Command with Character: Redefining Police Leadership for a New Era

During my years in law enforcement, I have witnessed both exemplary leadership and deeply ineffective command. Some of the poorest leadership I encountered relied on the outdated axiom, “Because I said so.”

On one occasion, I asked a supervisor who frequently used that approach why he believed it was effective. His response was blunt: “Because I’m the adult and you’re the teenager.”

My reply was simple: even teenagers perform better when they understand the reason behind what they are being asked to do. While there are moments in law enforcement when an order must be given without explanation—especially in urgent or dangerous situations—that approach should be the exception, not the standard.

Leadership in law enforcement is not primarily about authority—it is about responsibility. While the public often associates police leadership with rank, command presence, and decision-making under pressure, the deeper reality is that leadership in this profession is measured by what happens when no one is watching: how standards are upheld, how people are treated, and how trust is protected.

Shaping Norms and Expectations

Leadership perspectives in law enforcement must account for the deliberate shaping of organizational culture. This culture is not incidental; it is actively created through patterns of behavior that are accepted, modeled, and reinforced by leadership. When supervisors consistently demonstrate professionalism, ethical behavior, and procedural fairness, those values become embedded within the organizational identity. Conversely, when misconduct is overlooked or favoritism is tolerated, it signals to employees that stated values are optional. Research by the U.S. Department of Justice emphasizes that agency culture is one of the strongest predictors of officer behavior and community outcomes, reinforcing the critical role leadership plays in setting the tone for the entire organization¹. Leaders influence not only what behaviors are permitted, but also what behaviors are promoted. Recognition programs, training priorities, and informal peer validation all stem from leadership choices. For instance, when a department prioritizes de-escalation and community engagement in both training and performance evaluations, it communicates that those skills are as valued as tactical proficiency. Leaders who align organizational goals with daily expectations foster a consistent culture, reducing internal confusion and increasing accountability at all levels².

Aligning Culture with Community Expectations

Law enforcement operates within a broader civic ecosystem, and leadership must ensure that internal culture aligns with external expectations. Community trust is not a static asset; it is earned and renewed through daily interactions that reflect shared values. Cultural misalignment - such as a department that prioritizes aggressive enforcement in a community that seeks collaborative problem-solving - can erode legitimacy. Leaders who actively seek community feedback, support restorative practices, and promote inclusive dialogue help bridge the gap between agency culture and public trust³. This alignment also requires cultural humility within the department. Effective leaders understand that community needs are not monolithic, and they adapt their approach based on the unique demographics, histories, and concerns of different neighborhoods. By embedding cultural competence into hiring, training, and evaluation systems, leaders ensure that the department’s internal values remain relevant and responsive to those it serves. This responsiveness strengthens both operational effectiveness and community relations.

Strategic Communication as a Leadership Tool

Internal Communication for Cohesion

Clear, consistent internal communication is a cornerstone of effective law enforcement leadership. Leaders must ensure that every officer understands the department’s mission, values, and operational priorities. This is especially important during periods of organizational stress, such as staff shortages, policy changes, or high-profile incidents. Poor communication in such times can lead to misinformation, resentment, and operational inefficiency. Studies have shown that internal transparency increases trust in leadership, improves morale, and enhances compliance with directives⁴. Supervisors and command staff should not rely solely on formal memos or briefings. Regular face-to-face interactions, open-door policies, and structured feedback opportunities allow officers to voice concerns and feel heard. This two-way communication builds cohesion and demonstrates respect for frontline perspectives. Leaders who make themselves available and responsive are more likely to be trusted, particularly when difficult decisions must be made.

External Communication for Trust and Transparency

Leadership also carries the responsibility of clear communication with the public. This extends beyond press conferences during crises. Ongoing, proactive communication about departmental goals, community initiatives, and use-of-force policies helps demystify law enforcement operations and build transparency. According to the National Policing Institute, agencies that practice proactive communication see higher levels of community satisfaction and cooperation⁵. Effective leaders ensure that communication is not only accurate but also empathetic. Public statements must reflect an understanding of community emotions, especially in the aftermath of controversial incidents. Leaders who can strike a balance between legal accuracy and human compassion are more likely to retain public confidence. Additionally, leveraging multiple platforms - from town halls to social media - allows departments to reach diverse audiences and maintain an open dialogue.

