Ann-Christine Andersson Arnten, Bengt Jansson, Klaus Olsen and Trevor Archer
There is a tendency to regard police-work, implying independence and initiative in the absence of direct presence of authority that places a premium upon leadership, as a ‘drudge’ although ‘daily hassles’ may be converted immediately to “special events”. Despite this aspect, police leadership tends not to differ from other, civil, forms of leadership. A sample of police leaders (n=106) was compared to civil leaders derived from government administration and private enterprise (n=1650). Personal attitudes to and experiences of job relations and characteristics are measured with the JMT three subscales (Inner Drive and Tolerance to stress distress from the main scale Stability together with Enterprise from the main scale Action) all of which provide an indication of the leader’s resourcefulness. Low-level scoring on any of these three attributes is expected to induce negative influences upon subordinates whereas the opposite outcomes may be predicted by high-level scoring. The results indicated that: (i) All-level police chiefs differed markedly from executive leaders in public administration and private enterprise; the former expressed the lowest levels of tolerance to stress, enterprise and Inner drive. (ii) Correlational analyses indicated that there were clear-cut, positive and strong relationships between the three variables, tolerance to stress, enterprise and Inner drive. (iii) there was a marked difference between public and private executive leaders with regard to enterprise and Inner drive to the advantage of the private executive leaders. The present results are discussed in relation to police leadership inadequacy and efforts to overcome the situation.
分享此文章
English 
Spanish 
Russian 
German 
French 
Japanese 
Portuguese 
Hindi 