Arrested Development: an

exploration of training and culture

within Greater Manchester Police

MMU Fellowship

Roger George Pegram and

Professor Peter Clough

0

Table of Contents

Summary

Introduction

Failures in Police training

Methodology

Results

Behaviours

The Training of the Special Constabulary

Standards and Culture

Inter-Branch Working and the Cultural Dynamics

Well-being

The ‘Academic’ Police Officer Versus the ‘Trade’ Police Officer

Conclusions and Recommendations

Bibliography

Appendices

1

Summary

This study sought to review Greater Manchester Polices’ training and how these

significant changes in budget and the way in which the police operate affect the

training environment. It will also looked at what future changes will or could happen

and also sought to make recommendations on how Greater Manchester Police can

make these changes and better facilitate change in the area of training.

More specifically it examined the challenges that the trainers within the training

branch (currently known as Organisational and Workforce Development), who

deliver this training to officers and staff, face both inside and outside of the work

environment and how they can adapt to more effectively deal with the waves of

change that they face.

Recommendations for further research are made. This will ensure that an evidence

based approach is taken in line with the ‘triple T strategy of policing’ pioneered by

Professor Lawrence W Sherman and explained in his work ‘The Rise of Evidence-

Based Policing: Targeting, Testing, and Tracking’ (Sherman, 2013). Such testing of

hypothesis is essential to ensuring that what works in policing is recognised and

utilised. Equally, it is essential to also identify what practices do not work and ensure

they are discarded.

Introduction

The Police Service has in recent times undergone the greatest period of change in

its history. This has been driven by British Police forces having their budgets

significantly cut and therefore being forced to find more efficient and lean ways of

working. The expectation is that the police service can cope with a reduction in

2

budget yet seek to maintain and improve the quality of the service that it provides.

There has been much written about this and arguments as to whether the police

service can provide a high level of service to the public with such budgetary cuts

continue at the time of writing this paper. Indeed, the current Chief Constable for

Greater Manchester Police, Sir Peter Fahy, stated it was the "biggest challenge GMP

has ever faced". (BBC News website 1)

Failures in police training

In the early 1980’s police training come under heavy criticism following on from the

disorders seen in London, Liverpool, and Manchester. Lord Scarman was

commissioned to investigate and report on the Brixton disorders of 10th -12th April

1981. Lord Scarman wrote “The training of police officers must prepare them for

policing a multicultural society. Much of the evidence submitted to me has suggested

that the present training arrangements are inadequate.” He went on to state “It was

argued that the total time and resources devoted to training are insufficient, and in

particular that inadequate emphasis is put in training on problems of policing a

multiracial society.” (Scarman, 1981 pg. 79)

This was later elucidated upon by the Macpherson report which was released in

1999 which again criticised police training following the murder of Stephen

Lawrence. A number of recommendations were made to address police training

specifically in the area of racism awareness and valuing cultural diversity. (BBC

News Website 2)

3

Following on from the recommendations made by Lord Scarman the Police

Training Council (PTC), the tri-partite-led (ACPO, APA, Home Office)

governing body for national police training issues replaced in 2002 by the

Police Training and Development Board (PTDB), created KUSAB a

mnemonic for police training to address the following in all areas of police

training: Knowledge, Understanding, Skills, Attitudes, and Behaviours.

(HMIC, 2003 pg.17)

Police training had traditionally focused on law and definition and this new mnemonic

was created out of recognition of the need for attitudes and behaviours training.

In more recent times The HMIC (Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Constabularies)

released a report entitled ‘Taking Time for Crime’ in 2012 and stated the following

about police training:

‘…training was focused on procedures and legal use of police powers

rather than on becoming an effective crime-fighter. The emphasis is on

removing risk rather than proactive intervention. Some evidence-based

knowledge is taught, but there is little evidence that this is being applied

on the ground (CID officers being the exception). (HMIC, 2012, pg.2)

This statement from HMIC displays that police training still focuses on

‘procedures and legal use of police powers’ and indicates that there is still need

for improvement in training officers in the attitudes and behaviours. In 1978,

albeit in an American context, Professor Lawrence Sherman asked the

following question in relation to police training “Should the curriculum offer

training or education?” (Sherman, 1978 pg.62). Professor Sherman also states

“…the best way to educate the police institution for change is to develop the 4

capacity of the police to use knowledge to solve problems” (Sherman, 1978

pg.1) this clearly makes the distinction between training and education. It also

clearly articulates the benefits of developing knowledge to inform problem

solving. Police training certainly addresses the first three elements of KUSAB.

The Knowledge, Understanding, and Skills. However the last two elements,

Attitudes and Behaviours, will surely come from education. Could better

educated officers and staff bring about the ‘effective crime fighters’ that the

HMIC report ‘Taking Time for Crime’ mentions?

Taking policing back to its birth Sir Robert Peel set out nine principles (NY Times

website) that he gave as ‘General Instructions’ that were issued to every new police

officer from 1829 these principles were:

1. To prevent crime and disorder, as an alternative to their repression by military

force and severity of legal punishment.

2. To recognise always that the power of the police to fulfil their functions and

duties is dependent on public approval of their existence, actions and

behaviour and on their ability to secure and maintain public respect.

3. To recognise always that to secure and maintain the respect and approval of

the public means also the securing of the willing co-operation of the public in

the task of securing observance of laws.

4. To recognise always that the extent to which the co-operation of the public

can be secured diminishes proportionately the necessity of the use of physical

force and compulsion for achieving police objectives.

5

5. To seek and preserve public favour, not by pandering to public opinion; but by

constantly demonstrating absolutely impartial service to law, in complete

independence of policy, and without regard to the justice or injustice of the

substance of individual laws, by ready offering of individual service and

friendship to all members of the public without regard to their wealth or social

standing, by ready exercise of courtesy and friendly good humour; and by

ready offering of individual sacrifice in protecting and preserving life.

6. To use physical force only when the exercise of persuasion, advice and

warning is found to be insufficient to obtain public co-operation to an extent

necessary to secure observance of law or to restore order, and to use only the

minimum degree of physical force which is necessary on any particular

occasion for achieving a police objective.

7. To maintain at all times a relationship with the public that gives reality to the

historic tradition that the police are the public and that the public are the

police, the police being only members of the public who are paid to give full

time attention to duties which are incumbent on every citizen in the interests

of community welfare and existence.

8. To recognise always the need for strict adherence to police-executive

functions, and to refrain from even seeming to usurp the powers of the

judiciary of avenging individuals or the State, and of authoritatively judging

guilt and punishing the guilty.

6

9. To recognise always that the test of police efficiency is the absence of crime

and disorder, and not the visible evidence of police action in dealing with

them.

These principles are in the main about the prevention of crime yet police training

rarely touches on this aspect. Police training focuses predominantly on law and

procedures. It is evident that the education required in skilling officers and staff in

criminological matters of crime prevention and understanding causations of crime is

missing. Indeed, the College of Policing has highlighted ‘evidence based policing’

within its strategic intent saying

“A fundamental element of our role as a professional body is to be a

catalyst for the development and use of knowledge and research by and

for those working in policing. This will ensure that the best available

evidence of what works is accessible for practitioners when making

decisions.” (College of Policing, 2013, pg. 12).

The ‘what works’ centre within the College of Policing aims to promote the use of

what works and share good practice amongst the forces of England and Wales. The

Society of Evidence Based Policing (SEBP) is a global network looking to promote

evidence based thinking and practice. This is going some way to addressing the

smarter thinking that is needed in the current time of austerity where significant cuts

to the police budget have been made. The College of Policing, Higher Education

facilities and the SEBP have the capabilities to ensure that the best possible

methods for reducing crime are identified, used, and also tested as being effective.

Police training needs to become the outlet for these agencies to promote evidence

based practice at a local level. This would involve educating police trainers in 7

evidence based thinking and ensuring that they promote the use of best evidence

during the lessons they deliver.

Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Constabularies (HMIC) may well hold police forces to

account with regards to their use of evidence based practice in the near future. It is

unthinkable that this accountability around the use of evidence based practice will

not happen as the evidence base of what works in policing grows and more

understanding in what reduces crime and harm within our communities is gained.

This research sets out to explore police training with Greater Manchester Police and

to see how culture and the environment within which training happens affects the

ability for Greater Manchester Police to deliver quality police training, education, and

more importantly effective crime fighters.

