from rules-driven management to a wholesale rejection of
departmental policies that focuses more on results than on process? Although sounding
farfetched, this scenario may become a reality when Generation X moves into executive
leadership positions.
California law enforcement is in transition. For the first time in the history of American
society, representatives from three different generations, Baby Boomers, Generation X and
Generation Y, are working side by side. Virtually every agency employs representatives of each
of these groups. Walk into a command staff meeting at any mid-sized California law
enforcement agency and take a look around the table. Chances are the majority of those in
attendance are at least in their early forties who have been in law enforcement for twenty plus
years. Direct your gaze toward the head of the table and you are likely to find someone nearing
or over fifty who has spent the majority of his or her life in police service and now leads the
organization. The current organizational leadership in most California law enforcement agencies

6. 6
was formed over decades through the values and ideology of their generational cohort, the Baby
Boomer generation (born between 1945 and 1964).
Now, take a walk through the hallways and briefing rooms of those same agencies.
There you will most likely encounter the new breed of police officer, those born between 1965
and 1980 (Generation X) and those born between 1981 and 2000 (Generation Y). The majority
are assigned to the patrol division, although some are in special assignments, while a smaller
number might be in first line supervisory roles. Few if any are in command-level positions with
fewer still occupying executive officer positions in any but the smallest of California law
enforcement agencies.
The convergence by these three generations on California law enforcement has created an
environment of transition. In a study by the Center for Organizational Research, The Aging and
Retiring Government Workforce: How Serious is the Challenge? What are Jurisdictions Doing
about it? (2003), Dr. Mary B. Young notes that the United States is, “…rapidly approaching a
crisis in its workforce, triggered by the convergence of two demographic trends: the growing
number of aging baby boomers in the population and the much smaller number of younger
people who follow behind them.” Clearly Young was referring to Generation X.
Baby Boomers have already begun retiring, especially within the law enforcement arena,
taking with them their institutional knowledge and leadership. The pace at which they leave the
workforce will continue to accelerate as more Boomers mature in age. As a result, the younger
generations, particularly Generation X, will be tapped to step into executive law enforcement
leadership roles, whether they are ready to or not. As this trend continues, law enforcement will
then have at its helm someone who thinks, learns and is motivated differently, and whose values
are generally not aligned with those from whom they take over the leadership position. As a new

7. 7
Champion Of the People (C.O.P.), the Generation X / Y police officer learns about the how,
what, and why of policing through the paradigm of the Baby Boomers who came before them.
However rest assured, when they become the leader, they will do so in such a manner that fits
their values and style. It is unlikely they will follow the status quo.
This research project will explore the challenges mid-sized California law enforcement
may encounter once members of Generation X occupy their executive leadership positions, the
possible generational conflicts that may result, and what leaders today can do today to prepare
for this potential future.
Statement of the Issue
Over the last several decades, Baby Boomers’ values shaped the foundation on which
California law enforcement is based. The paramilitary structure, replete with its vertical
hierarchy and command and control management philosophy has been the model by which the
majority of California law enforcement agencies defined their purpose and methods. Long
hours, staying until the job is finished, organizational loyalty, respect of superiors and having
one career with the same employer are expectations Boomers have of themselves and others.
They expect those values and world views to be adopted by the generation who follows them.
While in theory this sounds plausible, as this futures project will detail, Baby Boomers
are the oil to Generation X’s water. Generation X officers have generally been indoctrinated into
California law enforcement using methods and systems defined and endorsed by Boomers.
While on the surface this might not appear problematic, it is really akin to trying to fit the
proverbial square peg into a round hole. Generation X possesses a different view on
employment, relationships, loyalty, motivation and organizational structure, to name just a few.
As such, they have had to endure entry into an unnatural setting, learn what they believe to be

8. 8
inefficient practices, and doing so through the filter, beliefs and methods of the Boomer
perspective. To them, the existing law enforcement workplace with its long hours, adherence to
hierarchy, inflexibility and expectation that work comes first, is not how things should be and
will most likely change that when they take command.
It is possible, even inevitable, that when Generation X really begins to fully take over
executive leaderships positions within California law enforcement by 2019, its management and
operations will change significantly. In the future, we just might see a greater emphasis on
results versus methodology, increased flexibility for and participation by staffing, more
management support for employees’ lives outside of work, and other changes that seem drastic
from the Boomer perspective. By the year 2019, California law enforcement leadership could
become more agile when it comes to changing the way systems operate or, more apt to
eliminating systems altogether, as long as it means the job gets done efficiently and effectively.
Issue Foundation and Development
This futures project will examine the changes mid-sized California law enforcement will
encounter when members of Generation X assume executive leadership roles with those agencies
while exploring if their values will significantly influence the way a law enforcement agency is
managed. Included will be a review concerning the interplay between the new leadership and
employees from other generations, potential impact to the public’s perception and expectations
of law enforcement and what steps should be undertaken now to prepare for the potential
outcomes of this forecast.

9. 9
Environmental Scan
According to survey results reported in the California Police Chiefs Association’s
Membership Demographic Report (2009), the average age of a California Police Chief is 52.05
years of age. Since the majority of California law enforcement offer the retirement package
commonly referred to as three percent at 50, one can make an educated assumption that
California law enforcement has entered a time unparalleled in its history, a time when it will
begin to see a massive drain on its leadership and institutional knowledge.
While the argument could be made that there are those waiting in the wings, poised to
step into the Chief’s shoes, many of those are from the same generation as the outgoing leader.
As an example, the entire Monterey Police Department Command staff, comprised of a Chief,
two Deputy Chiefs and three lieutenants, will be eligible to retire within the next five years. Of
its ten sergeants, five will become eligible for retirement during that same time frame. Although
not empirically established as representative of California law enforcement, it is very likely
many agencies are faced with a similar potential loss. That leaves Generation X to fill the void,
but how prepared are they to do so?
According to the Center for Disease Control, there were 58.9 million registered births
between 1964 and 1980, the era of Generation X’s introduction to the world. While that might
sound like an impressive number, consider that the Baby Boomers number approximately 78.2
million. There will be nearly 20 million less people to replace the Boomers in the workforce.
California law enforcement has already experienced the difficulty associated with this out of
balance scenario as it has struggled to find qualified candidates to fill entry level positions. It is
imperative that California law enforcement prepare for the potential outcomes of Generation X
leadership given the looming leadership deficit it faces.

10. 10
In her article, When Gen X Runs the Show (2009), Anne Fisher states that when
Generation X is in charge in 2019, “…they will make some big changes.” She suggests that the
Generation X leader will lead a workforce that will have little resemblance to what we know
today. It will primarily be staffed by other Gen X’ers and those of the Generation Y cohort (born
1981 to 2000) who will define success not by the position they hold but rather what they
accomplish that gives them personal satisfaction. Additionally, the hierarchical management
styles of the Boomers will go by the wayside and morph into a more collaborative decision-
making model. In short, the values of Generation X, coupled with the needs of Generation Y,
will reshape the face of California law enforcement.
Generation X will spend a great deal of time unlearning the systems and methods
presented by their predecessors while constructing a work environment better suited to their
values and expectations. While the idea of such drastic change to the profession might be
viewed as sacrilegious, current leaders should ask themselves, “Is it realistic to expect a
generation significantly different from us to carry on the same ideals when they take over the
front office?” Did Boomers make a similar sacrifice, foregoing those values most important to
them and accept those of their parents? One need only look at the Vietnam War protests, the
sexual revolution and civil rights movement as testament that each new generation has its own
ideals and beliefs which they pursue regardless of what mom and dad thought.
Exploration of Generation X values is a natural leaping off point for review of literature
used as resource information for this project.

11. 11
Literature Review
In their article Solutions for Retaining Generation Y Employees in the Workplace (2008)
Kenneth Levitt, Debra Lowe and Terry Wilson described Generation X as the children of
workaholic Baby Boomers who, as a result, grew to become self-reliant latchkey kids. Because
they witnessed their parents fall prey to corporate downsizing, Generation X grew distrustful of
corporations/management and developed a survival mentality where they focused upon
individuality – looking out for their own best interests. Generation X has poor social skills as a
result of their isolation growing up and self-reliance. On the plus side, they are technically adept
and embrace change. They want the opportunity to do meaningful work that makes a difference
in the world.
Author Drew Sanders, in his article To Protect and Serve: What Generation Y Brings to
the Law Enforcement and How Police Agencies can Benefit (2008) provides a very detailed
outline of the difference between the workplace characteristics of Baby Boomers, Generation X
and Generation Y. He compares nine attributes among the generations, which clearly delineates
the differences between the three cohorts and provides the reader with a simple method of
comparing one to the other. Here are the top seven:

