Command and Staff Program

Leadership in Practice: Ladder Leadership

Replies
270
Voices
137
Dr. Mitch Javidi
Instructions:  
  1. Post a new discussion related to the topics covered in this module.  Your post needs to provide specific lessons learned with examples from this module helping you enhance your leadership capacity at work.
  2. After posting your discussion, review posts provided by other students in the class and reply to at least one of them. 
  • Edit
    Monte Potier

    After viewing the video I now have a better understanding of the "Shakedown Style" and how officers can go through the ranks and carry it with them. We are "cynical" in nature as we are young officers and can keep that same way of thinking during our careers. It is only after understanding that "everyone is not out to hurt us" can we improve and get to the "real manager" style.

    • Edit
      Brian Johnson

      Monte, it is easy to spot the "Shakedown" style but remember that the "Pragmatic Bureaucrat" use their position of power (mid-level manager) to take advance of and to get rewards. This is much more cynical and unethical in my book. Brian

      • Edit
        Joey Prevost

        What I don't care for with the Pragmatic is that they only care about others when it benefits them and they need others to accomplish something. Once this type of leader is identified, subordinates keep this information in the forefront of their minds.

          • Edit
            Lt. Richard Paul Oubre

            I agree with you Brian. The Pragmatic bureaucrat are only interested in themselves and do hide their intentions. You can spot them if you pay attention.

          • Edit
            Miranda Rogers

            I agree, I think they may be harder to detect until it's too late. At the end of the day, they are in for themselves.

        • Edit

          Without a doubt once another feels as though they have been slighted or used for the benefit of another to self promote, it will totally take away the credibility and trust of that leader.

        • Edit
          Paul Brignac III

          You are correct Joey. The unfortunate truth is that often it takes a long time to for this type of leader to be exposed. In these cases a substantial amount of damage can already be done to divisions or departments.

      • Edit
        Travis Linskens

        I agree, Brian. Both styles will impact employee morale but the pragmatic bureaucrat impacts both employee morale and trust.

    • Edit
      chasity.sanford@stjohnsheriff.org

      I agree with you, because as young officers they may feel that they may always need to prove something to show their authority, when in reality they would only need to apply the real manager style for things.

  • Edit
    Brian Johnson

    The law enforcement profession has rewarded "shakedown" leaders for decades. It is our responsibility as visionary leaders to help modify the behavior of those still among our ranks. We can no longer accept and promote those that have this positional and authoritative style of management. This will require a deep dive into the various styles of leadership, which encompass the visionary leader.

    • Edit
      Frank Acuna

      Brian, very well said. We do need visionary leaders who can move beyond the "old school" autocratic management style.

      Frank

    • Edit
      Nancy Franklin

      Brian, I agree that this shakedown style of leadership has been ingrained in officers and is one that we must be cognizant of and work to change. It is important to modify these behaviors for the good of the individual, as well as the organization, if we are to develop credible leaders for the future.

      • Edit
        Jason Porter

        I also agree with what ya'll have posted. We have to get that way of thinking out of our agencies in order to better the organization as a whole and develop young vibrant leaders with forethought to replace us.

      • Edit
        Kyle Phillips

        I agree Nancy, I agree that we need to be aware of these behaviors within our ranks so we can make positive changes to produce credible authentic leaders.

    • Edit
      Lt. Mark Lyons

      I agree. Its very frustrating to see people in leadership positions who are only concerned for themselves, abuse their authority and have no real understanding of what it takes to be a leader.

      • Edit
        Samantha Reps

        I agree, it's frustrating to say the least, when you watch people in leadership position that only care about themselves and has complete disregard of those they are leading.

  • Edit
    Frank Acuna

    Wouldn't it be wonderful if every one of our leaders in law enforcement were Real Managers? I believe we have all worked for both Shakedown Style and Pragmatic Bureaucrat Style leaders. Hopefully, you don't find yourself as a Shakedown or Pragmatic Bureaucrat. I believe a Real Manager can be more effective and is more well rounded, however, I believe in adaptability and there are traits of a Shakedown or Pragmatic Bureaucrat in all of us. As a para-military organization, sometimes you must be autocratic in tense situations, but this should be the exception and not common practice.

    Frank

    • Edit
      Drauzin Kinler

      Most agencies still have a long way to go. I think we are just a small percentage of agencies that take part in leadership training. Most officers hear the word leadership and have a different perspective on the true meaning of the word. I have learned so many things along this journey and consider myself fortunate to have had the opportunity to learn about all the flaws that I have personally. I plan to work on my style of leadership and hopefully become a real manager before I end my law enforcement career.

      • Edit
        Jarod Primicerio

        I believe we should just focus on becoming the real leader for our agencies. We cannot worry about everyone else but we can continue to grow individually and positively impact others. Optimistically, we slowly can erode these detrimental managerial styles.

      • Edit
        dlavergne@stcharlessheriff.org

        I agree with you, Captain Kinler. This program has made me do a lot of self-reflecting on how I can improve not only myself and my shift but also our agency. I also plan to work on my style of leadership and hope to become a real manager before I retire although I have a longer time to work on it than you.

      • Edit
        Major Willie Stewart

        Drauzin,
        I think you are absolutely right. I think law enforcement has a long way to go toward leadership. As so many of the modules have emphasized it starts on a personal level. We must accept change and be willing to implement change. That starts from the top and bottom of the ladder. Leadership is also about the willingness to want to adapt to change.

    • Edit
      clouatre_kj@jpso.com

      Frank, I agree. A perfect world would be for more agencies to invest in leadership training and develop more leaders into Real Managers.

    • Edit
      Major Willie Stewart

      Frank,
      That's is an unrealistic world. Sadly, I think we have worked with Shakedown and Pragmatic leaders more frequently than we'd like to. I'd say we often call them "micromanagers". As a leader we have to adapt with so many different aspects of policing. I think the problem comes when we focus more on getting to the top of the ladder. Sometimes when we get there we forget what it took to get us there and at some point we were those on the bottom and wanted someone to care about us and our needs as subordinates.

    • Edit
      Brent Olson

      Frank,

      It would be wonderful! I have worked for some great leaders, but also have worked for some that employed quite a bit of the Pragmatic and Shakedown styles. I think that it is necessary for some of those types of leaders to be present, as it allows us to identify and recognize the good leaders we have had to emulate their style.

  • Edit
    Kyle Turner

    In my experience, the Shakedown style of leadership is the style taken on by those who desire power and promotion at an early stage of their career (ie first promotion within an organization) while at the same time they really don't care about the people around them. They discipline to demonstrate to their superiors that they are keeping people in line, resulting in discipline practices that may be unfair, inconsistent, and not based on ethical or department standards. As this type of leader promotes, they become smarter and realize that their supervisors don't appreciate this style. However, they still or selfish and uncaring about their subordinates, so they hide their style and transition to the Pragmatic Bureaucrat Style, which is very similar but less overt. Their motives remain the same, still self-centered, they just become better at masking them.

    • Edit
      Chris Corbin

      Kyle, while I don't believe that I ever worked with a Shakedown Style leader, after reading your post, I can now see that it is very likely that some of the Pragmatic Bureaucrat leaders I have worked with cleared arrived at that style as a means of adapting to the expectations placed on them as they promoted. You are absolutely right in your assessment that their motives don't change much, but they just hide it better.

    • Edit
      ereeves@cityofwetumpka.com

      Excellent point. They will be very resistant to change and probably never will. They will continue to set that example for their subordinates.

  • Edit
    Joey Prevost

    Earlier in my career I saw that the Shakedown Style of leader was more prevalent. I think this may have been carried over from those that came before. I have also noticed that while there are still some hangers on, it is gradually being phased out. I also believe it comes about as the result of an individual with something to prove that has never led others. The Pragmatic leader is still self serving, but not as draconian as the previous model. I have noticed more of these than the Shakedown leader. Maybe because they can survive better due to showing some concern for those under them, albeit only when it benefits them.

  • Edit
    Chris Corbin

    I have never worked at a large agency and fortunately have not had to deal with the Shakedown Style leader. However, I have had to work with a few Pragmatic Bureaucrat types. Fortunately, it seems that both of these are beginning to dwindle in number at the higher levels of today's organizations. I believe that is the result of newer leaders recognizing the 'games' that such leaders play, but more importantly because those newer leaders seem more interested in collecting the best information available, from all levels of an organization, about a candidate's true colors. It is up to us to remain vigilant in our evaluation and mentoring of our subordinates so that this behavior doesn't have a chance to take root and ruin things for our organizations.

    • Edit

      I'm with you Chris and I have never worked for a large agency either. My agency has three hundred employees and I've been there twenty years. I remember maybe one that fit the Shakedown style, but he was already a lieutenant when I started and wasn't around him much. Apparently I haven't missed anything by not working for a large agency. I've heard chatter about the problems and always assumed people were just disgruntled or being hyperbolic.

  • Edit
    Drauzin Kinler

    During my law enforcement career, I have experienced each style of leadership. Early on in my career, all of my supervisors were the shakedown style leader. Later on, I worked with pragmatic style managers. Most of the supervisors I ever worked with were self-servant type leaders that looked out for what was in their best interest. I have only had the pleasure of working with one real manager that genuinely cared about the people that worked for the organization.

    • Edit
      Dan Wolff

      Drauzin Kinler,
      I think “back in the day” as most called it the authoritarian style of leadership and policing was most prevalent. Now with today’s society changing and access to social media and such things are changing for the better to promote subordinates below and not just look at them as stepping stones to make the next rank. Working with real managers who are genuine is what makes a leader emulate them when they see good results.
      Dan

  • Edit
    Nancy Franklin

    The "Shakedown Style" of management has been very prominent in the experiences I have had in my career. I have had exposure to only a handful of "Real Managers" and for those, I am truly grateful. I have had some great mentors in my career who have taught me the value of being a "real manager" and have worked to try to integrate these principles into my own style - which is a work in progress. The "Pragmatic Bureaucrat" manager is a common management style as individuals work to manage budgets and adjust to changing resources and missions of organizations.

