The collateral consequences of GPS-LED supervision in hot spots policing

Hot spots policing is popular, yet little is known about officer receptivity to the tactic and its impact on internal procedural justice, organizational commitment, and self-legitimacy. The nature of the tactic means that officers must relinquish their discretionary powers so that they can be directed to crime and disorder locations at specific times and for regimented durations. This loss of ‘spatiotemporal autonomy’ is exacerbated by technological tracking devices. We examined the receptivity of British officers to hot spots patrols, where the deployment was tracked with individual GPS trackers, compared to parallel patrols without hot spots policing or tracking. In contrast to the comparison group, officers in hot spots disliked the routinization of their shifts; regimented patrols were detrimental for internal procedural justice and organizational commitment. The ramifications of the introduction of GPS-enabled systems include certain tracking of officers and their compliance, such as a Taylorist time and motion study. While hot spots policing remains an effective tactic, questions about sustainability may be raised if officers’ expectations, attitudes and receptivity are not managed.     

Rethinking Conflict: Perspectives from the Insight Approach

In this article, the authors present the “insight approach” to conflict as an analytical and methodological framework that addresses the dynamic interactions between conflicting parties. According to the insight approach, conflict is relational, dynamic, and adaptive, generated from the responsive interpretive frameworks that parties use to construct meaning. Conflict arises as a result of parties' experience of what insight theorists call “threat‐to‐cares,” which generates defend–attack patterns of interaction between them. The authors suggest that rethinking the nature of conflict so that it is seen as an interaction embedded in meaning making enables conflict interveners to help parties gain insight into, and articulate, the values that are being generated, advanced, threatened, and realigned within the complex interactions that define us as social beings. In doing so, parties develop abilities to generate new patterns and solutions that can limit and even eliminate the experiences of threat that generate conflict between them.     

国际核不扩散形势与世界安全——“第一届中英智库安全战略论坛暨国际核不扩散形势与世界安全”选辑

2010年11月10日,中国和平与发展研究中心与英国皇家三军防务研究所（RUSI）在北京共同举办＂第一届中英智库安全战略论坛暨国际核不扩散形势与世界安全研讨会＂。英方学者提交的论文可以反映西方主流智库学者在国际核裁军及核军控问题上的基本看法,现将其中两篇英文和中文翻译摘要刊出,以飨读者。     

The Interpersonal Style and Complementarity Between Crisis Negotiators and Forensic Inpatients

Previous negotiation research has explored the interaction and communication between crisis negotiators and perpetrators. A crisis negotiator attempts to resolve a critical incident through negotiation with an individual, or group of persons in crisis. The purpose of this study was to establish the interpersonal style of crisis negotiators and complementarity of the interpersonal interaction between them and forensic inpatients. Crisis negotiators, clinical workers and students (n = 90) used the Check List of Interpersonal Transactions-Revised (CLOIT-R) to identify interpersonal style, along with eight vignettes detailing interpersonal styles. Crisis negotiators were most likely to have a friendly interpersonal style compared to the other non-trained groups. Complementarity theory was not exclusively supported as submissive individuals did not show optimistic judgments in working with dominant forensic inpatients and vice versa. Exploratory analysis revealed that dominant crisis negotiators were optimistic in working with forensic inpatients with a dominant interpersonal style. This study provides insight into the area of interpersonal complementarity of crisis negotiators and forensic inpatients. Whilst further research is required, a potential new finding was established, with significant ‘similarity’ found when dominant crisis negotiators are asked to work with dominant forensic inpatients.     

Embracing the new professionalism: self-regulation, mandatory reporting and their discontents

In response to perceived failures in medical self-regulation in Australia, first in two States (for doctors) and now under the National Registration and Accreditation Scheme (for all health practitioners), mandatory reporting of peer status or practice that poses risks to patients has been introduced. Yet now, in response to the lobbying of State and federal health ministers by the medical profession, mainly in relation to the impairment provisions, this is to be reviewed. This column argues that claims concerning the negative consequences for practitioners of mandatory reporting are illogical and lack supporting evidence. There is, however, evidence that the medical profession does not consistently act in accordance with its professed positions in the area of physician impairment and departure from accepted clinical standards. The call for a review of mandatory reporting reflects an outdated model of regulation that does not align with increasing calls for a "new professionalism". In its own interests, but primarily in the interests of patients, the medical profession should embrace new attitudes and practices that will at first appear to threaten the privilege of self-regulation, but on proper scrutiny will be seen as necessary to retain it.     

The Constitution of Criminal Law: Justifications, Policing and the State��s Fiduciary Duties

This paper, originally written for a conference on criminal law in times of emergency, considers the implications of the ‘German Airliner case’ for criminal law theory. In that case, the German constitutional court struck down as unconstitutional a law empowering state officials to order the shooting down of a hijacked plane on the grounds that the state could not order the killing of innocent civilians. Some have argued that despite this ruling, individual officials should still be entitled to claim a criminal law justification defence. I argue that the nature of justification defences necessarily ties them to the powers of the state to engage in such activity. I also argue that both the constitutional decision and its criminal law implications are salutary.     

Helping organizations help others: organization development as a facilitator of social change

This article explores organization development (OD) interventions and their likelihood of increasing social change outcomes in public agencies. The central argument of this work is that public and nonprofit organizations can deliver better social outcomes by systematically engaging in OD interventions. An in-depth survey was conducted in 3 agencies of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania at the end of the gubernatorial administration of Tom Ridge (1995-2002). During his administration, Governor Ridge led the agencies of Pennsylvania government through a large-scale change effort to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of service delivery to the citizens of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. The change effort was a remarkable event for the Commonwealth because no other governor in the history of the state had attempted to conceptualize and deliver a comprehensive large-scale change management initiative. The successes and setbacks served as a fertile context to shed light on the following research question: Do OD interventions increase the likelihood that public organizations will deliver better social outcomes? This question is important in that public organizations may need to engage in organization development activities to improve their internal operations, which in turn may help them provide exemplary social outcomes to those whom they serve. In short, organization development interventions might allow public organizations to help themselves to help others.