Methodology

In this qualitative study eight interviewees, were recruited from OLWD

(Organisational Learning and Workforce Development) branch within Greater

Manchester Police on an opportunity basis. These interviewees train in the areas of

Crime training, Uniform training, and Computer training. All are experienced trainers

who have spent significant time in the training environment.

For the current study, an Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis (IPA) approach is

used as; “IPA is an inductive approach. It does not test hypotheses, and prior

assumptions are avoided. IPA aims to capture and explore the meanings the

participants assign to their experiences” (Reid, Flowers & Larkin, 2012, p.20).

IPA was first used in the mid-1990s and draws upon psychological concepts and

ideas which have much more established histories. Smith & Osborn (2003) put 8

forward a case for an approach to psychology which was able to capture both

experiential and qualitative aspects but could still interact with mainstream

psychology.

Much of the early work using IPA was conducted in health psychology but the use of

IPA is being expanded to the social sciences more generally (Smith, Flowers &

Larkin, 2012). It is with regard for the transferability of this research method from

psychology to physiotherapy applied practice where a significant proportion of

subjective history taking includes the exploration of psychosocial impacting factors.

IPA studies are conducted on relatively small sample sizes. The aim is to reveal

something of the experience of each of those individuals. As a component of this, the

study might explore the similarities and differences in each case and move to more

general claims. The aim is to find a reasonably homogenous sample in order that

both similarities and differences in views and experiences can be fully explored.

Immediate claims often are bound by the identified group investigated. An extension

may be used via theoretical generalising of principles, where the reader of the report

accesses the evidence in relation to existing experiential and professional knowledge

(Smith, Flowers & Larkin, 2012).

Ethical approval was sought in line with the University’s Academic Ethical

Framework and the University’s Guidelines for Good Research Practice. Ethical

Approval was granted by Manchester Metropolitan University following the

application of an ethics approval form (AEAF) which is attached in the appendices.

One of the challenges faced was the fact that the interviewees all had to remain

anonymous and due to their particular skill areas and areas of business it was easy

to identify them by some of the comments made during the interviews. These 9

comments have been left out or edited but the essence of what was being said has

been captured. The interviewees were told that their identities will remain

anonymous and that they will be allocated a number within the body of this paper.

The technique used was by way of informal structured conversational interview. The

interview consisted of conversation around three main areas. The questions posed

being:

1) What have you seen change in police training during your career?

2) Can you tell me about the culture that exists in relation to training within Greater

Manchester Police?

3) How do you feel Greater Manchester Police can improve the training it delivers?

This then allowed for conversation to flow and more questions to be asked along

these three main questions the research set out to explore.

Results

The results identified the following five main topic areas that the interviewees

concentrated on: behaviours, the training of the Special Constabulary, standards and

culture, inter-branch working and the cultural dynamics, well-being, and the

‘academic’ police officer versus the ‘trade’ police officer.

Behaviours

10

Clearly, we have seen the need for police to be better equipped to deal with

behavioural situations and also have an enhanced awareness of their own

behaviours. What came out of all the interviews that were conducted was the fact

that the trainers knew there was a lack of emphasis on behaviours within the police

training arena. Interviewee one said:

“We concentrate on definitions and things like that; we are not good at soft

skills.”

When questioned further on what they meant by ‘soft skills’ they went on to add:

“Well, things that don’t fit easily into the boxes of definitions. Psychological

issues and things like that. I mean there is a course going on today by an

outside speaker about unconscious bias, it is very interesting and they

have had to bring an outside speaker in because I don’t think anyone

within the job is aware of it.”

Interviewee five said:

“Everybody that comes into our classes has been through a recruitment

system to get the job. They have been assessed as having the attitude,

the behaviour, and the potential to be damn good at a testing job. Then

we say ‘okay we are going to forget you have got that’ and we don’t

expand on the potential they have been recruited for.”

Interviewee five then went on to link this to behaviour stating:

“If we start with changing attitudes the behaviour will follow automatically

as in betaris box; attitude drives behaviour. If people understand the why

11

we will hook them. Get them giving their opinions, value the opinions that

you have recruited them for. Thousands is spent on recruitment and

training and they have live skills they can bring in. Tell them why and they

will understand… We have to look at it and do something differently.”

Clearly, the feeling is that we could make better use of the students and their existing

skills. It is intimated that police training does not build on these skills but rather

dampens them down. Traditionally police training moulds the officers into what the

organisation wants them to be. However, it could be that these officers are moulded

into what the trainer believes a good officer to be and dependant on the trainers

experience, understanding, and values differences in the message of what a good

police officer is will occur. Interviewee five sees it differently and believes that

building on their existing skills and what they have brought into the organisation

should be built upon. This then brought a comment from Interviewee five of:

“We run the risk of taking a thirty year step backwards in the pursuit to cut

costs.”

Indeed, in these times of austerity policing may well be tempted, even forced to

review how much of an investment it puts into the training of its officers and staff.

Interviewee 2 was asked about the value placed on training. They said “There is no

value placed on training.” And that it feels that training seems to be a ‘knee jerk’

reaction to bad press or HMIC reporting. Interviewee 2 explained further their opinion

of the response officer training day which was built into the response officers current

shift pattern:

12

“The Wednesday training was just a knee jerk reaction to something and

response officers are coming and being trained in something that is not

going to be of any real benefit to them. And we have only targeted

response officers it is like saying ‘you’re getting it wrong and nobody else

is’.”

Interviewee Three in the same way said:

“It seems to me that the response officers training day I think was a knee

jerk reaction to the restructure of the force and the new policing model.

Response officers were given a limited and specific role and it seems they

were given something back by way of a training day, which is all well and

good for that cohort of people there is little left in the pot for the rest of the

organisation. A glaring example of that is the neighbourhood policing

teams who do not get any training and if they want training have to find it

for themselves.”

Interviewee five backed this up saying:

“It would be better if people understand why they are doing it. Why they

are being trained rather than a ‘sheep dip’ approach of everybody on

response is getting this.”

Accordingly, John Adair a leading authority on leadership in organisations agrees a

sheep dip approach to training does not work. (Adair, 2011 p.g.207)

The Training of the Special Constabulary

13

Throughout my interviews with the uniform training officers there was a constant

theme and disgruntlement around the training of Special Constables. Special

Constables training at the time of interviewing was conducted predominately on

Saturdays and Sundays by uniform training staff that would not be paid overtime but

would receive a day back in lieu for them to use in the future. This is still the case

with the exception that Special Constables are now also trained on a Friday in duty

time. The training of Special Constables on a Saturday and Sunday for a day in lieu

is an informal arrangement. Some felt that this informal arrangement is unfair.

Interviewee 3 said:

“…you can’t enforce ad-hoc arrangements or goodwill. Putting in a clear

structure communicates what your expectations are, and then if people

refuse or decline to work you have something rigid to fall back on.”

Interviewee One echoed those views and suggested that the informal arrangement

should be abolished and that a formal system be put in place:

“A proper shift system where everyone gets to do it and we would need

more staff. At the moment people can and do opt out it is a voluntary

system. It is done on goodwill and sometimes that goodwill only goes one

way.”

The interviewees were asked if that should include evening and weekend working.

The reply from Interviewee One was as follows:

“I have no objection to that as long as it is done under regulations and

properly staffed. The objections I have with the current system for specials

is the job is now assuming that you’re willing to work a six day week,

14

which might not always be the case might it? I don’t agree with it we

should work within regulations and have proper staffing.”

Interviewee Four agreed:

“With regards to specials… I think it should be done under regs (police

regulations). You should be paid a fair days pay for a fair days work.

Overtime pots should be there and used accordingly especially when

there is income generation as we are being told there is. Use the money

for the good of the workers.”

Interviewee Two was concerned as to the workload and the amount of Special’s

training that would be needed in future. They believed that as there are cuts to

budgets and regular officer numbers decrease there would be a focus on recruiting

“free police” and the impact that would have on the trainers:

“The amount of specials coming in I have been told will double. We

cannot do it. We struggle to get people to work them now.”

The question of quality was raised with most feeling that specials were not being

afforded the quality of training that regular officers are provided with.

Interviewee Two: “The training they get as specials, they are not tested.