    • Edit
      Lance Leblanc

      Nacy, I would agree that the "Shakedown Style" is most prevalent in my agency also. I am hoping with schools like this, positive change to our leadership can come about.

    • Edit
      Laurie Mecum

      I agree the Shakedown style is most prevalent...however not as much as it used to be. We need more Real Managers in the organizations so that the younger generations do not continue any of these styles.

  • Edit
    Jarod Primicerio

    In my department, I have worked with and for both the shakedown and pragmatic styles of managers, each leaving somewhat of a trail behind them. It is obvious when you interact with a manager that solely cares about themselves and their next promotion. There is no courage in taking on the status quo as it may jeopardize their next promotion. The lack of empathy and even desire to casually communicate sickens me. I hope the next level of management seeks to diffuse these individuals from continuing a path of destruction.

  • Edit
    Jason Porter

    I think my way of leadership is based on life experiences and the leaders that I have been lucky enough to have had throughout my career. I haven't had the shakedown type leader or the pragmatic type that I can recall. I think I would have picked them out pretty quickly. I have seen subordinates that have these traits and I am not a fan. I try to lead them in a way of a real manager so that they one day can lead in that way.

    • Edit
      Monte Potier

      I believe as more leaders become more effective we will be able to eliminate a lot of the "shakedown or pragmatic" leaders.

      • Edit
        Judith Estorge

        I agree with your statement. I find our agency, for example, is moving forward by trying to grow leaders with proper training courses. It is fortunate when organizations start the training early in an administrators career to provide them with the tools necessary to do an effective job.

      • Edit
        Clint Patterson

        I hope you are right, Monte. I want to think that by becoming more effective leaders, we will be able to extinguish the shakedown and pragmatic leaders and develop more real management/leaders.

      • Edit
        Scott Crawford

        I have to believe that the role of law enforcement leaders are changing. There are many bright young eager minds out there that hopefully will get the chance to shine. If we teach them the right way, you may be right and we will rid our agencies of that kind of leader.

  • Edit
    Dan Wolff

    In learning of the shakedown style leadership and their authoritarian leader style, it was a, do as I say not what I do. Morale always seemed to be at a low point during those times. As I progressed I seen the more of the bureaucratic style where use of subordinates made you look good and they took all the credit. As a subordinate we seen the real leader they were and it sent a message of low credibility for that person. Most prevalent I see now are the real managers where they promote growth from the subordinates. It’ motivating and brings morale to a new level.

  • Edit
    Lance Leblanc

    I think that most would agree that at a police agency, the ladder leadership is the most common style. It is rare that you come across "real managers" but since my agency has made a commitment to developing leadership, we are starting to see a change. Previously, we have focused on FBI LEEDA and now we are transferring our focus to command college.

    • Edit
      David Cupit

      Lance it is encouraging to hear that your agency has committed to developing leadership and you are seeing the results. I think more agencies should incorporate this in their environment.

  • Edit
    Chasity Arwood

    Ladder leadership is the style is the style that is in place at my agency. It seems that the pragmatic bureaucratic leaders are still present at my department. Hopefully, with more leadership classes being offered to younger officers ,my department will have more real managers who take care of their subordinates.

  • Edit
    Judith Estorge

    The shakedown managerial style appears to be filled with cynicism and the belief that police work is solely authoritarian. Going up the ladder of success for this supervisor is to the detriment of anyone in their way. The real managerial style of leadership it the most beneficial to the agency and its fellow officers.

  • Edit
    David Cupit

    The Pragmatic Bureaucrat managerial style is a little softer style than the Shakedown managerial style. I think this type of leadership would be harder to recognize. Even though it might be harder to recognize, it is still detrimental to the employees.

    • Edit
      Kevin Balser

      I agree that they are a little harder to identify because they are the sneaky ones that are playing the game behind closed doors. They give the appearance that they are good for the team but are not at all.

  • Edit
    Brian Lewis

    The "shakedown" style is not very prevalent in my agency, unlike the "pragmatic bureaucrat" style. It's very common to see mid-level managers concerned with others when it benefits them either for recognition or promotion. And if you're good at disguising the pragmatic style, you can unfortunately go far in your career.

  • Edit
    Clint Patterson

    The pragmatic bureaucrat style is the one that stands out the most to me. The person that only looks out for themselves and is willing to step on others to get where they want to go. I dislike this type of person, and unfortunately, we all work with one or more of them. Sometimes this person, I feel, is overlooked purposely because their supervisors don’t want to deal with them. This type of person is the wolf in sheep clothing. The unfortunate subordinates who work for this pragmatic style person will realize these characteristics and lose trust in them as a leader.

  • Edit
    Laurie Mecum

    The Shakedown style I believe has been the way things are done for many years. May not be as prevalent now as it use to be. Not just in law enforcement but in many organizations. It is really sad to think back and see how many leaders were really out for just themselves and not the good of the people they work for. All to get to the top.

    • Edit
      Christian Johnson

      It is sad, Laurie.

      Fortunately though, our Agency has placed an emphasis on creating adaptive leaders.

  • Edit
    Roanne Sampson

    I learned about the different typologies of leadership (wise, real, good and cautious). Individual who are lower in rank will mostly fit in the real or cautious style, while higher ups mostly fit into the good or wise. The shakedown and pragmatic styles of leadership are problematic. As more leaders receive training, I find that the shakedown and pragmatic styles of leadership will diminish with time.

    • Edit
      David Ehrmann

      I hope training can help to refocus these types of leaders' mindsets. For this to be successful, the leader needs to buy into the training they're receiving, become self-aware, and do some self-reflection, then make an effort to change.

  • Edit
    David Ehrmann

    This module was an extension of the previous module, where it discussed the theory presented by Irwin and Normore on the Ladder Principle in Police Management. As the topics of the shakedown style and pragmatic bureaucrat were discussed, I began to reflect on “leaders” I knew who were pragmatic bureaucrats. They secretly cared about themselves more than their people while acting as though they thought about their people. However, when push came to shove, they would not stand up for their people and, in fact, roll them under the bus just to look good. Leaders need to be aware of these types of supervisors and do everything in their power to curtail their advancement.

    • Edit
      Amanda Pertuis

      I agree David. More people need to speak up so the Shakedown and Pragmatic Bureaucrat's can be identified.

    • Edit
      Rocco Dominic, III

      I too have worked with leaders who cared about themselves and how their division looked in the eyes of their superiors. Not caring about their subordinates.

  • Edit
    Christian Johnson

    Unfortunately, I have worked under Shakedown and Pragmatic leaders.

    Each of them was toxic in different ways and created nothing but low morale in their wake.

    Fortunately, our Agency has placed an enormous emphasis on leaving those styles behind and is focused on creating adaptable, caring leaders.

    • Edit
      dlevet@stcharlessheriff.org

      yes it is unfortunate, but you also saw these people in action came to the realization that is not how things are supposed to be.

  • Edit
    Amanda Pertuis

    Ladder Leadership was in practice when I was first hired on. I have worked for all three managerial styles. Thankfully our agency is trying to create Authentic Leaders and many of the Shakedown and Pragmatic Bureaucrat Styles are retired.

    • Edit
      Burke

      I too have worked for many pragmatic and shakedown type supervisor's over the years. I am glad to have finally been able to put a name to that style of management.

      • Edit
        Henry Dominguez

        Exactly!!! I remember to vividly the issues and problems these leaders caused within our department throughout the years.

  • Edit
    Rocco Dominic, III

    I have worked with all both the pragmatic and shakedown manager. These supervisors caused low morale and the loss of good subordinates. Luckily they are no longer with the department. Thankfully the department implement leadership classes that everyone has to complete if they want lateral transfers or promotions.

    • Edit
      Donnie

      I’ve seen this too. Fortunately we have superiors that are educated leaders and unafraid to learn new things. My superiors are held to a high standard by the sheriff and they hold us to the same standard. Since my sheriff’s standard is held by the community he serves, he understands the need for leadership education which helps avoid those two styles.

  • Edit
    McKinney

    Again, another interesting style for us to be aware of and concerned with. I think that “Pragmatic Bureaucrat” and the “Shakedown Leadership Style” should be immediately addressed for the safety of the organizational members when it becomes visible to us. It saddens me to know that individual(s) will incorporate this practice within an organization, such as law enforcement, considering the other challenges that we endure.

    • Edit
      Lance Landry

      I caught that also where Dr. Long mentioned we see these Pragmatic and Shakedown styles but rarely ever address them. It could be because most of our generation survived those types of leaders and learned from their mistakes. I am not saying avoidance is the proper way to handle them. It’s just a thought.

    • Edit
      jbanet@bossiersheriff.com

      I agree with you that it is hard to believe that some people would choose these leadership styles, even though I have personally seen them in action. When I saw them, (even though I didn't have a label on them) I made a conscious statement in my head that If I was ever in a position to lead, I would not follow their example. As law enforcement professionals we face enough challenges and must come together as a team and think of each other first.

  • Edit
    Burke

    This module reemphasizes the negative leadership of the shakedown and pragmatic supervisor. It puts a label on supervisor's that I've had over the years and who I aspired not to be like. It give me more understanding on who they were and their mindset.

