International Journal of Emergency Mental Health, Vol. 10, No. 2, pp.

95-108 © 2008 Chevron Publishing ISSN 1522-4821

Stress Shield: A Model of Police Resiliency

Douglas Paton John M. Violanti

University of Tasmania State University of New York at Buffalo

Peter Johnston Karena J. Burke

Massey University University of Tasmania

Joanna Clarke Denise Keenan

HM Prison Service Cognition Associates

Abstract: This paper discusses the development of a new model of police officer resiliency. Following
Antonovsky’s definition of resilience, the model is built on the view that the resilience of a person or group
reflects the extent to which they can call upon their psychological and physical resources and competencies
in ways that allow them to render challenging events coherent, manageable, and meaningful. The model
posits that a police officer’s capacity to render challenging experiences meaningful, coherent, and
manageable reflects the interaction of person, team, and organizational factors. The paper argues that a
model that encompasses these factors can be developed using theories drawn from the literatures of
occupational health and empowerment. The development of the model is also informed by the need to
ensure that it can accommodate the importance of learning from past experiences to build resilience in
ways that increase officers’ capacity to adapt to future risk and uncertainty. By building on recent
empirical research, this paper outlines a new multi-level model of resilience and adaptive capacity. The
Stress Shield model of resilience integrates person, team and organizational factors to provide a proactive
framework for developing and sustaining police officer resilience. [International Journal of Emergency
Mental Health, 2008, 10(2), pp. 95-108].

Key words:police, stress, trauma, resiliency model

Police officers are regularly exposed to critical incidents. & Smith, 2003) calls for a reappraisal of this aspect of police
Although this work traditionally is viewed as a precursor to work. While not denying the potential for pathological out-
the development of acute and chronic posttraumatic stress comes, growing evidence for resilient (adaptive and growth)
reactions, growing evidence for it to be associated with adap- outcomes introduces the need to identify predictors of resil-
tive and positive (e.g., posttraumatic growth, enhanced sense ience.
of professional efficacy) outcomes (Aldwin, Levenson, &
First, it is pertinent to consider what is meant by “resil-
Spiro, 1994; Armeli, Gunthert, & Cohen, 2001; Paton, Violanti,
iency”? The term resilience is often used to imply an ability

Douglas Paton and Karena J. Burke, School of Psychology, University of Tasmania, Launceston, Tasmania, Australia; John M. Violanti,
Department of Social and Preventative Medicine, School of Medical and Biomedical Sciences, State University of New York at Buffalo, NY;
Peter Johnston, School of Psychology, Massey University, Albany, New Zealand; Joanna Clarke, HM Prison Service, York, England; Denise
Keenan, Cognition Associates, Adelaide, South Australia. Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to:
Douglas.Paton@utas.edu.au.

IJEMH • Vol. 10, No. 2 • 2008 95

to “bounce back.” Being able to bounce back is an important hitherto been acknowledged. This argument is based on the
capability. However, because police officers are called upon fact that the police organization defines the context within
repeatedly to deal with increasingly complex and threatening which officers experience and interpret critical incidents and
incidents, it is appropriate to expand the scope of this defini- their sequelae and within which future capabilities are nur-
tion to include the development of one’s capacity to deal tured or restricted (Paton, 2006). Officers respond to inci-
with future events. Consequently, the definition adopted here dents as members of law enforcement agencies in which the
embodies the notion of “adaptive capacity” (Klein, Nicholls, organizational culture influences their thoughts and actions,
& Thomalla, 2003). Resiliency thus defines the capacity of representing the context in which challenging experiences
agencies and officers to draw upon their own individual, col- (using a schema whose nature derives from patterns of inter-
lective, and institutional resources and competencies to cope action with colleagues, senior officers, and organizational
with, adapt to, and develop from the demands, challenges, procedures over time) are interpreted (Paton, Smith, Ramsay,
and changes encountered during and after a critical incident, & Akande, 1999; Paton, Smith, Violanti, & Eranen, 2000;
mass emergency, or disaster. Weick, & Sutcliffe, 2007). However, the organization is not
the only influence. Several person- and team-level factors
Understanding and managing resilience involves adopt-
(e.g., coping, social support) have also been implicated as
ing a perspective that assumes that salutary outcomes occur
playing complementary roles in predicting resilience (Paton,
when individuals and groups can use their psychological
2006), and they must be included in any comprehensive model.
and physical resources and competencies in ways that allow
them to render challenging events coherent, manageable, and
meaningful (Antonovsky, 1990). In emergency populations, Modeling Resilience
“critical” incidents create a sense of psychological disequi-
The development of models of resilience faces several
librium that represents that period when the existing interpre-
conceptual challenges. Although resilience is evident when
tive frameworks or schemas that guide officers’ expectations
officers successfully adapt to actual critical incident demands,
and actions have lost their capacity to organize experience in
research into resilience must be undertaken prior to such
meaningful and manageable ways (Janoff-Bulman, 1992;
events occurring to ensure that intervention can be under-
Paton, 1994). The challenge is to identify those factors that
taken to arm officers with a capability to adapt before they
can be developed prior to exposure that predict officers ca-
experience critical incidents. This would not be a problem if it
pacity to develop a schema that broaden the range of (unpre-
were possible to predict exactly what officers will be called
dictable) experiences that officers can render coherent,
upon to confront. However, because critical incidents are
meaningful, and manageable (Fredrickson, Tugade, Waugh,
characterized by considerable diversity (e.g., mass casualty
& Larkin, 2003; Paton, 1994, 2006). Building on recent empiri-
incidents, school shootings, biohazard attack), police agen-
cal research into how protective services officers adapt to
cies cannot predict what their officers will encounter. Conse-
highly challenging circumstances (Burke & Paton, 2006;
quently, any model used to guide this activity must identify
Johnston & Paton, 2003), in this paper we outline a new model
the resources and competencies that facilitate the proactive
of adaptive capacity. In constructing the Stress Shield model
development of a general capacity to adapt (i.e., render any
of resilience, it is essential that the theories used to inform its
future experience meaningful and manageable) to unpredict-
development can integrate personal, team, and organizational
able circumstances.
levels of analysis.
This introduces a second conceptual problem. There is
Integrating Officer, Team, and currently no measure capable of capturing the diverse ways
Organizational Factors in which police officers can experience meaningfulness and
manageability in the context of their work. Until such mea-
Although typically investigated at the level of the indi- sures are developed, what is needed is a measure that can
vidual officer, this paper argues that the comprehensive un- capture the experience of coherent, meaningful, and manage-
derstanding of resilience must integrate organizational, team, able outcomes irrespective of the specific outcomes officers’
and individual perspectives, with the organizational level of experience. The construct of job satisfaction can fulfil this
analysis having greater influence in this process than has role.