Specials come of a weekend and they are not tested, so how do we know

they have learned the stuff that they need? All they have to do is put a

bum on a seat and stay there. If they don’t want to learn it, nobody is

going to come and say ‘no you can’t be a special’. And then they send you

out and there is an assumed knowledge which means that they are

outside representing GMP and they’re not even identified as specials 15

anymore (uniform for Specials is the same as regular officers). So a

member of the public sees them as a police officer and assumes they

have the knowledge and experience.”

Interviewee Five states: “Specials training is like school sports day it is too

inclusive and to fair, nobody ever fails”

Interviewee Four offers one reason as to why Specials training may be viewed as

failing:

“With the specials it’s weekends. What they learn weeks 1, 2, and 3 they

have forgotten by week 12.”

Indeed the training for specials is less intensive than that of the IPLDP (Initial Police

Learning and Development Programme) and it could be that retaining the knowledge

from the earlier weeks is a problem for Special Constabulary students.

Greater Manchester Police in recent years has only recruited from a pool of police

staff and Special Constables on to the IPLDP programme to become regular Police

officers.

Interviewee Two remarked:

“The specials come with an idea that they know a lot, but then they will

come up to you and say ‘I didn’t realise how little I knew’.”

Interviewees Two then states that they believe that PCSO’s (Police Community

Support Officers) actually turn out to be better student officers than people from a

Special’s background:

16

“PCSO’s come feeling a little bit disadvantaged compared to the specials

as they haven’t done legislation. When actually they are very good

communicators. And it shows that they have been out there, doing it,

talking to people.”

Interviewee Two then adds that a varied background makes for a good class of

new recruits:

“Police staff you have to assume no knowledge and they all get the same

lesson regardless of what they have done before. Some come from

custody and others from comms (Communications). And although they

have not been a special or PCSO they will have skill sets that can add to

the course and that’s quite good.”

Interviewee One speaks of how formal examinations should be used to assess

the knowledge of Special Constables in training and how knowledge that

should have been learnt during training whilst Specials’ is not retained and how

new recruits from a Specials’ background identify this themselves:

“Specials’ training is not fit for purpose it is bums on seats. There should

be an end of course examination for them. There is currently an end of

course SDE day but that is not stringently assessed. We know that the

quality isn’t there as a lot of the specials join as regulars and PCSOs and

we go over stuff such as theft and TWOC things that they have allegedly

gone over as specials and they say ‘I’m amazed how ignorant we were as

specials we knew none of this stuff it never got over to us’. The people

who join us from the specials feel the specials’ training is substandard.”

17

However, Interviewee Four’s opinion was that role-plays and reviewing how

Special’s apply the law within a practical environment was the real test:

“We now do role plays. We actually try to see how people can apply

theory in made up scenarios, but for the role-player to them it is real or as

real as it can be. They are in uniform and they are under pressure

because others are watching them.”

Interviewee Five had a more cynical view as to why there are no formal

examinations for specials during their training:

“We cannot have an exam what if somebody fails? (They say

sarcastically) If they fail they should be back classed and re-trained. If we

are not training to a standard then why bother in the first place? There has

to be an end goal and at the moment you pass by just turning up.”

Interviewee Four who has recently trained a class of PCSO recruits and said

the following:

“On the recent PCSO course more than half of them are ex-special’s with

more than 3 years in so these are experienced specials. At the end of the

course 50-60% of them said collectively it was frightening the training we

had as specials and were allowed to work on the streets because we now

know after undergoing 8 weeks training how little we actually knew.”

Interviewee Two gave an interesting insight as to some of the difficulties trainers face

when receiving recruits that have already worked within the organisation and how

that compound the existing police culture:

18

“The benefits from recruiting from outside is that there is no bad practice

already engrained and they come with an eagerness to learn. The

PCSO’s and specials as they have already been outside they are tainted

a little bit because of what they have learned on divisions that has been

bad practice or perhaps a little bit slapdash. They have learned the culture

and sometimes you have to undo all that.”

Standards and Culture

The question of standards within the branch, Greater Manchester Police, and

policing as a whole was a strong theme from those who were interviewed. This

included quality of training, uniform standards, behavioural standards, equipment

standards, the standard of recruits, the standard of the trainers, and the standards of

supervision.

One of the strongest themes was the question of ‘operational competence’. Indeed, it

is a question that is difficult to answer. Should police trainers be operationally

competent and what does operational competence look like?

Interviewee Seven was particularly passionate about this area. They believed it

important to remain operationally competent and that officers coming to the training

school to be taught from operational roles respected that. They stated:

“Me personally I like to go out and keep operational. When new legislation

comes in I want to go out and see it applied and apply it myself. There are

certain people around, and it is not for me to criticise, that are comfortable

in reading legislation and imparting that knowledge… we need to make 19

sure that we are also capable of doing what we are and that is being a

cop…I cannot just read a cookery book and go and teach a chef. The

person delivering needs to really understand it.”

Interviewee Five had a different view and did not believe that it was essential to have

to go out and work on the street as a police officer in an operational capacity in order

to be able to teach police officers and staff in the classroom. They also did not

believe that operational competence gave respect from the learner. Instead, they

were of the opinion that respect comes from being a good trainer and would rather

see time invested in developing the training staff to become better trainers:

“Training is development and if you want to develop the force you need to

develop training first…Officers want to come to Sedgley Park and it not be

viewed as a chore because the last time they came to Sedgley Park they

got some quality training off some quality trainers. That is where I would

like us to be.”

Interviewee Five then said that up skilling trainers in policing systems would be of

benefit and that there is a lack of investment in the training staff:

“How many trainers could do an ISIS file? You can train a monkey to walk around

with a yellow jacket on! When they arrest someone they would look stupid as they

wouldn’t know what to do after the law bit ended. We can teach people in house in

systems, the job on the outside the good guy bad guy bit hasn’t changed since

Robert Peel. It is the back office stuff we let ourselves down on… We should be

current; in fact we should be ahead of the game and be able to say what is coming.

That doesn’t happen because there is no investment in us.”

20

Interviewee Three was more balanced when it came to operational competence.

They recognised the need for trainers to remain current and suggested a period of

reviews for trainers to ensure this happens:

“I think trainers should be subject to six monthly reviews because we are

in rapidly changing times, we struggle to keep up.”

Another theme within standards was that of uniform standards and the standards of

supervision.

Interviewee Five remarked about the response Wednesday training:

“The sergeants come with their staff and often look as bad as them!”

Interviewee One offered a view on how the hierarchy of rank has softened over the

years but concluded that it could be of benefit:

“There are now less bosses than what there was and presumably they

have to do more work. The rank structure now is not as austere. Back in

the day you know you had to call people ‘Sir’ and stand up when they

walked in the room. That doesn’t happen now. There has been a

softening of the rank structure and I’m not saying that is necessarily a bad

thing.”

Interviewee Six spoke of the need for Sergeants and first line leaders to take a more

active role in developing their staff whilst doing the roles they are in:

“First line leaders, Sergeants should be identifying development needs of

their officers. Recognising what that officer needs and giving some help,

support, and guidance and advising on a development programme. Sir

21

Peter Fahy emphasises he wants natural born leaders, he wants people

who can do what they say. Walk the walk, talk the talk and show

leadership.”

Interviewee Seven saw it as their role to enforce and uphold uniform standards

within the training environment but felt they did not have the support to do so:

“I think it impossible in training to uphold uniform standards when those

above you don’t uphold them…We are the middle ground in training. We

don’t have the support to discipline from command. I feel from the

discipline side of things it is really substandard.”

There were also failings pointed out in officer standards in doing their core

functions. Interviewee Six believes that this should be addressed via

development reviews but under the current management and with the cuts in

budget that Greater Manchester Police are currently only aiming for ‘minimum

standards’:

“As development continues your appraisal should pick up on, have you

developed in witness management? Have you improved in crime scene

investigation? The minimum evidence will never change with uniform

response until we implement change. If it is the minimum standard

opposed to gold standard and the Chief (Chief Constable) wants minimum

then that won’t change until he or she decides to change it. And the

training school under our command now will follow the organisational

requirement… We have leadership programmes and if we are managing

22

people we should be managing them to achieve above minimum

evidence.”

They also recognised a ‘diminishing skill set’ for frontline officers:

“There is a diminishing skill set of the uniformed officer because they are

not being allowed to practice it.”

This was echoed by Interviewee Two:

“If there are people out there getting basics wrong like rubbish statements

and rubbish files then maybe that should be getting identified and those

individuals should be getting particular courses in line with an action plan

done by their supervisor.”

