Correctional Officers - Judgment & Decision-Making
Most correctional
officers are adequately prepared for the job and in most cases resilient in
nature and disposition and do remarkably well under the circumstances of
working inside a large jail or prison. However, we must all admit that stress
does take its toll and one of their main challenges is to deal and manage stress
while making good sound decisions and appropriately based judgment calls that
keeps everyone safe and sound twenty four hours a day seven days a week.
To be a good
decision maker, we must first stabilize our emotional conduct and resist the
natural negative impacts of stress. This requires self-awareness and self-care.
Once this is achieved the mindset is much clearer and better in most cases to
offer better decision making efforts and safer environments to work in most of
the time. Therefore it is important to mention that a clear mind makes better
decisions especially under duress.
Focusing on
the fact that many officers and correctional employees are aware how to combat
stress we should focus on better judgment and decision making processes and actions
beyond the fair, firm and consistent concept taught in many law enforcement
academies throughout the country. So it is favorable to start looking at
quality of judgment and decision making in the corrections field. Whether or
not the ability to measure judgment is reasonable or even possible we shall
examine what constitutes good judgment and compare it with the job at hand as a
correctional officer.
First off,
correctional officers have an array of tools at his or her disposal besides
their basic training. This includes post orders, institutional orders and
agency directives or policies. It is a well-accepted practice that most
decisions are based on such a foundations and requires little coaxing or
motivation to stay on track with such guidance.
However, not
every decision can be made out of a book or policy thus the individual must be
capable of making independent judgment with independent criteria based on
individual qualifications and standards to boost their basic foundation when
trained or mentored by others. In addition there are firm emergency
preparedness plans that need to be reviewed and learned to make critical
decisions under stressful situations.
Using a basic
skill such as a situational awareness assessment, one can expect a number of different
decisions for different situations. This fact has long been established over
time and through practical experience and time. Regardless, correctional
officers need to realize that whatever decision they make it will have a
significant impact on the situational outcome and lessons learned from taking
such actions.
In corrections there are blurred boundaries
that are often misread or in some cases unrecognized at the time of the
assessment. Thus theoretically, officers must learn how to approach each
problem and evaluate and analyze things quickly in order to determine the correct
approach to the problem and be put at risk that they do not have all the
information needed to make a good decision.
This is
quite complex in nature and often neglected in training line staff to prepare
them for command decision positions. First we must recognize that judgment and
decision making are intimately linked but are two separate concepts requiring
separate processing. The process demands separate cognitive demand and pose
distinct challenges in order to
Judgment is
an assessment tool that allows alternatives between choices suggested in the
problem solving process. It takes into consideration a continuum of different
aspects that are based about a person, an object or a situation. Hence the
final result based on judgment is an overall evaluation based on factors
provided or given for each person, object or situation.
Decision
making is determined to be a choice between alternatives and determines a
specific response to a persons, object or situation. Herein because there are
consequences for such a decision and accountability why such a decision was
made in the first place it is important to distinguish the difference between
these two concepts.
When it is
all said and done, a correctional officer relies on the quality of judgment to
do the job properly. This requires an analysis for accuracy and review the
quality of facts gathered or provided and then encompass those established
guidelines provided for such a condition. This leaves little wiggle room in the
level of accuracy or for taking incorrect or deviating practices to make it
come together as a valid evaluation that can be resolved satisfactorily.
So what
makes a decision a good decision you have to ask? Working in such a complex
environment that is influenced by many uncertainties the best decisions are
those that yield the best results, conditions or consequences for achieving a
safe and secure environment. However, one must take into account such results
could in fact have come about by chance and not because of a thorough
evaluation of the process involved. Some may call it luck but others call it a
calculated guess for making the “best” decision at the time.
Regardless good
decision-making involves using your training, your experience, the laws of
logic and probability along with common sense. Keeping it rational and
determining the probability of the outcome is a common approach and should keep
in mind that the optimum decision may be ideal for one situation or person but
not in other situations or persons. In other words, evaluating the outcome
should include comparing options or decision how to resolve it taking into
consideration of all the facts before finalizing a decision.
However,
what is reasonable for one person may not apply for another person. One
decision maker can be of average experience while the other may be relatively
better experienced and determine which strategy is better based on the
examination of the problem and comparing possible outcomes with various
strategies while in the end looking at tradeoffs or compromising factors.
Regardless
the process should include the goals, the consequences, and the relative value
of outcomes of different approaches or options. This would logically be
considered a good decision making process that takes much into consideration
before the final decision is reached.
Therefore,
here we have to caution the decision maker not to rely on ‘lessons learned” in
the past as the factors may not be identical or duplicated creating a different
outcome possibility and flawing the process. This is where the judgment comes
into play and create a need to assess and decide the outcomes through
comparisons and some level of consensus, peer acknowledgment and or evaluation
and the appropriateness of the action proposed to be taken with the challenge
to take the ultimate or best decisions for each problem or call to make.
Henceforward
in a correctional setting one must be cautioned and be made aware that such
evaluations if taken as a routine matter could reveal a degree of predictable
or anticipated course of action of the proposed action and would be to the
benefit of controversy as how well the inmates know the decision will be made
ahead of time and how consistently these facts gathered are applied with the
individual’s knowledge base creating a pre-determined response to a problem.
In other
words, specifically in a critical or crisis situation, there should be room
made for actions or decisions made by the antagonistic group and that it is a strong
possibility that they will make tactical or strategically implied assumptions
that whatever decision is made, formulated and finalized within a hostile
situation or environment the method [solution] chosen could fall into the hands
of the inmates and thus the response is compromised even when following the
process but failing to compare potential outcomes and consequences laid on the
table beforehand.
Like it was
mentioned and said in the beginning of this article, working inside a prison
has many uncertainties and planning a situational assessment using judgment and
decision-making tools should be done with caution and with some level of
expertise and experience as well as taking the time to conduct peer assessments
[for consensus] and share evaluation materials before finalizing the
resolution.
No comments:
Post a Comment