12. 12
Workplace
Characteristic
Baby Boomers
1945 - 1964
Generation X
1965 - 1980
Generation Y
1981 – 2000
Work Ethic  Workaholic
 Equals their worth
 Eliminate the task
 Self-reliant
 Skeptical
 Wants structure and
direction
 What’s next?
 Multi-tasking
 Tenacity
 Entrepreneurial
Work is…  Who they are  Difficult challenge
 A contract
 A means to an end
Leadership Style  Consensual
 Congenial
 Loves meetings
 Everyone’s the same
 Challenge others
 Ask why
 TBD
Communication  In person  Direct
 Immediate
 Email
 Voicemail
Rewards &
Feedback
 Money
 Title/Recognition
 Something to hang
on the wall
 How am I doing?
 Freedom
 Whatever I want
 Meaningful work
Motivated by  Being valued
 Being needed
 Freedom
 Removal of rules
 Working with other
bright people
Work/Life
Balance
 None
 Live to work
 Balance
 Work to live
 Balance
 It’s 1700 and I have
another gig
In a study conducted by Forecasting International entitled 55 Trends now Shaping the
Future of Policing (2008) Dr. Marvin Cetron and Owen Davies identified trend 45 as the belief

13. 13
that Generation X and the Millennials will have Major Effects in the Future. Listed among the
implications is that, “Employers will have to adjust virtually all of their policies and practices to
the values of these new and different generations, including finding ways to motivate and reward
them.” It is possible that the California law enforcement agency of tomorrow will have fewer and
less restrictive policies, focus more on results rather than process, employ a great focus on a
balance between work and life, and work more collaboratively with less hierarchical structure
while allowing greater leeway and more risk taking.
David Brand, in his article The Future of Law Enforcement Recruiting: The Impact of
Generation X (2008), conducted a survey of criminology students at Florida State University
whose average year of birth was 1975, the middle of Generation X. A review of the responses
was both troubling in some respects while others offered encouraging signs:
 30 percent believed their off duty conduct had no bearing on their professional career
 28 percent believed a convicted felon could make a good law enforcement officer
 31 percent would not leave a party where marijuana was being smoked
 93 percent felt local law enforcement was a profession, rather than a job
 45 percent indicated they wanted to remain with the same agency their entire career
 Nearly 45 percent believed a paramilitary structure was necessary to enforce
discipline
In his article Integrity, Ethics and Policing with Honor (1995), Stephen Vicchio
identified the following as the core virtues of every police officer:
 Prudence  Trust
 Courage  Effacement of Self Interests

14. 14
 Justice  Intellectual Honesty
 Responsibility
In their book, Generations at Work, Filipczak, Raines and Zemke identify the following
as the core values of Generation X:
 Diversity  Fun
 Thinking Globally  Informality
 Balance  Self-reliance
 Technoliteracy  Pragmatism
While on the surface, these core values do not appear problematic as they relate to law
enforcement, when compared to those identified by Vicchio or the current values of leading
California law enforcement agencies, the discrepancies are apparent. The following represent
the core values of the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department currently listed on their web
site:
 Honor  Common Sense
 Respect  Fairness
 Integrity  Courage
When the lists are compared, it is evident that the values attributed to Generation X are
more egocentric, values sought by the individual, while the other two are focused more on

15. 15
axioms one might associate with delivering quality police services. Can you imagine a
department in the year 2019 listing one of its core values as “fun?” It is doubtful that at that time
many Baby Boomers, who will be relying on police services as they reach more vulnerable ages,
would consider this an acceptable measure of what they want in a law enforcement agency.
Loyalty is one value that appears to be missing from Generation X list. In James
Johnson’s article The Intergenerational Workforce, Revisited (2008), he notes that Generation X
is seen as disloyal. This is partly the result of the experiences they had while growing up in a
world in which they saw their parents give their all for a company only to lose their jobs to
downsizing. Generation X has grown up in a world in which they were left to fend for
themselves as “latchkey kids” as both parents were forced to work due to global economic
uncertainty. In Kate Poindexter’s article Passing the Torch but not just yet (2008), she reinforces
this notion by pointing out that both Generations X and Y changes jobs on average every 2.8
years. It appears that the definition of “career” has taken on a much more truncated meaning. In
his article Retaining and Growing Talent: Strategies to Create Organizational Stickiness (2008)
Frank Benest suggested that this generation tends “…to view themselves as ‘temps’.” The most
important factor that seems to keep them in a particular job is their belief that they are doing
meaningful work and receive good training and educational opportunities. It has been said that
the best way to keep them at a particular job is to increase their skill base to help them build their
résumé should they ever want to leave. The things that look good on a résumé are the same
things Generation X wants out of a job. As long as they get it, they will most likely stay.
Although not explicitly mentioned by Vicchio or the Sheriff’s Department, it is clear that
there is at a least an inference to the necessity for being committed to something or someone.
Vicchio indicates that, “Trust ought to engender loyalty…” to one’s peers, the organization and

16. 16
the community. The Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department’s use of “Honor” and “Respect”
can also be traced back to loyalty.
However, Generation X does in fact have loyalty, loyalty to themselves and those close to
them. They long for a balance between their professional and private lives and demonstrate that
they are immensely loyal to their families and activities outside work. In her article
Understanding Generation X (2008) Helen Dennis indicated that Generation X wanted, among
other things, for their employers to be cognizant of their need for life beyond work and to be
supportive in their quest for it. She also believed that because of the broken promises
experienced by their parents in corporate America, Generation X was distrustful of those in
leadership positions. That may explain why loyalty, in Baby Boomer terms, is not in the
vocabulary of this cohort. To Generation X, loyalty and respect are earned; they are not to be
bestowed upon someone simply because of their years of service.
According to Filipczak, et. al., Generation X is not against authority per se, just not
impressed by it. Clearly, this thinking does not fit in well with the paramilitary structure most
contemporary law enforcement agencies employ. Generation X is distrustful of others and to
whom they show loyalty. Because of the experience of their parents with downsizing,
Generation X trusts virtually no one but their closest allies. Dennis indicates that because of this,
Generation X was taught to focus on their own survival. She asserted that, “They came of age
with a sense of social distance – of adults expecting little from them and doing little for them.”
Simply put, they have little or no confidence in their security with a particular organization or the
promises made to them by its leaders.
On the job, Filipczak et. al., indicated that Generation X is viewed as having the follow
assets and liabilities:

17. 17
Assets Liabilities
 Adaptable  Impatient
 Technoliterate  Poor People Skills
 Independent  Inexperienced
 Not Intimidated by Authority  Cynical
 Creative
Many of the assets can be beneficial to a law enforcement setting. Officers today are
encouraged to me adaptable, technologically literate, independent and creative. Yet when
viewed from a futures leadership perspective, their drive for independence can be problematic.
Independence can mean going it alone; working by oneself to complete a mission. Law
enforcement by its very nature requires officers work as teams to accomplish the mission.
Imagine the disruption that would entail should the leader of the department espouse an “every
man for himself” mentality. This could create internal conflict within an organization as more
members of Generation X occupy leadership positions in organizations heavily staffed with
Generation Y police officers. The boomers will be long gone; few of them will still be working
in law enforcement in 2019 due to the 3% at 50 retirement system. Generation Y values a team
environment and longs for a leader who adopts a more inclusive style among his/her employees.
If Generation X is truly committed to independence in the workplace, they may fight a revolt
among their staff or, in the worst case, a mass exodus. As noted earlier, both Generation X and
Y have propensity to change jobs if they feel they are not learning new skills, doing meaningful
work or employed by an organization that does not value them as a person.

18. 18
The question that needs to be asked is, “What have today’s leaders done to prepare
Generation X for the passing of the torch?” In his article Who is Going to Fill Their Shoes? A
Perspective on the Recruitment of Police Chiefs (2002), retired Monterey Police Chief Gary
Brown suggested that sitting Chiefs have done little to prepare those below to succeed them at
the top. One main reason appears to be their unwillingness to recognize that Generation X has
different values than they do and try to develop a better understanding of what makes Gen X
tick. As Chief of Monterey, Brown was known as a developer of people, intent on preparing
them for their next level of responsibility. He recognized the value in collaboration and
inclusion, at all levels of the organization. In hindsight, his leadership style fit nicely into what
Generation X is seeking.
In the Forecasting International study, Cetron and Davies listed the rapid change of
societal values as one of the top ten (10) trends for policing. Within that trend, a panel of subject
matter experts was asked to offer their thoughts. John Jackson, a strategist for the Houston
Police Department summed up the predicament facing California law enforcement when he
stated, “Boomers are reluctant to choose successors. In the coming decade, a leadership vacuum
is likely to emerge because Boomers have failed to groom their successors.”
Conclusion
By all accounts, the referenced literature review and accompanying environmental scan
suggest that Generation X is remarkably different in a number of ways compared to their
predecessors, the Baby Boomers. How those differences will impact the future of California law
enforcement is still up for discussion. The profession may be faced with a tumultuous transition
wherein existing systems, policies and operations are completely dismantled or develop into a
richer, more egalitarian work environment where the team becomes the most important part of

19. 19
the recipe for success rather than who is in charge. Generation X personnel currently employed
in law enforcement have already started challenging the status quo, emphasizing a desire for a
work/life balance, questioning the authority of those in charge and focusing on results rather than
long hours. The private sector has already implemented changes that adhere more to those things
important to this generation. Many agencies have modified their recruiting methods to create a
better fit with Gen X values and thus attract more candidates. This is a sign that some in law
enforcement recognize the need to adapt in order to attract Generation X to the profession. This
might be a sign that the profession will recognize the need to adjust to the leadership style of
Generation X by the year 2019.
The goal of this futures project is to forecast the most likely impact this issue will have
upon law enforcement in the future so that its current leaders can better prepare their
organizations and the profession in general, for what lies ahead. Although we cannot be certain
of the actual impact, this futures project may identify potential outcomes and allow for
preparation of their coming. Noted British Futurist Ian Pearson summed it up best when he
quipped, “Accuracy is impossible for all but the most trivial questions, but blurred vision is
better than none at all.” It is hoped that this research will make that blurred vision a bit clearer
and at least point today’s leaders in the correct direction to react to the potential outcomes.
To forecast the future requires a thorough assessment of the trends and events, and their
associated variables, which could impact the issue at hand. Chapter two will delve into
identifying and analyzing the potential trends and events that could help solidify a clearer
forecast of the future of California law enforcement leadership.

