Broken Windows Theory; Should it be applied to the Military? Is it? Can it reduce things like SHARP violations?

SSG Robert Burns — Thu, 05 Mar 2015 18:56:59 -0500

Broken Windows policing is a theory that was highlighted during the police officer choking out the guy selling cigarettes who died at the scene. The idea is that enforcing the "minor" (broken window) crimes prevents major ones, while letting them go leads to further disorder.
Applying this to military in the manner of enforcing the basic standards like wear and appearance of uniform, proper courtesy, parade rest, etc. Because these things aren't enforced as they should be, does it inherently foster an environment where things like SHARP violations or other major crimes can thrive? Or are they enforced and these major crimes have nothing to do with those who commit these minor offenses.
I encourage you to read this article to have a better understanding of the theory, but please post your thoughts on the matter.
http://cebcp.org/evidence-based-policing/what-works-in-policing/research-evidence-review/broken-windows-policing/

Broken Windows Policing | Center for Evidence-Based Crime Policy

The broken windows model of policing was first described in 1982 in a seminal article by Wilson and Kelling. Briefly, the model focuses on the importance of disorder (e.g. broken windows) in generating and sustaining more serious crime. Disorder is not directly linked to serious crime; instead, disorder leads to increased fear and withdrawal from residents, which then allows more serious crime to move in because of decreased levels of informal...

Response by CW5 Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 5 at 2015 7:31 PM

CW5 Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 05 Mar 2015 19:31:37 -0500

I think the military word for the broken windows crimes enforcement is "discipline," and I would say that if we enforce discipline in the seemingly minor things, it has a good chance of remaining in place when it comes to the major things. Discipline is the key to it, in my opinion.

Response by Lt Col Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 5 at 2015 7:48 PM

Lt Col Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 05 Mar 2015 19:48:40 -0500

I am not convinced it works that well. We have implemented this in the AOR. Strict uniform and general order enforcement. We still have sexual assaults at contingency bases.

Even the model applied to New York City. Yes it probably lowers crime on paper especially in specific areas where there is more police concentration. But does it really lower crime overall, or is it that people are less likely to get caught committing more major crimes because the police are busy attending to lesser offenses.

Take a drug dealer or a kingpin. He might find the fact that the police spend time on smaller crimes that he can use this to his advantage by doing a drug deal when he knows the cops busy and the eyes will be off of them. I'm some cases in certain cities the drug dealers have people commit misdemeanors on purpose to create a distraction. If all the cops are dealing with small crimes then he just goes somewhere where the police are not present to do his drug push.

People are commit large crimes regardless. I think the best way is to have more vigilance in policing. Obviously crime is still crime and a cop sees it he needs to act but to spend resources and energy on the minutiae you may miss when something more egregious is going on. The presence of cops is more important than the arrests. If someone is going yo burglarize a house they are less likely to do it in a neighborhood where they see cops patrolling all night. They will most take the path to least resistance and find get area that is not so patrolled. Most people tend to make risk assessment as to what they think they can get away with. And I think this is true even in the military.

I am not sure if the above thesis will work since it has Ben tried in the AOR.

Response by MAJ Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 5 at 2015 7:51 PM

MAJ Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 05 Mar 2015 19:51:37 -0500

Absolutely! They're called standards, customs, and courtesies, and they exist for many reasons; not the least of which is to continue to reinforce discipline within our ranks.

Response by SPC David Shaffer made Mar 5 at 2015 8:58 PM

SPC David Shaffer — Thu, 05 Mar 2015 20:58:52 -0500

I think the broken window policy is good in the general public because it shows people the police are watching. In the military everyone is (or should be) policing each other. Also, we all know the military teaches respect, responsibility, and how much it will suck if you stray from the military rules and code.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 5 at 2015 9:13 PM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 05 Mar 2015 21:13:18 -0500

Good article. With not enough data to back up the theory. In my opinion in order to change is through education and creating conscience in our Soldiers. By changing ways of thinking and culture, will go a long way. Teaching and developing values. Helping soldier to modify behaviors will help to create a discipline environment.

Response by COL Vincent Stoneking made Mar 5 at 2015 9:17 PM

COL Vincent Stoneking — Thu, 05 Mar 2015 21:17:57 -0500

Response by GySgt Joe Strong made Mar 5 at 2015 10:59 PM

GySgt Joe Strong — Thu, 05 Mar 2015 22:59:07 -0500

I think the issue goes to the greater society from which we draw our members and a potential weakening of "the consent of the Goverened".
The societal turning away from previously defined social mores has opened up more questioning of authority and its strictures.
In this questioning many small acts of internal defiance now drive more frequent acts of external defiance and without those prior mores in place there's a weakened response in calling things wrong.
Look at the many scandals in Govt, look at their relative ethical seriousness in comparison to the relatively small matter that brought down the Nixon Administration.
Society needs to revisit the idea that anti-societal elements might need to cease to be encouraged and accepted and popularized thru popular culture.
As to Broken Windows theory, it needs to be a systemic effort if it's going to be applied. This NCO applying it and that NCO not doing so, only serves to weaken further the discipline one presumes we want to shore up.
Those are my thoughts on the question.

Response by CPT Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 6 at 2015 6:29 AM

CPT Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 06 Mar 2015 06:29:01 -0500

I think the Broken window policing is great. It is a small portion of Community Policing that came popular in the 90's. It works great. I have seen it in action. But I don't think is would really work here. The basics of it is that you take away places that criminals may gather. If there is little interest in an area then people won't bother them there. It takes away any chance of criminals to find any safe haven. In addition police need to have a greater presence in the community. This came after the findings of the Kansas City preventive patrol experiment. The KCPP experiment found that mere presence or increased patrols had little to no impact. The interaction of the police in the community has the biggest impact of crime. This is what happened when they tried to cite him for a small charge.