  • Edit
    Lance Landry

    Early in my career the Shakedown Style was quite prevalent in both upper and middle supervisory levels. Fortunately, that generation retired and moved on and a new generation leader has taken over. He adapted because he experienced the same leadership styles. This leader instilled the “we” concept associated with the Real Manager Style, and it is expect of all his supervisory staff. We are only as strong as our weakest link.

    • Edit
      Royce Starring

      I found that the older supervisors at my agency used this style of leadership. We still have some of the new generation that follow the old supervisors style of leadership.

  • Edit
    Donnie

    I’ve seen all three types of styles of “Ladder Leadership”. I’ve seen them in the military and in law enforcement. Having a better understanding of this principle now than from the last lecture, I see that it is still something to avoid minus the “Real Manager” style. Regardless of what label a style is given or what we learn in the future, there are two things to remember; where you came from and taking care of those who are where you were, now. No matter what you do as a leader, subordinates are watching and mimicking. You are developing junior leaders whether you know it or not.

  • Edit
    Royce Starring

    This lesson goes into a deeper description of the Machiavellian /Shakedown stile and the pragmatic style than it did in the previous lesson. It was interesting to see how they were different in some ways and the same in other ways.

  • Edit
    jbanet@bossiersheriff.com

    Police agencies have rewarded those who use the "Shakedown Style" on a regular basis. I have seen it within my own organization. Some people over indulge in the power and authority bestowed upon them by being an officer and that mentality carries over into any higher position they achieve. After taking this module of instruction I believe it is my duty or responsibility to change this style within my own organization. I would rather my organization lead from the role of the Real Manager concept.

    • Edit

      I agree that I have seen this in my agency often. I too hope to help lead the change at my agency. With several key leaders completing this training I believe we have a great oppurtunity to change.

  • Edit
    chasity.sanford@stjohnsheriff.org

    In the learning area 3, module 10, I've compared the shakedown style and Pragmatic Bureaucrat style, I've learned that the shakedown style is all based on a power move. I've noticed people within my department who displays that style. When in reality there's nothing wrong with coming with a softer approach and utilize the pragmatic bureaucrat style. To apply a softer touch with your organization for a better understanding.

  • Edit

    I found the indepth review of Machiavellian style leadership to be eye opening. The theory of shakedown style being engrained because of the culture and real world tactics of front level enforcement gives insight as to how this style evolves and why it seems to resurface in law enforcement leadership. I have seen the pragmamatic style also appear prevalent. As I have risen in rank and become involved in more administrative concerns such as budgets the example given of cutting overtime really hit home. It is not uncommon in our area to see Senior Staff level rank to actually be a salaried employee who does not get overtime. The salary is significantly higher to justify their extended hours, but also giving them the authoritiative excuse they have to work extra and don't even get paid for it. I can remember when I was applying for a rank position a friend who was at that level told me I needed to learn to NOT be a 40 hour employee. Sometimes you have to work an extra hour here and there, but don't put that on your time sheet. Show you are committed. It is hard to change this mindset because much of the rank on top of the ladder got there with this belief and they expect the same of the new leaders coming up.

    • Edit
      mtroscla@tulane.edu

      I believe that a lot of this mindset comes from law enforcement operating in a para-military fashion and those leadership traits are common in the military.

      • Edit
        Major Stacy Fortenberry

        I will disagree to an extent with you on the leadership traits of shakedown and pragmatic bureaucrat style being common in the military. With the military being at war for so many years they have revamped most of their leadership training from the old cold war days.

    • Edit
      cbeaman@ascensionsheriff.com

      I can also remember years ago that we would work several hours over and not be compensated for it. I agree that it was a mindset. It was something that was expected by upper management.

  • Edit
    mtroscla@tulane.edu

    A common theme in these modules seems to be balance, and this one is no exception. Balancing the goals with the morale and happiness of the officers is a constantly changing target and only an adaptive leader can hit that mark.

    • Edit
      michael-beck@lpso.net

      You seemed to have hit the nail on the head with that remark. They all point to us being able to be able to see the necessity to make certain our officers are well cared and when they are, they will be more apt and will to make certain the goals of the agency are met.

  • Edit
    Lieutenant John Champagne

    Shakedown leadership has been around my entire career, and it seems as though those are the leaders who are promoted. I believe the more we educate ourselves as an agency, the sooner we will move towards the real manager style of leadership.

  • Edit
    michael-beck@lpso.net

    I found the portion of the description of the Shakedown style to be extremely interesting and thought provoking, especially when Dr. Long cited the police managers are promoted due to psychopathic tendencies. Never had I dared to connect dots to that degree. It was also interesting when he spoke of the budgeting as being a point of contention when concentrating on the Pragmatic Bureaucrat. There were many times in my career, especially when I was a new sergeant, I was told by my supervisors, that I was expected to give hours to the agency if I was to be a good supervisor. It was really disconcerting but I now see this was one of the small things on which they had control in order to make themselves look better by making certain we were “in budget”. It’s a relief that these ideals have changed and the newer command staff does not think as they did once.

    • Edit
      guttuso_fa@jpso.com

      we had the same issue in our department at one time where the supervisor would degrade you or look at you like you were crazy if you put in overtime for 30 minutes because you were on a late call. However, that has change and a deputy has no issues turning in overtime for 15 minutes without fear of being ridiculed. Now, of course, it is usually give back in comp time due to budgetary reasons but most deputies seem to be fine with that solution.

  • Edit
    cbeaman@ascensionsheriff.com

    Shakedown style of leadership will always be around. Unfortunately, there are people who will do anything to get to the top of their organization. These types of people often climb the ladder very quick. It makes you wonder why upper management can’t see what everyone else can see when it comes to these types of leaders.

    • Edit
      Adam Gonzalez

      I would guess that this is true for every organization. It is both disheartening and discouraging...for everyone. As one instructor previously noted, "Everyone knows what the problems are, and they are waiting to see what you do about them". However, as discouraging as this is, it is exciting that we are each in positions to be the change agents of our agencies. We can make the difference now and in the future and move past these unfortunate past follies of those before.

  • Edit
    Major Stacy Fortenberry

    It seems an easy trap for an officer to fall into and bring the way he learns to get results on the street to how to get results in the office. I have seen this time and again. caring for the development of those under your trust needs to be hammered into every person we mentor. Educating future leaders on the pitfalls of career building on the backs of others is essential. Two and tree day schools on leadership has been the norm within my agency. Topics such as these are breezed over. Advocating for more substantial leadership development is required.

  • Edit
    Henry Dominguez

    It is so good knowing that these problem leadership characteristics are being identified. There is no room for Shakedown and Pragmatic Leadership in police departments. This causes a lack of trust within the department that is now carried onto the streets from subordinates, thus causing tension with the community we are trying to gain trust from. The scary thing is the lecture states that Psychopathic Personality traits are to be more commonly found in police work than you might see elsewhere. I think we as leaders now need to do our part in educating ourselves as well as subordinates in a proper and better way to lead.

    • Edit
      McKinney

      I agree there is no room in an agency for a supervisor to use a Shakedown or Pragmatic leadership style. I believe, as you mentioned, that when these types of behaviors are present, it can cause “subordinate(s)” to become dissatisfied, which can carry over into their job assignments.

  • Edit
    ereeves@cityofwetumpka.com

    I worked the first half of my career for shakedown leaders and it really makes a subordinates life hard. They get to learn valuable lessons they should be taught. That was the culture of the department I worked for then and as far as I know there is still an abundance of shakedown leaders to this day. They also have an extraordinary turnover rate.

    • Edit
      cody.hoormann@stjamessheriff.com

      My agency was the same way when I started my career. It has since improved in the recent years. There are still a few in the lower ranks but they can be helped and led the right way. I believe their actions are the way they are due to being taught that way by past leaders.

  • Edit
    guttuso_fa@jpso.com

    These types of leaders were definitely prevalent throughout my early career in law enforcement. We still have a few but it has diminished quite a bit. I am guessing that is because back in the day I don't recall going through any leadership training but know it is much more common to be sent to leadership courses. Unfortunately, I don't believe that it will ever go away because some people are only in it for themselves.

    • Edit
      blaurent@stcharlessheriff.org

      I agree, I believe, "It was always done this way; this is the way you have to do it attitude." I know back when I started my career, there was no leadership courses offered for training purposes. I think the old school mentality caught up to a lot of agencies with lawsuits or high turnover rates.

    • Edit
      mmoscona@floodauthority.org

      Frank, you and I probably know a lot of the same people you are referring to. I agree with you that there will probably be these types of leaders in our profession forever but we can hope that there are more of us than them and the harm they cause is overshadowed by the rest of us.

  • Edit
    dgros@stcharlessheriff.org

    Regardless of the agency type, size, location, etc., these styles of "leaders" exist everywhere. Looking back at some of the ranking officers, I have either been around or with directly for, I am happy to say that I have had the fortunate relationships with those officers who many considered to be a cop's cop. They were regarded as true brothers and sisters and took care of their people. They also warned of these styles of leaders and who to be careful around. These styles of leaders are what lead people to leave bad bosses, not bad companies.

    • Edit
      dpertuis@stcharlessheriff.org

      I agree Darren, there are a few left today. Fortunately for us we have had some good leaders along the way.

  • Edit
    dpertuis@stcharlessheriff.org

    This was a short lecture, but really hit some key points. The thing that stood out to me was I have been seeing pragmatic bureaucrat and shakedown leaders for several years and didn't seem to realize it. These types of leaders can be toxic and should be a concern for agencies to fix the problem, before poisoning an entire division or agency.

    • Edit
      Lieutenant Dustin Jenkins

      I agree that most of us have been lead and subjected to this type of leadership in our agencies. What is a little disturbing to me is I can think of a few new subordinate leaders who may still fall into these categories and will have to attempt to lead them out of it.

