As law enforcement leaders strive to improve performance within their operations, what is the best measurement for success? By the very nature of their assigned responsibilities, law enforcement officers face various problematic events, ranging from rapidly evolving threats to emergency response driving, vehicle pursuits, and foot pursuits. Other areas of concern include general law enforcement liability claims, automobile accidents, serious injuries, or even death. The following article is the first in a focused series on how agencies can use risk management tools to limit exposures in the ever-evolving law enforcement risk management world.

So, what can be done in this atmosphere of relentless uncertainty? When flying an airplane, proactive action is better than reacting when something goes wrong because it will probably be too late. Aviation uses risk management as a critical component to ensure safety, operational efficiency, and regulatory compliance. Due to complex systems, high speeds, and the potential for catastrophic failure, the aviation industry deals with inherently high risks, so it relies on structured risk management practices. Risk management in aviation is systematic, proactive, and ongoing. It is embedded in every aspect of the industry to enhance safety, reduce incidents, and manage complex interactions between humans, machines, and the environment.

Much like aviation, law enforcement is inherently high-risk, and catastrophic failure is always possible. Therefore, preparing for challenges can help decrease potential losses. By implementing regular, proactive, and continuous risk management within law enforcement operations, we can increase safety, reduce opportunities for liability lawsuits, lower serious injuries, and improve operational effectiveness.

However, attitudes toward risk vary from person to person. The risk spectrum ranges from those who are risk-averse or uneasy with uncertainties to those who are risk-tolerant, meaning they have no specific reaction. Finally, risk-seekers find that uncertainty is just a part of the job. Risk seeking is not always a bad thing; however, it becomes problematic by lulling one into a false sense of security that continued outcomes will remain the same when things go right. For example, if an officer takes a sharp curve at 70 mph, it lulls them into thinking they are NASCAR-bound expert drivers, and the result will be the same every time. 

Some key concepts in risk management include risk threshold, risk appetite, and risk boundaries, which help organizations make informed, consistent decisions about safety and operations. Risk appetite is the amount and type of risk an organization is willing to accept to pursue its objectives. Let’s take, for example, pursuits. An agency may be of the mindset that it will chase all criminals at any cost, which would be considered its risk appetite. The risk threshold is the specific point or limit at which a risk becomes unacceptable and requires action. The same agency, because of a pursuit, kills a well-loved local family of four when the officer fails to clear the intersection. The loss of the family, the cost of litigation, and the reputation surpass the risk threshold, and the agency will change its policies and procedures. Finally, formal or informal limits, or risk boundaries, are set around operational behavior or actions to ensure operations stay within the defined risk appetite and thresholds. These aim to set the tone for a safety culture, a warning system to trigger mitigation, and prevent drift into unsafe territory. For instance, there are often many injuries in defensive tactics training. An agency can set risk boundaries by having a Safety Officer present during training to help avoid injuries. If injuries become prevalent, it should trigger the agency to look for ways to mitigate the type and frequency of injuries once the risk threshold is crossed.

Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) and Key Risk Indicators (KRIs) have long been used in risk management to identify and measure the potential for losses. KPIs provide actionable insights into performance and departmental development. Some KPIs in business consist of net profit, gross profit, and return on investment. They also have customer metrics that involve customer satisfaction, retention, and net promoter scores (do your customers recommend you to others). Operational metrics may include employee productivity, efficiency ratios, social media engagement, and brand awareness. Moreover, finally, from a human resource perspective, they measure employee satisfaction, turnover rate, absenteeism, training effectiveness, and the time it takes to fill a position.

By tracking key performance indicators, leadership will gain valuable insights into various aspects of departmental performance, from policy adherence to citizen interactions, traffic stops, community trust, agency turnover and retention rates, and its budgetary impact on an organization. Adopting KPIs within operations can also support continuous performance refinement in measured areas and ensure alignment with the agency’s Mission and Vision statements. Some indicators may include tracking accidents the agency is having and developing mitigation strategies through training, discipline, and take-home car privileges. When it comes to injuries, tracking the types of injuries is crucial to implement measures to reduce them. Automobile crashes can also be tracked per year to develop training, as well as risk thresholds for the next year. Citizen complaints thresholds and use of force incidents can be used as an early warning system.  The result is a meaningful opportunity to enhance policy and procedures and strengthen community relations.

Key Risk Indicators (KRIs) are very closely related to KPIs. KRIs rely on the risk criteria for an organization’s strategic risks. In law enforcement, strategic risk refers to internal and external factors that can hinder an agency’s ability to achieve short-term and long-term goals and objectives that could impact the agency’s effectiveness and reputation. Examples of external strategic risks include political and economic instability, community relations and public trust, advancements in technology, and changing crime patterns. Internal strategic risks include effective leadership, staffing and training, policies and procedures, data analysis, and resource allocation. Effective KRIs provide quantifiable information about emerging trends that could eventually push the risk level beyond the threshold.

These two tools can be the proverbial crystal ball to help identify, measure, predict, and mitigate future outcomes within law enforcement operations. This method can also assist with predicting budgets and funding allocation, planning training calendars based on departmental losses and injuries, and increasing the value of physical and mental fitness programs to reduce line-of-duty injuries.  

An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure, and predicting the future is challenging without a crystal ball. In law enforcement, there is always a risk to the life and safety of officers and the communities they serve, as well as departmental liability and reputation. Implementing strong, successful risk management begins with leadership. While this is a relatively new concept for many law enforcement organizations, all personnel at all operational levels should embrace risk management strategies to protect internal and external stakeholders. Understanding that risk mitigation requires buy-in and active participation at all organizational levels is also essential.

This is just the beginning of our risk management journey. Understanding is just one piece of the puzzle. In the next article, we will examine in greater detail how KPIs and KRIs will assist leadership in driving departmental culture and officer safety.  Things will really come together to paint a greater picture of organizational risk management, the benefits to leadership and agency success.