Understanding the administration of
justice organizations.
Look at big picture

BEFORE EXPLORING THE ISSUE OF ADMINISTRATION, WE MUST LOOK AT THE TERM
CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM.

• Can you identify the three components of the criminal justice system?
• Is each component ONE single organization?
• What does it mean when we identify something as a single/one
  organization?
• Can you name any organization and then identify the "Boss" over the entire
  organization?
• Who controls all of the components of the criminal justice system?

THE so called C.J. system has more than 18,000 separate state and local Law enforcement agencies. Each agency operates differently and even its officers do not necessarily share the same uniform and vehicle markings, and they certainly do not have the same pay from jurisdiction to jurisdiction. Many heads of law enforcement agencies are appointed, others are elected.

Can you identify the agency represented in the photos above?
Is it MORE than one agency?
Is there any ONE person in charge of all three?

What are the possible consequences of this fragmentation?

One example of an attempt to eliminate duplication of function and fragmented law enforcement:

Why is it important to look at all components of the criminal justice system when
studying the administration of c.j. organizations?

Administrative Problems and factors:

Can span entire system/all components

Or exist just within a component

Study of all of the components of the CJ System is important for an understanding of the impact actions in one component
have on another component or sub component.

What is a sub component? Well.....?

Below a depiction of the kind of problem that can arise between different
agencies in the same criminal justice component, or between components.
Harmony: NOT
Confounding Issues which arise:

• Impact of activities and decisions in one component on another.
• Different objectives and goals for each component
  
• Different objectives and goals for agencies within a component
  

　

QUESTIONS NOT ANSWERED BY AUTHOR:

What is the mission and goal of the CJ system?

Is each component's mission in harmony
with that mission?

How can you have a system-wide mission if no
one has the authority to proscribe it?

Degree of congruence of goal setting by components/
agencies

Can you hold any component responsible for JUSTICE,
if other components independent of that component play a
part in it?

When the MISSION fails-who is responsible?

When the mission is accomplished
(continuing???) who can take credit for it?

RELATED PROBLEMS:

HOW TO:

Measure of success-
outcome measures different for each component

What are police outcome measures and some problems?
PROBLEMS WITH CRIME STATISTICS
(Scroll down in web page linked above to paragraph
" Police Departments Pressured to Alter Crime Data")

What are outcome measures for prosecutors?

ROLE CONFLICTS:

• Police make arrests-not evaluated on quality
  of arrests
• prosecutor-stuck with poor reports/
  investigations, judged partially by their success in
  obtaining convictions-Can you see a problem
  with this???

• Public Defender/defense attorney-judged by success
  in getting charges dropped according to book.
  (what is really more common is to work at
  lowering charges) Sound like a GAME?
  INVOLVED-charges stacked by prosecutor so they
  can be used in bargaining for guilty plea.
• COURTS: More independent IN OPERATION
  according to text author and supposedly
  sentence offenders as they see fit!!!
  NOT necessarily. Changes due to Sentencing
  Guidelines in some jurisdictions.

• CORRECTIONS: Conflict between punishment and
  rehabilitation-SUCCESS IN NEITHER-WHAT IS
  PUNISHMENT NOT determined by Corrections depts.
  Do YOU know what is punishment????

Author indicates that Agencies are: overcrowded, overburdened,
with high caseloads, etc.

AUTHOR: conditions exist today as it has for several decades

SEVERAL VIEWS OF JUSTICE SYSTEM

• process
• network
• non-system

Reality: System fragmentation-opposite of
            what term SYSTEM implies 

Author: Much of the failure to deal effectively with crime
may be attributed to organizational and administrative
fragmentation of the justice process. YET author states
the CJ system has been successful in meeting its mission.

• system fragmentation
• between components
• within components

Article in 1928:
Failure of CJ system due to lack of intelligence
by police.

SCHWEIZER-view of system vs. non system

Considering a "system" to function like one long conveyor
belt, the term system does not apply to the "Criminal Justice
System" because:

	Different belts for each component and different belts within.
	No one person in charge of it
	Different funding sources for each belt
	Different speed for each belt
	Different capacity
	Different technology and age of belt (breakdowns)
	work load effected by persons in other components without adjustment
	Education and training differences within component belts
	Conflict and lack of cooperation between belts
	Conflict with private sector belts

NOTE: The term BELTS or CONVEYOR BELT, is a METAPHOR and
should not be used literally. These terms represent organizational components/
structures, which you must identify in any exam, instead of simply writing about
BELTS.

How does public sector employment differ from private sector employment?

PUBLIC VS. PRIVATE SECTOR

Private Sector: Extrinsic rewards

• financial compensation
• salary and benefits
• private office
• bonuses
• enhanced job titles
• company car
• awards
• memberships.

Public Sector: Intrinsic rewards

• job is gratifying
• sense of worth
• feel good about what they accomplish
• self actualization???
  Difficult to provide these intrinsic rewards
  given the nature of some public sector jobs.

POLICY MAKING and GOAL SETTING
in Justice Administration-

• scientific research oriented approach not realistic
• Administrators often practice a systematic method???-
• Possess an infinite knowledge of past
  consequences of actions that outsiders do not.????????
• NOTE Instructor comment
  
  Goal setting-administrator NOT
  independent (May be told by mayor/council
  or city manager to "Keep crime down")
  Methods influenced/controlled by persons
  outside of typical police agency.

CJ SYSTEM CHARACTERISTICS:

Lack of predictability

Police with wide discretion-biggest
problem is abuse of discretion

Judges-great discretionary latitude
-disparities in sentences

Author: Systems approach is still in its infancy
Instructor's Response:
Can't be much of a system if it's in its infancy.

Important Concepts/Information:

Each of the three components of the CJ system affect each other.

Agencies within a component, i.e. courts, police or corrections, affect each other.

It is important to study all three components since they all affect each other

It is important to study all three components since all can experience similar problems.

Individual goals and objectives of in each component may conflict with those of other components.

There can be no mission for the entire C.J. system since no one is in charge of it.

Policing in the United States is highly fragmented with more than separate 18,000 agencies

The Dept. of Homeland Security is an example of a consolidation of some crucial federal law enforcement functions that did not resolve existing conflicts between formerly separate chains of command.

The goals of one C.J. component may conflict with those of another

Uniformity among all law enforcement agencies, corrections, and the courts is not possible

Funding sources differ for most agencies, hence differences in operation, effectiveness, goals, etc.

Some Public Sector jobs can have benefits and rewards similar to private sector jobs

Some Public Sector jobs simply are not intrinsically rewarding

Our C.J. System is not much of a system