96 Paton, Violanti, Johnston, Burke, Clarke, Keenan • Stress Shield: Police Resiliency
Satisfaction and Resilience Job Satisfaction was measured by the Job Satisfaction In-
ventory (Brayfield & Rothe, 1987). The results are summa-
Thomas and Tymon (1994) found a relationship between
rized in Figure 1.
perceptions of meaning found in work tasks (“meaningful-
ness”) and enhanced job satisfaction. Spreitzer, Kizilos, and The model accounted for 44% of the variance in job
Nason (1997) observed a positive relationship between com- satisfaction. Organizational climate was the best single pre-
petence (“manageability”) and job satisfaction. These find- dictor of job satisfaction (Figure 1) and, by inference, repre-
ings have been echoed in the critical incident literature, with sents a significant influence on officers’ ability to render their
finding meaning and benefit in emergency work being mani- critical incident experiences meaningful and manageable. The
fest in changes in levels of job satisfaction (Britt, Adler, & relationship between organizational climate and how officers
Bartone, 2001; Hart & Cooper, 2001; North et al., 2002). deal with the consequences of critical incidents was evident
in the influence of climate on coping (Figure 1). Organiza-
Because the job satisfaction construct can capture
tional climate had a negative influence on emotion-focused
changes in the meaningfulness and manageability facets of
coping, resulting in an increase in negative work experiences.
resilience, as well as the implications of the coexistence of
Similarly, climate had a direct positive influence on problem-
positive and negative aspects of officers’ experience, it rep-
focused coping, resulting in an increase in positive work
resents a construct capable of acting as an indicator of offic-
experiences. Organizational climate also demonstrated a di-
ers’ resilience and their future capacity to adapt to
rect negative influence on negative (“hassles”) work experi-
unpredictable and challenging critical incidents. Having iden-
ences and a direct positive influence on positive (“uplifts”)
tified a means of measuring adaptive outcomes, the next task
work experiences. Positive and negative work experiences
is to identify the personal, team, and organizational level fac-
made relatively equal and separate contributions to job satis-
tors that influence resilience.
faction.

Given that satisfaction assesses perceived meaning, the

Organizational Characteristics, Coping, and
Resilience culture or climate of an organization represents one source of
officers’ ability to impose and sustain coherence and mean-
Hart and Cooper (2001) proposed a conceptual model of ing on critical incident outcomes. The important role played
organizational health that predicts that interaction between by organizational climate indicates that police agencies have
individual and organizational factors influences the experi- a key role in facilitating staff adaptability and resilience.
ence of salutary outcomes. Of particular relevance for the
This model (Figure 1) accounted for 44% of the variance
present paper was the central role that Hart and Cooper af-
in job satisfaction, leaving a substantial portion of the vari-
forded organizational climate. “Organizational climate” de-
ance to be explained. Hart and Cooper (2001) argued that the
scribes officers’ perceptions of how their organization
inclusion of individual (e.g., personality, hardiness) and group
functions, and these perceptions influence both their well-
(e.g., peer and supervisor support) constructs could help
being and their performance within their organizational role
account for additional variance. There are other reasons for
(Hart & Cooper).
developing the model further.
Burke and Paton (2006) tested the ability of this model to
predict satisfaction in the context of emergency responders
Developing the Model
(police, fire, paramedic) experience of critical incidents. The
model tested how interaction between organizational climate Although this model (Figure 1) provides a sound basis
(measured using the Team Climate Inventory [Anderson & for the relationship between organizational culture and of-
West, 1998]), officers’ experience of organizational and op- ficer resilience, additional elements are required to account
erational practices prescribed by the organizational culture for how officers’ experiences of the work environment and
(measured using the Police Daily Hassles and Uplifts Scale critical incidents are translated into schemas that contribute
[Hart, Wearing, & Headey, 1993]), and officers’ problem-fo- to or detract from the officers’ capacity to learn from experi-
cused and emotion-focused coping styles (measured using ence in ways that facilitate their future capacity to adapt.
the COPE Inventory (Carver, Scheier, & Weintraub, 1989).

IJEMH • Vol. 10, No. 2 • 2008 97

 Figure 1: The relationship between personal characteristics, organizational climate, work experiences and job
satisfaction. Adapted from Burke and Paton (2006).

Emotion .62
focused coping J Negative work

J
experience
J
-.20 -.87
J
Organizational Job
Climate Satisfaction

.40
J R2 = .44
.10
J
J
Problem .33
J
Positive work
focused coping experience

As outlined above, any theory used must meet certain fluence resilience (e.g., delegating responsibility for crisis
criteria. First, it must encompass personal, team, and organi- decision making (Paton & Flin, 1999), this facet of empower-
zational levels of analysis. Secondly, it must contribute to- ment may contribute to increasing resilience. However, it is
ward explaining how challenging experiences are rendered the finding that empowerment has demonstrated strong links
meaningful and manageable (by predicting change in satis- to motivating action under conditions of uncertainty (Con-
faction). One such construct is empowerment. In the next ger & Konungo; Spreitzer, 1997) that renders the concept of
section, reasons why empowerment represents a construct empowerment capable of providing valuable insights into
that informs an understanding of resilience are discussed. how resilience can be developed and sustained.

