The contested community police officer: An ongoing conflict between different institutional logics
| Published date | 01 December 2019 |
| Author | Jan Terpstra,Renze Salet |
| DOI | 10.1177/1461355719889465 |
| Date | 01 December 2019 |
| Subject Matter | Special issue: Change and Continuity in the Police |
Special issue: Change and Continuity in the Police
International Journal of
Police Science & Management
The contested community police officer:
2019, Vol. 21(4) 244–253
ª The Author(s) 2019
An ongoing conflict between different
Article reuse guidelines:
institutional logics
sagepub.com/journals-permissions
DOI: 10.1177/1461355719889465
journals.sagepub.com/home/psm
Jan Terpstra
Radboud University, the Netherlands
Renze Salet
Radboud University, the Netherlands
Abstract
This paper concentrates on the ongoing conflict about the role and work of community police officers in the Netherlands.
This conflict can be understood as a result of conflicting institutional logics. Although there are important differences
between the community officers, there is the logic or perspective used by most of the community officers. This logic
puts much emphasis on personal relations, trust-building, direct information, craftsmanship, tacit knowledge, involvement
and discretion and experience. However, community officers have also been confronted with two other logics, with more
emphasis on crime fighting and managerial control. In addition, there is also a third, more implicit logic, built upon a frame
consisting of two opposing images of community officers. On the one hand, many of the current community officers are seen
as old-fashioned and outdated. On the other hand, a more positive image of new community police officers is presented,
called community officers 2.0 This can be seen as a way to create a new type of community police officers that is more in line
with the managerial need for organizational control and with a more limited and instrumental view on community policing.
Keywords
community policing, institutional logics, change, continuity, police
Since the introduction of community-oriented policing as a
In the Netherlands, Terpstra (2010) found in his study on
major innovation, many authors have noticed that institu-
community police officers, that the central ambitions of
tionalization of this police model is highly ambiguous and
community policing are realized to only a limited extent,
contradictory, and that its implementation often proves to
despite the fact that these officers are generally highly
be difficult and hampered by diverse obstacles (for an over-
involved and very motivated to do something about the
view, see Terpstra et al., 2014). For instance, in Denmark,
problems in their communities. One of the main conclu-
Holmberg found that the practice of ‘proximity policing’
sions of Terpstra’s study was that community officers are
(as it is called there) often differed from its original aims
confronted with high and also conflicting expectations. In
and underlying principles. One of the main factors contri-
his view, it was hardly realistic to expect that individual
buting to these implementation problems has been the
community police officers would be able to meet all these
vagueness of the concept of community policing, in com-
demands, given their limited capabilities, skills and exper-
bination with its often very high ambitions (Holmberg,
tise. Terpstra suggested that it is important not to create an
2002). Evaluation of the well-known community policing
overload of expectations and demands on these officers.
experiments in Chicago showed that a complex of different
factors, both inside and outside the police organization,
made it hard to implement this policing model (Greene,
Corresponding author:
2000; Skogan, 1998; Skogan and Hartnett, 1997; Wood
Jan Terpstra, Radboud Universiteit, 6525 XZ Nijmegen, Netherlands.
et al., 2004).
Email: j.terpstra@jur.ru.nl
Terpstra and Salet
245
About 10 years later, we repeated this study on commu-
of individuals may react to these contradictions in different
nity police officers. We carried out observations on the
ways, diverging from conformity to manipulation or rein-
daily practices of community policing at the same locations
terpretation. They can also decide to mobilize different
as in the first study, and in most cases with the same offi-
institutional logics to serve their own purposes (Friedland
cers (Terpstra, 2019a). One of the main conclusions of this
and Alford, 1991). Institutional logics may be contested,
second study was that community police officers in the
and as a result struggles may arise between supporters of
Netherlands are now confronted with even more conflicting
different logics – for instance, about the application and
demands and expectations. We found a constant struggle,
validity of these logics (Friedland and Alford, 1991).
in some cases more or less hidden from view, about the
Since the work of Friedland and Alford (1991), many
position and work of community officers in the Nether-
researchers have tried to develop this perspective. For
lands. This conflict partially concerns interpretation of the
example, Scott (2014: 91) states that ‘many of the most
role and identity of community police officers, and how
important tensions and change dynamics’ in and between
their tasks and activities should be carried out.
organizations can be understood ‘by considering the com-
In this article, we try to understand this ongoing conflict
petition and struggle among various categories of actors
regarding community officers as resulting from contradic-
committed to contesting institutional logics’. In a compa-
tions between different institutional logics (Friedland and
rable line of thinking, Thornton et al. (2012) explored the
Alford, 1991; Thornton et al., 2012). We think that the
close relations between institutional logics and two other
perspective of institutional logics is highly promising as a
phenomena: organizational identity (both collective and
means of understanding complex situations with actors
individual) and organizational practices. In their view, insti-
who are more or less chronically confronted with contra-
tutional logics ‘provide the cognitive and symbolic elements
dictory expectations and claims about their position and
that actors employ in their social interaction to reproduce
work practices. This perspective may also be relevant to
and alter practices and organizational identities’. On the
seeing how these contradictions and tensions contribute to
other hand, shifts in organizational identities can ‘also cata-
both organizational change and stagnation. Instead of giving
lyse changes in logics’. The relations between logics and
a systematic and detailed analysis of changes in the position
identities/practices can vary, and are seen as primarily a
and work of community police officers in the Netherlands,
matter for empirical investigation (Thornton et al., 2012).
this article concentrates on the relevance of the institutional
An example of an empirical study about change in insti-
logics perspective for understanding important contradic-
tutional logics is that by Scott et al. (2000). This study deals
tions, conflicts and changes in the police.
with ‘profound institutional changes’ in US healthcare over
First, we deal with some of the main elements of the
a period of more than 50 years. The authors showed that
theory of institutional logics, followed by a brief overview
these developments are highly dependent on not only mate-
of the historical development of community policing in the
rial circumstances, but also their institutional environment.
Netherlands. Next, we present some information about the
One of the core elements in the institutional environment
design and methods of the two studies that we conducted on
consists of institutional logics, which refer to ‘the belief
community officers in the Netherlands, and some of the
systems and associated practices that predominate in an
main conclusions and findings. We then come to the central
organizational field’. They also provide the organizing
issue of our analysis: the constant struggle over the position
principles ‘that supply practical guidelines for field parti-
of community officers as a result of conflicting institutional
cipants’. These institutional logics also specify ‘what goals
logics. In the final section, we go back to the relevance of
or values’ can be pursued within a field or domain, and
the theory of institutional logics and the issues of profes-
indicate what means are ‘appropriate’. This implies that
sionalization and implementation of community policing.
institutional logics have both a cultural–cognitive and a
normative dimension (Scott et al., 2000). Institutional
logics do not operate in isolation. They must be understood
Conflicting institutional logics
in close relation to the relevant institutional actors (and
The notion of institutional logics was introduced in 1991 by
their relations of power) and the structures of governance
Friedland and Alford. According to them, in modern West-
(Scott et al., 2000).
ern society, multiple institutional logics are available to
Scott et al. (2000) showed that, over the past 50 years,
individuals and organizations. Each logic consists of its
US healthcare has been dominated by several conflicting
own typical set of material practices and symbolic con-
logics, each with its own claims and interests. One of the
structions, such as theories, frames and narratives (Thorn-
elements about which these institutional logics are in con-
ton et al., 2012). In the view of Friedland and Alford
flict is the interpretation of professionalism and the auton-
(1991), contradictions between institutional logics may be
omy and hegemony that...
To continue reading
Request your trial