  • Edit
    Lieutenant Dustin Jenkins

    This lecture is almost a verbatim review of the article published on Law Enforcement Today and I was happy to listen to it after reading the article earlier. The negative implications that leaders who utilize the shakedown and pragmatic bureaucrat style can cripple the future leaders of our departments and create an environment of every man for themselves. In our profession a great deal of our work rest on effective teamwork. When a leader does not care for their subordinates it is next to impossible to have an effective team behind him.

    • Edit
      steven.brignac@stjamessheriff.com

      True, and also for teams to work together. This can be division in an organization that hampers productive results and public trust.

  • Edit
    blaurent@stcharlessheriff.org

    I have seen many different types of leadership styles in my career. I can recall it used to be the attitude, "Don't show them everything you know, because they will take your spot or won't need you anymore." There were a couple of times I went to supervisors for help, and I was told to figure it out on your own. There are still a few of these supervisors that are toxic in the department, but they are fading out as they retire. I have noticed a vast improvement in leadership styles and positive impacts on the work culture.

    • Edit
      Justin Payer

      I have also seen all types of leadership in my career. I am seeing less of the bureaucratic style of leader and hopefully this trend will continue. I have seen a trend that more law enforcement agencies realize they need real managers.

  • Edit
    cody.hoormann@stjamessheriff.com

    Shakedown and Pragmatic Bureaucrat style leaders can ruin an organization. They look out for themselves and for the next way they can be promoted. They don't care about what happens to the people under them and are not interested in building them up to be the next leaders of the organization. It is impossible to build teams and goals under these types of leaders.

  • Edit
    anthony.joseph@stjamessheriff.com

    Both shakedown and pragmatic leadership styles can cause bad culture within the organization and ruin the development of future leaders. this typestyle can also cause a communication breakdown.

  • Edit

    So many times, we see the Pragmatic Leadership style, and we do not even know that it is occurring. We watch our leadership just coast day to day, not wanting to deal with any issues that may arise. Until reviewing this chapter, I was unaware of how much leaders can coast and let everyone fend for themselves.

    As leaders, we need to make sure that we do not coast, but lead with intention, and lift others with us in our leadership.

    • Edit
      wdanielfield@ibervilleso.com

      I agree this level of supervisor is busy doing his or her own job tasks, has concern for further promotion and those above. They rarely have the time to get to know the people that work for them.

  • Edit
    steven.brignac@stjamessheriff.com

    Looking back over the years, I can see how I have used each style in my leadership. It seems that when you have to train yourself, you will take these steps in order. Also, I enjoyed the definitions of different types of officers, and have one that should be added to the list. I will use this in the future as a motivational growth skill for my team. Would like them to self identify and also, their goal of who they would like to be.

  • Edit
    dlavergne@stcharlessheriff.org

    I have worked for all three styles of leaders in the past. The shakedown style, the pragmatic bureaucrat style, and the real manager style. I met with a lot of frustration when dealing with the shakedown and pragmatic bureaucrat style. When dealing with those types of leaders, it was infuriating to see them change when someone of a higher rank walked into the room.

    • Edit
      cvillere@stcharlessheriff.org

      Devin:
      I agree that it is infuriating to see people change to save face and try to impress their supervisors when, as their subordinates, we see how self-serving they can be. They put on a good show for their bosses but in reality they only have their own interest at heart, not ours, not our agency's.

      Hopefully, by educating people on effective leadership styles and interpersonal relations, we can help develop our supervisors to be more authentic leaders.

      • Edit

        Is is hard to watch but many felt like that was where their only options were. Explaining these premises goes along way in ending these cycles. It also helps weed out the bad from the good, as many bad leaders will not be told how ineffective they are.

  • Edit
    cvillere@stcharlessheriff.org

    Learning more in depth about the Ladder Principle, Shakedown Style, Pragmatic Bureaucrat, and the Real Manager leadership styles made me reflect on others I have worked for. One particular person who actually say out loud that the ends justified the means, intentionally quoting Machiavelli. He would talk to me and our peers like we just committed a crime, it often felt like an interrogation. This continued until we stopped reinforcing his behavior; we no longer responded to his questions. We collectively decided to stop answering his questions when he behaved in this manner and would point out his behavior to him. At one point, we also pointed it out to his Major, who sent a clear message that he wasn't going to tolerate that kind of treatment.

    Years later, our agency began instituting a Credible Leadership Program which may have helped him change some of his behaviors, coupled with the strong stance from us and our Leaders. Now, I think he makes a conscious effort to self-manage and use his emotional intelligence to approach things differently. I am proud of him for identifying his problem, and taking steps towards changing his behavior. In the end, the person has internalize the goal in order for change to truly be effective.

    • Edit
      Mitchell Gahler

      You're exactly right that the culture suffers. Along with the attitudes and behaviors of those who are affected by negative leadership. This module really provided insight of negative managerial styles which we can reflect on as our careers develop. Sometimes, ignorance and self-gain takes precedence over authenticity, which then creates negative power and poor morale.

  • Edit
    sid.triche@stjohnsheriff.org

    I feel the shake down and pragmatic styles are here to stay for sometime. Its too hardwired into our culture. It would take a new strong leadership and training to end these to leadership styles.

  • Edit
    clouatre_kj@jpso.com

    Every department has all of these types of personalities and leaders. It would be wonderful if more agencies especially the larger ones would dedicate more resources to developing the officers into Real Leaders. Real Leaders really manage up and down their chain of command and understand the importance of both.

    • Edit

      i see more of the ladder principle being utilized in civil service departments. With that being said I have worked for two different sheriff's offices in my 19 year career and have seen leadership in all styles of this module and the harmful affects of poor leadership. Leadership is a skill that most agencies do not spend enought training on and it has negative affecrts on the agency

    • Edit
      Eric Sathers

      I agree. Leadership development at all levels needs to be key. I also think it is important to talk to a supervisor's subordinates to truly understand how they are doing.

  • Edit
    dlevet@stcharlessheriff.org

    i believe that when people are first promoted to a position of authority they will tend to gravitate to the shakedown because i am the authority and you must do as i say. This is definitely if their agency doesn't have some type of leadership training. They don't know any better but do know that they have authority over subordinates, and that is all they know. It will take time for them to hopefully understand that is not the correct way to lead.

  • Edit
    mmoscona@floodauthority.org

    Having Shakedown and Pragmatic leaders in to many positions of authority can ruin an organization. Throughout my career I have had to work for and deal with these types of leader. Everyone who works for them is miserable and it is reflected in their work, attitudes, and their interactions with the public and even themselves. It's encouraging that agencies are beginning to see that leadership training is imperative not just for supervisors but for all officers.

  • Edit

    This module does well to show what type of manager/supervisor styles exist in the LEO agencies we experience or in private service as well. People who use their step "on the ladder" to not oversee or misuse those up and/or down make better leaders overall. It shows that the "iron fist" class/style usually does not bode well for longevity in this modern policing world. When we can help and/or improve those we work with, real managers outlast and outshine "down looking" personnel every time.

    • Edit
      Captain Jessica Jo Troxclair

      I agree this type of leadership style is not anything I would want to see in the future of my agency. I am not saying it isn’t used by some supervisors within my agency but I have not been subjected to it. I believe with the leadership training we receive a most supervisors stay clear of this way of leading.

  • Edit
    Lt. Mark Lyons

    This training module made me reflect back on some of the different types of supervisors I have worked for in the past. One of those supervisors stood out among all the others. When this person was around, we had a highly politicized culture and everyone was expected to "stay in their lanes" and do what they were told. When I first started at my agency I had heard rumors about this person and how they ran the organization. I was never exposed to it as a new deputy, but when I got promoted to Sgt, I saw it first hand. This person wasn't interested in anything I wanted to accomplish as a supervisor, and didn't care to know anything else about me. After the promotion "photo op" ceremony, this person looked at me and said "Congratulations, and remember, your not doing your job right unless they (the deputies on my shift) hate you". I was in complete shock, and didn't know what to say. I thought he was joking, but I could clearly see, he was serious. That's how he operated as a very high ranking supervisor. He kept everyone looking over their shoulders by causing constant paranoia and fear. He encouraged everyone to report anything we heard or saw someone doing to him personally. He rewarded those who played his games and punished those who spoke out or didn't play by his rules. It was the craziest thing I had ever witnessed in my life. You couldn't write a movie script that contained the amount, or level of creativity that this person had when it came to manipulating, punishing and controlling the entire staff at our agency.

  • Edit

    While listening to this module and the Ladder Principle description and the leadership styles, I noted several supervisors throughout my career that applied to these principles. Most of my career, the style of leadership that I worked for, has been the Shakedown Style and Pragmatic Bureaucrat. This seems to be the style that fits the "good ol boy" style of leadership. Luckily I now work for a leader who personifies the Real Manager Style, and it has made a massive difference in my career and others in our division.

    • Edit

      As I said , in my post, I am lucky in the leaders that I have had. I have a great leader that follows these principles, but I had a few that made me want to quit. I had a chief that almost ended my career, because I was going to quit and never do tis work again. I was asked by someone to give it six more months, which I did and everything changed.

  • Edit

    Well I can say that I certainly misunderstood a phrase from the last module. I had looked at this article after module 9, literally minute before starting this. I really do not know what to say, except that overall I have been lucky in the leaders, managers and supervisors that I have had. There have been the one that fir the pragmatic and Machiavellian, but overall I have had more good than bad.

    Depending on when you enter law enforcement, many of the good leaders that I have had exhibited traits of the Machiavellian and the pragmatic. I think that leadership has a spectrum and some traits may cross those lines. I had a watch commander that set down the rules for his watch, in writing. If you followed these rules, then everything was cheery and rosy, if not, you hated life.