Motivational interpretations of empowerment derive from

Empowerment a theoretical perspective that argues that if people have suf-
ficient resources (psychological, social, and physical) and
The first issue is whether a relationship between em- the capacity to use them, they will be able to effectively con-
powerment and satisfaction can be demonstrated. Several front the challenges presented by events and the environ-
studies have demonstrated that empowerment predicts sat- ment (Conger & Konungo, 1988; Spreitzer, 1997).
isfaction in individuals and teams (Kirkman & Rosen, 1999; Empowerment theories argue that the potential to use re-
Koberg, Boss, Senjem, & Goodman, 1999). The second issue sources to accomplish tasks derives from the relationship
is whether empowerment theories can encapsulate the indi- between the organization and the officer. Empowerment theo-
vidual, team, and organizational influences in ways that posi- ries thus afford opportunities to develop models that inte-
tively influence the meaningfulness and manageability of grate personal, team, and organizational factors.
experiences (captured by job satisfaction). It is to a discus-
sion of how empowerment satisfies this criterion that this Conger & Konungo (1988) conceptualize empowerment
paper now turns. as an enabling process that facilitates the conditions neces-
sary to effectively confront (i.e., develop meaning, compe-
tence, etc.) future challenges. Conger and Konungo argue
Empowerment as an Enabling Process that individual differences in meaning and competence re-
Empowerment is a well-used construct in the manage- flect the degree to which the environment (i.e., the police
ment literature, usually in relation to processes such as par- organization) enables actions to occur. Empowerment thus
ticipation and delegation (Conger & Konungo, 1988). Because describes a process that uses organizational strategies to
delegation, as an attribute of organizational culture, can in- remove conditions that foster powerlessness (e.g., organiza-

98 Paton, Violanti, Johnston, Burke, Clarke, Keenan • Stress Shield: Police Resiliency
tional hassles) and encourage organizational practices (e.g., critical incidents in ways that demonstrate how it contributes
organizational and operational uplifts, self-efficacy informa- to the learning process required to maintain adaptive capac-
tion, competencies) that develop officers’ learned resource- ity in the changing environment of contemporary policing
fulness (Johnston & Paton, 2003). (Paton & Violanti, 2008).
Thomas and Velthouse (1990) complement this position
by adding that beliefs about future competence derive from Critical Incidents, Incident Assessment,
the schema or interpretive framework, developed through and Behavior
the enabling process of empowerment, which provides mean- Environmental events (critical incidents) provide infor-
ing to officers’ experiences and builds their capacity to deal mation to officers about both the consequences of their pre-
with future challenges. In addition to its ability to inform an vious task behavior and the conditions they can expect to
understanding of resilience directly, the notion of enabling experience in future task behavior (Conger & Konungo, 1988).
through the development of an empowering schema means In addition to it emanating from their own experiences, task
that the empowerment construct can help explain how offic- information (e.g., the assessment of critical incident experi-
ers’ experiences of their organizational culture (e.g., the ences) can also be provided by peers, subordinates, and
hassles and uplifts that reflect how it is enacted) and critical superiors at work in the context of, for example, performance
incidents are translated in meaningful and manageable ways appraisals, training programs, and meetings (Figure 2).
(manifest as changes in levels of satisfaction; see Figure 4).
Through each progressive cycle of event (i.e., following
By providing a mechanism that offers an explanation for a challenging critical incident), assessment (of specific criti-
the relationship between the organizational environment and cal incident experiences), and feedback, officers develop,
the schema that underpins future adaptive capacity, empow- maintain, and change the operational schema they use to
erment theories have considerable potential to inform an un- plan for, interpret, and respond to critical incidents. This pro-
derstanding of how resilience is enacted in police agencies. cess is depicted in Figure 2. For it to inform the development
This capability is further bolstered by the fact that empower- of resilience, it is necessary to identify how empowerment
ment is conceptualized as an iterative process involving a cycles contribute to the development of future adaptive ca-
cycle of environmental events, task assessments, and be- pacity. The environmental assessment process translates into
havior (Figure 2). Consequently, empowerment theories can two outcomes: task assessment and global assessment.
accommodate the repetitive nature of police involvement in

Figure 2: The cycle of environmental events, task assessments, and behaviour. Adapted from Johnston and
Paton (2003). The hashed line indicates the input into organizational learning.

Interpretive
Styles Global
attributions, envisioning, Assessments
evaluation

J
J J

J
Task

J J
Interventions Environmental Experience Assessments
Events Meaning, competence,
Information choice, impact
J

