Improving the promotional process for supervisors

I  took my first promotional test for sergeant in 1978, when I only 24 years old and had three years on the job. I finished ninth out of the top 10, but the list expired after three years, and I never got promoted until a few years later. Even back then, I noticed many limitations and deficiencies in that process. We took a very generic written exam without any information about what we needed to know and what to study. Despite that, I still had a high score on that segment of the overall process. The next phase was a performance evaluation, which for all practical purposes was useless. It consisted of a checklist with about 10 different components, including appearance, tardiness, compliance with rules, attitude and other overall performance measures. Nothing on the evaluation seemed pertinent to becoming a supervisor, and the ratings were often biased and inconsistent depending on who prepared your evaluation. In my case, my arrest and self-initiated work totals far exceeded those of the officers ahead of me on the final list. There was no emphasis put on motivation or quality of work standards. The process favored seniority, regardless of how well or how poorly one performed as a patrol officer.

The final portion of the sergeant test was an oral interview with the Board of Police and Fire Commissioners. That was nothing more than a few irrelevant questions that had little to do with qualification for a promotion. The final eligibility list was based on the total scores of the written exam, the performance evaluation and this final interview. Because of my age and lack of seniority, my overall score was lower than all of the veteran officers.

The key is to groom potential candidates well before any promotional process and better prepare your personnel to become leaders.

Over the years, I took promotional tests for sergeant and lieutenant and finished at the top of the lists. The testing processes became somewhat more advanced and improved, but they still placed too much emphasis on the written test and seniority. Some testing processes awarded points for college degrees. While education is important, there are many officers with advanced degrees who can’t make a decision in the field. The written test typically included materials such as the criminal and traffic code, along with policy manuals and the contract with the police union. All of these could easily be looked up rather than memorized verbatim. There was one component that was more job-related, and that was an assessment center. An outside company would develop the elements of this test, which included such components as handling a critical incident, conducting employee counseling and other problem-solving exercises. Role players were used to add to the reality of these scenarios. 

Assessors from outside the agency would monitor and evaluate each candidate, and the final list was based on the overall scores from these three aspects of the assessment center. There were certain criteria provided on what performance dimensions would be reviewed. These included such areas as judgment, decision-making, oral and written skills, leadership and interpersonal skills. Although an assessment center is more useful in determining who might be a better candidate for a promotion, it still lacks some crucial characteristics, which can benefit a candidate who just had more time to study or has some insight on how to best approach these assessment exercises from talking to officers who have taken them in the past and got promoted. Many of those who finished high on the list may not have been in the field for some time and came from administrative positions. These become poor supervisors and often created low morale among their subordinates.

It became clear that while some of these candidates finished high on the final list and would get promoted, many of them lacked the experience and knowledge of officers who actually handled critical incidents and many real-life situations requiring problem-solving skills on a daily basis. 

So, in a nutshell, how can a department determine the best candidates for supervisors? The answer to this dilemma is to determine which officers actually are qualified to advance and have a propensity for advancement. Not every officer wants to get promoted and some only test for the wrong reason, such as to get a pay raise or for prestige. The key is to groom potential candidates well before any promotional process and better prepare your personnel to become leaders. A career development program can identify these individuals and can offer them advance training aimed at developing their ability to become respected leaders in the department. 

The candidates can be mentored by one of the department’s best supervisors and can shadow them in the field. A supervisory development advanced training course of 40 to 80 hours should be offered as well. A candidate for promotion should be required to participate in a set total of hours with their mentor as part of their field training. Once an officer has completed a set number of hours with their mentors and passed the advanced training class, they can be approved to be acting supervisors to fill in when a sergeant or lieutenant is going to be absent for any reason. This gives them actual experience on their own. Their mentors should review what transpired in their absence and discuss the performance of the acting supervisor. That type of internship should weed out any candidate who just isn’t ready to be a supervisor at that time.

One aspect of a quality test process is to incorporate a reality-based training program into the assessment center. In my experience, candidates were required to dress professionally and not wear their uniforms when they were scheduled to appear for their test. The tests were often conducted at a local hotel, using different rooms for the different exercises. The Albuquerque Police Department recently incorporated a more realistic evaluation process to use for the assessment center component of a promotional test. These performance evaluations are now conducted at the Reality Based Training Center (RBTC). Officers wear their BDU uniforms and carry all their duty gear, but their weapons are not loaded. The RBTC has a realistic dispatch center, and the candidate can receive radio calls and interact with their officers and the dispatcher after the scenario unfolds. These scenarios can range from a police pursuit to critical incidents, and the candidate is evaluated on the same performance dimensions mentioned earlier. The officer may interact with role players on scene or direct officers from a remote location such as their police vehicle. These scenarios can be based remotely on real-life examples. 

Unlike the hotel setting, this approach can simulate locations using the RBTC and provide something more than pretending a conference room is a parking lot with a suicidal subject. The realism of these exercises will better determine how well the candidate performs under pressure. In addition to the higher-risk scenarios, candidates can conduct employee counseling interviews or meet with a citizen in an actual office setting to discuss neighborhood issues. The office can be used for the candidate to prepare actual written reports based on the other scenarios they participated in. Both verbal and written communication skills are better assessed using this process.

Finally, many times in an assessment center, outside assessors from another agency are used to evaluate a candidate’s performance. The candidate in these processes is never actually able to speak to their own qualifications and accomplishments or to why they want to be a supervisor. Some type of an “oral resume” session should be included to better determine how the candidate has prepared for a promotion and what sets them apart from the others. The assessors should be trained to evaluate some of the leadership capacities, such as their passion, work ethic, commitment, initiative, attitude and character, from these more personal interviews with an unbiased assessor. 

If this type of leadership development system can be developed and incorporated in a department, those candidates who successfully go through the required classroom training, complete field training and mentorship, and serve time as an acting supervisor can be placed on an ongoing eligibility list. The candidate will have already completed all the necessary requirements for promotion and can be promoted as openings occur, rather than spending the time and effort to conduct a costly one-time promotional process every couple of years or so.

The military promotes leadership development at West Point. The West Point Leader Development System focuses on teaching cadets to live honorably, lead honorably and demonstrate excellence by focusing on five facets of character — moral, social, civic, performance and leadership. Police agencies should focus on developing these characteristics when selecting candidates for promotions to a supervisory position. Choosing the best of the best to lead our agencies will improve our ability to serve and gain respect and trust in our communities.