MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3165554395 · doi:10.1093/police/paz055

Creating a Change Culture in a Police Service: The Role of Police Leadership

2018· article· en· W3165554395 on OpenAlexaff
Neil Dubord, Curt T. Griffiths

Bibliographic record

VenuePolicing A Journal of Policy and Practice · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPolicing Practices and Perceptions
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCulture changePublic relationsService delivery frameworkService (business)Organizational cultureBusinessIdentification (biology)Process (computing)Political scienceMarketingSociologyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Despite the increased emphasis on best practices and evidence-based policing, creating a change culture in police services has remained elusive. Few police agencies have developed the capacity to assess the effectiveness and efficiency of their operations, and there has often been a lack of innovative police leadership to lead reform efforts. This article presents a case study of a municipal police service that transformed the delivery of patrol services and, in so doing, altered the culture of the organization. The role played by an independent review of the department’s patrol division, the service delivery model that was developed, and the strategies used by senior management to secure buy-in from the membership via a department-wide collaborative process are discussed. The discussion concludes with the identification of key requirements for police leaders to create a change culture in their police services and, in so doing, improve the effectiveness and efficiency of the delivery of police services.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.036
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.037
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.036
Threshold uncertainty score0.192

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0360.037
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0270.031
Scholarly communication0.0230.007
Open science0.0030.014
Research integrity0.0030.008
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.183
GPT teacher head0.448
Teacher spread0.265 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations13
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePolicing A Journal of Policy and PracticeSame topicPolicing Practices and PerceptionsFrench-language works237,207