As


se
Ev ss
a l u men
ati t
on
Behavior J

IJEMH • Vol. 10, No. 2 • 2008 99

 According to Thomas and Velthouse (1990), officers’ Parallels can be drawn between the choice and impact ele-
task assessments comprise several components. The first ments of empowerment and perceived control, another factor
component, meaningfulness (or meaning), describes the de- that has been widely implicated in thinking on stress resil-
gree of congruence between the tasks performed and one’s ience and adaptability.
values, attitudes, and behaviors. Empowered individuals feel
The ability to draw a direct comparison between the com-
a sense of personal significance, purpose, and commitment
ponents of task assessment and the concepts of meaningful-
to their involvement in work activities (Spreitzer, 1997; Tho-
ness, manageability, and coherence adds weight to the
mas & Velthouse). Meaningfulness is increased by experi-
argument that empowerment can encapsulate resilience in
encing uplifts, such as receiving recognition and being given
police organizations. This comparison also illustrates how
responsibility, but is constrained by organizational hassles
hassles and uplifts can affect core empowerment processes
(e.g., “red tape”) that shift the emphasis from meaningful role
such as meaning and choice (see Figure 4), thus affording an
performance to meeting administrative expectations.
opportunity to see that empowerment research complements
The second component, competence, is analogous to the earlier model (see Figure 1) and how their integration
Bandura’s (1977) notion of self-efficacy. Competence is fun- contributes to the development of a comprehensive model of
damental to the belief of officers’ in their ability to perform police resilience.
their operational roles successfully (Spreitzer, 1997). This
Before continuing to advance this argument, there is
outcome is comparable to the manageability component of
one final form of assessment that remains to be discussed:
resilience. Importantly, Bandura points out that there is a
global assessment, which further establishes empowerment
direct relationship between the level of self-efficacy (i.e., com-
as a construct that plays an important role in informing the
petence) and the level of effort and persistence that officers
understanding of officers’ resilience and their capacity to
invest in facing challenging events, thus making an impor-
adapt to future incidents.
tant contribution to officers’ capacity to adapt to the unex-
pected. Although task assessments are localized within a singu-
lar task and time period, global assessments refer to an out-
The third component, choice, reflects the extent to which
come of empowerment that embodies a capacity to generalize
officers perceive that their behavior is self-determined
expectancies and learning across tasks and over time. Tho-
(Spreitzer, 1997). A sense of choice is achieved when officers
mas and Velthouse (1990) observed that global assessments
believe they are actively involved in defining how they per-
describe a capacity to fill in gaps when faced with new and/or
form their role (a prominent item when officers report uplifts)
unfamiliar situations. This aspect of empowerment is essen-
rather than just being passive recipients (as is often the case
tial for adaptive capacity in a profession where one cannot
when officers describe hassles). The sense of choice is en-
predict what he or she will be called upon to confront and
hanced when the organization delegates responsibility for
thus must be able to use current experiences as a basis for
planning and task performance to officers. This facet of em-
preparing to deal with future risk and uncertainty.
powerment is comparable to the coherence component of
resilience. A sense of choice is particularly important for deal- Both global and task assessments, and thus the capac-
ing with emergent, contingent, emergency demands and for ity to adapt, are influenced by officers’ interpretive styles
creative crisis decision-making and the development and (Figure 2), with these schemas comprising separate but re-
maintenance of situational awareness when responding to lated components (Thomas & Velthouse, 1990). According
critical incidents (Paton & Flin, 1999). An ability to exercise to Thomas and Velthouse, interpretive frameworks are influ-
choice also facilitates learning from training and operational enced by the work context, with management practices (in-
experiences and, in an empowering climate, facilitates others tervention; see Figure 2) having an important influence on
to do likewise and pass on learning. how the schemas are developed and sustained.

The final component, impact, describes the degree to

which officers perceive that they can influence important Empowerment Schema and Resilience
organizational outcomes (Spreitzer, 1997). Where choice con- The first schema component concerns the attributions
cerns control over one’s work behaviors, impact concerns made by officers to account for success or failure. Empower-
the notion of personal control over organizational outcomes.

100 Paton, Violanti, Johnston, Burke, Clarke, Keenan • Stress Shield: Police Resiliency
ment is greater when officers attribute causes for failure to formance expectations, and who acknowledge environmen-
external (i.e., other than personal shortcomings), transient tal limitations on their outcomes, are better able to adapt to
(i.e., likely to change over time), and specific (e.g., limited to a highly threatening circumstances (Paton, 1994; Raphael,
specific day or event) factors. 1986).
The role of this schema component is consistent with In addition to being able to predict satisfaction and thus
findings in the literature of critical incident stress. For ex- inform understanding of how meaning and manageability
ample, Paton and Stephens (1996) discuss how an officer’s develop, by mediating the relationship between organiza-
frequent experience of successful outcomes under normal tional characteristics and satisfaction, empowerment repre-
circumstances can lead to the development of the helper ste- sents a mechanism that illustrates how an officer’s experience
reotype. The schema of the helper stereotype fuels officers’ of organizational culture (e.g., hassles and uplifts) is trans-
expectations that they will always be resourceful, in control, lated, via the above schema components, into resilience and
and able to put things right. The suddenness, scale, and future adaptive capacity. Having identified the potential of
complexity of mass emergencies and disasters make it inevi- empowerment theories to inform understanding of resilience,
table that officers will have to deal with failure at some point the next issue involves identifying its organizational predic-
or with not being able to perform at their expected level (Paton, tors.
1994). Under these circumstances, the helper stereotype re-
Several antecedents to psychological empowerment
sults in officers’ internalizing failure (Raphael, 1986) rather
have been identified. Prominent among these are social struc-
than, more correctly, attributing a given problem to environ-
tural variables (access to resources and information, organi-
mental complexity. Similarly, organizational hassles such as
zational trust, peer cohesion, and supervisory support) and
reporting practices that supersede concern for officers’ well-
personal characteristics (personality). This literature can con-
being or that project blame on officers increase the likelihood
tribute to identifying the predictors of empowerment that can
that officers will perceive problems as emanating from inter-
be included in the Stress Shield model.
nal sources (MacLeod & Paton, 1999). In contrast, feedback
processes that differentiate personal and environmental in-
fluences on outcomes contribute to the development of Access to Resources
attributional schemas that sustain adaptive capacity Having insufficient, inadequate, or inappropriate re-
(MacLeod & Paton). sources to perform response tasks contributes to critical in-
A second schema component, envisioning, refers to how cident stress risk (Carafano, 2003; Paton, 1994). Having
officers anticipate future events and outcomes. It influences resources (physical, social, and informational) allows indi-
the quality of the attributional processes brought to bear on viduals to take initiative and enhance their sense of control
critical incident experiences. Officers who anticipate positive (impact) and self-efficacy (competence) over environmental
rather than negative outcomes experience stronger task and challenges (Gist & Mitchell, 1992; Lin, 1998; Paton, 1994).
global assessments and, thus, empowerment. With regard to One resource that plays a pivotal role in predicting empower-
response problems, the existence of a learning culture in po- ment is information.
lice agencies that interprets problems as catalysts for future Crisis information management systems capable of pro-
development and not as failure (Paton, 2006; Paton & viding pertinent information in conditions of uncertainty are
Stephens, 1996) will increase positive expectations regarding essential to adaptive capacity in emergency responders
performance and well-being. (Paton & Flin, 1999) and play an important role in creating a
The final schema component, evaluation, refers to the sense of purpose and meaning (Conger & Konungo, 1988)
standards by which one evaluates success or failure. Tho- among officers (Figure 3). However, information itself is not
mas and Velthouse (1990) argue that individuals who adopt enough. The social context in which information is received
less absolutist and more realistic standards experience greater is an equally important determinant of empowerment. In this
empowerment. This observation is reinforced by findings in context, one aspect of the agency-officer relationship be-
the critical incident literature. Officers who have realistic per- comes particularly important, and that is trust.

