Cloke And Goldsmith (2011)

Today’s law enforcement are facing tremendous adversities; from advancing technologies to deplorable relationships with the communities and lack of leadership to failing policies. The current climate may be one of the most challenging times to be in law enforcement. Accordingly, leaders must have the ability to recognize and respond to evolving changes and problems facing the organization. Cloke and Goldsmith (2011) suggests a five-step process in creative problem solving; First, admit that there is a problem, second, collaborate and clarify, third, jointly investigate, fourth, invent neutral solutions, and five, jointly act.

It is paramount for leaders to treat members of their department with dignity, fairness, and respect. Therefore,

drawing on step four, “Invent Solutions That Satisfy Everyone’s Interests Without Becoming Attached to Any Particular Solution” (Cloke and Goldsmith, 2011, p.190) will neutralize the anger of department members. By listening and soliciting officers’ views on the issues impacting policy and procedure, officers are more likely to comply with rules and regulations.
In an open forum with divisive opinions, incorporating objections, disagreements, and concerns into the solution process will ensure fairness and neutrality (Cloke & Goldsmith, 2011).

Furthermore, when members of the department are given the opportunity to be heard and voice their opinions, leadership is perceived as legitimate and just. The penultimate process is to ensure that members does have an opportunity to vent their frustrations and be heard. So, “before selecting a solution for implementation, [leaders] should consider the merits of all possible solutions, without favoring any particular one” (Cloke and Goldsmith, 2011, p.190). A policy change must represent the core value of not only the organization, but the people that makes the organization. Lastly, once a consensus is reached, leaders have the obligation to ensure the solution is inclusive, representative, and legal. Therefore, the solution should be reaffirmed by “consulting with experts, critics, coaches, and anyone affected by the problem or the solution to solicit feedback on alternative solutions” (Cloke and Goldsmith, 2011, p.190). This last step ensures that members of the department are included in the decision making while protecting the interest of the

organization.
Developing a policy to govern members’ personal opinions on social media should be in general terms. For example, officers shall conduct themselves, on or off duty, in such a manner as to reflect favorably on the department. Officers shall not conduct themselves in a manner that may bring the department into disrepute or impairs the operation and efficiency of the department. Members shall not engage in any conduct that is unbecoming an employee of the department. Freedom of speech is a protected constitutional right; however, officers are held to a higher standard and when officers share their personal opinions on social media while indicating a nexus to the police department, their actions can be considered unbecoming, thus, appropriate discipline may be imposed.