Patrol officer productivity is an understudied topic in police research. Prior studies on productivity have primarily relied on rudimentary statistics, such as calls for service and arrests. A more advanced method for evaluating productivity should (a) account for the diverse activities of patrol officers, (b) weight different productivity outputs, (c) evaluate officers in terms of available minutes for self-initiated activities (productive time), and (d) offer agencies the flexibility to select, prioritize, and weight patrol activities most relevant to their jurisdictions. Borrowing from a baseball sabermetric called Value Over Replacement Player, we create and test an innovative statistic called Value Over Replacement Cop. This metric analyzes 12 patrol activities and generates a single number by which to quantify and evaluate a patrol officer’s productivity. Using data from a midsize U.S. Police Department (325 sworn officers), we find strong support for the validity of this new metric.
Agyapong, O. (1988). The effect of professionalism on police job performance: An empirical assessment (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Florida State University, Tallahasse.
2.
AlpertG. P.WalkerS. (2000) Police accountability and early warning systems: Developing policies and programs. Justice Research and Policy2(2): 59–72.
3.
BeutlerL. E.StormA.KirkishP.ScoginF.GainesJ. A. (1985) Parameters in the prediction of police officer performance. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice16(2): 324–335.
4.
BittnerE. (1983) Legality and workmanship. In: PunchM. (ed.) Control in the police organization, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, pp. 1–10.
5.
BragaA. A. (2005) Hot spots policing and crime prevention: A systematic review of randomized controlled trials. Journal of Experimental Criminology1(3): 317–342.
6.
BragaA. A.BondB. J. (2008) Policing crime and disorder hot spots: A randomized controlled trial. Criminology46(3): 577–607.
7.
BrandlS. G.StroshineM. S.FrankJ. (2001) Who are the complaint prone officers? An examination of the relationship between police officers’ attributes, arrest activity, assignment, and citizens’ complaints about excessive force. Journal of Criminal Justice29(6): 521–529.
8.
ChappellA. T.MacDonaldJ. M.ManzP. W. (2006) The organizational determinants of police arrest decisions. Crime & Delinquency52(2): 287–306.
9.
CrankJ. P. (1990) The influence of environmental and organizational factors on police style in urban and rural environments. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency27: 166–189.
EngelR. S. (2002) Patrol officer supervision in the community policing era. Journal of Criminal Justice30(1): 51–64.
12.
FamegaC.FrankJ.MazerolleL. (2005) Managing police patrol time: The role of supervisor directives. Justice Quarterly22(4): 540–559.
13.
GaricanoL.HeatonP. (2010) Information technology, organization, and productivity in the public sector: Evidence from police departments. Journal of Labor Economics28(1): 167–201.
14.
HatryH. P. (1976) Approaches to productivity measurement and program evaluation. Public Productivity Review1(3): 21–28.
15.
HatryH. P. (1978) The status of productivity measurement in the public sector. Public Administration Review38(1): 28–33.
JamesB. (2001) The new Bill James historical baseball abstract, New York, NY: Free Press.
18.
JohnsonR. (2011) Officer attitudes and management influences on police work productivity. American Journal of Criminal Justice36: 293–306.
19.
LerschK. M. (2002) Are citizen complaints just another measure of officer productivity? An analysis of citizen complaints and officer activity measures. Police Practice and Research3: 135–147.
20.
LiederbachJ. (2005) Addressing the “elephant in the living room”: An observational study of the work of suburban police. Policing: An International Journal of Police Strategies & Management28(3): 415–434.
21.
NunnS.QuinetK. (2002) Evaluating the effects of information technology on problem-oriented policing. Evaluation Review26(1): 81–108.
22.
ParksR. B.MastrofskiS. D.DejongC.GrayM. K. (1999) How officers spend their time with the community. Justice Quarterly16(3): 483–518.
23.
RosenfeldR.FornangoR.BaumerE. (2005) Did ceasefire, compstat, and exile reduce homicide?Criminology & Public Policy4(3): 419–449.
24.
ShaneJ. M. (2011) Daily work experiences and police performance. Police Practice and Research13(3): 1–19.
25.
ShaneJ. M. (2010) Organizational stressors and police performance. Journal of Criminal Justice38(4): 807–818.
26.
SlovakJ. S. (1986) Styles of urban policing: Organization, environment, and police styles in selected American cities, New York: New York University Press.
27.
SmithB. W.NovakK. J.FrankJ. (2001) Community policing and the work routines of street-level officers. Criminal Justice Review26(1): 17–37.
SunshineJ.TylerT. R. (2003) The role of procedural justice and legitimacy in shaping public support for policing. Law & Society Review37(3): 513–548.
30.
TerrillW.McCluskeyJ. (2002) Citizen complaints and problem officers: Examining officer behavior. Journal of Criminal Justice30: 143–155.
31.
Van MeterD. J. (2001) Evaluating dysfunctional police performance: A zero-based approach, Springfield, IL: Charles Thomas.
32.
WalkerS.AlpertG. P.KenneyD. J. (2001) Early warning systems: Responding to the problem police officer, Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, National Institute of Justice.
33.
WoolnerK. (2002) Understanding and measuring replacement level. In: SheehanJ. (ed.) Baseball prospectus 2002, Dulles, VA: Brassey’s, pp. 55–66.
