Leaders

PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE, "Major" and below please read. We want the same things as you. Just keep in mind that everything you say and do has a great effect on everyone around you and even the people around us.



Coaching a Winning Team

Some supervisors like to think of themselves as managers. To manage means to maintain. Few organizations can afford to have someone maintaining territory. If it is not growing, it is dying.

Every territory needs a leader. The best leaders see themselves as coaches. They are constantly working to improve the skill level of each individual while insuring that all the individuals collectively become team focusing on a common, mutually agreed upon goal.


Setting the Stage for Success

The first step to having a successful, productive team is to have all the members (including the leader) on the same page. It is very important that the leader know every team member’s goals and aspirations (personal and family). Individual conferences are required to get the process going.

The next step is for the members as a team to set the team goals. The leader has the challenge of relating the personal goals to the team goals. If they are not in sync, the likelihood of success is rather dim. Leaders must understand how to develop team ownership of projects in order to move the team collectively and individually to its potential.


Developing Team Member Accountability

Accountability springs from understanding. When all analyses are done, the bottom line is accountability relates to the use of time - time management.

It is nearly impossible to drive a person to the proper utilization of time, but it is relatively easy to lead them to do so.


Effective Team Communications

Commands, directives, orders, etc. move only in one direction. They do not qualify under the proper definition of effective communication. Communication is a two-way dialogue.

Many leaders do not have a clear understanding of the approach to use to solicit cooperation, present critical information, or provide verbal disciplinary action. People skills are required for leaders to effectively lead their teams without having them in a constant uproar and in ongoing state of confusion.


Building Synergy In a Team

How does a leader get the team to perform at a level higher than the collective abilities of the players on the team? Synergy. Strong leaders understand that the sharing of ideas, the sharing of effort, and the push to a common goal can and will generate an effort which exceeds 100% of the collective ability of the individuals on the team

You need to be called in for a drug test. Some of what you post is very good..........for a smaller agency. We are over 1200 just in Enforcement, add the jail and you want the Sheriff and his staff to sit down with everyone and have a chit chat about goals :roll:

The #1 problem with this agency, or almost any business for that matter, is the leader needs to surround himself with support staff that will tell him/her like it is. For far too long we have had staff that has only told the Sheriff what the Sheriff wants to hear, thus leaving the top brass with the illiusion that everything is just hunky dory. Be on the outside and try to show them something other than the picture that has been painted and you become the enemy....... :(

I read leadership 101 too

If the top brass wants an accurate evaluation of daily operations, they need to talk to the slick sleeve deputies. Otherwise they will not have an accurate picture, and this agencies problems will continue as they have in the past. The brass needs to talk to several deputies on each squad and address the problems that are a common thread in each deputies evaluation.

Now the question is, will this happen?

No, what they need is for the brass in the tower to ride once a month with a deputy in a marked car like they had to do in the 80's

[mod 184]

Furthermore, whenever brass does come around he is paired with a company man who thinks whatever he is doing is the greatest thing in the world. Unfortunately, there are so many Nay Sayers who can do nothing but complain and offer no suggestions for improvement that you can't put anyone with them. And, unfortunately, those that identify problems and offer solutions to them, that may not be what the big guys want to hear, are often told they need to keep their opinions to themselves. So while your suggestion about a ride along sounds good, it will be self-defeating. While I understand that you can not run this company as a democracy, we do need a safe avenue (or forum) where we can offer up suggestions to correct the problems we perceive. Enter this web site. If enough people talk about a problem and offer creative viable solutions, before long it will not fall upon deaf ears. Wishful thinking maybe, but hey, why not give it a shot!

No, what they need is for the brass in the tower to ride once a month with a deputy in a marked car like they had to do in the 80's


Oh yes, that did a LOT of good! - Not!!!!

======

Here is how it works:

1. "The Brass" were all at one time slick-sleeved rookies who thought they knew more than their supervisors about how to improve the agency.

2. They complained about things just like the current crop of troops on the streets do.

3. They got promoted into jobs where they learned about the outside pressures and needs of the agency to respond to public opinion and to operate in conformity with all kinds of state and federal laws and regulations that the troops never think about.

4. Their focus changed from looking out for the troops to protecting the agency.

5. A "ride along" or "feedback from the troops" isn't going to change their focus. They don't need education about the troops' concerns; they know, but it isn't their top priority. Protecting the agency is the higher priority.