    I did have one Lt. that you had to develop defense mechanisms to deal with him on a daily basis. The only leadership training that he had, was from the Marine Corps, during the Vietnam War. He looked at everything as combat. To be honest, while he was a it overbearing and did eventually promote to captain, he was not concerned with it, except that to him it was a sign of competence. Once promoted, he told me he wish that he had not taken the job.. He said he missed the arguing with the guys and just the camaraderie.

  • Edit
    Adam Gonzalez

    It was hard not to think about many of the different leaders that I have had throughout my career as I listened and took notes throughout this module. So many times, I have had the Shakedown Style and/or Pragmatic Bureaucratic Style of supervisors that were more managers than leaders. The "Good 'Ol Boy" system of politics were played and the intended outcome resulted. Or in other words, "deference was paid" as the instructor stated. Clearly, these leadership styles have long been outmoded and counterproductive. Real leaders do not rely upon fear tactics or "paying homage" to those above only, again as the instructor declared. Let us make sure that we also do not fall prey to these dreadful and hurtful means to an end!

  • Edit
    wdanielfield@ibervilleso.com

    Throughout my career I had the shakedown leadership style supervisor that used fear to keep someone from interfering with their goal of rising, perhaps to the top if possible. Because of this type of leadership, officers below these type of leaders fear speaking out against them fearing he/she may want to get even and may cause waves, interfering with his/her career plan.

  • Edit

    Many of the comment here reflect on past supervisors and how they were either a shakedown or pragmatic. As like many here, I too worked under these types of people. I can say, as well, after some self-reflection, I am sure at one time or another I was pragmatic when I was a Corporal. I never had a name for it, but I hated it when I was doing it. Age and wisdom have made that a long and distant bad memory but the reality is we all have to seek growing in who we are and who we want to be.

    • Edit
      Lt. Joseph C. Chevis

      I agree, I believe that with time, age, and wisdom we should all grow to become better and who we want to be.

    • Edit
      Paul Gronholz

      I definitely agree. I too have fit into the shakedown and pragmatic bureaucratic leader styles. I am thankful for additional the additional training we've received on how to be real managers.

  • Edit
    Lt. Joseph C. Chevis

    I have worked for shakedown and pragmatic leaders. They were dreadful leaders, and the morale of my peers was below the standards. Those leaders were lacking leadership skills and were not competent too lead. When they were promoted as supervisors they gravitate to the shakedown. Their line of thinking was” I have authority and you will do what I say”. The agency at that time did not seem to have any trainings for leadership and were promoting people just to fill up a spot.

    • Edit
      Zach Roberts

      I have also unfortunately worked under dreadful leaders that wore down on the organization to the point morale was extremely low and leadership was next to nothing. It was very much the "Do what I say, not as I do" leadership. This was an awful time as we seen a mass exodus and staff was leaving left and right. This made it so the deputies who stayed had to work lots of overtime while the leadership did nothing to change it.

  • Edit
    Captain Jessica Jo Troxclair

    After viewing this module on ladder leadership I understand these three managerial styles are used by leaders in law enforcement agencies around the world. I believe the pragmatic style and the shakedown style are both ineffective and negative. I haven’t worked with a supervisor that utilized this leadership style and I obviously benefitted from that. I would have a very difficult time working for someone that practiced either style of management.

    • Edit
      Lt. Marlon J Shuff

      Jessica, consider yourself fortunate that you haven't had any supervisors who subscribed to those styles of leadership. Unfortunately, I have. They certainly make you appreciate the Real Management style a lot more.

  • Edit
    Lt. Richard Paul Oubre

    Throughout my career, I have been exposed to Shakedown style leaders and Pragmatic Bureaucrats. Those people only cared about themselves. Thankfully, I have seen that style start to fade, but the "suck ups" are still around. I hope that as we work on our leadership styles to more effective leaders, the number of ineffective leaders will diminish.

  • Edit
    Lt. Marlon J Shuff

    Like many others in the group, I have observed all three of these management styles over the years. Sadly enough, I have also observed many young leaders imitate the Shakedown and Pragmatic Beaureacrat styles of leadership. It was learned behavior; the way their supervisor led was how they thought they had to once they became a supervisor themselves. Thankfully, through leadership training courses such as this one, most officers now realize that these leadership styles are self-serving and are not conducive to a sustainable work environment. We can finally break the cycle and create a culture to "weed out" these negative leadership styles.

    Marlon Shuff

    • Edit
      James Schueller

      I couldn't agree with you more, as I too have seen many new supervisors try and follow the same path as their Shakedown or Pragmatic Bureaucrat predecessors. I made a similar comment in my post before reading and commenting on this one, specifically that this type of training is exactly what is needed for our agencies to break the cycle.

  • Edit
    Mitchell Gahler

    In the module, Ladder Leadership, Long discussed the Ladder Principle and different managerial styles utilized by law enforcement agencies. While reviewing the Shakedown and Pragmatic Bureaucrat leadership styles, it's disheartening that these styles exist in our profession with the amount of integrity and trust that is expected of us. Both of these styles discussed how these managers focused on themselves first in order to utilize their power for promotional and individual gain. Luckily in our agency, neither of these managerial styles exist. However, I had experienced these styles in my previous employment which reflected behaviors and attitudes of the employees with a decline of positive morale.

    • Edit
      Joseph Flavin

      I think you said it well that it is disheartening these styles exist in our profession. It's important to have the mindset that we need to bring others up the ladder with us. Only worrying about oneself is no way to lead people.

      • Edit

        I agree with your comments. In leading this way we begin to lose trust amongst our employees. Once employees understand that their supervisors carry these characteristics I believe that is where we start to see morale dip, public encounters become a concern, and the mission and vision of the organization will become lost.

    • Edit
      Eduardo Palomares

      It seems to me that promotional opportunities were given to more individuals with these styles. I have seen great leaders that care for their people. They possess the outmost integrity and are by nature great people. They are still around but are becoming extinct. It is our job as current leaders to foster the real manager style to build future leaders.

      • Edit
        Chad Blanchette

        I agree. I think a good step in the promotional process would be to obtain honest feedback from the applicants team. Just because someone tests well, does not mean they are good leaders.

  • Edit
    Joseph Flavin

    Module #10 went into greater detail about the 3 distinct managerial styles with emphasis on the Shakedown Style and the Pragmatic Bureaucrat Style. Thinking about what is best for yourself and disregarding others was the common theme between the shakedown and pragmatic bureaucrat styles. This module reinforced to me the importance of having the right leaders in those supervisory positions. I can see how people would be discouraged to work for someone with a shakedown or pragmatic bureaucrat style.

    • Edit
      Jennifer Hodgman

      I agree with you, this module also reinforced to me the importance of having the right leaders in those supervisory positions.

  • Edit

    It is interesting to go over the different styles in this module and the one previous in looking at how promotions occur within agencies. I have noticed the characteristics that define each of these but didn't necessarily know the terms for each one. Within our organization, we have a combination of these individuals. What I have mostly recognized or have been alerted to during our promotional processes is the "backstabbing" mentality where those in the application pools will look to undermine those competing for the same positions. They are not really interested in bringing others along with them it is more about themselves. Once promoted I think we see a combination of all three. Of course, we are always trying to achieve a real manager style. For some, that takes a lot of work and reassurance from me that each managerial position is safe as long as each supervisor is trying to adhere to the mission and vision of the organization. I have tried to get rid of the shakedown and pragmatic by taking away the competition once our supervisors make it to the Sergeant level. After Sergeant, our promotions are not competed for in an interview process we look at performance and alignment with mission and vision in making our decision. In addition, we talk to the peers they supervise to look for the real manager style of leadership in our pick.

    • Edit

      Interesting approach to promotions at the second line supervisor level and above. I think its important to evaluate feedback from peers (while taking things with a grain of salt due to potential back stabbing).

      • Edit

        Some years ago, our agency had all employees fill out surveys on the direct supervisor. It only happened once. I think some feelings got hurt and glaring short comings were brought to light.

  • Edit
    James Schueller

    I liked the discussion of the four seminal typologies of Officers (Wise, Real, Good, and Cautious) and where certain personnel/levels in the organization tend to be. I found it interesting to take the three managerial styles described and see how they fit people within my organization in the past and present. This type of instruction is important because I think this material has a real chance of changing those who were or are more focused on their own career development to see the "error of their ways" and start behaving like real managers. With my agency investing in sending so many staff through the program (both from our Law Enforcement and Detention Divisions) I am encouraged to think where the future will lead .

    • Edit
      Durand Ackman

      I agree Sgt, I too am encouraged and excited to see where this education will lead our organization in the future. You are correct, hopefully the information from these courses will help all of us improve our leadership styles.

  • Edit
    Eduardo Palomares

    In this module, the real manager really stood out to me. While l have seen the Pragmatic and Bureaucrat Style have been proven to be successful, the real manager is superior. Careful consideration has to be taken when considering candidates for leadership and promotional positions. The best way to predict behavior is to look at past behavior. If these candidates were hard asses that didn’t care for the public, they will most likely do the same to their troops. The ladder leadership individuals will shakedown their people to achieve results by using power and authority. They are the future traitors of the next rank as well. No matter the rank or position these individuals will step on anyone for personal gain and advancement.