20. 20
CHAPTER TWO
FUTURES STUDY
Introduction
By the year 2019, representatives of Generation X, those born between 1965 and 1980,
will be well on their way to filling the majority of the executive leadership positions within
California law enforcement. By that time, even the youngest of the Baby Boomers in police
service will be age 55; it is unlikely many will still be working as fulltime peace officers, except
those who either started their career later in life or are planning on working until they die. Make
no mistake about it, these holders on will be the exception rather than the norm.
As Gen X replaces Baby Boomers, so too shall the values and philosophy used by the
former generation to guide their respective agencies be altered or completely dismantled by those
whom have taken over the leadership positions. How will their different perspective on work,
authority, sense of team and work/life balance to name a few, change the manner in which the
police agency of the future will look? What impacts shall this have upon the law enforcement
profession and how will mid-sized California law enforcement adapt?
Nominal Group Technique
Futures forecasting is not a science nor can it be attempted in a vacuum. No singular
discipline has the insight, experience or knowledge to accurately define and identify factors that
could potentially influence a given forecast. To forecast as intelligently as possible requires
utilizing people with differing perspectives, who view the world through a variety of paradigms,
to examine the issue at hand and define the trends and events that could potentially influence it.
That, in its simplest terms, is the basis on which the Nominal Group Technique (NGT) is built.

21. 21
In a NGT, a small panel is convened with the purpose of identifying trends and events
that could impact a given issue utilizing proven brainstorming and decision-making techniques.
The panel members should represent a broader cross section of perspectives in order to illicit a
creative list of potential trends and events. Each panel member is usually provided materials
ahead of time identifying the issue statement, discussing the purpose and practice of the
technique, and defining what constitutes a trend and an event, with examples of each included.
The NGT consists of five steps. First, the panel is asked to compile a list on their own of
those trends they believe could impact the issue statement being examined. Then, the panel is
surveyed individually to ascertain their ideas in a round robin-style format. These are posted on
large flip charts until no further suggestions are offered. The panel then reviews the listed items,
clarifies any areas that are unclear and combines those offerings which refer to the same or
similar topic. The panel is then given a finite number of stickers and instructed to place one next
to each of the entries that to them are the most important. Once the voting is complete, the top
ten are identified. The same process is then done to identify events.
For this particular futures project the NGT took place on September 24, 2009 at the
Monterey Conference Center. The panel was comprised of individuals with professional
expertise in municipal government, human resources, basic police academy instruction, military,
non-profit education and the media. Those participating on the panel included a deputy city
manager, non-profit educational community affairs director, a United States Air Force colonel
serving as the assistant commandant of a military educational installation, vice president of
human resources for a major resort, newspaper opinion editor, municipal benefits coordinator,
Generation X police officer and a basic police academy program coordinator. It was hoped that
this broad range of experience and viewpoints would help garner a creative array of trends and

22. 22
events. The diversity of the panel is extremely important; should it be made up solely of
representatives from a single discipline, one runs the risk of a very linear range of thinking which
could stifle creativity and limit new perspectives.
Prior to beginning the process, the panel was provided a brief summary of the
information gathered during the literary review of this project, most notably the traits and values
identified as being germane to Generation X, so they had a better understanding of the
characteristics that make up this generation.
Trends
The panel was advised that a trend was a statement of general direction in which
something tends to move; a general tendency or inclination which can impact the focus issue. It
has a past, a present and a future yet is not directional; there can be no use of terms indicating an
increase, decrease or the like.
The following table (Table 1) depicts the ten trends receiving the highest number of votes during
the NGT and their associated median scores in each category. These trends, identified as the top
ten, are listed in rank order with Trend One (T1) being the one chose by the panel as that which
was of the greatest concern. The panel was asked to assign a score of 100 to today, the day of
the NGT, to provide an arbitrary baseline from which to define their other ratings. The panel was
asked to rate the level of impact each trend upon the issue statement five years in the past, five
and ten years into the future. This provides a graphic depiction of whether the panelist viewed
the trend as emerging, waning or constant. The median of the panel members’ level of concern
the trend would have on the issue is depicted in the column on the far right with a score of ten
meaning the panel considered the impact to be high.

23. 23
Table 1
Trend Summary Table
Trends -5 Years Today + 5 Years +10 Years Concern
T1 State of the
Economy
90 100 125 130 10
T2 Organizational
Culture/Structure
95 100 120 130 8
T3 Careerism in Law
Enforcement
100 100 125 135 7
T4 Recruitment 120 100 130 150 9
T5 Change in
Technology
75 100 120 150 9
T6 Training
Opportunities
100 100 120 120 7
T7 Public Perception &
Organizational
Reaction
90 100 120 120 8
T8 Work/Life Balance 80 100 125 150 9
T9 Perception of Law
Enforcement as a
Prestigious Career
80 100 110 120 7
T10 Attitudes regarding
joining public
service
95 100 120 130 7
Trend One – State of the Economy

24. 24
The panel believed quite unanimously that the state of the economy, whether at the local,
state or federal level, would be the trend with the most significant level of concern among the top
ten. It was agreed that this trend touched almost every other trend identified. For example, as
the profession has seen in the past, a robust economy generally reduces the number of applicants
vying for entry level positions while, conversely, an economic downturn steers more toward
considering law enforcement as a stable career. This belief was tested during the current
economic crisis as for the first time in most panelists’ memories; municipalities were forced to
lay off public employees, including police officers. Nonetheless, recruitment and retention of
qualified applicants fluctuates with the economy health, as does the ability to stay abreast with
technology, provide meaningful training opportunities, maintain a work/life balance and ensure
public service, especially law enforcement, remains an attractive career choice.
As Generation X leaders assume the helm at California law enforcement agencies, the
state of the economy will increasingly impact their ability to maintain the status quo, let alone
adapt law enforcement agencies to more readily conform to their values and leadership styles.
The panel believed that this trend would continue to grow in magnitude in out years as police
agencies are expected to maintain or even increase service levels while cutting expenses. It was
viewed as a growing trend that will require a complete restructuring of the way police service is
delivered in order to remain solvent and effective. This trend was rated as having a level of
impact of 90 five years ago, 125 at year five and 130 at year ten. The overall level of concern
was a ten and was the trend that received the highest rating in this category.
Trend Two – Organizational Culture/Structure
With this trend, the panel discussed the various possibly ways a law enforcement agency
would look by the year 2019. They wondered if the paramilitary model so pervasive in the

25. 25
profession today would continue to remain the standard or if, through the influence of
Generation X leadership, it would morph into a hybrid model of hierarchical structure or
completely transform into an as yet unimagined image of police structure. One panelist
suggested that the workforce could be decentralization through the use of technology to
eliminate the need for every employee to report to the station prior to beginning their duties. He
thought the use of technology could provide an organization with an advantageous way of
changing its structure and culture. Would the regionalization or consolidation of service delivery
affect the level of service while disrupting the culture within multiple agencies? Would there be
a modified emphasis on careerism, the notion of promoting to get ahead, or a greater reliance on
specialists or decentralization? Would the generation gap between Baby Boomers and
Generation X that appears so evident today somehow shift into a generational rift between
Generation X and the millennial generation who they will then be leading? Will the
organizational culture of 2019 be fluid enough to support the values of Generation X?
The panel viewed this trend as continuing to grow in intensity and impact over time. With
a median level of concern of eight, the panel considered this trend as one that will most likely
create significant change within the profession, for better or for worse. They saw the level of
impact to be similar five years ago (95) to the baseline of today (100). By five years, the level
increased to a score of 120 and to 130 by 2019. They considered the effects that potential
regionalization and a continued emphasis on decentralization, coupled with Generation X’s
reported distrust of authority, dynamic definition of leadership, and emphasis on horizontal
career growth could have upon the organization culture and structure. Most agreed that the
change was coming the degree to which no one could accurately predict.
Trend Three – Careerism in Law Enforcement