Interviewee Four thinks that police training has become too easy and that this

impacts on the quality of frontline officer:

“We don’t fail people in training, that’s the truth. You almost pass by

attendance. That’s the problem.”

Interviewee Two recognised that standards have slipped and believed that training

had a part to play in that but defended the trainers telling me that:

“Not all police training is fit for purpose but there is no value placed on

training.”

The interviewees also spoke of the outdated facilities which trainers felt hindered by.

Interviewee Five felt ‘embarrassed’ by the standards of equipment at the Sedgley

Park site adding:

23

“We have educated people come from college where they have interactive

whiteboards... we need to upgrade”

Interviewee Seven again felt ‘embarrassed’ by the equipment that they are expected

to work with:

“I appreciate we have a money issue but the technology we are expected

to use is embarrassing. Trainers are constantly contacting us to fix up

projectors etc… in HYDRA we have an Apple TV box and stream

everything wirelessly from the iPad through it. We need WiFi throughout

the centre. We apparently pay an outside company a huge amount of

money to come in daily and service our technology. We wouldn’t need to

do that if we invested in better kit.”

Interviewee Six felt a pressure to ensure that all aspects of policing were covered in

the initial period of training and believed that more could be done with regards to

staged learning and ongoing continuous professional development. Although they

recognise that there is not always an appetite from the learner for this:

“You can’t train everybody now to train every area and learn everything at

the same time there is too much to know in policing. It is that diverse you

can only do staged learning throughout your career… although there has

to be thirst from the individuals to learn.”

When speaking to Interviewee Four they felt that there was not sufficient recognition

for officers and staff attending courses that have been successful and that it impacts

on the motivation and desire to learn:

24

“Certificates have stopped and that boosted personal motivation and gave

recognition.”

Interviewee Four also commented on how training was not an enjoyable experience

for the learners:

“Training needs to be sexy for want of a better word. As it is now it is dull

and it is dire you would rather go sick than come to training class and that

needs thinking about.”

Police training was recognised as changing by the trainers interviewed. Some spoke

of how it had changed since they joined. This offered an interesting insight into their

views of how police training had changed and their thoughts on that.

Interviewee One: “Basically, when I went to Bruche all you did was learn

definitions there was no suggestion of any diversity. Diversity came to

Greater Manchester Police in 1990 when we got Mr Wilmott, the old chief

left and that is when we got diversity. So now we get other issues like

diversity and vulnerability which in the past would have been

unthinkable…We now recognise vulnerability and mental health back in

the day we didn’t. Back in the day it was avoided because nobody

recognised it.”

Interviewee One then added how not only training had changed but also the role of

the officer:

“When I joined everybody was a thief taker and 99.9% of the cops were

cops because they wanted to send people to prison. The major change is

now you have a split in the job it might actually be 60/40 you now have 25

people who say they do this job for the victims and I would put that as

high as 60% now. 60% of the cops now see the victims as their first

priority. Of course when I joined nobody ever admitted that, it was viewed

as soft. If you were here to help victims you would have been told to join

social services. So that’s been a total culture change it was about thief

taking and sending people to prison and the victims were a secondary.

Quite often they were badly treated because the system was set up that

way. Policing has moved from right wing more to centre.”

They added an example of how this new ‘softer’ style of police training happens:

“On recent self-development days we got service users from a disability

centre and I think them coming in was very impactive and that was top

end training as people had a bit of empathy with them. Where we bring

specialist people in and service users in that I think is the way it should

go. We do it on PCSO course when the health service came in and did

our mental health training, we also use ‘Choose Life’ who are ex-drug

addicts who come in and talk to students about their chaotic lifestyles and

offending and I think that is a superior level of training. PCSO’s, new

recruits, and response officers get that training.”

Interviewee Three spoke of how the military feeling around policing was now gone:

“The training regime I was brought through was military based it was

discipline first and learning second…the way you presented and spoke to

people came first before learning the law. Training was done by didactic

presentation at the front of the class and humiliation tactics. There was a

26

great onus on passing exams and it was not done in a supportive way it

was done in a disciplinarian way… Training changed in the early 90’s and

it became more about self-assessment. The classrooms changed from

desks to sitting in a horseshoe. Identifying your own learning style and

working that into the lessons and things like non-verbal communications

came in. That style has stood the test of time for the last 25 years or so.”

Interviewee Four offered a very different view. They believed that people are not

getting as good a service from its police as they were previously. They spoke of how

the budget cuts that have resulted in reduction in numbers and the police

performance culture have diminished the personal touch that was once

commonplace:

“Back in the day we used to do things to help people but in the last 10

years we have become a business…we ask ‘can we afford to do it before

we help people’ 20 years ago we didn’t ask that.”

Interviewee Five insightfully explained how investigations have changed and now

there is more demand on detectives than ever before. They also spoke of the

changing ways in which we work and how they perceive that the implemented

policing model has de-skilled frontline officers in certain disciplines:

“Detectives need multiple skills…policing is more complex now than it

has ever been…Primary investigators a few years ago, primarily those in

uniform, dealt with enquiries from cradle to grave. They responded, they

took the report, they took witness statements, they processed the prisoner

and they understood the outcome because they had to do the prosecution

27

file. Now the model in this force is response do response, neighbourhoods

deal with neighbourhood issues and de-skilling has occurred. Plus is the

interest level of the response officer the same because they don’t have to

investigate any further?”

Inter-Branch Working and the Cultural Dynamics

It was evident through speaking to all of the interviewees that improvement is

needed in how the branch works together. All interviewees spoke of how they felt

isolated in their own area of business. However, this seemed to be more prominent

when interviewing trainers within uniform training. This seemed to create an ‘us and

them’ culture. There was an evident lack of knowledge as to what is being done by

differing areas of the branch. This in turn created a feeling that each is working

harder than the other as nobody seemed to understand each other’s workload.

Interviewee One stated:

“Interfacing with other areas of the branch such as OST and Crime

Training is near non-existent. Why can’t crime training get involved with

the specials training? You have to question that. We don’t have the right

people in the right places when delivering training we could have more

specialists you know like statement day get a crime specialist to do it. We

have people in branch that we are not prepared to use.”

Interviewee One was asked what the perceived blockage was. Their reply was as

follows:

28

“The blockage is I believe that the people in crime training think they have

a higher status and they are here to train detectives and not to train

specials and new recruits. I think that is what it is, a status block. It is the

same with the other areas of the branch they see themselves as specialist

and get status out of it.”

Again linking it to specials training, Interviewee Two asked the question as to why

Crime training does not get involved?

“Because specials are uniformed officers it has been decided that uniform

training will do all their training. They have lessons on statements…

vulnerable people. Well we have a department called crime training why

isn’t crime training teaching them? And why after teaching something like

statements are they not assessing them on the e-portfolio?”

Interviewee Two speaks of the new E-Portfolio that IPLDP students now have to

complete as part of their training and also asks why the Crime Training department

do not get involved in training areas they are experts in with IPLDP student officers

and Special’s :

“Why I am I training somebody how to navigate around a computerised e-

portfolio when we’ve got an I.T. training department? Domestic violence:

Why are crime training not training domestic violence to both IPLDP and

specials? We can teach them domestic violence we can teach them

DASH. However, they’re supposed to be the subject matter experts over

in crime training for those particular subjects.”

29

Interviewee Two was asked what the perceived blockage was and got a similar

response:

“They think it is beneath them. They are specialists in their area and they

only want to teach specialists. Also, the blockage is it happens on a

weekend. If we had specials lessons in the week they would do them.”

Interviewee Six who works in the Crime Training department acknowledged the

divide by saying:

“One side does one set of training and the other do the other and never

the twain shall meet.”

They then offered an explanation as to why this divide exists:

“Irrespective of specialism we are all police officers there is no barrier in

that respect. We are all skilled in the world of training. The barrier is

resourcing. To free someone up from our area to move across would be

problematic due to the volume of our courses.”

Interviewee Six then dispels any suggestion of elitism and offers a solution. They

clearly believe that the matter is one of resourcing and lack of inter branch

communication:

“What does this branch need? What can we do to help each other? This is

the meeting that needs to happen. To work with purpose. We all see each

other on site and get on with each other. We all respect what each other

trains but do we really understand what each area does and how that

30

benefits the organisational learning? This is organisational learning and

workforce development not uniform training or crime training.”