    • Edit
      Ryan Lodermeier

      I agree, careful consideration is the key when evaluating future leaders. I think you bring up a good point that the only predictor of future behavior is past behavior. This should be taken into consideration with promotional opportunities and lists are created. How do we gauge that x factor, the factor that tells us "while this person looks good on paper there isn't something quite right about their ability to lead." I hope future modules touch on this

  • Edit
    Kyle Phillips

    This module talked about the three different types of leaders, both the Shakedown Style and Pragmatic leader appear to mainly be concerned with what is best for them, not necessarily the organization or anyone else in it. These styles of leaders cater to those above them as they feel those are the only people whom can derail their career. It appears that law enforcement ranks are filled with these types of leaders. Through awareness and diligent promotional processes, I believe these leadership styled individuals could be filtered out, allowing authentic leaders to emerge.

  • Edit
    Chad Blanchette

    This was an interesting module. This was pointed out in some of the other discussions in regards to the 4 seminal typologies.
    Up to this point, I have certainly seen them but did not connect the dots. We certainly have a mixture of the 4 here at RPD.

    • Edit
      Maja Donohue

      Connecting the dots is definitely the beginning of understanding and your description makes sense to me. Knowledge is power as some would say, therefore developing our leadership skills and expanding our knowledge of what good leadership it is, and what it is not, should be a priority for us if we want to do things right.

    • Edit
      Brad Strouf

      Sadly I would suspect that we all see a combination of the four in almost every agency. I enjoyed the breakdowns in this module as well.

  • Edit
    Ryan Lodermeier

    This module touched on 3 different leadership styles and their traits. My interpretation of the shakedown style leader is one who cannot differentiate when he/she is interacting with suspects/interrogations on the street and the officers that he/she is supposed to lead. The pragmatic leader seems to use his/her officers as a tool when needed but otherwise does not show care or concern. I am hoping that future modules touch on the 4 seminal typologies more and go into greater detail, i found this portion of the module interesting .

  • Edit
    Durand Ackman

    This module touched on 4 types of officers but didn't go into much detail on each of them. More info on those would be beneficial as I think I understand them but definitely have some questions. The module also spoke of 3 leadership styles. The Shakedown style and pragmatic bureaucrat seem very similar to me. Maybe I misunderstood but both seem very focused on their own improvement, the pragmatic bureaucrat just seemed to be able to hide it a bit better. I have had supervisors that are definitely the shakedown style as well as some I would put in the pragmatic category. The pragmatic ones seem to care about their employees at first but the employees typically can see through the charade.

    • Edit
      Gregory Hutchins

      The greatest challenge of the pragmatic bureaucrat is their style is contagious. Within specific organizations, one can see how the shakedown manager's shift changes with these people's growth. The group of "old School" fire and brimstone leaders that, by default, by lasting longer than others get promoted, and their style tends to morph into the pragmatic style. In a sense, proximity to the top, seeing from administration concerns over toxic, undue workplace hardships that cause them to see they need to tone down their outward authoritarian behavior. From the higher level, they can promote and use subordinates as the hammers, as the new generation of shakedown leaders.
      Nevertheless, they pretend to care for those within the formation. As the underlings get promoted, the culture or club of individuals that care for each other, accepting one's problematic or illegal behavior, creates a wedge between the command and the subordinates. The interesting point is the behavior is observable from below, yet these pragmatic and problematic leaders feel their actions are invisible to others. Out of fear and intimidation, many capitulate to the behavior and, over time, mimic the same traits. The more leaders cross the ethical and moral line, the easier it gets.

  • Edit
    Ryan Manguson

    I found the 4 seminal typologies very interesting. I would be interesting more development on those typologies. The further explanation of the ladder principle was good as well. We should all hope to be real managers and not fall into the autocratic or pragmatic styles.

  • Edit
    Samantha Reps

    This learning lesson was interesting. As they mentioned the three managerial styles as shakedown, pragmatic bureaucrat and real manger. Although I do feel the pragmatic style and the shakedown style are very similar and they are more managers rather than actual leaders.
    In this lesson they shared the four seminal typologies as the wise officer, real officer, good officer and ladder. They barely touched on this subject.

    • Edit

      I agree, Samantha. I would have liked to have heard more on the subject of the pragmatic leader. I think the shakedown leadership method was the main concentration. I did gain some great insight though.

      • Edit
        Jarvis Mayfield

        I agree i gain more from the Real Manager as short as the lesson was i learned that the manager is the caring of all leaders.

  • Edit
    Paul Gronholz

    I agree that the reason that some leaders use a shakedown style of leadership is that they've learned that it works based on their contacts with the public. We make decisions in law enforcement, and in really any organization because our decisions have worked in the past. We don't make changes because the outcome was successful. Now we are learning that just because a decision that an officer made led to a successful outcome, there are better ways to do things. We are taking the time to train officers to recognize and make decisions after thinking through the best possible outcome rather than simply what has worked in the past. Thankfully, when it comes to leadership, law enforcement organizations are recognizing that additional leadership training is required in order to make effective leaders and thankfully we're receiving it.

    • Edit
      Kelly Lee

      Agree with your thoughts Paul on why some choose to use the Shakedown style of leadership, Unfortunately we have learned that in this day and age that type of leadership is not acceptable or tolerated. We need to do better and be better for both the public and organization otherwise we will never start moving forward.

      • Edit

        I agree with Sgt. Lee and Sgt. Gronholz, good leader development is key to eradicating these negative management styles. It is also time senior department administrators to make it clear that these approaches will not be tolerated. Sadly, since Machiavellian personality types still seem to haunt the upper echelons of many agencies, these changes cannot happen until there is a substantial change of command. Organizations and our profession in general can't wait.. It goes back to the module on adaptability.. you either adapt and change or your out of a job.

  • Edit
    Kelly Lee

    After reviewing this module, I almost think we owe it to ourselves, our departments and our newly promoted staff to receive this training as well. I think almost anyone can look around their own agency and see most if not all new leaders, leading by either the Shakedown or Pragmatic Bureaucrat style of leadership. I think this comes from being young, most likely not knowing any better and conducting leadership the same way you have learned from one or more past supervisors. I think it also has to do with them wanting to "protect themselves or their position" and let people know who is in charge and accepting their place on the "ladder."

  • Edit
    Maja Donohue

    This module had some very deep insights into why people behave a certain way. Dr. Long pointed out how the negative aspects of this line of work combined with a para-military organizational structure and certain personality characteristics form a perfect storm in which shakedown and bureaucratic leadership styles are allowed develop and persist. He also described how to recognize behavior patterns and personality characteristics to form a better understanding of each leadership style. The three managerial styles also explain exactly what happens when leaders uphold organizational values and when they don’t. For me, this module really emphasizes the importance of credibility and authenticity in leadership.

    • Edit
      Timothy Sandlin

      Yes, it helped me understand a little more into how almost natural the officer may take the authoritarian style with them when they move into management.

  • Edit

    How we exercise power ( or the ways we should avoid doing it) is the main point of the presentation. lets face it, the ladder principle is alive and well in many police organizations. Simply put, the ladder principle dictates that those on the higher rungs of the promotional ladder control the climber (aspiring leader), and those below the climber are inconsequential. Dr. Long mentions that the "Good" and the "Wise" officer tends to be higher in administration. While police departments may be trending this way, my experience has been that the ladder system only serves to amplify the negative effects of the Machiavellian personality types that tend to inhabit the higher levels of the ladder. I think the different styles described by Dr. Long are interesting. I think we have all known a leader in our careers that employed the "Shakedown or the "Bureaucratic " management style. The Shakedown may start innocently enough as the line officer working the street learns how and when to exercise authority, but when applied later as the officer moves up in rank, it can be detrimental. If the "carrot and the stick" worked on the street it is natural to think it should work as a management style. The Bureaucratic style is more nuanced. Here, the leader still cares about what the higher ups think, but it all comes down to thinking about themselves first. Sadly, these managers make a show of caring about people only when it benefits them. I think Dr. Long hit it on the head when he said, both of these negative management styles are rarely if ever addressed by "Good" and "Wise" leaders at the top levels of the organization.

  • Edit

    I particularly enjoyed Dr. Long speaking about the manipulative nature of the "Shake Down" leader. I have personally seen individuals within my organization observe their superiors then contrive performance based upon what they believe that supervisors wants/needs. This sometimes works, but leadership is sometimes able to see through the manipulation and thwart that individual's advancement.

    • Edit
      Andy Opperman

      Your right that sometimes leadership can see through the manipulation, I think what is really important is that many times peers have already seen through the manipulation. This is where a peer review process comes in handy as long as it does not become a popularity contest.

  • Edit
    Christopher Lowrie

    The real manager style is one to work towards- A leader who balances care for subordinates with efficient public service, fiscal responsibility and maintenance of public trust, through their credibility morality and authenticity, they understand human nature. Avoiding pragmatic and shakedown styles is key.

    • Edit
      Steve Mahoney

      I agree. The pitfalls that we all fall into is that shakedown style is the easy path to take to get something done right away so it it done more often than others

  • Edit
    Jennifer Hodgman

    I have been fortunate to work with supervisors who reflect the real manager style. In our department, the Chief places a great deal of time and money on developing and training our leaders. My hope is that in doing so, people are more cognizant of their leadership style and as a result we have created more with real manager skills.

    • Edit

      Helping form tomorrow's leaders is an essential element to real management. If we attempt to make others shine and get ahead, this says a lot about us as leaders and that we're not intimidated by others' successes. Check the egos at the door.

    • Edit
      Marshall Carmouche

      Real managers seem to be the most pleasant to work for. Not everyone has the wisdom, maturity, compassion, understanding or fortitude to be able to be "real managers".