IJEMH • Vol. 10, No. 2 • 2008 101

Trust Dispositional Influences
Trust is a prominent determinant of the effectiveness of Although less extensively researched than other vari-
interpersonal relationships, group processes, and organiza- ables, one dispositional factor that has attracted interest is
tional relationships (Barker & Camarata, 1998; Herriot, Hirsh, the personality dimension of conscientiousness, particularly
& Reilly, 1998), and it plays a crucial role in empowering offic- with regard to its attributes of achievement orientation and
ers (Spreitzer & Mishra, 1999). People functioning in trust- dependability (McNaus & Kelly, 1999). Conscientious indi-
ing, reciprocal relationships are left feeling empowered and viduals experience a stronger sense of meaning and compe-
are more likely to experience meaning in their work. Trust has tence in their work, particularly during times of change and
been identified as a predictor of a person’s ability to deal with disruption (e.g., responding to critical incidents in which of-
complex, high-risk events (Siegrist & Cvetkovich, 2000), par- ficers need to adapt to unpredictable, emergent demands)
ticularly when relying on others to provide information or (Thomas & Velthouse, 1990), demonstrate greater levels of
assistance. perseverance in these efforts (Behling, 1998), and are more
committed to contributing to collective efforts (Hough, 1998).
Trust influences one’s perception of other’s motives,
This contributes positively to both the level of cooperation
their competence, and the credibility of the information they
with and support for coworkers that they demonstrate in
provide (Earle, 2004). People are more willing to commit to
work contexts and to sustaining a cohesive team response to
acting cooperatively in high-risk situations when they be-
complex events.
lieve those with whom they must collaborate or work under
are competent, dependable, and likely to act with integrity (in
the present and in the future) and care for their interests Modeling Empowerment and Resilience
(Dirks, 1999). Organizations functioning with cultures that
Using these variables, Johnston and Paton (2003) de-
value openness and trust create opportunities for officers to scribed how empowerment mediated the relationship between
engage in learning and growth, thus contributing to the de-
the above predictors and resilience (job satisfaction) in hos-
velopment of officers’ adaptive capacity (competence) (Barker
pital staff dealing with critical incidents. Psychological em-
& Camarata, 1998; Siegrist & Cvetkovich, 2000) (Figures 3 powerment was measured using Spreitzer’s (1995a)
and 4). The quality of this aspect of the interpersonal envi-
empowerment scale. Trust was measured using the interper-
ronment is also influenced by officers’ dispositional charac-
sonal trust at work scale (Cook & Wall, 1980). Access to
teristics. resources and information was assessed using Spreitzer’s
(1995b) social structural measures. Conscientiousness was
assessed using Costa and McCrae’s (1992) conscientious-
ness scale. The results are summarized in Figure 3.

Figure 3: The relationship between empowerment and job satisfaction. Adapted from Johnston (2002)
and Johnston and Paton (2003).

Conscientiousness Trust .28

.18 .20
J J
J

Critical
Incidents
} Empowerment
} Global/Task
Assessments
.37
J
J
Job Satisfaction R2 = .51
J