They then go on to speak about planning and how better forward planning would

create a more inclusive working environment:

“If we had a better training plan, classroom planning, forward planning

with regards to the force training requirement then we would work better

together.”

Interviewee Six acknowledges the need for closer working with their uniformed

neighbours and states they would be quite happy to work alongside them:

“I’m quite comfortable to sit over with uniform staff and I know some of my

colleagues would be. I think that the culture issue is not us and them. The

culture is the training. The fact that uniform train uniform and we train

C.I.D. nobody dislikes each other.”

Interviewee Seven who works in a separate area of business to both uniform and

crime training felt the ‘tensions’:

“There is a tension between certain units, I can’t put my finger on it and I

don’t know why it is there.”

Interviewee Five (a uniformed trainer) told of how they did not know people who work

on site that have been here for years. They see the benefits of working together with

other areas of the branch and offer a solution in creating opportunities to work

together:

31

“The community of OLWD is segregated… I don’t know people from other

training arms, such as crime training or computer training. It is the way the

site is laid out. We don’t mix or see each other. We should have cross

skilling and have crime training mixing in with uniform training… We could

mix the trainers around. I would love to go to public order for a bit. That

would be good CPD for me.”

It would appear that some arms of the branch do work well together. That is

predominantly down to the type of training that they deliver and that the curriculum or

course dictates that they do work together. Interviewee Eight who works in computer

training said:

“I’ve worked on quite a lot of projects and train in ICIS (a GMP computer

system for file build) and work closely with crime training…We do talk to

each other a lot (Uniform Training). We train OPUS (GMP computer

system) for example and fit into their timetable.”

Interviewee Two’s earlier question about why computer training did not get involved

with the student officers’ e-portfolios was put to Interviewee Eight:

“We were never approached to look at that.”

Interviewee Eight then articulates the benefits of more integrated working and the

need for changing the ‘this is my bit’ culture and how this will improve the trainers:

“We could link up a lot of the courses together…work together and have

less ‘this is your bit this is my bit’…No disrespect to them but people

(trainers) are not using the computers so they are not up to date. There is

32

still a lot of learning to be had… Some people strangely enough are still

‘computer-phobic’.”

Interviewee Four had a more cynical outlook and believed management was the

barrier:

“I think we have too many leaders looking after number one. You have the arm

benders (officer safety trainers) led by their leadership, computers, crime all led

by different leaders. We need to roll together… I see six little units all doing

their own thing and that’s not good.”

Interviewee Six shows the need for greater inter-departmental communication and

acknowledges that training in different areas would be of benefit to the learner. They

particularly see that this would improve Greater Manchester Police’s quality of

primary investigation and ask the question as to whether detectives’ working with

uniformed officers in the operational setting actually has created this cross pollination

of skills that was hoped for:

“There needs to be more input on primary level with new recruits and

ongoing learning for our officers. Whether there should be a detective

input, I think it would be a positive…What could we (Crime Training) offer?

It is quite difficult to understand what uniformed training would want from

us? If you have various roles of uniform response, we did have Priority

Crime Investigators (PCI), Volume Crime Teams (VCT) for instance. We

did train uniformed officers in these roles in primary and secondary

investigation. That got stopped when the new policing model came in and

that meant that the PCI role and VCT’s went and detectives were

33

integrated into the neighbourhoods. They said that there would be shared

learning between investigators and uniform and that would develop in the

workplace. Now whether that has ever been measured I am not sure but

that was the theory behind it.”

Well-Being

Interviewees spoke about the branch and indeed the forces drive to improve and

ensure the well-being of its staff. Whilst speaking on the subject of well-being they

spoke of how the government cuts had impacted on them.

Interviewee One said that they did not feel the effects of the cuts in training but

warned that they did not expect this to last much longer:

“We are not over worked. There is more work than what we have done in

the past but we are not overworked. I can see single training coming in

and that would be disastrous when running a course it would start off fine

but after a few weeks you would be stressed and exhausted and the

quality of the lessons would be affected.”

By single training they mean one trainer in class (at present it is usually two trainers

to each class). Interviewee One then speaks of how the cuts to staff have been

manageable for trainers but insists that if single training came in it would not be:

“Under Redland they stripped out the admin people and we do our own

photocopying and materials and that is manageable but if we went to

single training it wouldn’t be.”

34

Interviewee Two feels the strain of the cuts more than Interviewee one:

“We have lost a lot of personnel in relation to back office work so SDE

days, exams and getting lessons done. Now we environment scan

ourselves but we used to have a whole team doing it. Keeping up is a

struggle… Personally, I think we are in danger of becoming too many

things to too many people.”

Interviewee Four speaks about the imbalance that there is in how workload is

allocated and how this has a very negative impact on well-being:

“You have officers who will go on the sick with exhaustion quite genuinely

and some others who are still sat in the sun.”

Interviewee Five puts a positive slant on the cuts and believes it has identified and

eradicated previously unseen wastage:

“Austerity drove justification of everything we do and in some places that

was a good thing as it stopped the obscene wastage that was

commonplace and is now no longer there.”

Interviewee Six was keen to speak about how mundane routines in training driven by

supervision can have an adverse effect on well-being:

“Routines can impact on well-being if you don’t get a break, if you don’t

get time for self-development (and you are) constantly training the same

course. Finishing a course and starting again with the same course. We

will actively be involved in other areas of crime training. It becomes

mundane if you keep doing the same. We go out and do interviews, speak

35

with officers about problem areas of crime, work closely with divisional

detectives and go to scenes and major incident rooms. This keeps you

operationally competent which keeps your work life balance and interest

in place. I think it is a good thing but not everybody wants to do it as they

are comfortable coming to work and doing 8 until 4 or 9 until 5. There is a

need for it.”

Interviewee Six then speaks of how the new agile working system (which allows staff

to work from home or a station closer to home when not involved in classroom

activities) and also flexible working patterns has had a positive effect:

“We have the benefit of a work-life balance in that the organisation has

supported agile processes. They have supported working patterns to ease

issues of overtime and we have more flexibility over when courses can be

run whether that be an early start or a later finish.”

Interviewee Six had seen a difference within their training area since the cuts and

describes how they deliver fewer courses due to the decreasing numbers of trainers.

They also point out the importance of identifying the right trainers to deliver the

training at the training design phase:

“We used to have 36 detectives in role (crime training) now we only have

20-22 yet we are maintaining the same output. We don’t do financial

training, analytical training is reduced, surveillance training, we have had

to increase the size of our ICIDP because of reduction in staff. It is all

down to capacity but seeking out the right people to do the right training

should be identified at the training design phase.”

36

Interviewee Five told of how a personal investment by the branch in terms of

continuous professional development would improve their well-being and would

improve their performance within the working environment. They also

acknowledged that should such an investment be forthcoming that it is right to

stay within training to give back to the branch value for money:

“If you gave me qualifications to help me do my job better I would move

mountains for you. You would get me working evenings and weekends in

my own time to achieve it. My motivation would go through the roof. And

you would get a return from me I wouldn’t expect it for free I would sign on

the dotted line and commit to staying in training.”

The ‘Academic’ Police Officer versus the ‘Trade’ Police Officer

There is a lot of ongoing debate around how much academia should influence

policing. Indeed, there are many policing professionals and academic scholars

who advocate the importance of evidence based approaches to policing. In turn

there are many who believe that policing is a craft and as such cannot be

reliant upon academia.

Interviewees were asked for their opinions of how academia and police training

could work together.

Interviewee One saw the need for academia in policing but did not see how the

trainers could be expected to deliver that within the classroom setting:

37

“I am all in favour of training in psychology as long as it is an outside

speaker and the bosses don’t think that the trainers can speak some

‘psychobabble’. We should be getting outside speakers in who are

credible for example the lady who came in on SDD days and did food

nutrition and the forensic psychologist. That went down well because

people respected them and it wasn’t some trainer trying to stand up and

deliver something they have read in a book. That needs to be done by the

experts.”

Indeed, Interviewee One had previously been involved with universities and

police training and told me that it was a bad experience:

“A downside to this is when IPLDP started we sent them to University for

a week as one of the modules and it didn’t work out well, as the University

brought people in from the outside various community groups with an axe

to grind with the cops so people turned up and gave it to these new

recruits. Rather than having guest speakers who might have their own

agenda they need to put their own academics up who are charismatic and

knowledgeable.”