  • Edit
    Major Willie Stewart

    We learned about three types of ladder leaders; shakedown, pragmatic bureaucrat, and real managers. Shakedown leaders are opposite to what a law enforcement agency wants and need as a leader. Each leadership styles gives us the understanding of how leaders exercise power and authority. It explains the importance of subordinates when it comes to police managers and the chain of command. It is important that we familiarize ourselves with these leadership styles and know that they can overall tarnish morale in a department. Shakedown and Pragmatic leaders can be seen as selfish leaders. Selfishness is never a positive character trait in any leadership role. Nonetheless, there is a positive leader out of the ladder principle known as Real Mangers. Real managers are credible, authentic, ethical, and have an understanding of human nature. Think about these three leadership styles and ask yourself where do you fall in line as a police manager?

  • Edit

    Well, I just have to say I’m glad I work where I do. Very few get promoted anymore if they’re not known for being a team player. And even fewer that trampled others to try and get to the top. There have been a few promotions in the twenty years I’ve been there that were believed to be part of the good ole boy system. After reading all the above posts, I’m glad I don’t work for a large agency if it is really that bad (we are hiring btw for anyone looking for something better). Of the two types though, I would rather have the one that would stab you in the front rather than stab you in the back. At least then you knew what to expect if you saw him/her coming versus the one that was stealing lunch money behind their backs.

  • Edit
    Timothy Sandlin

    This module helped me better understand the shakedown and pragmatic bureaucratic styles. Unfortunately, I have experienced these styles of leadership. They are focused on their personal agenda and is hostile to anything that stands in the way of accomplishing their goal. These styles of managing create a toxic environment that negatively impact employees as well as the organization.

    • Edit
      Nicole Oakes

      I agree. I too have worked for supervisors that were all about themselves. About taking all the, "Glory," for whatever work their subordinates do, when it's good and then throwing you under the bus when it's not up to standard. It does create an unhealthy work environment.

    • Edit

      Narcissistic managers are terrible to have. Those who will step on your head to gain height in their own career. I have seen this too and it helps me focus on what I never want to become. We will fail but I think our followers see us and what we're trying to accomplish. They will be more forgiving of our errors if we're authentic.

  • Edit

    I have always wondered how "bad" supervisors get promoted. The ladder principle types. The lowest of rungs might not "matter" but they still have a voice. Cops talk. A lot. Word gets around pretty quickly if a supervisor is a ladder principle type. You would also think that the powers that be would eventually find this out. so why promote "that guy"?

    I came to the realization that often times the "powers that be" are so far removed from the reality of life for the entry level people that they don't know. Usually they don't care and as long as the "bad" supervisor can make things run smoothly. I've also seen that many higher ups like to have their butts kissed. They know exactly what type of supervisor this person is and they are ok with it.

    It is said and true when the article talked about how law enforcement attracts narcists and psychopaths.

    • Edit

      Frankly, I think it's because they align themselves in such a way that is appealing to those who are already in power, possibly cut from the same cloth. If we do things for our uppers to make them look good, that is oftentimes rewarded through promotion or special assignment. We'll just call it hind end smooching.

    • Edit
      Sgt. Shawn Wilson

      Could you please explain with further references your statement that law enforcement attracts psychopaths. I have attached the definition below.

      "a person having an egocentric and antisocial personality marked by a lack of remorse for one's actions, an absence of empathy for others, and often criminal tendencies"

  • Edit
    Nicole Oakes

    We must strive to be more of the manager style leader. We must balance care for subordinates, with effective public service, fiscal responsibility, and maitenance of public trust.

    • Edit
      Robert Schei

      I agree, the real manager is what we all strive for and who we want to work for. The pragmatics and shakedowns should be avoided and hopefully they will be discovered and replaced.

  • Edit

    The shakedown style is the old way of doing the job of a manager. Leadership is a new way, a better way. We have to balance the interests of our organization, our peers, our supervisors, our followers, and the community all at the same time. If we focus only upward on the ladder, that may get us ahead with our supervisors. If we focus up and down the ladder we bring a better balance to our leadership role. We owe it to everyone to try the best we can as leaders and be authentic.

  • Edit
    Robert Schei

    I found the 4 types of officers to be interesting and would have enjoyed more information related to this area. The pragmatic and shakedown style leadership style seem similar with the pragmatic being more shady. These leaders do exist and usually staff see through them quickly and do there best to avoid. I am often times perplexed why upper management doesn't seem to figure this type of issue out.

  • Edit
    Andy Opperman

    I think the question becomes how do we design a promotional process with in our departments that seeks out and finds the real manager. Any promotional process related to interview and testing has a weakness when it comes to weeding out the Machiavellian or Pragmatic Bureaucrat Style Candidates. Even peer review processes have flaws and can be seen as popularity contests. I think it can be simply assessed that people who have psychopathic type psychologies with be drawn to positions of power. Their goal is authority. Makes you really question why we keep putting people of the Machiavellian or Pragmatic Bureaucrat style in power? I think the answer to promotion comes down to training and molding leaders early in their career and then hand picking them for positions of authority. While I like a testing or interview process better than seniority there is no easy answer to finding the Real Manager.

  • Edit

    I guess it goes with saying that the "Shakedown/Machivellian style of leadership is possibly the worst way to be viewed as a leadership. By stepping on others to get to your goal you will find yourself extremely lonely...and maybe that is okay for some. There is really no room from this type of individual in our ranks. They are like a cancer. These type of people are the ones that aren't invited to their own retirement party.

    • Edit
      Thomas Martin

      It was a lonely life indeed for one shakedown type that I knew. He had a couple cronies that were birds of the same feather, but stuck to himself for most of his career. No one had respect for him, or his rank, and very few appreciated the way he spoke towards staff. He was able to make it to retirement, and decided to keep his department cell phone number (thinking that people would want to stay in touch with him). He was mistaken, and frequently wonders why no one calls him.

  • Edit
    Brad Strouf

    While the last module touched on the topics of shakedown style and pragmatic bureaucrat style, this module did an excellent job in defining both and explaining the differences between the two styles of management. Neither style is ideal or should be acceptable in a organization.

  • Edit
    Sgt. Shawn Wilson

    When we discuss leaders, I am hesitant to use the word leader when applied to either shakedown or pragmatic. Both are more concerned with there own self interests then the advancement of their people. I do not consider these people to be leaders in any capacity. A leader will never place their own self interests above the welfare of their people.

    • Edit
      Matthew Menard

      I agree. I feel that labeling them as managers is more appropriate. They are there to make decisions, however if they don't work towards the real manager styles they will never earn the trust and respect of those they are suppose to be leading.

    • Edit
      Sergeant Michael Prachel

      Indeed, there is a difference between a leader and a manager. Just because you are in charge, the boss, or whatever title you want to say, doesn’t mean you’re a leader if you are only concerned about yourself. Those that utilize the Shakedown or Pragmatic Bureaucrat Styles have no business taking on a position that supervises others in a public safety capacity.

  • Edit
    Jarvis Mayfield

    In most departments the old days were filled with Pragmatic leaders. These guys rode their time out not making many waves but still loyal to the department head only for a position. Even when this leader was identified not was done to change things which continued the cycle.

  • Edit
    Matthew Menard

    I see both the shakedown and pragmatic mangers as styles we need to strive towards leaving in the past. The more real managers we can promote or create, the better our organizations will become. I can think of people I have worked for who fit into both shakedown and pragmatic styles, and view them as people I did not enjoy working for. Just because someone is promoted or wants to be promoted does not mean they need to be harmful to those below them.

    • Edit
      Ronald Smith

      Matthew
      I agree we need to promote real managers, but the challenge in our profession is who gets to teach the people how to be a cop has a huge influence on the entire career. Real managers start on day one by being taught the job is not an us against them. This job should be promoted as us for them.

  • Edit
    Gregory Hutchins

    As the shakedown and the pragmatic styles tend to dominate the profession, the chances of seeing a positive change in organizations seem far-fetched. Mentioning the charade from the pragmatic leaders is a significant issue with this challenge. These leaders will paint a different story to executives, councils, and commissions that the actual problem is from the bottom.

    Without a significant event, these leaders will continue cultivating the next generation of shakedown and pragmatic leaders. Only a few real leaders may attain a promotion. Pragmatic leaders will consider them a threat. Therefore they will be ostracized and excluded from many organizational processes. Regardless of these leaders' abilities to serve as a real leader, be genuinely concerned for the agency and its employees, and hold all to the same standards, the bending, twisting, and editing of the rules for personal gain will continue. Its continuance will continue to hold the agency back from meeting the transparency requirements needed to foster the community's and subordinates' complete trust.

    • Edit

      Very well stated, sir. I continue to hope every day for our profession that real leaders will step up to the plate for those promotions and that eventually will outnumber the shakedown and pragmatic ones. Morals in leadership will eventually win.

  • Edit
    Marshall Carmouche

    The shakedown leadership style has more potential to destroy morale quickly due to the potential of power grabs or moves and that power going to the heads of leaders. Pragmatic, being a softer approach i think could give better results while the leader still having power to assure tasks are completed and the works gets done. The real manager approach would, of course, always be the most successful approach.

  • Edit

    It is amazing to me the number of excuses police executives throw out when their department is thrown into the public spotlight. These people are clearly fighting for their jobs and often either employ, or simply are by nature, a Machiavellian or pragmatic leader. They have no concern for their employees as they blame the officer, their training, training staff, the unions or mediation services. What I see happening in organizations from my point of view is that when Chiefs finally hold their people accountable, it is too late and there has not been proper documentation and processes followed. Sure, there’s a little to show the chief “tried” but not enough had been done early enough to make a much longer lasting impression to enhance the department. Authoritarian and pragmatic leaders of the past (and a lot are still here today) are to blame for a lackluster police culture in many large organizations.