Fostering Resilience and Adaptability

Preparing for Operational Challenges

Law enforcement leadership requires more than crisis response; it demands resilience in the face of sustained pressures. Whether dealing with staffing shortages, policy reform, or community unrest, leaders must cultivate operational flexibility. This begins with contingency planning and scenario-based training. Leaders who prepare their teams for uncertainty - rather than over-relying on routine - foster confidence and reduce panic when conditions change. The Police Executive Research Forum has emphasized the importance of adaptive leadership in preparing for emerging threats and operational shifts⁶. Resilient leadership also includes emotional and organizational stamina. Leaders must model composed decision-making even under extreme pressure. This steadiness inspires confidence and reduces the likelihood of emotional contagion, where stress spirals through the chain of command. Leaders who practice reflective supervision, seek peer consultation, and prioritize their own wellness are better positioned to lead consistently through prolonged periods of challenge.

Encouraging Innovation and Learning

Adaptability also means embracing continuous learning. Effective leaders encourage innovation by creating space for experimentation and constructive failure. When officers see that leadership is open to new ideas - such as alternative response models or community-led initiatives - they are more likely to contribute creatively. This culture of learning can lead to process improvements, stronger community partnerships, and more effective service delivery. Departments should also invest in leadership development at all levels. Field training officers, first-line supervisors, and mid-level managers need structured opportunities to build skills in conflict resolution, organizational management, and strategic thinking. Leadership is not reserved for the top of the hierarchy; it must be cultivated throughout the organization. Agencies that do this well create a bench of capable leaders prepared to meet future challenges proactively⁷.

Ethical Leadership and Decision-Making

Leading with Integrity

Ethical leadership is not just about avoiding misconduct. It is about making decisions that reflect the values of justice, fairness, and service. Every policy interpretation, personnel decision, or public statement is an opportunity to demonstrate those values. Leaders must be willing to make the right decision even when it is unpopular or politically difficult. The International Association of Chiefs of Police emphasizes that ethical leadership involves not only personal integrity but also the courage to challenge unethical behavior in others⁸. This commitment to ethics must be visible. Leaders should articulate the rationale behind difficult decisions, especially when those decisions involve discipline or public accountability. Transparency in ethical reasoning reinforces the department’s credibility and shows officers that fairness is not situational. Leaders who consistently align their actions with stated values set a powerful example that becomes self-reinforcing throughout the organization.

Balancing Competing Obligations

Leadership in law enforcement often involves complex trade-offs. Public expectations, legal constraints, staffing realities, and officer safety can all pull in different directions. Ethical leaders acknowledge these tensions and navigate them with a principled approach. For example, a decision to terminate an officer for misconduct may satisfy public demand for accountability but strain internal morale. Leaders who approach such decisions with honesty, empathy, and procedural fairness are more likely to maintain organizational integrity and trust. Decision-making frameworks, such as those based on procedural justice, can help leaders apply consistent standards across different situations. These frameworks emphasize voice, neutrality, respect, and transparency - not only for the public but also within internal operations. By anchoring decisions in these principles, leaders avoid arbitrary or reactionary choices and promote a culture of fairness throughout the department⁹.

Bibliography

1. U.S. Department of Justice. 2015. “The President’s Task Force on 21st Century Policing Final Report.” Washington, DC: Office of Community Oriented Policing Services.

2. Skogan, Wesley G. 2008. “Why Reforms Fail.” Policing and Society 18 (1): 23-34.

3. Tyler, Tom R., and Jeffrey Fagan. 2008. “Legitimacy and Cooperation: Why Do People Help the Police Fight Crime in Their Communities?” Ohio State Journal of Criminal Law 6 (1): 231-275.

4. Rosenbaum, Dennis P., Amie M. Schuck, Sandra K. Costello, Darnell F. Hawkins, and Marianne K. Ring. 2005. “Attitudes Toward the Police: The Effects of Direct and Vicarious Experience.” Police Quarterly 8 (3): 343-365.

5. National Policing Institute. 2022. “Community Engagement Strategies in Law Enforcement.” Washington, DC.

6. Police Executive Research Forum. 2017. “Guiding Principles on Use of Force.” Washington, DC.

7. International Association of Chiefs of Police. 2020. “Leadership in Police Organizations: A Framework.” Alexandria, VA.

8. International Association of Chiefs of Police. 2019. “Ethical Policing is Courageous (EPIC) Program Overview.” Alexandria, VA.

9. Tyler, Tom R. 2006. “Why People Obey the Law.” Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.