Through the years, the supervisor-leader debate has resulted in many different arguments. As a general rule, I believe that you can lead in many techniques without being a supervisor; but to be a good police supervisor, you have to possess good leadership skills! According to Whisenand and McCain (2015), leadership is essential to the existence of an organization. Supervisors also have an important role to play in the success of an organization, but supervisors and leaders are not necessarily equals. Let’s start by closely examining the responsibilities of a supervisor and a leader.

Police supervisors are tasked with the responsibility of managing the work of others (subordinates) to ensure that any designated task is completed in the right manner and on time. Generally, police supervisors carry out formal administrative duties over the police that are obliged by their employment status to abide by the commands from supervisors. In contrast, leadership has both formal and informal roles of management. Formal leaders are those bearing titles like country manager, district manager, or department manager. However, there are those police leaders that inspire people to follow their visions without a formal title of “leadership.”

interact with their team members. Although police leaders are not always entrusted with the

responsibility to oversee the performance of others, they do influence the actions of their

team members in line with organizational objectives. Police supervisors, unlike leaders, are

tasked with the responsibility of helping their subordinates set goals and develop strategies to

achieve these goals; directly influencing their performance in the process.

At this point, it becomes palpable that both police leaders and supervisors inspire and

motivate police at all levels to act in a way that benefits them and their company. I strongly

support the idea that you cannot be a good police supervisor and a bad leader. For a police

supervisor to get the performance he or she desires, he or she has to possess the ability to

influence and motivate his or her team members to cooperate and yield their best

performance; which basically depends on a supervisor's leadership qualities. Good police

supervising leaders are more expected to inspire their subordinates to give the finest, not like

those supervisors lacking worthy leadership skills and therefore have to depend on the power

derived from their positions in their organizations (Whisenand and McCain, 2015). Hence,

you cannot be a good supervisor and a bad leader all at once. Alternatively, you cannot be a

good police leader but a bad supervisor for the reason that as a good leader, you will be in

possession of positive leadership traits; the elements that make you a good supervisor!

Therefore, I am of the opinion that a good police leader can double-up as a good police

supervisor because both professions warrant the possession of good leadership skills for the

leadership practices to be considered "effective."

Question 2

It is the opinion of Whisenand and McCain (2015) that organizational leaders are

expected to be perfect. The fact is that in reality, you can be a professional at one particular

area only despite the array of academic qualifications. That is your strength. However, we do

have weaknesses too. As a leader, you also have your weaknesses. The option of whether to

employ a strength-based leadership approach or a weakness-based approach in your

leadership approach depends on your liking. I am of the opinion that an excessing strengths

approach is more beneficial than the excessing weakness approach. The clarification of my

thinking is that once a police leader knows his and his team's strengths, he can invest in other

people's strengths by delegating responsibilities. Additionally, a police leader that clearly

understands his strengths and weaknesses can get the right people on his team because he

knows exactly what he wants in them. This improves the selection method (Whisenand and

McCain, 2015).

Furthermore, a strength-based leadership approach inspires creativity and innovation

among team members because of passing on responsibilities to team members. The only

drawback with this leadership approach is that it only focuses on the strengths and not

weaknesses. Consequently, the performance, skills, or knowledge gaps that may exist in an

organization are ignored. The end result of such an error is that the team members'

development process can grind to a halt because of a weakness that has never been

diagnosed. For instance, a marketing manager can over emphasize on the educational

adeptness of his team members, but overlooks the idea of coaching them on how to make

effective selling presentations. Such a team will excel theoretically, but will miss the mark

when it comes to securing deals because of ineffective presentations. In the long run, such a

team will fail because the manager did not factor in all the elements of success.

On the other hand, you can choose to employ a weakness-based leadership approach.

The police leader, in this approach, focuses on improving the weaknesses of his team

members. Therefore, it is the duty of the police leader to instill the desired work decorum in

his team. This approach is not as beneficial as the strength-based approach because it is often

costly to train the team members. Additionally, the process of improving on team members'

weaknesses can lead to loss of motivation in weaker team members. Frail team members can

feel picked-on whenever they do not grasp one or two work related concepts. It is benign to

argue that this potentially damages the motivation of police, negatively affecting their

performance. Thus, I can confidently state that a strength-based leadership approach is more

advantageous because it offers more benefits to the management of police when compared to

an excessing weakness approach.

Question 3

According to my perception of management, I can define a manager as an individual

that is responsible for the administering of all or part of a company. To me, being a manager

means making the necessary decisions regarding the planning, controlling, organizing, or

staffing of an organization. The specific traits of a good police manager are: good

communicator, ethical, fact decision maker, trustworthy, critical and creative thinker,

emotional stability, self-assurance, enthusiasm, and fast problem solver. I would argue that a

transformational style of leadership is the best. The police leader, employing a

transformational leadership approach, emphasizes on the worth of attaining organizational

goals, then mobilizes the efforts of his subordinates to implement change, and then sets a

moral example that builds further on the professional ethical motives of other police. All the

items of discussion in this essay are my points of perspective.

References

Whisenand, P. M., & McCain, E. D. (2015). Supervising police personnel: Strengths-based

leadership (8th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall

Police Management and Supervision

Extrait

Question 2

Question 3

References

Frequently asked questions

What is the relationship between police leaders and supervisors?

What is the difference between a strength-based and a weakness-based leadership approach? Which is better?

What are the key traits of a good police manager, and what leadership style is best?

What is the perception of management?

What is the source document referenced?

Acheter maintenant

Résumé des informations