.17
.26
Resource
Information
Access

102 Paton, Violanti, Johnston, Burke, Clarke, Keenan • Stress Shield: Police Resiliency
 The model shown in Figure 3 provided good support for Peer Cohesion and Empowerment
the role of empowerment as a predictor of resilience, account-
The quality of relationships between coworkers predicts
ing for some 51% of the variance in job satisfaction. It also
the meaning that officers’ perceive in their work (Major,
supports the inclusion of empowerment in the Stress Shield Kozlowski, Chao, & Gardner, 1995; Liden et al., 2000; Mullen
model. However, before doing so, other social structural (e.g.,
& Cooper, 1994; Paton & Stephens, 1996; Perry, 1997) and
senior officer attitudes and behavior, levels of peer cohesion
increases the level of social support provided to coworkers
and support) and dispositional (e.g.., hardiness) variables (George & Bettenhausen, 1990). Members of cohesive work
capable of predicting adaptive capacity through empower-
teams are more willing to share their knowledge and skills, an
ment can be identified.
essential prerequisite for the development and maintenance
of the learning culture that is fundamental to agency and
Senior Officer Support and Empowerment officer resilience. Cohesive networks are also less dependent
on senior officers for obtaining important resources. Peer
Senior officers play a central role in developing and sus-
relationships are an alternative source for such resources
taining empowering environments (Liden, Wayne, & Spar-
(Liden et al., 1997), contributing to a greater sense of self-
row, 2000; Paton & Stephens, 1996). They have a major role in
determination in one’s work (see Figure 4).
creating and sustaining a climate of trust and empowerment
as a result of their being responsible for translating the orga- Taken together, the social structural variables of senior
nizational culture into the day-to-day values and procedures officer support and peer cohesion can make a valuable con-
that sustain the schema officers engage to plan for and re- tribution to a model of resilience (see Figure 4). In the earlier
spond to critical incidents. discussion of the choice and impact components of empow-
erment (see above), a comparison was made between them
Leadership practices such as positive reinforcement help
and the construct of perceived control. Consequently, the
create an empowering team environment (Manz & Sims, 1989;
final variable proposed for the model, hardiness, is a disposi-
Paton, 1994). This is particularly true when senior officers
tional one that informs an understanding of the relationship
focus on constructive discussion of response problems and
between perceived control and resilience.
how these problems can be resolved in the future; this type
of approach from both coworkers and senior officers empow-
ers employees (Quinn & Spreitzer, 1997). It does so by draw- Hardiness and Empowerment
ing one’s emphasis away from personal weaknesses in a Hardiness has a long history as a predictor of resilience,
difficult or challenging situation and placing it on an active
one which embraces the officer-agency relationship (Bartone,
approach of anticipating how to exercise control in the future
2004). Hardiness may be an important adjunct to empower-
(Paton & Stephens, 1996). In this way, the behavior of senior ment. Portraying empowerment as a multi-level process in-
officers contributes to the development of the attributional,
troduces another issue. Although organizational decisions
envisioning, and evaluative schema components (see above)
can provide the conditions necessary to enable officers, this
that are instrumental in translating officers’ organizational does not automatically imply that officers will be able to fully
experiences into resilient beliefs and competencies.
utilize these opportunities. It is necessary to have an en-
Quality supervisor-subordinate relationships, of which abling (empowering) environment and officers with the dis-
supportive supervisor behavior is a crucial factor (Liden, positional characteristics to be empowered (see Figure 4).
Sparrow, & Wayne, 1997), create the conditions necessary The control, challenge, and commitment facets of hardiness
for personal growth (Cogliser & Schriesheim, 2000) by en- represent a dispositional indicator of officers’ potential to
hancing general feelings of competence (global assessment) utilize environmental opportunities to learn from an empow-
(see Figure 4). Additionally, quality supervisor-subordinate ering environment. For this reason, hardiness is included in
relationships encourage the creation of similar value struc- the model. It has an advantage over conscientiousness in
tures between officers (Cogliser & Schriesheim), building that hardiness is open to change through team and organiza-
shared schema, enabling employees to find increased mean- tional intervention (Bartone).
ing in their task activities, and contributing to the develop-
ment of a sense of cohesion between colleagues.

IJEMH • Vol. 10, No. 2 • 2008 103

 Integrating the occupational health and empowerment dictable and challenging circumstances repeatedly, it is im-
models (Figure 1 and 3) with the additional factors described portant that resilience programs be designed as learning strat-
above provides the foundation for the Stress Shield model of egies and that any model used to guide this activity identify
resiliency. The Stress Shield model is depicted in Figure 4. the resources and competencies that facilitate the proactive
Paths contributing to the development of empowerment are development of officers’ general capacity to adapt (i.e., ren-
shown as solid lines. Paths proposed to reduce empower- der any future experience meaningful and manageable) to
ment are illustrated as hatched lines. Because it can capture unpredictable circumstances. The Stress Shield model was
changes in perceived coherence, meaningfulness, and man- proposed as a means of achieving this goal.
ageability, satisfaction is retained as an outcome measure.
The Stress Shield model was developed by integrating
However, because the occupational health and empowerment
and building on theoretically robust and empirically tested
literatures have not examined posttrauma outcomes specifi-
work. This approach increases the expected utility of the
cally, a measure capable of capturing this aspect of officers’
model. The Stress Shield model describes resilience as re-
experience must be included in any test of the model. For this
sulting from the interaction between person, team, and orga-
reason, posttraumatic growth has been included as an out-
nizational factors. However, the benefit of any model is a
come measure in the model (Figure 4).
function of its being theoretically rigorous and capable of
informing the design of practical programs in police agen-
Conclusion cies. All model components (with the exception of conscien-
tiousness, and its influence can be accommodated in selection
Recognition of the fact that critical incidents can result
in resilient (adaptive and growth-oriented) outcomes for po- or assessment procedures) are amenable to change through
organizational intervention and change strategies. Guidelines
lice officers means that exercising duty of care requires that
for changing hardiness, peer support, supervisor support,
police agencies have at their disposal a model that they can
use to guide the development and maintenance of resilience. organizational hassles and uplifts, trust, and empowerment
are available in the literature (Bartone, 2004; Cogliser &
Furthermore, because police officers will encounter unpre-

Figure 4: The Stress Shield model of resilience. Solid lines indicate positive influences on adaptive capacity and
growth. Dashes lines indicate pathways with a negative influence on empowerment.

