Preliminary
Organizational Plans for the Incoming Director, State Juvenile
Bureau.
As the incoming
Director for the State Juvenile Bureau, I wanted to spend some time
outlining my plans for the Bureau. The goal of every leader should
always be to leave his organization better off then when he arrived.
I intend to reorganize the Bureau to be better off as far as
effectively achieving the goals it was established to accomplish. I
know there is some organizational conflict between the Board and the
Bureau, and my strategy involves mitigating
that conflict, as well as reducing any introrganizational stresses
that have arisen. Finally, I will detail the processes we will use
to make more efficient decisions; equity, accuracy, consistency with
theory, consistency with resources, and making decisions that
contribute to future decisions.
My plan is to
reorganize the Bureau on a hierarchal basis
with a formalized process for participative leadership for each level
of responsibility, including the base level
of the officer. Every decision should be made by the person who is
accountable for that particular responsibility. I plan on being a
directive leader. However, decision-making is more effective when
all available information, including consequences, has been made
available to the decision maker. One issue
that we experience is the problem of working within bounded
rationality; “judicial officials
and probation officers in the juvenile court are required to make
numerous decisions about the intake, processing, and disposition of
juvenile offenders within limited time frames and with limited
information.(Shook & Sarri, 2007, p. 1336)
Reducing the problems this issue causes can only happen when the
people that will implement the decision have been involved with the
process of making the decision. This plan, although autocratic, will
allow for an established level of discretion
in areas the officers should be knowledgeable in.
Let me define the
missions of the bureau so that I can outline my plans for more
effective adherence to the goals; Historically, “three
mandates were adopted for juvenile justice system and probation
interventions in what has become known as the Balanced Approach: to
protect public safety, to hold youths accountable for their offenses,
and to promote rehabilitation” (Schwalbe &
Maschi, 2009, p.358) Furthermore, “ the underpinning of juvenile
justice has historically been parens patriae which emphasizes
furthering the best interests of the child “ (Lowe, Dawson-Edwards,
Minor, & Wells, 2008, p.138). Of course, realistically
appraising any organizational situation requires an understanding of
the conflicts that organization experiences, both externally and
internally. To deal with internal politics I would study and
recognize the informal power structures, and attempt
to formalize these relations when possible based on expert power and
competence.
To understand our
extremal conflict, I posit that The Board itself operates
from it's own influences;“policy
makers and the public demand accountability from these decision
makers based on perceptions that juvenile crime is increasing and
that, as a result, they need to take a more hard-line approach with
youth” (Shook & Sarri, 2007, p. 1336) I feel the need to
communicate to the Board that not all juvenile offenses are actually
crimes, I would explain to the board about status
offenses, and the concept of “aging out
of delinquency”, as Holman and
Ziedenber contends(2006,
p. 6) and finally discuss the severity of mala in se
offenses, and the need to protect society from them. I would
reassure them that our goals involve recognizing this severity of
offense in treatment of juveniles, “particularly
those involving whether to incarcerate a youth, involve some
judgments about youths level of risk to public safety
or reoffending”
(Perrault, Paiva-Salisbury, & Vincent, 2012, p.
487). Finally, I would remove some conflict by instituting a policy
to identify and remove employees whose partisanship, or interest in
“showing up” the Board members, is more important to them then
achieving the goals of the bureau.
There are several processes which aid
in the efficiency of decision making in the
bureau. The first of these is equity, and the understanding that all
juveniles are treated the same under the law
and due process.. The second process involves the concept of
accuracy; “The first crucial step for promoting juvenile justice
practices that are consistent with the RNR approach is identification
of youths' risk for reoffending and criminogenic needs
using a valid, developmentally appropriate risk/needs
assessment tool.” (Vincent, Guy, Gershenson, &.McCabe,
2012, p.385) . Since adherence to our goals requires a consistency
with theory (as our goals are based on theory), I would require an
organization-wide educational program to aid every employee in
understanding our goals; it's not necessary to set up a doctoral
program, but the basic theory our daily activities and decisions are
based on should be an integral part of every officer's knowledge
base. Our organizational effectuation also
requires consistency with resources and we need to communicate with
other agencies and avoid the following type of situation; “These
staff groups have little contact with each other except regarding
juveniles who drift from child welfare to juvenile justice or in
courts in small communities where some of the same persons may be
serving both delinquent youth and child welfare clients“
(Shook & Sarri, 2007, p. 1338). Finally we need to make
decisions that contribute to future decisions, another way of
describing this is by using a cybernetic approach in which “both
the process and the outcome should help to improve decision making in
the future” (Stojkovic, 2014, p.373).
In conclusion, we are looking forward
to a juvenile system in which we accomplish our goals of protecting
both the youth of our society and our
society itself. We will do this by an
established chain of command in which officers use their competence
to make recommendations to the system as a
whole and to use discretion in their areas
of responsibility and competence. Furthermore, we will seek to
reduce organizational conflict. Finally, we will set this
organization up to improve effectuation in decision-making by
recognizing the processes of equity,
accuracy, consistency with theory, consistency with resources, and
making decisions that contribute to future decisions.
References
Holman,
B.& Ziedenberg, J. (2006),.The dangers of detention: The impact
of incarcerating youth in detention and other secure facilities.
Washington, D.C. Justice
Policy Institute.
Retrieved February 15, 2014 from
http://www.justicepolicy.org/images/upload/06-11_REP_DangersOfDetention_JJ.pdf
Lowe, N. C.,
Dawson-Edwards, C., Minor, K. I., & Wells, J. B. (2008).
Understanding the Decision to Pursue Revocation of Intensive
Supervision: A Descriptive Survey of Juvenile Probation and Aftercare
Officers. Journal of Offender Rehabilitation, 46(3/4),
137–169.
Perrault, R..
Paiva-Salisbury . M., & Vincent, G. . (2012). Probation
Officers’ Perceptions of Youths’ Risk of Reoffending and Use of
Risk Assessment in Case Management. Behavioral Sciences & the
Law, 30(4), 487–505. doi:10.1002/bsl.2015
Schwalbe, C. S., & Maschi, T.
(2009). Investigating probation strategies with juvenile offenders:
The influence of officers’ attitudes and youth characteristics. Law
and Human Behavior, 33(5), 357–67.
doi:http://dx.doi.org.southuniversity.libproxy.edmc.edu/10.1007/s10979-008-9158-4
Shook, J. J., &
Sarri, R. C. (2007). Structured decision making in juvenile justice:
Judges’ and probation officers’ perceptions and use. Children
and Youth Services Review, 29(10), 1335–1351.
doi:10.1016/j.childyouth.2007.05.008
Stojkovic, S.
(2014). Criminal justice organizations [VitalSouce bookshelf
version]. Retrieved August 31, 2014 from
http://digitalbookshelf.southuniversity.edu/books/9781305465695/id/ch12-P148
Vincent, G., Guy,
L.,Gershenson, B. &.McCabe, P.. (2012). Does Risk Assessment Make
a Difference? Results of Implementing the SAVRY in Juvenile
Probation. Behavioral Sciences & the Law, 30(4),
384–405. doi:10.1002/bsl.2014
No comments:
Post a Comment