26. 26
The panel defined careerism as the notion of continuously promoting within one’s
profession, moving up or horizontally along a planned, established career path. In the United
States military, there is considerable pressure to promote; one panel member indicated there is a
well known military adage that says you either move up or move out. The panel spent a great
deal of time discussing whether this was germane only to the military or applicable to other
professions. The media representative indicated this ideal was prevalent within that profession
too as many cub reporters aspire to move to larger, more prestigious markets. The vice president
of human resources indicated her company viewed careerism as much more about horizontal
movement and layers or job families than strictly vertical assent. The academy coordinator noted
that many Generation X officers have an expectation that they will be able to move into a special
assignment after just two to three years on the job. Under current organizational parameters, such
thinking is incongruent yet in the future the culture may change making this way of thinking
more prevalent and accepted.
One panelist shared a comment she had received from a consultant in her non-profit after
she explained her participation on the NGT and asked for his input on Generation X. When
asked about his feelings regarding this population, he replied, “Gen X’ers don’t think they need
to put in the time, don’t think they need to earn it. Good luck to the police force.” The panel
determined careerism should not be confined to vertical or horizontal movement with a particular
organization but the law enforcement profession as a whole.
This trend was viewed as being consistent over the last five years (100). By year five, the
level grew to 125 and by year ten, 135. To the panel, this trend represented a level of concern
that registered a seven.
Trend Four – Recruitment

27. 27
With a level of concern listed as a nine, the panel believed that this trend will continue to
grow in intensity and significance. Seemingly impending changes in retirement law and benefits
were viewed as impacting the stability and longevity of police employment. The benefits
manager stated, “They are probably not going to have as good a retirement as we do now.” She
surmised, and the panel agreed, that this challenge will only increase once the economy rebounds
and government work is not viewed as such a promising career. She wondered, “What are we
going to offer to attract, recruit and retain these people?”
The group discussed other issues related to recruitment, most notably whether existing
hiring standards and practices would need to be adjusted given changes in societal norms and
mores. Specifically, one panelist questioned whether the norming of some societal drug use
would require a modification to minimum hiring standards. If changes are not made he quipped,
“At some point, you’re going to have no pool of applicants left.”
The panel surmised that current hiring standards established by the State of California’s
Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training (POST) inhibit some very worthy
candidates from applying for positions. One panelist knew of several young men who in the
panelist’s opinion would make outstanding police officers yet due to the rigorous and time
consuming academy process, cannot commit to making the jump to law enforcement. This was
based upon their concerns over having to quite their existing jobs, thus losing income, or be
away from family for such an extended period of time. The panelist suggested that, “The
institution is keeping some very talented, bright people out of the profession by making it so hard
to get into it.”
It was recognized that other trends identified could influence the level of concern with
recruitment. For example, all of those previously discussed could, to some degree impact the

28. 28
degree of concern as it relates to recruitment. Economic stability, organizational structure/culture
and careerism can all influence recruitment efforts depending upon how they play out. The panel
quickly determined that no one trend was independent of all of the others.
The panel saw the trend as having a greater level of concern (120) five years ago than
today yet believed it would rebound and grow to 130 within five years and 150 by 2019. As
noted earlier, they rated the level of concern as a nine.
Trend Five – Change in Technology
It was agreed that this generation is generally much more adept at and reliant upon
technology to perform their work and live their lives. Those that follow them, the millennials,
were seen as having an even greater dependence upon it. From new tools for field use to unique
training methods utilizing technological advances, reliance upon changes in technology will
continue to modify how Generation X will lead in the future. An organization’s ability to keep
up with technological advances was viewed as paramount to providing Generation X with the
means to lead in a manner to which they are predisposed. The panel surmised that the law
enforcement leader in the year 2019 would want to employ a variety of technological tools, from
advances in forensic evidence to enhance social networking sites as a means of communicating
with personnel and the service population, to lead his/her organization.
This belief was certainly supported by the panel’s identification of the level of concern at
a nine. Although the level of impact five years ago was listed as 75, they thought it would
increase to 120 by year five and 150 by 2019. The implication here is that the level of impact
will continue to grow well into the future. Clearly, they believed that Generation X has a
significant reliance upon technology, are restricted when its use is limited and will incorporate it
more into the way in which they lead tomorrow’s law enforcement agency. Changes in

29. 29
technology will most assuredly advance its use; the likelihood that things will take a step
backward is highly unlikely. Technology will continue to allow Generation X leadership to
modify the organizations they will steer in the future.
Trend Six – Training Opportunities
Many generational pundits espouse that in order to retain Generation X and Y employees,
an employer must provide meaningful training opportunities the employee deems valuable at not
only their current job but also as an attractive addition to their résumé for future employment. In
essence, they suggest that in order to retain employees, employers must work toward building
their employees’ résumés. If not, those employees will look to move to another employer who
will satisfy this need.
The panel astutely recognized that Generation X has a propensity for having multiple
careers within their professional lifetime. One panelist suggested that they are prone to a
minimum of two to three careers over a lifetime as opposed to one as has been the norm. He
questioned how this trend, should it continue and grow in intensity, would impact leadership in
ten years. Since Generation X views this as an acceptable outcome, will this become more
prevalent? Will the Generation X leader of the future condone and prepare his/her organization
for such rapid turnover? Can the leader of the future effectively lead an organization that could
experience rapid turnover resulting in consistent erosion of institutional knowledge and
potentially wasted training opportunities?
The panel believed this trend would possess a level of concern of seven which means that
they believed its impact would be somewhat significant. They saw no difference in the level of
impact today compared to five years in the past and saw it jump to a level of 120 at five years in
the future and remain steady.

30. 30
Trend Seven – Public Perception of Law Enforcement and the Organizational Response to that
Changing Perception.
The panel believed that the public’s perception of police as an institution will change
over time. The public’s expectations of law enforcement have increased due to a variety of
causes and will continue to do so. As the general public gains more exposure to police conduct
through the news media (actual) and entertainment industry (fantasy), their perception and
expectations of police based shall adjust. With the prevalence of television programs like CSI,
the public now believes crimes should be solved within 60 minutes. Shows like this have
exposed them to what they believe to be actual investigative and evidentiary techniques. With
technology advancing at exponential rates, there is no telling what the public’s expectations of
law enforcement will be by the year 2019.
The panel wondered how the law enforcement institution will react to that changing
public perception and if the leaders of the future will be able to recruit personnel who can adapt
to those changes. Law enforcement has historically been a closed environment, offering little
insight into their methods and rationale. It is quite possible the changed perception will require
greater transparency in how policing occurs in the future. How will law enforcement react?
The level of impact was view as reaching a score of 120 by year five and remaining
stable thereafter. They did believe that it would be greater than it was five years ago (90) but
would not change substantially after the five year mark. The level of concern assigned was an
eight.
Trend Eight – Work/Life Balance

31. 31
It has been said in an astounding number of literary sources that one issue extremely
important to Generation X is the notion of the work/life balance. This trend deals with this
generation’s view that there exists competition between their professional obligations (work) and
their outside interests and family affairs (life). Generation X believes that one should work to
live rather than live to work, as their predecessors did. Their life away from work takes
precedence over their job. To them, the employment is a necessary evil that provides the
financial support for fun and activities. Generation X views no clear boundary between their
work and life way from the job. They see no issue with updating their Facebook page, access
Twitter, shop on line, download music, or sending text messages, to name a few, all while on the
job. One panelist referred to this as the casualness of Generation X.
The panel discussed how this desire could influence recruiting efforts, retention of that
cohort and change the landscape of the typical law enforcement agency. One member suggested
that benefits packages may be reworked to allow for onsite childcare, on duty time to support
employee participation in community service events, enhanced wellness programs, flexible
schedules to allow for more time off and the like. An HR specialist on the panel indicated that
the one of the top two questions asked by job applicants at her company was the organization’s
level of community involvement and how they support their employees’ involvement in it.
One area the panel viewed as potential problematic for law enforcement was the conflict
that could emerge between the individual’s desire for balance and the agency’s need to have
personnel available to respond 24/7 or flexible enough to cover vacancies that may arise. One
panelist pointed out that the Baby boomers often sought out opportunities to work overtime in
order to make extra money. She suggested that this trend will continue and result in it becoming

32. 32
increasingly more difficult to get people to work overtime when they are so strongly drawn to
their lives away from the job.
Although not considered too much of an impact five year ago (80), the panel believed the
level of impact would grow to 125 in five years and 150 in ten. The panel assigned the level of
concern at a nine given the implications this trend could have upon organizational culture,
staffing, service delivery, recruitment, retention and benefits.
Trend Nine – Perception of Law Enforcement as a Prestigious Career
The panel realized that almost every trend discussed could impact whether someone in
the future would view law enforcement as a desirable career. If the perception becomes one in
which police work was deemed unattractive, the Generation X leader will be hard pressed to fill
the ranks of his/her agency. One panelist wondered if people would still be drawn to this career.
It was agreed that many factors influence the desirability of a profession. In the case of law
enforcement, the state of the economy plays a significant role. A poor economy generally attracts
more people to public service as it is seen as a more stable job. However, even today there is
discussion of revamping the retirement system afforded to public safety employees. Should that
be dramatically changed, the incentive to apply, even when times are tough, may not be as
powerful.
One panelist wondered just how a career would be defined in the future. He suggested
that given the propensity of Generation X to change jobs frequently throughout their adult lives,
a two to five year career in law enforcement may be somewhat more desirable than one spanning
thirty years. Should this occur, how will it affect the leader’s ability to maintain momentum as
he/she steers the organization? If the Generation X leader is unable to attract millennials to join
an agency because the profession is no longer considered prestigious, his or her degree of