J Positive work
environment
P.F.
J

J Coping
J

Peer Adaptive
Cohesion Capacity
Conscientiousness K J
J

Organizational Growth
Climate J Trust J Empowerment J

Emotional Stability
J

Job
Satisfaction
J

Supervisor
Support
J E.F.
Coping
J

J Negative work
environment

104 Paton, Violanti, Johnston, Burke, Clarke, Keenan • Stress Shield: Police Resiliency
Schriesheim, 2000; Hart et al., 1993; Herriot et al., 1998; Perry, Britt, T.W., Adler, A.B., & Bartone, P.T. (2001). Deriving ben-
1997; Quinn & Spreitzer, 1997). The fact that the proposed efits from stressful events: The role of engagement in
Stress Shield model is derived from empirically validated theo- meaningful work and hardiness. Journal of Occupational
ries and includes variables that can be acted upon and influ- Health Psychology, 6, 53-63.
enced by police agencies to influence selection, training, Burke, K., & Paton, D. (2006). Well-being in protective ser-
assessment, and strategies for change confers upon the model vices personnel: Organisational Influences. Australasian
both theoretical rigor and practical utility. Journal of Disaster and Trauma Studies, 2006-2. http://
trauma.massey.ac.nz/issues/2006-2/burke.htm
Carafano, J.J. (2003). Preparing responders to respond: The
REFERENCES challenges to emergency preparedness in the 21st Cen-
tury (Heritage Lecture No. 812). Washington, DC: The
Aldwin, C. M., Levenson, M. R., & Spiro, A., III. (1994). Vul-
Heritage Foundation.
nerability and resilience to combat exposure: Can stress
have lifelong effects? Psychology and Aging, 9, 34¬44. Carver, C.S., Scheier, M.F., & Weintraub, J.K. (1989). Assess-
ing coping strategies: A theoretically based approach.
Antonovsky, A. (1990). Personality and health: Testing the
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 56, 267-
sense of coherence model. In H. S. Friedman (Ed.), Per-
283.
sonality and disease (pp. 155-177). New York: John Wiley
& Sons. Cogliser, C.C., & Schriesheim, C.A. (2000). Exploring work
unit context and leader-member exchange: A multi-level
Anderson, N.R., & West, M.A. (1998). Measuring climate for
perspective. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 21, 487-
work group innovation: Development and validation of
511.
the team climate inventory. Journal of Organizational
Behavior, 19, 235-258. Conger, J.A., & Konungo, R. (1988). The empowerment pro-
cess: Integrating theory and process. Academy of Man-
Armeli, S., Gunthert, K. C., & Cohen, L. H. (2001). Stressor
agement Review, 13, 471-482.
appraisals, coping, and post-event outcomes: The dimen-
sionality and antecedents of stress-related growth. Jour- Cook, J., & Wall, T. (1980). New work attitude measures of
nal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 20, 366-395. trust, organizational commitment and personal need non-
fulfilment. Journal of Occupational Psychology, 53, 39-
Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory
52.
of behavioural change. Psychological Review, 84, 191-
215. Costa, P.T, & McCrae, R.R. (1992). Revised NEO Personality
Inventory (NEO PI-R) and NEO Five-Factor Inventory
Barker, R.T., & Camarata, M.R. (1998). The role of communi-
(NEO-FFI) professional manual. Odessa, FL: Psycho-
cation in creating and maintaining a learning organization:
logical Assessment Resources.
Preconditions, indicators, and disciplines. Journal of Busi-
ness Communication, 35, 443-467. Dirks, K.T (1999). The effects of interpersonal trust on work
group performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 84,
Bartone, P. (2004). Increasing resiliency through shared
445-455.
sensemaking: Building hardiness in groups. In D. Paton,
J. Violanti, C. Dunning, & L.M. Smith (Eds.), Managing Earle, T. C. (2004). Thinking aloud about trust: A protocol
traumatic stress risk: A proactive approach (pp. 129-140). analysis of trust in risk management. Risk Analysis, 24,
Springfield, IL: Charles C. Thomas. 169-183.
Behling, O. (1998). Employee selection: Will intelligence and Fredrickson, B. L., Tugade, M. M., Waugh, C. E., & Larkin, G.
personality do the job? Academy of Management Execu- (2003). What good are positive emotions in crises?: A pro-
tive, 12, 77-86. spective study of resilience and emotions following the
terrorist attacks on the United States on September 11th,
Brayfield, A.H., & Rothe, H.F. (1987). Job satisfaction index.
2001. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 84,
In B. Stewart, G. Hetherington, & M. Smith (Eds.), Survey
365–376.
item bank (Vol. 1, pp. 21-31). Harrowgate: University Press.

IJEMH • Vol. 10, No. 2 • 2008 105

George, J.M., & Bettenhausen, K. (1990). Understanding Liden, R.C., Sparrow, R.T., & Wayne, S.J. (1997). Leader-mem-
prosocial behavior, sales and turnover: A group level ber exchange theory: The past and potential for the fu-
analysis in a service context. Journal of Applied Psychol- ture. Research in Personnel and Human Resources Man-
ogy, 75, 698-709. agement, 15, 47-119.
Gist, M., & Mitchell, T.N. (1992). Self-efficacy: A theoretical Liden, R.C., Wayne, S.J., & Sparrow, R.T. (2000). An examina-
analysis of its determinants and malleability. Academy of tion of the mediating role of psychological empowerment
Management Review, 17, 183-211. on the relations between the job, interpersonal relation-
Hart, P.M., & Cooper, C.L. (2001). Occupational Stress: To- ships, and work outcomes. Journal of Applied Psychol-
ogy, 85, 407-416.
ward a more integrated framework. In N. Anderson, D.S.
Ones, H.K. Sinangil, & C. Viswesvaren (Eds.), Interna- Lin, C.Y. (1998). The essence of empowerment: A conceptual
tional handbook of work and organizational psychol- model and a case illustration. Journal of Applied Man-
ogy, Vol. 2: Organizational psychology (pp. 27-48). Lon- agement Studies, 7, 223-238.
don: Sage Publications. MacLeod, M.D., & Paton, D. (1999). Police officers and vio-
Hart, P. M., Wearing, A. J., & Headey, B. (1993). Assessing lent crime: Social psychological perspectives on impact
police work experiences: Development of the Police Daily and recovery. In J.M. Violanti and D. Paton (Eds.), Police
Hassles and Uplifts Scales. Journal of Criminal Justice, trauma: Psychological aftermath of civilian combat.
21, 553-572. Springfield, IL: Charles C. Thomas.
Herriot, P., Hirsh, W., & Reilly, P. (1998). Trust and transition: Major, D.A., Kozlowski, S.W., Chao, G.T., & Gardner, P.D
Managing today’s employment relationship. Chichester: (1995). A longitudinal investigation of newcomer expecta-
John Wiley & Sons. tions, early socialization outcomes, and the moderating
effects of the role development factors. Journal of Ap-
Hough, L.M. (1998). Personality at work: Issues and evidence.
plied Psychology, 80, 418-431.
In M.D. Hakel (Ed.), Beyond multiple choice: Evaluating
alternatives to traditional testing for selection (pp. 131- Manz, C.C., & Sims, H. (1989). Super-leadership: Teaching
166). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. others to lead themselves. New York: Prentice Hall.
Janoff-Bulman, R. (1992). Shattered assumptions. New York: McNaus, M.A., & Kelly, M.L. (1999). Personality measures
Free Press. and biodata: Evidence predicting their incremental predic-
tive value in the life insurance industry. Personnel Psy-
Johnston, P. (2002). Psychological empowerment as a medi-
ating and multidimensional construct. Unpublished chology, 52, 137-148.
master’s thesis, Massey University, Albany, New Zealand. Mullen, B., & Cooper, C. (1994). The relation between group
cohesiveness and performance: An integration. Psycho-
Johnston, P., & Paton, D. (2003). Environmental resilience:
logical Bulletin, 115, 210-227.
Psychological empowerment in high-risk professions. In
D. Paton, J. Violanti, & L. Smith (Eds.), Promoting capa- North, C.S., Tivis, L., McMillen, J.C., Pfefferbaum, B., Cox, J.,
bilities to manage posttraumatic stress: Perspectives on Spitznagel, E.L., Bunch, K., Schorr, J., & Smith, E.M. (2002).
resilience (pp. 136-151). Springfield, IL: Charles C. Tho- Coping, functioning, and adjustment of rescue workers
mas. after the Oklahoma City bombing. Journal of Traumatic
Kirkman, B.L., & Rosen, B. (1999). Beyond self-management: Stress, 15, 171–175.
Antecedents and consequences of team empowerment. Paton, D. (1994). Disaster relief work: An assessment of train-
Academy of Management Journal, 42, 58-74. ing effectiveness. Journal of Traumatic Stress, 7, 275 -
288.
Klein, R., Nicholls, R., & Thomalla, F. (2003). Resilience to
natural hazards: How useful is this concept? Environ- Paton, D. (2006). Posttraumatic growth in emergency profes-
mental Hazards, 5, 35-45. sionals. In. L. Calhoun and R. Tedeschi (Eds.), Handbook
of posttraumatic growth: Research and practice.
Koberg, C.S., Boss, R.W., Senjem, J.S., & Goodman, E.A.
Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
(1999). Antecedents and outcomes of empowerment.
Group & Organization Management, 24, 71-91.