Interviewee Two did not see the need for academia within the policing setting.

They felt that unless you have done ‘the job’ then you would not understand the

dynamics of being a police officer. They also stated that different learners have

different styles and that they like to be facilitative and practical when they teach:

I don’t like university type stuff, lectures and reading books. That is not for

everyone. I like facilitation, it being real and it being here.

38

They also believe that the police are now being involved in more areas than

they should be:

“You can’t be everything to everyone. It’s like mental health. We are lay

people when it comes to that at the end of the day and we can’t identify

certain mental health issues. Yet, there is an expectancy that we can.”

Interviewee Four understood that police training did not give officers enough and

how they speak of their personal experiences as operational officers in the

classroom and also integrate this in practical assessments:

We are not equipping people with the street crafts, street skills. However, I

personally and some other officers talk from experience and bring it in

during role-plays.

Interviewee Four acknowledged the need for academia within policing and also how

a practical application of academic findings must be used. However, they also are

aware of how policing culture stifles the acceptance of academia and how this drive

for academic help within police training is coming years too late:

“We need to understand trends, patterns, models and theories. We need

to be able to apply them then when we come across them in the real

world. We’ve turned our back on research and academia because we

know policing. I think that is a mistake and we need to buy in and

embrace it. Running academic education alongside police training is vital.

We have opened the door to it but we are year’s too late and playing

catch up.”

39

Interviewee Four goes further stating there is a need for police training to improve

and work in unison with academic institutions:

“Training needs to improve there is no question about that. It needs to be

joined up. It is not joined up I think the police service has stood by and the

academic world has flew ahead. The police needs to be working with

academics who can talk about how people react, why people react, the

best ways to communicate, and the best ways to work with people. Police

training has stood separate for too long and now needs to wake up.”

Interviewee Five links it to operational competence and sees an opportunity to

enhance their skills as a trainer:

“My operational role is to be the best trainer I can be. If I was on response

it would be to be the best response officer I can be. Operational

competence is to be the best you can be in your current role. Train me in

my current role let me benefit from some quality training. Let me go to

MMU (Manchester Metropolitan University) and come back with some

ideas I can put into my training.”

Interviewee Six is already aware of the benefits and spoke of how a previous

partnership with a university had collapsed due to a lack of funding. Nevertheless,

they had seen a positive impact on those who had been through the university

process prior to this breakdown:

“Physically you could see that some officers write better, construct their

evidence better, they understood the investigative processes better. That

was because the academic side meant the writing up of material had to

40

improve and it did. It made them think wider about academia in

investigative processes such as why do sex offenders commit offences?

Why do burglars repeat offend? This academia in its lowest form started

to open up evidence based thought processes for these detectives. It is as

simple as that. Funding is the issue. We had a fantastic programme up

and running but the moment the government cut back funding we had to

withdraw from the University.”

Interviewee Six also had some strong comments about trainers who shy away from

academia and how the branch can ensure that academia is integrated into training:

“The trainers here need to up their game. They need to be asked ‘what

have you read in the last 6 months that you have integrated into your

lesson plans?’ How have you as supervisors managed and spoke to your

constables about environmental scanning? Just because they are not

academic does not mean they cannot talk about academia. They don’t

need to be at Professor Level!”

Plainly, there is mixed feelings about whether or not academia has a place in police

training. Interview seven was not of the opinion that it helps create a good police

officer:

“A university could come in and teach law far better than us, but that is not

what an officer is about.”

Conclusions and Recommendations

41

The interviewees all have spoken about the need for improvement in the way police

training is delivered and that police training can explore various differing methods for

delivering the quality training that it seeks to offer.

The findings are that more attention needs to be paid to inter-branch communication

with regards to work coming in and skills matching individual trainers to particular

courses and training design. It also found that there is a need to review the

equipment available for trainers as it has been described as embarrassingly out of

date. Equally, a review of how trainers are allocated workload and how many trainers

are assigned to a course would be welcome in order to ensure maximum efficiency.

Special Constabulary training is felt to be of a lower standard of that delivered to new

recruits or PCSO’s (this is an area currently under review by OLWD). Also, careful

consideration needs to be given to the knowledge of trainers in the areas of evidence

based policing to ensure that knowledge imparted on others in the areas of crime

prevention come from a sound evidence base and not just from experience or

conjecture.

From the findings in this study many changes can be made. Some will be minor

adjustments and others will require a more methodical investigation to ensure an

evidence based approach that will indicate clear improvement.

One recommendation would be to review the disparities in allocations of work and

the number of trainers used to deliver courses. The findings are that there is a

feeling amongst the interviewees that some courses have more resources than is

needed and others less so. There is also a need to review how the administration

function is carried out, with trainers currently being responsible for their own

administration since the cuts to back office staff. This has resulted in trainers being 42

out of the classroom fulfilling these administrative duties such as photocopying for

class handouts.

Another would be to review the forward planning of courses and encourage inter-

branch working during the design phase, this would introduce a level of expertise

and improvement to courses. The blockage appears to be more of a question of

communication than of culture. The inter-branch working between Crime Training

and Uniform Training, for example, could be greatly improved by the introduction of a

three monthly meeting of first line leaders to discuss the ongoing training needs and

the forthcoming training requirements. This would then allow forward planning of

resources for a collaborative approach to working. All areas of the OLWD branch

have specialist skills and it would be of benefit to the learner if these specialists had

an input on the design and delivery of their skill area.

The training for the Special Constabulary is, at the time of writing this conclusion and

recommendations part, under a period of review. I would highly recommend that this

review takes on an evidence based approach to test and track the results of any

changes in line with Professor L.W. Sherman’s work (Sherman, 2013). This will

ensure that the Special Constabulary recruits get a quality training programme that is

fit for purpose.

It became clear during this study that a lack of consistency in trainer could be a

blockage to the Special student officers’ development. Those who trained PCSO’s

and IPLDP students stated that the students felt they did not have the breadth of

knowledge as Specials’ that they received whilst being trained as PCSO’s or student

police officers. The IPLDP and PCSO students benefit from being allocated a small

team of trainers who solely look after them during their initial training period. The 43

recommendation is for a randomised control trial to be conducted between two

intakes of specials’. This would take the form of a control group who are trained in

the traditional way and an experimental group who are allocated a team of trainers in

the same way as the PCSO and IPLDP students are given. Come the end of the

initial training period an end of course assessment by way of knowledge examination

and also practical application in a scenario based test could be done. This would be

a good way to assess if having a regular team responsible for training specials will

benefit the learner, as my hypotheses suggests, rather than the random allocation of

trainers as is currently the case.

In terms of evidence based policing more needs to be done in this area within the

police training environment. The debate continues as to whether training should be

law based knowledge or the education to understand criminality and effective

prevention techniques. Presently, the small amount of prevention spoken about in

the classroom is based on experience, conjecture, and culture. It is not taught from a

sound evidence base. There is a distinct difference between police training and

police education. The trainers who work in the training school are excellent

competent trainers of policing procedures and law. However, they are not equipped

to give the education that is required to achieve the aim set out by HMIC of turning

out effective crime fighters. The education of police officers in the criminological,

sociological, and psychological causes of crime is what is needed yet sadly lacking.

The push for evidence based policing is getting traction and this will transform

policing. More collaboration with academic institutions and the ‘what works’ centre

for crime reduction within the College of Policing is needed. The over focus on

teaching law and procedures rather than evidence based methods of policing is

44

stifling the development of officers in terms of lateral thinking and innovation. Officers

need to have knowledge of the differences between correlation and causation. The

continuous professional development needed is in some of the criminological

theories that underpin the discipline such as ‘Routine Activity Theory’ (Akers &

Sellers, 2009), ‘Socio-Spatial Theory’ (Bottoms, 2012), and ‘Control Theory’ (Hirschi,

1969) to name a few. This investment, which could be brought in part by

collaboration with academic institutions, will ensure that officers have the tools in

their toolkit to recognise particular causes of crime and criminal related activity and

police with an evidence base. In the current time of austerity it is essential that

officers can think for themselves and have an evidence base to draw from when

making decisions. This is an area that requires great improvement if police training is

to turn out the effective crime fighters that are needed to serve our communities in

times of diminishing budgets.