33. 33
leadership success will be greatly diminished. Naturally there will still exist a portion of the
population who will be drawn to the profession but prestige may no longer be one of the reasons.
The panel considered this to be of moderately high concern and rated it as a seven.
Although only garnering a score of 80 five years ago, this trend was viewed as steadily
increasing over the ten year window with a level of impact set a 120 by 2019. Clearly they
believed that the prestige of the profession lured a substantial number of people to its ranks.
Trend Ten – Attitudes toward Joining Public Service
Although somewhat related to trend nine, the panel believed the attitude toward joining
public service was unique enough to separate out. The rationale was that law enforcement could
still be viewed as a prestigious career yet unless someone was willing to enter into public
service, the likelihood they would pursue law enforcement as a profession. Without those in the
population willing to forego the perks of private industry such as bonuses, stock options, and the
like, the Generation X leader will be challenged to fully staff the organization. Although public
safety salaries have risen significantly, the literature reveals that for Generation X, it is not all
about the money. They are more drawn to a career that provides a meaningful experience that
affords them the opportunity to be creative, contribute, have flexibility and have a say. Public
service, especially police work, by its very nature is not conducive to this way of thinking. It is,
however, possible that public service could adjust to the needs and values of their leaders
(Generation X) and workers (Generation Y) and become more amenable to that way of thinking.
The panel saw this as being a somewhat impactful trend that will gradually increase in
impact over the five and ten year marks peaking at a score of 130. Ultimately, they assigned the
concern level at seven.

34. 34
Events
Following the trend identification portion of the NGT, the panel was asked to then
consider identifying those events which would impact the issue statement. The panel was
provided with the following definition of an event and examples of them so they had a better
understanding of the information being sought:
An event is a significant occurrence or happening; something that takes place which can
have a positive or negative impact on the focus issue. Events are singular in nature. They
need not be law enforcement specific. Creativity is the guide; events can be a prediction or a
supposition.
Despite this preparation, the panel struggled with this portion of the NGT and took some
time grasping the difference between an event and a trend. Nonetheless, they remained
committed to the task and eventually were able to create a manageable number of events which
was then voted on in much the same manner as the trend segment.
The following table (Table 2) depicts the ten events receiving the highest number of votes
during the NGT ranking period. All numeric ratings are median scores. These events, identified
as the top ten, are listed in rank order in the left hand column with Event 1 (E1) being the one
most chosen by the panel during the voting process. The next column to the right depicts the
years within which the panel thought the event could occur. The next two columns factor the
probability the event will occur within 5 and 10 years, respectively. The final column
characterizes the impact the event would have upon the issue statement should it occur. A

35. 35
positive 10 rating means the impact would enhance the issue while a negative 10 indicates it
would inhibit it.

36. 36
Table 2
Event Summary Table
TOP 10 EVENTS
YEARS
WITHIN
WHICH
EVENT IS
POSSIBLE
PROBABILITY
0 TO 100%
IMPACT ON THE
ISSUE IF THE
EVENT
OCCURRED
(-10 TO +10)
5 YEARS
FROM
NOW
10 YEARS
FROM
NOW
E1 POST requires
AA degree
7 50 88 5
E2 Terrorist Attack
on U.S. Soil
4 75 85 4
E3 PERS Change /
Restructured
5 90 100 -3
E4 Public Service
Funding
Meltdown
10 28 73 -5
E5 Mass Inmate
Release
4 68 60 -7
E6 Global War –
Draft
10 10 28 -8
E7 State Economy
Collapses
4 50 40 -8
E8 Public Service
Funding Reform
6 50 78 4
E9 Technological
Collapse
10 18 25 -7
E10 Significant
Domestic
Terrorist Event
8 40 60 1
Event One – P.O.S.T. Requires an Associate’s Degree

37. 37
This event was the one receiving the most votes when the panel selected the top ten
events. It was described as the Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training (POST)
changing the minimum requirements for being a police officer in the State of California from a
minimum of a high school diploma or equivalent, to a minimum of an associate’s degree from an
accredited college. In discussing the impact, the panel believed that increasing this requirement
would eventually elevate the caliber of employee entering the profession and provide a more
educated workforce for the Generation X leader to manage. There was recognition, however, that
this could exclude a large of those who would have otherwise applied for open positions.
With a median impact at a positive five, the panel surmised that in the long run the
impact would enhance the leader’s ability to oversee a competent and intelligent workforce.
They anticipated that this could occur within seven years with a 50 percent probability it would
occur within five years and an 88 percent probability it would occur within 10 years.
Event Two – Terrorist Attack on U.S. Soil
Harkening back to the events of September 11, 2001, the panel believed that initial such
an event would be extremely disruptive and chaotic for the nation. However, just like back in
2001, they anticipated there would be a resurgence in patriotism, an increased sense of wanting
to do something to help protect the country and her inhabitants, and a renewed respect for law
enforcement. The academy director believed that such an event would result in a large portion of
the population, stepping up to the challenge and joining the fight. He suggested that because
generation X had experienced the events of September 11th, they would be in a better position to
respond were it to happen again.
One panel member reminded the group that a large part of the population wanting to join
the homeland security efforts chose to enlist in the military. He wondered if, as a result, there

38. 38
would a smaller candidate pool from which the Generation X leader could draw in order to staff
his/her department.
With the heightened awareness of terrorist threat found in today’s society, the panel
anticipated that it was possible another such event would take place would be within four years.
They assigned a 75 percent probability the event would occur within five years and an 85 percent
probability it would occur within ten. Despite the concerns, collectively the group ranked the
level of impact at plus four.
Event Three – Public Employees’ Retirement System Change/Restructuring
Part of the allure of public service is the lucrative retirement packages offered throughout
the state, most notably the three percent at 50 retirement program offered to public safety
employees. There is considerable talk currently calling for restructuring or, in the most extreme
example, the total dismantling of the public employee retirement system. The panel felt that it
was only a matter of when, not if it was to occur. According to the newspaper editor, “The public
has already decided…” to do something about what they perceive as an out of control system,
“…they’re just trying to figure the mechanism to address that.”
The panel recognized that a wholesale change would impact recruiting efforts by
minimizing that alluring aspect of the profession. It would also create a multi-tiered retirement
system within organizations which could impact organization health and morale. That being said,
they determined that by 2019, the majority of the impact would subside as many of those
occupying the upper tier of the new system will have retired and the remaining members would
be in a minority within the organization. As long as the change was done throughout the state,
they considered this a leveling of the playing field with no one agency having an advantage.

39. 39
Overall, they still considered the impact as a negative three which indicates if the event
were to happen, it would inhibit the leadership by Generation X executives. Seen as possibly
occurring with five years, this event was assigned a probability of occurring within five years of
90 percent and within 10 years of 100 percent.
Event Four – Public Service Funding Meltdown
This event was difficult for some panel members to fully understand. Offered by the
assistant city manager, this event would involve a complete collapse of the funding sources local
governments rely upon to fund the services they deliver to their constituents. Loss of property,
sales and transient occupancy taxes, along with vehicle licensing fees, grant sources,
redevelopment money and state and federal funds would cripple local government funding.
Should this occur, an agency’s ability to provide essential services to its community would be
seriously inhibited.
Besides the obvious threat to law enforcement funding, there were ancillary threats to
police services discussed by the panel. In particular, a loss of public funding would impact non-
public safety municipal services such as libraries, recreation departments and schools that offer
children constructive things to do and keep many out of trouble. A loss of funds here could
significantly increase the workload on an agency.
Since the panel saw this as possibly occurring within ten years, the Generation X law
enforcement leader will be faced with significant budgetary challenges by the year 2019.
Probability estimates were 28 percent within five years and 73 percent within ten. The panel
rated the impact as a negative five, recognizing that without money, service deliver and thus
public safety will be significantly hindered. Clearly this event would have dire consequences

40. 40
upon the leader’s ability to not only provide essential public safety services but also maintain
adequate staffing levels to maintain community welfare.
Event Five – Mass Inmate Release
A wholesale release of thousands of prisoners to the magnitude as is being discussed at
the state level and within the federal courts was viewed as a very significant event that would
challenge the Generation X leader of tomorrow. Such an influx of convicted felons was seen as
creating not only an unsafe environment within the communities of the state but also a
significant burden to an already overtaxed parole system. As a result, frontline law enforcement
could be required to absorb some of the burden through taking on some of the supervised release
responsibilities of the parole division.
Only one member of the panel viewed this as something positive but not from a law
enforcement perspective. He suggested it was long overdue but did recognize the effects such a
wholesale move would have on law enforcement. However, significantly painful events have
historically shown to actual encourage new forms of thinking and thus break a system out of the
status quo. While initially it may be difficult to manage, there exists the possibility that through
the creativity Generation X is known for, new methods of tracking, and supervising or even
rehabilitating released prisoners could develop.
In general, the panel viewed this event as a significantly negative event but believed it
could potentially happen within the next four years. Interestingly, however, the median
probability at five years was only 68 percent and dropped to 60 percent by year ten. If it was to
occur, the panel believed the impact would be a negative seven.
Event Six – Global War Breaks Out and the Draft is Reinstated