6. If the worst complainer who posts on this board were to be made a Major or Colonel next week, it would not be long before he developed the same "protect the agency" mindset because that is the primary duty of the Brass - to operate the agency in conformance with laws and regulations that they did not create.

7. This does not mean that they are cruel or unfeeling; just that it is the nature of the assignment. Over the years I have been able to sit in on staff meetings. The first question asked when an idea is proposed has to do with what liability the agency might be at risk for if the idea is implemented. After that there might be a discussion about the impact of the idea on the troops.

CONCLUSION: Your personal happiness on the job lies within you. You can spend your entire career grumbling and complaining and generally making yourself unhappy, or you can work within the system, enjoy your job, offer constructive criticism at appropriate times and have a great career.

You can be sure that when I was on the job there were more restrictive and confining rules than those that exist now. Particularly in the years before the Family and Medical Leave Act, the Americans with Disabilities Act and other state and federal laws and rules that protect the individual workers. Nothwithstanding all of that, I thoroughly enjoyed my career and consider myself very fortunate to have worked for and retired from the Hillsborough County Sheriff's Office.

My wish for each of you is a happy and safe career in Law Enforcement.

========

Footnote:

I have complete confidence in the kind heartedness and competence of David Gee. I am less than impressed with some of his selections for his top staff positions, but I don't see that he had many alternatives other than going outside the agency to fill some of the positions.

I'm confident that if he had gone outside of the agency, many of the same complainers would complain about THAT. :roll:

Very good R&C but you are suggesting that they only look from within the agency to the outside as to protecting the "agency". If they fail to see the problems that are on the inside, and the problems grow to the point that the Office suffers on the inside which leads to the public suffering, then how have they "protect the agency"???

Mr. Retired and Content, I understand what you are saying and you have some good points. I also have been to meetings and know that liability is one of the highest priorities on the list. Those meetings are not where the break down comes into play.

You are right about the mindset regarding protecting the agency. I understand that, but some staff and supervisors think they need to lead by threat or the threat of loosing ones current position if they make any waves. It does not take much to motivate people if you have ANY leaderships skills.

Reference to Sheriff Gee, no one really cares if he knows what we do on a daily basis because the majors run the Districts and Divisions. The majors are where the break down starts. Most of the rank and file just want the basics, good leadership and respect for the job we do.

Mr. Retired and Content, I understand what you are saying and you have some good points. I also have been to meetings and know that liability is one of the highest priorities on the list. Those meetings are not where the break down comes into play.

You are right about the mindset regarding protecting the agency. I understand that, but some staff and supervisors think they need to lead by threat or the threat of loosing ones current position if they make any waves. It does not take much to motivate people if you have ANY leaderships skills.

Reference to Sheriff Gee, no one really cares if he knows what we do on a daily basis because the majors run the Districts and Divisions. The majors are where the break down starts. Most of the rank and file just want the basics, good leadership and respect for the job we do.


Both this post and the other response to my last have good dialogue going. This is how the board should work.

With regard to threats as motivation, you are correct. It is sad, indeed, that so many supervisors think this is the only effective method of "leading." A supervisor who threatens subordinates is an insecure supervisor. It often indicates the supervisors' awareness of his inadequacy, and is employed to disguise his fear of exposure. I'm not sure how to fix this problem.




Very good R&C but you are suggesting that they only look from within the agency to the outside as to protecting the "agency". If they fail to see the problems that are on the inside, and the problems grow to the point that the Office suffers on the inside which leads to the public suffering, then how have they "protect the agency"???

This is another good point. The problem is exactly as stated; the staff is concerned about the external pressures - state and federal laws and public opinion - to the exclusion of awareness of situations within the agency which also need attention, if only to improve morale and service to the public. How to fix this? I'd be interested in ideas, but I think it requires more than a periodic "ride along," particularly as was pointed out in another post; the staff officer doing a ride along would end up paired with a "company man" who wouldn't bring up any significant issues.

All in all, this has the makings of a good dialogue.

.

And being paired up with a "company man" would show that the staff does not care nor want to learn about the internal mood of the Office. One would hope that staff would take their ride along serious. If I was a staff member I would take the shift commander off to the side and ask for the most radical deputy as my "driver". Maybe, just maybe both would learn a little from each other.