Personal loyalty to superiors in criminal justice agencies

Public workers in general, and criminal justice workers in particular, have a problem understanding the concept of loyalty at the workplace—to what, to whom, and at what price. Despite the fact that rules and regulations almost never mention loyalty to superiors, this unexamined practice has been sacrosanct regardless of how unworthy, inefficient, or immoral these superiors may be. Furthermore, the obligation of loyalty to persons rather than principles can encourage corruption, promote mediocrity, and demoralize the workers. Ironically, if both workers and superiors were loyal to departmental values, they would, by natural association, be loyal to one another. In criminal justice agencies the selection of loyalty objects can be as intriguing as the fear of being accused of disloyalty is real. This article discusses the arguments for and against personal loyalty to superiors, the risks to public service inherent in such relationships, and the organizational dangers involved in such pacts. As an alternative to personal loyalty to superiors, this article proposes a professional model based on organizational identification and individual accountability in which dutiful supervision is strengthened while superiors are appreciated as philosopher kings, role models, and mentors.