41. 41
Although universally considered an Armageddon-like situation, the panel believed that
this was, of those events generated, one of the top ten to consider. Many of the outcomes noted
with event two were discussed here. Patriotism, mass desire to be part of the national security
effort, and a surge in military enlistments were outcomes mentioned by the panel.
The panel believed that it was possible an event of this nature could occur within the next
ten years. While the same cataclysmic outcomes would occur, the panel thought it possible that
eventually such an event could flood the law enforcement profession with returning veterans
much like that which occurred following World War Two and the Vietnam War. Following these
conflicts, law enforcement experienced an inordinately high number of polished, mature and
disciplined applicants. It was determined that for this to come to fruition, such an event would
have to take place within five years in order for the military personnel to serve their commitment
and still have time to return and enter the law enforcement profession.
In reality, the panel suspected such an event would create a significant drain for the
Generation X leader in terms of not only his/her ability to recruit qualified applicants but also
maintain adequate staffing in light of reservist call ups. Depending upon public sentiment toward
the conflict, law enforcement may be faced with considerable domestic unrest akin to that which
was witnessed during the Vietnam War.
The panel thought it possible this event could occur within ten years but thought the
probability of it actually occurring within five years was ten percent and within ten years, 28
percent. Should it occur, they anticipated the impact upon Generation X leadership would be
negative eight, the most significant level of impact identified among all events.
Event Seven – State Economic Collapse

42. 42
Many of the outcomes identified in Event Four, Public Service Funding Meltdown, were
mentioned during the discussion here. The State of California impacts the budgets of municipal
government in a variety of ways, most notably as a funding source by supplying grant funds,
redevelopment monies, sharing of collected tax revenues as well as providing some funding for
local jurisdictions to achieve mandated responsibilities. A collapse of the state economy would
eliminate these funds and handcuff municipalities as they attempt to deliver service. Tasks such
as road maintenance would no longer be funded wholly or in part by state funds. This would
require that monies allocated for other purposes, like police services beyond basic patrol
functions, be seriously reviewed to determine if those funds could be used to offset some of the
lost revenue.
Again referring to the creativity and pragmatism of Generation X, the panel suggested
that a leader of that generation may be able to completely revamp police service deliver through
the use of existing technologies or unique staffing models to mitigate some of the losses.
Enhanced use of surveillance cameras could reduce the number of field level personnel required
to patrol individual communities. Thorough workload analyses could redirect staffing to cover
time periods requiring greater coverage and remove redundancy in other areas.
Seen as possibly occurring within four years, the panel thought probability of it taking
place within five years was 50 percent while it reduced to 40 percent within ten years. Should it
occur, however, the panel predicted it would have significant inhibitory effects upon the
Generation X leader and assigned it an impact level of negative eight.
Event Eight – Public Service Funding Reform
Contrary to their belief regarding the meltdown identified in event four, the panel
believed that public service funding reform could be a growth opportunity in which the

43. 43
Generation X leader could employ their creativity. Government has long been accused and, quite
frankly, guilty of falling into a pattern of conducting business as usual with little incentive to
continuously examine the status quo and adapt to changing times and conditions.
Should this event occur, Generation X leadership could use this as the impetus to create
significant change in the way they budget, conduct business and allocate resources. Often
through crisis, real change occurs. This is especially true of government work. Bureaucratic
process has a tendency to insulate processes from change and condones business as usual. The
panel believed that Generation X possessed the requisite innovation to face the challenge and
complete overhaul their business and service delivery models. The academy coordinator
surmised that such an event could require tomorrow’s leaders to revisit priorities and develop a
smarter approach to the way business was conducted.
Seen as possibly occurring within six years, the median probability estimates regarding
its occurrence were estimated to be 50 percent at five years and 78 percent by ten years. Should
it take place, the degree of impact was determined to be plus four as the panel saw this as an
opportunity for growth and transformation rather than a detriment.
Event Nine – Technological Collapse
This event was offer by the lone Generation X member of the panel. He described it as
something akin to the Y2K scare of 2000 but one that actually comes to fruition. Being the first
generation that relies heavily upon technology, it was believed such an event would create
significant challenges for them as try to adapt to and struggle with a loss of technological
maneuverability. With their reliance on computers, social networks and cellular communications,
Generation X was viewed as susceptible to becoming hamstrung should the technological
infrastructure collapse.

44. 44
Within the realm of social networking alone, communications among individuals and,
quite frankly, between law enforcement agencies and their constituents, would be significantly
jeopardized by such an event. Some suggested that their reliance on social networking has
impaired their ability to interact on a human level to one another. If the quasi-anonymity of
social networking and texting is lost, the panel wondered how Generation X will relate to one
another and, more importantly, to those they serve? The largest portion of their service
population, the Baby Boomers, will not tolerate a loss of service simply because technology has
been compromised. They remember how it was to deliver service the good, old fashioned way
and cannot fathom why Generation X cannot revert back to these tried and proven methods. It
was suggested that Generation X would feel naked without the ability to utilize technology to
communicate, manage data, and provide police services to those for whom they work.
Believing such an event could take place within ten years, the panel rated the probability
of its occurrence at 18 percent within five years and 25 percent with then. Although fairly
confident this event was unlikely to occur within the prescribed timeframe, the panel recognized
that it occurrence would have significantly negative impacts upon Generation X leadership and
rated the level at a negative seven.
Event Ten – Significant Domestic Terrorist Event
During the panel discussion, the issue of gangs rose to the forefront of the conversation.
The non-profit community affairs director suggested the group should focus on the event as if
major street gangs had somehow joined forces and taken over control of a major city within
California. As this idea began to gain momentum, the panel discussed California law
enforcements response and whether it would be as unified as it should be. The increased and

45. 45
unified effort of gangs, forming unions to attack the establishment, was viewed as a potentially
powerful event that could challenge the wits and wherewithal of Generation X leadership.
Clearly such an event would require, in all but the largest of agencies, reliance upon
outside mutual aid assistance and send a municipality into a state of fear. Again, from crisis
comes positive change. The panel believed that the ability of Generation X to think outside the
box and explore previously untouched approaches could completely revamp law enforcement’s
response to gangs and domestic terrorism. Through non-traditional thinking, Generation X could
potentially develop unique and more effective approaches to dealing with this issue specific and
the issue of gangs more generally.
Because of the potential, this event was given a slightly positive rating of plus one.
Although they panel believed it could occur within eight years, they noted the median probability
at five years at 40 percent and 60 percent by year ten. Like with many of the events, they
envisioned Generation X as viewing things from a different, fresh perspective that ultimately
could minimize the impacts of a potentially negative event.
Cross Impact Analysis
To determine the relational influences of the identified trends and events on one another, a Cross
Impact Analysis was conducted. While there may be no connectedness between a given trend
and event, there may still exist impacts when one is considered against another. The Cross
Impact Analysis looked at each event to determine if it impacted a given trend and, if so, to what
degree. The impact may be positive in nature, enhancing the likelihood the event will impact the
trend, or it may be negative, in which the event inhibits that same likelihood.
The Cross Impact Analysis was conducted after the NGT identified the trends and events.
Three police professionals, (two lieutenants and one sergeant) assisted by determining each

46. 46
event’s impact upon each trend. The raters utilized a scale of -5 to +5 with the negative numbers
depicting those events that would inhibit the degree of impact and a positive number depicting
those that would enhance the level of impact. Table 3 which follows displays the associated
rankings from that process.

47. 47
Table 3
Cross Impact Analysis
T1 T2 T3 T4 T5 T6 T7 T8 T9 T10
E1 2 2 2 1 2 1 2 1 2
E2 -3 1 2 1 1 2 1 2
E3 -1 -2 -2 1 -1 -2
E4 -3 3 -2 -1 -2 -1 -1 -1
E5 -2 1 1 -1 -3 -3
E6 -4 -1 2 3 3 -1 -1 -2 -1
E7 -2 -4 2 3 -3 -3 -3 -2 -1 -1
E8 -2 -1 -1 -2 -1 -1 -2
E9 -4 -1 1 -3 -3 -2 -2 -2 -2 1
E10 -3 -2 2 2 3 -1 1 2
LEGEND
EVENTS
E1: P.O.S.T. requires AA Degree
E2: Terrorist Attack on U.S. Soil
E3: PER System Changed/Restructured
E4: Public Service Funding Meltdown
E5: Mass Inmate Release
E6: Global War – Draft Reinstated
E7: State Economic Collapse
E8: Public Service Funding Reform
E9: Technological Collapse
TRENDS
T1: State of the Economy
T2: Organizational Culture/Structure
T3: Careerism in Law Enforcement
T4: Recruitment
T5: Change in Technology
T6: Training Opportunities
T7: Public Perception/Org. Reaction
T8: Work/Life Balance
T9: Law Enforcement as a Career