106 Paton, Violanti, Johnston, Burke, Clarke, Keenan • Stress Shield: Police Resiliency
Paton, D., & Flin, R. (1999). Disaster stress: An emergency Siegrist, M., & Cvetkovich, G. (2000). Perception of hazards:
management perspective. Disaster Prevention and Man- The role of social trust and knowledge. Risk Analysis, 20,
agement, 8, 261-267. 713-719.
Paton, D., & Jackson, D. (2002). Developing disaster man- Spreitzer, G.M. (1995a). An empirical test of a comprehensive
agement capability: An assessment centre approach. Di- model of intrapersonal empowerment in the workplace.
saster Prevention and Management, 11, 115-122. American Journal of Community Psychology, 23, 601-
Paton, D., Smith, L.M., Ramsay, R., and Akande, D. (1999). A 629.
structural re-assessment of the Impact of Event Scale: The Spreitzer, G.M. (1995b). Psychological empowerment in the
influence of occupational and cultural contexts. In R. Gist workplace: Dimensions, measurement, and validation.
and B. Lubin (Eds.), Response to disaster (pp. 83-100). Academy of Management Journal, 38, 1442-1465.
Philadelphia: Taylor & Francis. Spreitzer, G.M. (1996). Social structural characteristics of psy-
Paton, D., Smith, L.M., Violanti, J., & Eranen, L. (2000). Work- chological empowerment. Academy of Management Jour-
related traumatic stress: Risk, vulnerability and resilience. nal, 39, 483-504.
In D. Paton, J.M. Violanti, & C. Dunning (Eds.), Posttrau- Spreitzer, G.M. (1997). Toward a common ground in defining
matic stress intervention: Challenges, issues and per- empowerment. Research in Organizational Change and
spectives (pp. 187-204). Springfield, IL: Charles C. Tho- Development, 10, 31-62.
mas.
Spreitzer, G.M., Kizilos, M.A., & Nason, S.W. (1997). A dimen-
Paton, D., & Stephens, C. (1996). Training and support for sional analysis of the relationship between psychological
emergency responders. In D. Paton & J. Violanti (Eds.), empowerment and effectiveness, satisfaction and strain.
Traumatic Stress in critical occupations: Recognition, Journal of Management, 23, 679-704.
consequences and treatment. Springfield, IL: Charles C.
Spreitzer, G.M., & Mishra, A.K. (1999). Giving up control with-
Thomas.
out losing control: Trust and its substitutes’ effect on
Paton, D., & Violanti, J.M. (2008). Law enforcement response managers involving employees in decision making. Group
to terrorism: The role of the resilient police organization. & Organization Management, 24, 155-187.
International Journal of Emergency Mental Health, 10-
Thomas, K.W., & Tymon, W. (1994). Does empowerment al-
2, 125-136.
ways work?: Understanding the role of intrinsic motiva-
Paton, D., Violanti, J.M., & Smith, L.M. (2003). Promoting tion and interpretation. Journal of Management Systems,
capabilities to manage posttraumatic stress: Perspec- 6, 84-99.
tives on resilience. Springfield, IL: Charles C. Thomas.
Thomas, K.W., & Velthouse, B.A. (1990). Cognitive elements
Perry, I. (1997). Creating and empowering effective work teams. of empowerment: An “interpretive” model of intrinsic mo-
Management Services, 41, 8-11. tivation. Academy of Management Review, 15, 666-681.
Quinn, R.E., & Spreitzer, G.M. (1997). The road to empower- Weick, K.E., & Sutcliffe, K. M. (2007). Managing the unex-
ment: Seven questions every leader should consider. pected: Resilient performance in an age of uncertainty
Organisaitonal Dynamics, Autumn, 37-49. (2nd ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Raphael, B. (1986) When disaster strikes. London:
Hutchinson.
Manuscript Received: September 26, 2007
Accepted for Publication: April 14, 2008

IJEMH • Vol. 10, No. 2 • 2008 107