45

Bibliography

Adair, J. (2011) The John Adair Lexicon of Leadership: The definitive guide to leadership skills and knowledge. Kogan Page: London.

Akers, R.L. and Sellers, C.S. (2009) ‘Routine Activity Theory’ in Criminological Theories: Introduction, evaluation and application, 5th ed., New York: Oxford University Press, pg. 35-44.

Bottoms, A.E. (2012) ‘Developing Socio-Spatial Criminology’, in M.Maguire, R. Morgan, and R. Reiner (eds) The Oxford Handbook of Criminology, 5th ed., Oxford: Oxford University Press.

BBC News Website 23rd September 2013: Greater Manchester Police could axe up to 700 officer posts http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-manchester-24202387 (accessed 27th August 2014)

BBC News Website (2) 24th March 1999: Lawrence Key Recommendations http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/285537.stm (accessed 9th March 2015)

Hirschi, T. (1969) Causes of Delinquency, Berkeley: University of California Press.

HMIC. (2003) Diversity Matters http://www.justiceinspectorates.gov.uk/hmic/media/diversity-matters-full-report-20030201.pdf

HMIC (2012) Taking Time for Crime

New York Times 15th April 2014: Sir Robert Peel’s Nine Principles of Policing http://www.nytimes.com/2014/04/16/nyregion/sir-robert-peels-nine-principles-of-policing.html?_r=0

46

Rt. Hon. The Lord Scarman, O.B.E. (1981) The Brixton Disorders 10-12 April 1981. HMSO: London

Sherman, L.W (2013) The Rise of Evidence Based Policing: Targeting, Testing, and Tracking. The University of Chicago: Chicago

Sherman, L.W (1978) The Quality of Police Education: a Critical Review With

Recommendations for Improving Programs in Higher Education (the Jossey-Bass Series in

Higher Education)

Smith, J.A., Flowers, P. & Larkin, M. (2012). Interpretative phenomenological analysis:

Theory, method and research. London: Sage.

Smith, J.A. & Osborn, M. (2003). Interpretative phenomenological analysis. In J.A. Smith

(Ed.), Qualitative psychology: A practical guide to research methods (pp. 53-80). London:

Sage.

47

Appendices

Ethics Form:

Application for Ethics Approval Form (AEAF)(This form includes the University Ethics Check List and a risk assessment

IntroductionUndergraduate projects may be approved by supervisors. If approved by the supervisor, they and the student are required to meet to sign AEAF and the supervisor should then send it to the Departmental administrator.

If

Signed forms showing that ethical approval has been granted (AEAF/EDF) must be received by the Departmental administrative office before the research is undertaken.

Before completing this form, please refer to the University’s Academic Ethical Framework and the University’s Guidelines for Good Research Practice, both of which can be found at:

http://www2.mmu.ac.uk/rke/ethics-forms/Accessed 13th September 2013

You must also comply with the British Psychological Society’s conduct and ethics guidelines, which can be found at:

48

http://www.bps.org.uk/the-society/code-of-conduct/code-of-conduct_home.cfm

No data collection, or contact with prospective participants can take place before ethical approval has been given.

Please note that it is your responsibility to follow the University’s Guidelines on Good Research Practice and any relevant academic or professional guidelines in the conduct of your study. This includes providing appropriate information sheets and consent forms, and debrief sheets and ensuring anonymity in the storage and use of data. Once approval is granted any change in the questions, design or conduct of this research will require ethical approval from your supervisor and may require the submission of a new AEAF.

If you answer Yes to any of the questions in Section 3 (Ethical Issues and Risk Assessment) on this form, you must give a full explanation of what the risks are, and what steps you will take to minimise those risks. Note that even if you answer ‘no’ or ‘not applicable’ to any of the questions, this does not absolve you from responsibility if a risk is found when the research begins. You should therefore still discuss the issue on this form.

Section 1) Project and Applicant Details

To be completed by student

Final Year Research Project | Research Practical | Other (please circle)

Name of applicant: Roger Pegram

Email address: Roger.Pegram@gmp.police.uk

Programme of study: GMP Fellowship

Name of supervisor: Peter Clough

Department: Psychology

Title of proposed research: Arrested Development: an exploration of training and culture within Greater Manchester Police.

Summary of project

1. Give a brief overview of your project including [150 words max.]49

The project examines issues and challenges in providing training for police officers in Greater Manchester. The training functions at GMP are undergoing great changes and resourcing issues. It is unclear what aspects of the current training are effective and why. The current project will endeavour to identify issues and challenges, as well as looking for practical and strategic solutions.

Section 2) Method

1. Provide a clear description of the method to be used including [150 words max.]

The method is twofold. A desk based review of current practice in the U.K. and in other countries. The data collection phase will involve in depth interviews with Greater Manchester Police trainers (colleagues). The interviews will be recorded and transcribed and a thematic analysis conducted.

Section 3) Ethical Issues and Risk Assessment

1. Vulnerability: Could your study involve participants who may be classed as vulnerable and may need assistance to give informed consent?

[Tick the relevant box]Yes No ----- N/a

Discuss [150 words max.]

The participants who will be used will not be classed as vulnerable.

2. Consent & Deception: Will participants be deceived or will it be necessary for participants to take part in the study without their knowledge and consent at the time?

[Tick the relevant box]Yes No ------ N/a

2. 1 Deception: Describe the arrangements for briefing or de-briefing potential participants [note that briefing must ensure that participants are aware of their right to withdraw from the study] [150 words max.]

The purpose of the interviews will be made clear to all participants. They will be told that they have their right to withdraw their responses and/or involvement at any time. A summary of the key findings of the research will be provided to all participants .Participants know the researcher and how to contact him with any concerns

50

2.2 Consent: Describe the arrangements for obtaining participants’ consent. [150 words max.]

Participants will be provided with a brief overview of the project and process and will sign to say they have been fully informed and had the opportunity to answer any questions

3. Recruitment & Sampling: Have you or will you obtain permission from a gatekeeper (e.g. an external ethics committee) to access data, texts or participants?

[Tick the relevant box]Yes ------ No N/a

Discuss [150 words max.]

Access is agreed as these are GMP staff and this is GMP project. Senior management are aware of this project.

4. Data Storage & Protection: Will you collect and store personal information that would require you to abide by the Data Protection Act (1998)?

[Tick the relevant box]Yes ------ No N/a

Discuss [150 words max.]

The recording will be stored securely and not be released to a third party. The recordings will be erased after transcription. The transcribed interviews will be fully anonymised.

5. Harm: Could your study subject harm to participants’ psychological well-being, physical health, personal values or dignity, beyond that which they face in their normal lifestyles?

[Tick the relevant box]Yes No ------ N/a

Discuss [150 words max.]The study content is not thought to cause any harm to the participant. To ensure the well-being of the participants are protected, the research aims will be outlined in the participant brief and the participants will be assured that they can withdraw at any point.

6. Invasiveness: Are drugs, placebos or other substances (e.g. food substances, vitamins) to be administered to participants or will the study involve invasive, intrusive or potentially harmful procedures of any kind?

51

[Tick the relevant box]Yes No ------ N/a

Discuss [150 words max.]Drugs, placebos and other substances will not be administered.

7. Coercion: Will inducements be offered to participants in a way that could lead to or be perceived as a form of coercion?

[Tick the relevant box]Yes No ------ N/a

Discuss [150 words max.]Inducements will not be offered to the participants. Participation is completely voluntary.

8. Risk: Is there any possible risk to the researcher (e.g. working alone with participants, interviewing in secluded or dangerous settings)?

[Tick the relevant box]Yes No ------ N/a

Discuss [150 words max.]The researcher will not be at risk when collecting data.

9. Other: Are there any other ethical issues for your project?

[Tick the relevant box]Yes No ------ N/a

Discuss [150 words max.]All ethical issues have been considered.

Section 4) Anonymity, Confidentiality & Dissemination/Publication

1). Will the data on every individual/source be treated as anonymous?

[Tick the relevant box]Yes ------ No N/a

Discuss [150 words max.]The participants are known to the researcher. Any written information will be fully anonymised and the recordings erased.

2). Will the data provided by every individual/source be treated as confidential?

52

[Tick the relevant box]Yes No ----- N/a

Discuss [150 words max.]

NB: Research data cannot be treated as confidential because it must be available for discussion with your supervisor and will be reported in your research write up and might subsequently be published. What steps have been taken to warn participants before they take part in the study??