48. 48
Although the Cross Impact Analysis completed by the three person panel did not reveal
any impacts that rose to the extreme level of a plus five, there were several relevant enough to
warrant discussion.
IMPACT OF E4 – PUBLIC SERVICE FUNDING MELTDOWN
3
ON T3 – CAREERISM IN LAW ENFORCEMENT
This relationship was viewed as possessing phoenix-like characteristics whereby a
funding system that had run amok experiences a natural righting process resulting in requisite
realignment. A positive rating may appear to be counterintuitive since one’s initial reaction
would be that most would abandon ship when funding became a concern. However, the belief
was that incumbents would realize that this phenomenon was not restricted to their employing
agency which should encourage them to stay home and not venture out into greener pastures. As
a result, employees will stay with a single agency longer, become invested in it and desire to
follow either an upward or horizontal career path. They may decide that if they are there, they
might as well make the best of it.
This could prove very beneficial to the Generation X law enforcement leader who will
most likely be challenged with keeping members of their own generation and those to follow
(Generation Y) from leaving the agency after a few short years to start another career. Since the
entire public service funding system would be impacted, at least employees will not be tempted
to move on to another law enforcement agency. It is even possible that the meltdown could be

49. 49
tied to factors associated with or resulting from private sector budgetary impacts. If so, then the
jump to the private sector may not be as appealing a move.
IMPACT OF E6 – GLOBAL WAR – DRAFT REINSTATED
3
ON T4 – RECRUITMENT
Should we experience a global war that results in the selective service reinstituting the
draft, one would expect this would have significant impacts upon recruitment efforts. A large
percentage of the able bodied men and, quite possibly women too, could be called up for active
duty and decimate the available candidate pool for police officer positions. However, as noted
earlier, following the events of September 11th, law enforcement say a surge in the number of
applicants who felt compelled to do something to protect their country, both on foreign soil and
domestically. The Cross Impact Analysis panel believed this trend would continue. It was even
suggested that some of the increased interest in law enforcement may be those who believe
becoming police officers exempt them from being selected in the draft.
Again, those generations that followed the Baby Boomers are prone to wanting multiple
careers throughout their working lives. Getting someone into law enforcement that might not
have been considering it as a career initially would assist the Generation X leader in 2019 in
maintaining sufficient staffing. Once they are on the job, they may find that the Generation X
leader has created an environment that better suits their needs and wants than the typical current
law enforcement agency. They might just find the new structure, philosophy and management
style is something they really enjoy.

50. 50
IMPACT OF E – GLOBAL WAR – DRAFT REINSTATED
3
ON T5 – CHANGE IN TECHNOLOGY
The United States military is by far the most technologically advanced military force in
the world. Although consistently striving to develop the most advanced technology, the outbreak
of global war would most like offer new scenarios with unique requirement and thus hasten the
development of new weapons, nanotechnology, and tracking/surveillance equipment, to name a
few. Real time war creates situations for actual battlefield testing. With the trend in conflicts
heading toward a more urban environment, it is possible that their tools could have greater
civilian applications.
In fact, many military technological advances already find their way into the hands of
civilian law enforcement. This trend will likely increase as urban warfare requires the military
develop technologies for the type of environment in which law enforcement already operates.
With their dependence on and longing for the best technology, Generations X and Y police
officers will applaud new toys and tools with which to do their jobs. As a result, the Generation
X leader will be able to give his or her staff technologies that will satiate this desire.
IMPACT OF E7 – STATE ECONOMIC COLLAPSE
3
ON T4 – RECRUITMENT
Sound outlandish to suggest a meltdown of California’s economy would enhance law
enforcement recruiting? While on its surface, one would think that such an event would impact
agency budgets, reduce staffing, impact salaries and benefits. Such an event would really impair
recruitment or even prohibit it. While initially that will most likely be the case, it will also be the

51. 51
case throughout the state in virtually every industry. Such a leveling of the playing field would
minimize the loss of police officers or applicants to other governmental agencies or the private
sector.
With a median score of four years on the NGT panel event generation, it is suggested that
this would occur prior to the Generation X law enforcement leader taking the help of their
respective agencies. If this timeline holds true, the brunt of the negative impacts will have struck
prior to Generation X leading a law enforcement agency. Smoothing, righting and compensation
will have already occurred by that time. As a result, when Generation X assumes the leadership,
the agency will have adjusted to the economic collapse, learned to work within their new means,
and created a smart, more economically feasible recruiting plan that may not be so vulnerable to
budgetary crisis.
IMPACT OF E10 – SIGNIFICANT DOMESTIC
TERRORIST EVENT 3
ON T6 – TRAINING OPPORTUNITIES
Following the attack on the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City on
April 19, 1995, California law enforcement saw a significant increase in training opportunities
that related to homeland security and response to domestic terrorism. Prior to the attack, very
few law enforcement officers except specialists assigned to elite gang or investigative units were
exposed to training courses dealing with weapons of mass destruction, domestic terrorist
activities, recruitment and infiltration tactics. Once it happened, however, virtually every police
officer in the state received some type of training on the topic.
That being said, the majority of the terrorist training efforts focused on threats from those
outside U.S. borders. One can understand why the attention; within just five years after the

52. 52
Oklahoma incident, the U.S. experienced foreign terrorism in Saudi Arabia (Kohbar Towers
military complex bombing), simultaneous attacks on U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania,
attack on the U.S.S. Cole in Yemen and the events of September 11th. We became more focused
on those outside because they were viewed as great threat.
However, should a significant domestic terrorist event happen again, it will renew
opportunities to training police officers on ways to identify and combat domestic terrorism.
Included in this training would most likely be opportunities to work with new technology, an
addiction for Generations X and Y. The leader of 2019 will be able to offer their officers unique
training opportunities that prior to the event, had taken a backseat to foreign terrorism. Yet since
that study topic has reached near saturation, it is likely that following the next significant terrorist
event, more time and attention will be paid on training frontline responders on ways to identify
and mitigate it.
Alternative Scenarios
So what does all this mean? By forecasting potential trends and events and then gauging
the impact of each event upon each trend, is there now a rock solid understanding of just what
the Generation X executive law enforcement leader will face by 2019? Not exactly.
The work to this point has provided one potential set of baseline information that one
could utilize to build and forecast various scenarios of what the future holds. Taking the data and
creating a variety of outcomes takes independent trends and events and allows for the
development of possible future scenarios.
The next section of this futures project will explore three scenarios that were developed
from the trends and events identified in the NGT process and what that will mean for the
Generation X leader in 2019. First, a normative scenario will be explored which creates a future

53. 53
where little has changed as a result of the trends and events. Next, an optimistic scenario will be
examined wherein positive outcomes have resulted. Finally, a pessimistic scenario will be
discussed in which the future looks bleak.
Normative
Chief Belvedere sat at her desk perplexed. She had taken over as Chief of Police and
expected she would be a change agent. Being a member of Generation X, Chief Belvedere knew
what she and her employees, fellow X’ers and millennials, wanted at work, and was committed
to changing the way her agency would operate to better meet those needs and desires.
Chief Belvedere wanted to create a more egalitarian agency built upon results rather than
process; she wanted to minimize rules and policies (T2), relying instead upon the creativity of
her staff to solve problems in a pragmatic way. Although the agency still needed a chief, she had
hoped to downplay the department’s reliance on the tired old command and control hierarchy
that was prevalent when she first came into the profession. Instead, she hoped to create a fluid
group of employees who came together to tackle specific issues with the leadership of the project
turned over to the one employee who was the most knowledgeable in the topic. Once the project
was complete, the group would dissolve and continue working in an individual manner. She had
also hoped to create an in-house daycare center so employees with children could still get quality
family time even while working (T8). And, she thought, why not provide access to social
networking sites on the mobile computer terminals (MCT’s) in the patrol vehicles so employees
could stay connected all the time (T5)?
While all good ideas she thought, pulling it all off has proven to be difficult at best. It
seemed as if the concept of policing and institutionalization of the traditional policing model
were making change extremely difficult.

54. 54
Chief Belvedere spent her days managing from one crisis to another, looked up to make
all the hard decisions or determine if the actions of her employees were within policy. Policy –
that is something she felt very uncomfortable about but she knew that without rules of some
kind, there could be little hope of holding people accountable. Wait a minute, did she just use
the phrase: “Holding people accountable?” Has the many years she spent working for Lieutenant
Daniels, that crotchety codger from yesteryear, brainwashed her into thinking like and espousing
the ideals of his generation and not her own?
Regardless, her agency was still operating under the old command and control
hierarchical system where authority and position fostered respect and power, where work was
expected to take precedence over anything outside the job, especially one’s life away from work,
where employees were valued by how far and how quickly they climbed the ladder (T3), and
where one must check the policy manual before doing anything.
As she mulled over why things did not turn out the way she planned, Chief Belvedere
realized she was late for a Command Staff meeting. This should be a good one – they will be
discussing developing a program for an early warning system for problematic employees and a
policy to govern its use. She cannot wait.
Optimistic
As Chief Belvedere walked down the hall on the third floor of the Department headed to
the Dispatch Center, she happened to walk by the break room and overheard two officers
discussing an upcoming weekend plan. She heard Officer Hennessey mention that he had
planned on attending the X-Games in San Francisco next weekend but was scheduled to
participate in a DUI checkpoint. While the checkpoint would have been fun because they would,
for the first time, be using the full body scanners that provide the blood alcohol, DNA, and micro

