Image credit: NCinDC via Flickr
I got to thinking about this last night as I wrote a comment on this post. What does Generation Y really mean to law enforcement?
It was already on my mind as I recently finished an article on police recruiting and retention in this economy. (Shameless self-promotion: it will be out in the March/April issue of Police & Security News.)
Two of my sources had brought up Gen Y and their unique needs, suggesting that Gen Y’ers really don’t need all that much to be happy on the job. They’ve been portrayed as selfish and needy (isn’t every generation of young people?) but in reality, because they seek a better quality of work-life balance than they saw their parents get, it won’t take much to get—or keep—them. Think flexible work days instead of lucrative signing bonuses. Or the ability to install XM satellite radio in their take-home cars.
Not their parents’ social change
So what does this have to do with PR? Again, Gen Y really doesn’t demand much. As I wrote last night: “They are asking for information. They want to understand. They want to fix what’s wrong. They seek collaboration with authority to do it. That’s a striking counterpoint to their parents, the boomers, who protested against authority in all forms.”
Think about that. These kids were raised to seek input, to look up to authority rather than to tear it down. I think this makes it less likely that this generation will continue to repeat their parents’ and grandparents’ mistakes when it comes to police-community relations. Sure, some will: those trapped in the endless rut of groupthink bred in many neighborhoods (and no, I’m not just talking about inner cities; I see just as much of it out here in the sticks).
Go with their flow
What law enforcement needs to target with both public relations and recruitment, then, are the Gen Y’ers who want to be part of something better. Recruit them with intangible benefits rather than the salary-and-benefits packages their parents expected. Retain them by allowing them to use social media to reach out to their civilian peers, to take community policing to the Internet.
Sure, it means establishing strict policies on exactly what kind of information can be released, and it also means carefully guiding officers (with discipline as a last resort) as they blog or tweet or comment on MySpace and Facebook. There’s another blog entry or two right there.
But bear in mind that many corporations, which have at least as much of a reason to want to withhold information as police departments, are more and more allowing their employees to build relationships online. They understand that human connections, when people believe they are valued and trusted, make sales.
What “building relationships” could mean
How does this translate to public agencies? Maybe it’s as simple as cutting the police department some slack in cases like the BART shooting, when information cannot be immediately released during an active investigation. Imagine officers jumping online in the moments after the incident, not necessarily to talk, but simply to listen as their peers react—essentially providing a kind of critical incident “debriefing” to those who have just seen a horrifying video, who seek reassurance that they can still trust their police?
No, social media is not a cure-all. Some problems will never be solved, online or off. But I do think police departments have a unique opportunity to connect with civilians in ways they never have before. Social media tools are free and easily available. The question is not why should you–it’s what do you have to lose?
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_e.png?x-id=4f9daf84-b3c1-4205-bed1-2684c8471aa7)
Popularity: 100% [?]
7 Responses
Good call on the recruiting piece. I do wonder, however, if in this economy, the “salary and benefits” you discuss might be more important than you let on. I am a cop because I love it. I must admit, however, that in this economy my benefits and civil service protection seem all the sweeter. That might be something to emphasize, not downplay, during this recession.
Posted on February 9th, 2009 at 3:24 pm
Well, I don’t think Houston and Dallas PD’s competing signing bonuses have hurt their recruiting efforts.
But at the same time, salary/benefits shouldn’t be seen as the end-all be-all of recruiting. Agencies are going to have to make sure their work environments are positive if they’re going to retain the Gen Y’ers, who have been shown to walk if they don’t see their loyalty repaid.
In some ways I think the smaller agencies (who can’t afford pay incentives to begin with) are better positioned to groom tomorrow’s LE leaders by investing in them. That’s what’s behind a lot of the nonmonetary incentives being put in place in one of the PDs I interviewed, Eustis FL. That said, I think those young people for whom money is more important, will go to the larger agencies. But the smaller ones still have a chance to compete if they have strong nonmonetary support in place.
Does that make more sense?
Posted on February 9th, 2009 at 3:32 pm
Today the young guns want the cash. I believe they really like the job but do they have the fire in their belly like we had when we came on? I don’t think so. We are voting on a new contract which I think is pretty good but lots of rumbling because we are not number one…come on in this day and age be thankful. I put a poll on the cops society website asking….are cops underpaid?
A…YES
A….NO
A….SHIT no would do it for free
I think many of us would do it for almost free hey we do have to support the family but we do really love the job that much.
Posted on February 9th, 2009 at 4:12 pm
We don’t disagree, Mack. One of the articles I linked to (I think) talks about how Gen Y will happily change careers if they don’t find fulfillment. Not just jobs — careers! So satisfaction is key, whether it’s monetary (again, they’ll go to larger departments) or self-actualizing (departments that invest in careers).
The lt. I interviewed at Eustis did bring up the idea that the Gen Y’ers need to be guided in the norms of police culture. They don’t always see that their “sense of entitlement” can be a negative as well as a positive. Some end up doing stupid things, like Tasing a 15-year-old at a drinking party. Others don’t see the value of a long-term career. The latter are the ones that police departments need to be grooming. I see it as a necessary give-and-take of loyalties between the two.
Posted on February 9th, 2009 at 4:20 pm
My personal opinion on the whole “generation differences” is that while yes, there are differences between generations; I believe that EVERY generation likes to think that the new generation is somehow “inferior” to their own. Rock and Roll is ruining our youth…hippies…television…etc. etc. etc. Im betting that the cavemen thought that that newfangled “fire” thing was going to make the kids soft and weak.
I dont know how much stock I place in this whole “X vs. Y” stuff……
Posted on February 25th, 2009 at 2:33 pm
Tom — LOL @ “Im betting that the cavemen thought that that newfangled “fire” thing was going to make the kids soft and weak”! You have a point. At the same time, though, I don’t think it’s enough to be aware of overall intergenerational differences and the need for respect; every generation has a specific hallmark (or more), and that’s what leaders need to be aware of — it more effectively helps them pick battles and set boundaries.
In this case, rather than creating a blanket “no social networking” policy, police leaders who understand that social networking is part of this generation’s culture will be in a better position to help young officers use it to maximum personal and departmental effectiveness.
Posted on February 25th, 2009 at 3:05 pm
There was a recent news story about some “scientist” who concluded that “social networking is damaging our childrens brains”…the claim was that social websites and their “instant gratification” is “rewiring” our kids brains and causing social adaptation problems and a lack of ability to concentrate. Of course there was no information about this “scientist” or his/her “research”.
I find it odd how “rewiring” of a brain in a different pattern equates to “damage” and I’m wagering that the first generations to have telephones, televisions, photographs and recorded sound probably experienced similar “rewiring”…are we “damaged” because our generation grew up during the development of the PC and video game? Its far to convenient how “the new generation” always seems to be “broken” in some way.
Similarly, I’m leery of LTC Grossmans deductive leap that violent video games can bear the lions share of the blame for school shootings and violence. There seems to be human tendency to place the bulk of the “blame” on one element of what I see as a complex web of influences and causes in human behavior.
On the flip side…I think that there is a “reverse generational relationship” going on in police administration. The senior leadership tends to be the “older generation” that sometimes believes that their way was the “best” way and the “new kids” are all screwed up from all that rock n roll and video gaming…the old “for every finger you point-three point back at you” saying may be applicable in some of this “X-Y” stuff.
Posted on February 25th, 2009 at 3:40 pm
Add A Comment