With that being said it wouldn't work in the military. The only way it would work would be if you have sentries stand at post were the potential activity would take place. In addition you don't find many areas left in disrepair in the military. The issue we have with SHARP is that it comes from within. We have to police ourselves. I think the SHARP program does a good job in which the way it is currently going. I think they have changed it for the better.

Response by MSG Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 6 at 2015 6:40 AM

MSG Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 06 Mar 2015 06:40:18 -0500

I think the key word is "counseling" in my opinion. The troubled junior soldier, or "leadership challenges" as I vividly recall my senior leaders call them, are simply in dire need for more training and counseling sessions with their first line supervisor. The only thing I don't agree with is the spectrum range of probability of how a "broken window" theory could lead from disorder to anarchy, criminal activity. Things of that nature could be based on being a product of one's environment. Some situations are circumstantial. One can change the conditions of their current behavior if they change the environment around them. Within counseling, you change the conditions around them (i.e. talk things through, stress relievers, refer them to counseling, etc) Also discipline and enforce the standards, teach them their left and right limits as CW5 Private RallyPoint Member may have been leading to.

Response by SGT Jim Z. made Mar 6 at 2015 6:42 AM

SGT Jim Z. — Fri, 06 Mar 2015 06:42:10 -0500

SSG Robert Burns Excellent topic and I enjoyed reading the responses. As others have said the theory is indeed awesome and does work. I think CW5 Private RallyPoint Member Scott Montgomery nailed it with the military version of the broken windows policing effort is discipline and I agree. There are many little things that I see today that I may not have seen 20 years ago in how juniors talk to seniors I mean still stand a modified version of attention when speaking with officers that I come into contact on daily basis and some of them I have known for a dozen years or so. However, today I see on limited occasions enlisted talking with officers and not even near attention or parade rest. Another thing I see is hands in pockets these little disciplines may be enforced by some but not all.

MAJ Private RallyPoint Member comments under chief's post were spot on as well. However, I also see Lt Col Private RallyPoint Member point that even with enforcement it still happens but to rebut that I say it happens in community policing as well.

Response by SPC Joshua H. made Mar 6 at 2015 8:32 AM

SPC Joshua H. — Fri, 06 Mar 2015 08:32:41 -0500

I highly disagree with this type of approach.

It is a very slippery slope and reminds me of the thought police in 1984, or Minority Report.

1984 was supposed to be a warning, not a manual.

Response by SSG Robert Burns made Mar 6 at 2015 10:20 AM

SSG Robert Burns — Fri, 06 Mar 2015 10:20:38 -0500

Do you think this principle is or can be applied equally through the ranks?

Response by Capt Richard I P. made Mar 6 at 2015 2:27 PM

Capt Richard I P. — Fri, 06 Mar 2015 14:27:45 -0500

The counter to this idea is that there are limited resources (in policing and in military leadership) and prioritization of top offenses should be maintained.

There's also a broken window parable by Frederic Bastiat....its also worth checking out. But on another topic.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parable_of_the_broken_window

Response by Sgt Aaron Kennedy, MS made Mar 6 at 2015 3:51 PM

Sgt Aaron Kennedy, MS — Fri, 06 Mar 2015 15:51:53 -0500

Marked other because of the context of the question.

We already use broken window, or jaywalking, or gig line, or whatever you want to call it. Do the little things right, and the big things get done right as well.

Can it be applied to Sexual Harassment, Assault et al? That is a completely different question.

When talking about "discipline" we generally refer to avoiding matters of "neglect," as opposed to "intent." I hope that makes sense.

When we get into the Sexual Harassment/Assault realm, this isn't a "neglect" issue. Perhaps a lack of proper education, but not neglect. People don't forget. People take actions in a manner that is contradictory to good order. That isn't an enforcement issue. It's a reaction issue.

Response by SPC Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 6 at 2015 9:19 PM

SPC Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 06 Mar 2015 21:19:07 -0500

I was a cop for a bit after I separated, "broken windows" can work, but it's the sort of thing where you must have everybody on board. It can be intensive to apply it at first. Especially if you are trying to adapt it as a management style like TQM or apply it to an issue like Sharp.
On the crime side, something similar to a threat and vulnerability assessment could be done identifying, modifying or eliminating those locations where possible.
Since I'm not in anymore I can't attest to the effectiveness of the current training program, but if it's anything like it was during my time, I imagine it's a quarterly mandatory class conducted by the company or battalion rep. Add to that at the squad/platoon level, a follow up to reinforce at a more intimate level. It doesn't have to be a long drawn out process just five minutes here and there, like an on the spot correction, once a week, once a month, from various members of the chain art different times in different ways. Work it into monthly counseling as an area of focus, stop by the DEFAC for lunch or the platoon room, chat for a few minutes with a few troops, roll by the barracks on some pretext other than health and welfare and drop a few hints about the topic. Let the message spread itself that way. The "Windows" in this are the soldiers, if they aren't broken, then you just performed maintenance and strengthened that window, hopefully allowing it to buttress other, weaker panes you haven't been able to reach.

No organisation the size of the military will ever eliminate any crime completely, but, just like my pre 9/11 HMMWV that somehow broke between weekly pmcs sessions, I was able to limit what broke to things I couldn't control.