55. 55
chipped criminal history information of everyone on whose elbow the scanner was to be applied
(T5), the X-Games are the X-Games after all.
Chief Belvedere joined the conversation, stating that she had attended last year’s X-
Games and they were awesome. She encouraged Hennessey to do everything he could to attend
the event as this year was supposed to be something special. She asked how often he had been
required to work outside his normally scheduled hours. When she learned he had to work a
weekend four months earlier, she worried that he was being asked to sacrifice too much of his
life away from the job (T8) and told him he was excused from the checkpoint.
As she walked down to hall, she encountered Captain Morgan who indicated there had
been a problem with their recent grant reporting and the U.S. Department of Justice needed
clarification. Thinking who best to handle this situation, she remembered that newly hired
Officer Courvoisier had been a grant writer at a nonprofit for two years before coming to the
department. Belvedere instructed Morgan to have Courvoisier head up a team to address the
concerns (E1).
As they parted ways, Belvedere received a tweet from Officer Gilbey advising she had
been texting another officer when she rear ended a hover craft. Once the chief learned that no
one was hurt, she tweeted Officer Gilbey back advising her to be more careful.
Passing the training room, Chief Belvedere encountered a group of officers receiving
instruction on the latest version of pursuit interrupt technology. They would soon be leaving the
building to head to the vehicle operations course to put their training to the test. This technology,
first developed by the military during the war with India (E6), immediately stops the vehicle
being pursued, levitates it above the flow of traffic to reduce the risk of a collision and
incapacitates the driver by inducing an almost comatose-like state. Officers were excited about

56. 56
the prospect of using this cutting edge technology and looked forward to the next big
breakthrough in crime fighting technology.
Once at the dispatch center, Chief Belvedere saw six employees seated in front of a huge
bank of television monitors, with an equal number assigned to each beat within the city. A few
years earlier, the City launched an extensive drone surveillance system developed by a team of
officers. This team examined each sector of the city and determined how maximum coverage
could be achieved by the fewest number of drones. Once established, these drones conducted
round the clock surveillance, using infrared imaging, to monitor human microchip transmissions,
especially those emitting emotions of rage or anger, as well as elevated heart and respiratory
rates, in order to hone in on acts of violence or those committing crime. Once located, the drone
could be instructed to isolate and incapacitate the target or simply follow the suspect until the
dispatch center could direct field units to make the arrest. It was also programmed to use deadly
force if the situation warranted such use.
Chief Belvedere found the person she was looking for, Dispatcher Adolph Coors, and
thanked him for scheduling the recent department trip to Las Vegas. The Chief showed him the
tattoo she received one night after she and some of the female staff had attended a male revue
that weekend. She told him she already photographed it and posted it on the Department’s
Facebook page.
Pessimistic
“Where did it go wrong?” wondered Chief Belvedere. She thought eliminating every rank
between her and police officer and replacing them with “Team Leader” would build a more fluid
group of interdependent work units that could respond to problems in a more dynamic manner.
By eliminating levels, she thought she could foster a more egalitarian approach to her team.

57. 57
What she got was a disjointed collection of wayward teams unable to approach any issue from a
singular perspective. She knew that leadership should be viewed as a transitory position but
found that everyone wanted to lead and few wanted to be led (T9). Without the structure, there
was no one, other than herself, to settle conflicts and she was simply too busy to be involved in
all the trivia.
After all, she was dealing with the aftermath of her revision to the policy manual in
which she reduced it from a five inch think binder to a seven page document. It always troubled
her that there were so many rules involved in police work and she wanted to whittle them to the
basics. What she found was that the reduction actually made her job more difficult. Instead of
being able to specifically identify and address employee indiscretions, she had to instead respond
in general terms with little clarity. What this did was provide the union with every opportunity to
contest her decisions and disciplinary decisions.
Her idea regarding the creation of a flexible scheduling also backfired (T8). Belvedere
surmised she could allow employees to work from home on a rotational basis by sending
dispatch center data and on line reports to their home computers. She thought this would be an
ideal way to get the best bang for her buck after the state employed a “pay for performance”
budgeting model for local agencies after it survived the bankruptcy scare two years ago (E4).
Many of the duties formally held by sworn officers could now be farmed out to civilian staff who
come at a lower price tag. She also thought that with 37% of her patrol staff called up for active
duty and deployed to India for the latest global clash (E6), this would be a great way to stretch
her personnel resources. Unfortunately, most of the employees spent more time on their virtual
gaming or exercise system and missed important calls for service or ignored report processing.

58. 58
Since the Chief considered these activities important, at least in terms of a work/life balance, she
did not anticipate that her employees would provide adequate attention to their assignments.
She now realized as the Chief that in order for the work/life balance to work, the
employees had to be at work to fulfill the work portion of that balance. She knew that she had
difficulty staying on track and became easily bored. Heck, she often found herself drawn away
from work to update the avatar on her virtual business card or check the video feed from her
child’s school to make sure he was behaving. She soon realized that staying on track was not just
a problem for her but her generation and those that came after struggled with as well.
For a moment, she thought of calling old retired Captain Morgan, asking for advice on
how to right the ship. However, after just a moment, she remembered just how uncomfortable the
old way of thinking made her feel and how she could not stand Morgan because he felt he should
be respected due to his tenure and position. Belvedere could not stand that. She was quickly
shaken back into reality when someone came into her office to let her know the onsite daycare
center had just been closed because the employee who runs it decided to burn some comp time
and attend a Golden Girls Convention.
Conclusion
What does all this information mean? It means that the future is not predictable but one
can gather information to provide a glimpse of what is possible. The NGT panel developed a
series of trends and events based upon their paradigms and what they knew or think they know
about the issue. If a different panel was convened, the trends and events could have been
remarkably different.
A majority of the trends and events seemed to focus around financial concerns. As was
noted, this could have a positive or negative impact upon the issue and often could include both,

59. 59
depending upon the perspective. Could this prevalence have been as a result of the current
economic challenges being faced by virtually every agency in nation? Would the reoccurring
theme been something else if times were good? Would the thoughts of war and terrorism have
been a consideration if this country was not involved in conflicts with Iraq and Afghanistan due
to terrorist activities? In futures thinking, everything is relative.
The Generation X executive leader of a law enforcement agency in 2019 will be forced to
focus on balance in all aspects of their leadership. Clearly an all or nothing approach will not
work, at least not from the paradigm of the NGT panel in 2009. Wholesale change to the
structure and culture of law enforcement is not something that will probably occur completely by
the year 2019. Incremental change is required to modify a system as rigid and well-defined as
that found in current law enforcement agencies. The Generation X leader of 2019 can be
successful if they exercise diligence and intelligence in how they co about the transformation. If
they focus solely upon eliminating the last remnants of the Baby Boomers and erect a system
they desire without fully understanding the nuances and pitfalls of such a move, Generation X
leaders will fail miserably.

60. 60
CHAPTER THREE
STRATEGIC PLAN
Introduction
No one can predict the future. As the previous chapter revealed, there are a variety of
trends and events that pave the way for an untold number possible future scenarios. Planning for
a potential future requires a thorough, systematic approach, intent on gathering momentum from
those events and trends that enhance success while mitigating those that inhibit it.
The pessimistic scenario outlined previously is one that without thoughtful consideration
and intelligent planning would certainly make Chief Belvedere’s future as a leader bleak at best.
A detailed strategic plan is required if success is to be achieved.
The Strategic Planning Process
Strategic planning requires more than a concerted effort to think profoundly about how
best to approach the future. Strategic planning is defined as “…a tool for organizing the present
on the basis of the projections of the desired future. That is, a strategic plan is a roadmap to lead
an organization from where it is now to where it would like to be in five or ten years” (2009).
Strategic planning allows an organization the flexibility to adapt to it’s changing environment
through a structured, systematic methodology proven to add clarity to an undefined future.
Centered on logic and analytics, strategic planning inventories the known, clarifies the here and
now while exploring the weak signals that could indicate those trends and events that might
prove powerful in directing the future. In short, strategic planning affords an organization with
the mechanism by which it has greater control over defining and preparing for its future.
The Bryson Model (Bryson 1988), the strategic planning process employed here, is
focused on providing government and non-profit organizations with a tool to think intelligently

61. 61
about its future. This method helps leaders define what is truly important for the organization
through a structured ten step process which will be described in further detail shortly. First, a
little about the organization to which this model is be applied.
Organizational Description
This mid-sized California law enforcement agency, located along eight square miles of
the Central Coast, was founded in 1849. The military and commercial fishing served as this
city’s major industry at varying times within its history. Today, tourism is what drives its
economic engine, accounting for just over 25% of the City’s $100 million operating budget.
Although the live-in population is approximately 31,000, the tourism industry pushes the service
population to between 60,000 and 100,000 people, depending upon the day of the week.
The department consists of 53 sworn and 17 civilian positions. With an annual operating
budget of approximately $13 million, this agency by far has the largest budget in the City. The
department’s Command structure is depicted below:
The Command Staff leads ten sergeants, six of which are assigned to patrol while the
remaining four are assigned to Investigations, Traffic, Training, and Community Policing,
respectively. In addition, two civilian supervisors are assigned to oversee the agency’s type 1 jail
and 24 hour Records operations. Collectively, this group makes up the formal leadership team of