Key Policing Models

Why This Matters

Understanding policing models isn't just about memorizing definitions—it's about grasping the fundamental tension at the heart of law enforcement: how should police relate to the communities they serve? Each model represents a different answer to questions you'll encounter throughout this course: Should policing be reactive or proactive? Should success be measured by arrests or community trust? Is crime best addressed through enforcement, prevention, or relationship-building? These models also reveal how policing has evolved in response to criticism, research, and changing social expectations.

When you're tested on these models, you're really being asked to demonstrate understanding of legitimacy, effectiveness, and accountability in policing. Don't just memorize which model does what—know what problem each model was designed to solve and what trade-offs it creates. The most sophisticated exam responses connect specific models to broader debates about police-community relations, civil liberties, and evidence-based practice.

---

Relationship-Centered Models

These models prioritize the connection between police and the public they serve. The underlying principle is that effective policing requires community cooperation, and cooperation requires trust.

Community-Oriented Policing (COP)

• Partnership-building is the core function—officers work alongside residents rather than simply patrolling through neighborhoods
• Proactive problem-solving replaces reactive response; officers address quality-of-life concerns before they escalate to serious crime
• Success metrics shift from arrest statistics to community satisfaction and reduced fear of crime—a fundamentally different measure of effectiveness

Procedural Justice Policing

• Fairness of process matters as much as outcomes—how police treat people shapes whether communities view them as legitimate
• Four pillars define the approach: voice, neutrality, respect, and trustworthiness in every police-citizen interaction
• Legitimacy is the goal because research shows people comply more willingly with authorities they perceive as fair, reducing the need for coercive enforcement

---

Data-Driven Models

These models treat crime as a problem to be analyzed and solved through information. The underlying principle is that strategic use of data produces more effective outcomes than intuition or tradition.

Intelligence-Led Policing

• Information guides strategy—data about high-risk individuals and groups shapes where and how resources are deployed
• Inter-agency collaboration is essential; intelligence sharing between local, state, and federal agencies multiplies effectiveness
• Prevention through prediction aims to stop crime before it occurs by identifying emerging threats and patterns

Hot Spots Policing

• Geographic concentration is the key insight—research consistently shows crime clusters in small, identifiable locations rather than spreading evenly
• Crime mapping and analysis identify these hot spots, allowing departments to focus limited resources where they'll have maximum impact
• Deterrence through visibility works because increased police presence in high-crime micro-locations disrupts criminal opportunity

CompStat Model

• Accountability mechanism as much as crime-fighting tool—commanders must explain crime trends in their areas during regular data review meetings
• Rapid response to patterns allows departments to shift resources quickly as new crime trends emerge
• Performance measurement creates pressure for results, though critics argue this can incentivize stat manipulation or aggressive tactics

Evidence-Based Policing

• Research drives practice—policies and tactics should be tested through rigorous scientific methods before widespread adoption
• Continuous evaluation means strategies are adapted based on what the data shows actually works, not what feels right
• Bridges academia and practice by encouraging departments to partner with researchers and implement proven interventions

---

Order-Maintenance Models

These models emphasize visible enforcement to prevent disorder from escalating. The underlying principle is that environment shapes behavior—signs of disorder invite more disorder.

Broken Windows Policing

• Minor offenses matter because, according to the theory, visible disorder (graffiti, vandalism, public intoxication) signals that an area is uncontrolled, inviting serious crime
• Strict enforcement of low-level violations aims to restore order and community pride before problems escalate
• Controversial legacy—while some credit it with crime drops, critics link it to over-policing, racial disparities, and damaged community relations

Zero-Tolerance Policing

• No discretion, no exceptions—every violation, however minor, receives enforcement action to send a clear deterrent message
• Immediate crime reduction is the goal, achieved through high-volume arrests and citations that remove offenders and signal consequences
• Significant criticism for disproportionate impacts on minority communities, strained police-community relations, and questionable long-term effectiveness

---

Traditional and Problem-Solving Models

These models represent different philosophies about what police should fundamentally do—respond to incidents or solve underlying problems.

Traditional Policing Model

• Reactive by design—officers respond to calls for service rather than proactively addressing conditions that cause crime
• Hierarchical structure with strict rules, clear chains of command, and emphasis on standardized procedures
• Distance from community is often a byproduct; success measured by arrests and crime rates rather than public relationships or satisfaction

Problem-Oriented Policing (POP)

• SARA model structures the approach: Scanning (identify problems), Analysis (understand causes), Response (develop solutions), Assessment (evaluate results)
• Root causes over symptoms—rather than repeatedly responding to the same calls, officers analyze why problems recur and address underlying conditions
• Collaboration is essential because solutions often require partners beyond policing: social services, city agencies, community organizations, businesses

---

Quick Reference Table

---

Self-Check Questions

1. Which two policing models both rely heavily on data analysis but differ in whether they focus on people or places? What are the implications of each focus?

2. A department wants to improve its legitimacy in a community that distrusts police. Compare how Community-Oriented Policing and Procedural Justice Policing would approach this goal differently.

3. Broken Windows and Zero-Tolerance policing are often confused. What theoretical foundation distinguishes Broken Windows, and why does this distinction matter for evaluating each model's effectiveness?

4. If an FRQ asked you to explain the shift from reactive to proactive policing, which two models would you contrast, and what specific features would you highlight?

5. A police chief claims their department practices "evidence-based policing." What would you need to see to verify this claim, and how does Evidence-Based Policing differ from simply using crime data (like in CompStat)?