Chapter 7: Influencing

decision-makers
Who’s who?
 Decision-makers
 People and institutions that can have an impact on the
criminal environment
 Clients
 People who commission or receive a crime intelligence
product

 Often (but not always) interchangeable

 “Knowing and understanding the client’s current
focus is an essential element of ensuring the work
produced is welcomed by a receptive client as a
relevant and timely contribution. Most critically,
client understanding maximizes the chance that the
intelligence will be utilized and have a positive impact
on the criminal environment.”
 (Nicholl 2004: 66)
Who are decision-makers?
 Front-line officers  The traditional target for tactical
intel products
 Unclear if they are decision-makers
in the 3i framework because they
are easily drawn away by
emergency calls and other
activities
 Analysts need to maintain a close
contact with the front-line because
they are often a source of quality
information
Who are decision-makers?
 Front-line officers  Compstat and intelligence-led
policing both place heavy emphasis
 Police leadership on accountability and leadership
 This is especially the case in the
middle ranks of the police service
 The assumption that police
commanders ‘know’ how to do
crime prevention is not borne out
by their training schedules
Who are decision-makers?
 Front-line officers  Agencies that have compliance-
based processes or regulatory
 Police leadership control are in this category.
 Part of the growing nodal
 Non-law governance situation:
enforcement  networks of actors both within
law enforcement and from
outside agencies such as
government and the private
sector, all of whom have
responsibilities to provide
security.
 See Wood and Shearing (2007)
Who are decision-makers?
 Front-line officers  The main target for information
dissemination in the Community
 Police leadership Policing Era
 Intelligence-led policing and POP
 Non-law take a similar approach:
enforcement  engagement of the public in
the solution to crime problems
 The general public is appropriate when they can
help, but not an essential
ingredient necessary to solve
every problem.
 Publicly available Threat
Assessments are a way to influence
public thinking
Who are decision-makers?
 Front-line officers  Beyond traditional police to
include:
 Police leadership  Customs and border control
 Immigration authorities
 Non-law  Defense agencies
enforcement  Organizations with national
security responsibilities
 The general public  In the UK 1998 Crime and
Disorder Act made
 Security networks multiagency crime prevention
initiatives a statutory
requirement
Example of a security network
 Greater Manchester Against Crime
Partnership Business Model
 A business process model
 For partnership (multi-agency)
working
 Developed by a multi-agency team
 From an interpretation of the police
National Intelligence Model
GMAC PBM planning cycle
Influencing decision-makers
1. The decision-maker’s institutional environment
exerts considerable pressure
2. Decision-makers demand actionable intelligence
products over descriptive reports
3. The evolution from knowledge to intelligence
product is dependent on the nature of the decision-
maker

 This all suggests a complex relationship between decision-

maker and analyst
Dealing with decision-makers
 “If the client’s experience in dealing with intelligence
as a decision-making tool is rudimentary and
unsophisticated, the pressure on the analyst is
accentuated. They will generally be unsympathetic to
even reasonable requests for more information, more
time or a response indicating the question posed
cannot be directly answered”
 (Nicholl 2004: 55)
A complex problem
 “Analysts have no clear sense about which products
are considered useful to the target. They produce,
deliver, and through anecdotal evidence draw
conclusions about the value of their work. Neither
the analysts, nor the analysts’ managers are clear
about how and how well targets use their product.”
 (O’Shea and Nicholls 2003: 16)
Other influences on decision-makers
Solutions?
 Analysts should liaise directly with clients
 Analysts should understand how clients define
success
 Analysts should be aware of the possibility of
multiple clients
Maximizing influence
 Analysts should aim to maximize the distribution of
their products, and not work on the ‘need-to-know’
principle
 Locate analytical units close to decision-makers
rather than close to operational units
 Analysts can utilize security networks
Security networks
 Local security networks
 Initiatives that work with public and private resources available at the
local community level to overcome the more intractable crime
problems with origins in deteriorating social conditions
 Institutional networks
 Networks that smooth the progress of information flow between
government agencies or enable disparate agencies to collaborate and
pool resources
 Networks without borders
 Networks that, while similar to institutional networks, facilitate
cooperation at an international level between agencies with national
responsibilities
 Informational networks
 The web of electronic and informational technologies that enable
police officers to access vital information remotely

 (See Dupont, 2004)

Alternatives to the long, written report
 Short 6-page overviews
 One page summaries
 PowerPoint presentations
 Oral briefings
 Video presentations
 Text messages
In summary
 Influencing decision-makers requires resolute
accuracy in detail and fact, but also a flair for the
imaginative in terms of getting clients’ attention.