It will be outlined in the briefing discussion that data will be available for discussion with a research supervisor, however participants are to remain confident that their personal information will remain anonymous at all times.

3). Are your results likely to be of interest to your participants?

[Tick the relevant box]Yes ------ No N/a

Discuss [150 words max.]If you have answered ‘yes’, please explain how your research findings will be communicated to your participants.

Results will be of interest to the participants it relates to their key roles. A summary of the final report will be made available to them.

Section 5) University Ethics Check List

ETHICS CHECK LIST

This checklist must be completed before commencement of any research project. Note that ALL projects MUST have a risk assessment attached to this form*. Please also refer to the University’s Academic Ethical Framework and the University Guidelines on Good Research Practiceshttp://www2.mmu.ac.uk/rke/ethics-forms/ Accessed 13th September 2013

* See section 3 above

Name of applicant (Principal Investigator): Roger Pegram

53

Telephone Number: 07743 316183

Email Roger.Pegram@gmp.police.uk

Status: Police Officer

Department/School/Other Unit: Psychology Department, Manchester Metropolitan University

Programme of study (if applicable): GMP Fellowship

Name of supervisor/Line manager: Peter Clough

Project Title: Arrested Development: an exploration of training and culture within Greater Manchester Police.

Brief description of project activities: The project examines issues and challenges in providing training for police officer in Greater Manchester. The training functions at GMP are undergoing great changes and resourcing issues. It is unclear what aspects of the current training are effective and why. The current project will endeavour to identify issues and challenges, as well as looking for practical and strategic solutions

The method is twofold. A desk based review of current practice in the U.K. and in other countries. The data collection phase will involve in depth interviews with Greater Manchester Police trainers (colleagues). The interviews will be recorded and transcribed and a thematic analysis conducted.

.

Does the project require NHS National Research Ethics Service (NRES) approval?If yes, has approval been granted by NRES? Attach copy of letter of approval.

NO

Ethics Checklist

You MUST answer ALL questions

Yes No

54

1. Are you are gathering data from people? If Yes please attach evidence of consent?

x

2. If you are gathering data from people, have you attached a sample document explaining your approach to maintaining confidentiality and which each individual will sign their agreement.

x

3. Have you addressed data protection issues – relating to storing and disposing of data? Is this in an auditable form?

x

4. 4A. Have you addressed the issue of informing participants about your project work and ensuring that they are aware of what you are doing?

x

4B. Will the study involve recruitment of patients or staff through the NHS, or involve NHS resources? If yes, you may need full ethical approval from the NHS.

x

5. Does the study involve participants who are particularly vulnerable or unable to give informed consent (e.g. children, people with learning disabilities, your own students)?

x

6. Will the study require the co-operation of a gatekeeper for initial access to the groups or individuals to be recruited (e.g. students at school, members of self-help group, nursing home residents)?

x

7. Will the study involve the use of participants’ images or sensitive data (e.g. participants personal details stored electronically, image capture techniques)?

x

8. Will the study involve discussion of sensitive topics (e.g. sexual activity, drug use)?

x

Ethics Checklist (continued)

You MUST answer ALL questions

Yes No

9. Could the study induce psychological stress or anxiety or cause harm or negative consequences beyond the risks encountered in normal life?

x

55

10. Will blood or tissue samples be obtained

from participants?

x

11. Are drugs, placebos or other substances (e.g. food substances, vitamins) to be administered to the study participants or will the study involve invasive, intrusive or potentially harmful procedures of any kind?

x

12. Is pain or more than mild discomfort likely

to result from the study?

x

13. Will the study involve prolonged or repetitive testing?

x

14. Will it be necessary for participants to take part in the study without their knowledge and informed consent at the time (e.g. covert observation of people in non-public places)?

x

15. Will financial inducements (other than reasonable expenses and compensation for time) be offered to participants?

x

16. Does any relationship exist between the researcher(s) and the participant(s), other than that required by the activities associated with the project (e.g., fellow students, staff, etc)?

XWork colleagues

Approval for the above named proposal is granted

(a) To be completed by the Research Supervisor:I confirm that there are no ethical issues requiring further consideration.

Signature of Supervisor: Date:

NB Any subsequent changes to the nature of the project will require a review of the ethical consideration(s).

(b) To be completed by the Student:

I understand that I must carry out my research as described in this AEAF form and that any subsequent changes to the nature of the research, including questions, design or conduct will require ethical approval from my supervisor and may require

56

the submission of a new AEAF.

Signature of Student: Date:

Approval for the proposal is not granted

If approval is not granted the ethics proposal may be referred to the Psychology Ethics Panel (PEP):

(a) To be completed by the Research Supervisor:I confirm that there are ethical issues requiring further consideration and refer the project proposal to the Psychology Ethics PanelSignature of Supervisor:

Signature of Supervisor: Date:

(b) To be completed by the student:I understand that I cannot proceed with my research or contact any prospective participants until I receive ethical clearance for my research.

Signature of Student: Date:

Notes for Researchers, Managers and Supervisors

1. Approved applicationsWhen considering the University Ethics Checklist:If ‘NO’ is the response for ALL questions the manager/supervisor should approve the study, retain the original signed form and the agreed risk assessment and return a copy to the originator.

If the answer to ANY of questions 1 to 4 is YES then appropriate evidence must be provided by the originator to satisfy the manager/supervisor that the correct measures are in place to address minor ethical considerations. If the manager/supervisor is satisfied that issues have been addressed appropriately s/he should approve the study, retain the original signed form and the agreed risk assessment and return a copy to the originator.

Undergraduate and taught higher degree students should submit a copy of the form at the end of their research report or dissertation, or, in the case of an electronic submission, scanned and copied in.

2. Referral to the Psychology Ethics panel57

If the supervisor cannot grant approval the ethics submission may be referred to the Psychology Ethics Panel for consideration. If the Psychology Ethics Panel cannot grant approval the student may be advised to make a new ethics submission, based on a new research project, or the case may be referred for further scrutiny to the Faculty Research Group Office (see 3. Below) but please note that this can be a lengthy process which may delay the completion of the research project. 3. Applications requiring further scrutinyIf the answer to ANY of the questions 5-17is YES then the researcher will need to submit plans for addressing the ethical issues raised using the ‘Application for Ethical Approval’ form which should be submitted to the relevant Faculty Research Group Officer. This can be obtained from the University website (www.mmu.ac.uk/sas/minutes/Briefing_Note_Academic_Ethics_Procedures_Appendix_2_Modified_MMU_Application_Ethical_Approval.pdf).Forms submitted to the Research Group Officer will be passed to the Faculty’s Head of Academic Ethics who will arrange for an internal scrutineer’s report and recommendations to be sent for consideration by Academic Ethics Committee.

If the answer to question 4B was YES, the researcher may also need to submit an application to the appropriate external health authority ethics committee, via the National Research Ethics Service (NRES), found at http://www.nres.npsa.nhs.uk/and attach a copy to the ‘Application for Ethical Approval’.

Please note that it is the researcher’s responsibility to follow the University’s Guidelines on Good Research Practice and any relevant academic or professional guidelines in the conduct of the study. This includes providing appropriate information sheets and consent forms, and ensuring confidentiality in the storage and use of data. Any significant change in the question, design or conduct over the course of the research should be notified to the Supervisor or Manager and may require a new application for ethics approval.

Your signed AEAF must be scanned and submitted electronically with your dissertation (Journal Report).

Project Consent

My name is Roger Pegram and I am carrying out research a part of a GMP Fellowship. My research investigates aspects of our training provision. I am gathering data by using in depth structured interviews, the interviews will be recorded and then transcribed. In their written form they will be fully anonymised. .The recordings will be erased. All information will be strictly confidential. The findings will be discussed with my supervisor but no identification of the individual who provided the information will be used.

58

If you agree to an interview you have the right to withdraw at any time and/or withdraw your data. You can contact me or my supervisor Professor Peter Clough p.clough@mmu.ac.uk.

A summary of the key findings will be provided to you.

I understand the purpose of the project and agree to take part in the interviews

Signed

Date

Questions:

1) What have you seen change in police training during your career?

2) Can you tell me about the culture that exists in relation to training within Greater

Manchester Police?

3) How do you feel Greater Manchester Police can improve the training it delivers?

59

60

61