  • Edit
    Ronald Smith

    The people we work with have personal goals and being a little selfish is not a bad thing. We can take the little selfish way too far, the shakedown style of leadership is a detriment to everyone. The leader may get ahead or get the promotion but he/she leaves in their wake is misery and distrust. Once a person becomes a leader and starts treating subordinates like criminal suspects there is a high likely hood people will quit the leader and organization. The pragmatic or bureaucrat leader can not hide from the subordinates. Their actions and intentions are visible from a mile away, and they don't care who knows it.

  • Edit
    Thomas Martin

    I can clearly recall working for all of the three types of ladder leadership managerial styles. The shakedown leader was harder on his deputies than he was on his inmates. No one appreciated him, and most of us avoided him like the Coronavirus! The pragmatic bureaucrat was never heard or seen. We knew that he existed, because of the frequent emails he sent out, advising us what our jobs were and how we should be doing them. The real manager showed up early and always worked late. He knew what was going on in our personal lives and made it a point to spend time with each one of us. We trusted him and knew that he had our best interest at heart.

  • Edit
    Sergeant Michael Prachel

    I’ve been fortunate enough to have managerial leaders in my career that fit the Real Manager Style. Having strong morals, while being authentic to their subordinates and community they serve, are characteristics I’ve been lucky to be a part of. They have balanced care with their subordinates with efficient public service, fiscal responsibility, and maintaining public trust along the way. I have, however, seen other managers outside of my agency only show concern to those below them as necessary to deal with issues. This Pragmatic Bureaucrat Style is evident the manager thinks of themselves first and those under them, second.

  • Edit
    Paul Brignac III

    The most disturbing part of this lecture to me was the comment that more Psychopathic traits may be seen in Police Managers than in other professions. I wish the lesson would have spoke about why that is a little more. The last thing law enforcement needs today is to be labeled as such.

  • Edit
    Travis Linskens

    This lesson has reminded me how important it is to do self-assessments and seek feedback from our peers and supervisor to avoid developing habits from a shakedown leadership style. A shakedown style is undoubtedly easier because you've asserted you have the final say, but it severely impacts morale in the department. It also deters employees from helping identifying solutions to problems.

    • Edit
      Kaiana Knight

      I agree Travis. This lesson was a reminder to do a self-assessment because once morale is low in an organization or even a department, it's hard to pick it back up.

  • Edit
    Steve Mahoney

    This module is a wake up call to us all. It shows us the easy path which is the shakedown style. While this style might get the immediate result you are looking for it is the least desirable style to have. Eventually there will be collapse within your organization as no one will be looking out for each other they will only be concerned about themselves

    • Edit
      Sgt. Samantha Koscher

      I agree. An organization full of shakedown leaders would be a nightmare to work in! This is great information to bring awareness to the issue and to help leaders take steps to ensure they do not fall down this path.

  • Edit
    Scott Crawford

    When studying the shakedown, pragmatic and the real manger, I believe I would be more concerned with the Pragmatic style. With the shakedown style it seems as if they would be readily recognizable, where the pragmatic reminds me as the wolf in sheep`s clothing. I would think that style would be more difficult to deal with. This module was an eye opener.

    • Edit
      Buck Wilkins

      Scott when I began my career in law enforcement I was warned about those wolves in sheep clothing. There are still a few around but most have been weeded out.

      • Edit
        Stan Felts

        I never looked at it that way, but you are correct. The pragmatic leader is a wolf just like the shakedown style leader, but dressed in sheep's clothing.

  • Edit
    Eric Sathers

    This was an interesting module in the way it broke down the shakedown and pragmatic bureaucrat styles of leadership. I have seen, on occasion, the shakedown style of leader, however, that seems to be rarer than the pragmatic bureaucrat style. The pragmatic style seems to have greater survivability because it can create optics that the leader might actually care about their subordinates. In reality, however, the pragmatic bureaucrat only cares for themself, which is why it is important to talk to an individual's subordinates to truly understand how a leader is doing.

  • Edit
    Sgt. Samantha Koscher

    It was interesting to see how the shakedown style of leadership seems to come naturally to those in our profession. When we are removed from day to day duties dealing with the public and still apply the same tactics to dealing with issues it can become problematic. This in essence is policing our subordinates instead of leading them. Leaders should focus on building their relationships with their subordinates and working for the success of the organization, not just themselves.

  • Edit
    Buck Wilkins

    I feel that many agencies have always rewarded shakedown leaders because that is what they were taught. It is our responsibility as new leaders to help our agency teach those with this behavior that are still among our ranks. We can no longer accept and promote those that have this positional and authoritative style of management. This will help our agency produce better leaders.

    • Edit

      I agree, it's an unfortunate leadership style that is reinforced through reward. I don't think it's intentional, but I now thinks its important to notice it and try to correct it and offer better styles of leadership when we can. The advancement at the peril of others has to go.

    • Edit
      Derek Champagne

      You are right. I also think that they are rewarded because this is what the top wants. In order to change this, we have to implement and promote other leadership styles.

  • Edit

    Interesting that both leadership styles are self-serving and focuses on the advance of the leader, at the peril of others. While the shakedown leader may be more willing to disadvantage others, the pragmatic leader will do it as well when necessary. I find this an interesting characteristic of these two leadership styles and how to conflicts with servant leadership. Its interesting to see how these styles fit individuals I have known.

    • Edit
      Ronald Springer

      Capt. Decker,
      I am sure we can all think of people that we have encounter throughout our careers that were self-serving. But the important point is to identify those individuals and try to coach them into becoming better leaders or minimizing their negative impact.

  • Edit
    Brent Olson

    I enjoyed the part of the lesson that talked about the four seminal typologies: the wise officer, the real officer, the good officer, and the cautious officer. I started reflecting on my organization and trying to determine who may fall into each of the typologies. I would agree with the lesson when they said that positions at the bottom of the organization tend to be the more cautious officer and those at the top tend to be more the wise officers. It is a bit concerning that those at the bottom of the organization, the patrol officers and detectives, tend to be the more cautious officers. The cautious officers are defined as cynical or as disinterested avoiders. As the main contact with the public, this group of officers set the tone for our interactions with the community. It will definitely be an area of focus for me going forward to identify any cautious officers on my shift, and to work with them towards a different typology.

    • Edit

      Maybe they are cautious due to current or prior experiences with Machiavellian leaders? Is their cynicism a direct result of having their toes stepped on by someone above them on the ladder? I’ll admit, though, his inclusion of these four types of typologies when talking about self-serving leaders was a bit contradictory. If he claims senior officers to be wise and good, but then says those same officers are also selfishly looking up the ladder, what is the connection? I just didn’t quite connect the dots on this topic, even after listening again…

  • Edit
    Derek Champagne

    Prior to this module, I had never thought of these two types of styles Although I have seen the Shakedown leadership around my Agency and appears those are the ones who are rewarded. This was an eye-opener and a great lesson.

    • Edit
      Darryl Richardson

      Derek, I agree this was a great lesson. I had never heard of those terms before. Luckily, I have not had to work for a Shakedown leader before but have heard all about them. From what I have heard, they were always the ones that were rewarded.

  • Edit
    Jay Callaghan

    Unfortunately I have experienced my fair share of shakedown and pragmatic leaders. It was frustrating watching these individuals operate openly within our organization without any consequence for their actions. I learned a lot of what not to do as a leader from these individuals.

    • Edit
      Chris Crawford

      Agreed. And I could nor can I now figure out how they were allowed to succeed. The closest I've come is that despite all of the obvious character flaws, they often get the job done so therefore the higher ups figure, let them go.

    • Edit
      Jeff Byrne

      That's unfortunate, Jay. I think every organization has one or two in their leadership or manager positions. Makes it even more important to avoid that type of behavior and lead by example for the rest in the agency.

  • Edit
    Ronald Springer

    This module picked up directly where the previous module left off. I did appreciate how Dr. Long expanded on the psychological profiles of the managers that use the shakedown and bureaucrat style. I have never worked with a manager that used the shakedown style that I am aware of but I have encounter the pragmatic bureaucrat (Long, 2017). They were not my favorite supervisor by far as they only ever seem to care when they need me. It is a very poor excuse for a leader.
    Long, L. (2017). Ladder leadership. Module 10, Weeks 5 & 6. National Command and Staff College.

    • Edit
      Kenneth Davis

      Ronald- After 34 years I have seen my share of more of these folks than I care to count. It is amazing to me the way some of these folks are still practicing our craft even today, but even more disturbing that some of them have been imminently successful.

      Best and stay safe-

      Ken

  • Edit
    Kenneth Davis

    Its amazing to me how often I have witnessed the Ladder style in action. As we prepare to be selfless, authentic leaders, it bodes well for us to review the types of leadership that are destructive. It is sage to do so. Reviewing these typologies prepares us for the times when we, as leaders, must step in and curb such behavior. However, most importantly, it gives us keen insight to recognize when we ourselves may be about to get off the rails. I found the information in the module to be most helpful in preparing us to also coach and mentor our colleagues in order to stamp out this undesirable behavior.

    • Edit
      Robert Vinson

      Very good point. As discussed in a previous module, we can not achieve organizational change until we are willing to engage in personal change. This module gave me a lot to be mindful of and ensure I avoid.

  • Edit
    Kaiana Knight

    I enjoyed the part of the lecture that discussed the 4 seminal typologies. The wise officer, the real officer, the good officer, and the cautious officer. As it was discussed, several officers that I know came into mind for each type. When he discussed the shakedown style, I was a bit confused because I felt that he was talking about so many different things at one time. I think that when he discussed the pragmatic style, it was more precise. Overall, I enjoyed how the ladder principle was discussed and how it reminded us where we should be as a leader on the ladder.

  • Edit
    Chris Crawford

    It has always and still does amaze me that these two types of so called leaders can and do get away with what they do and how they do it. I really enjoyed Dr. Long referring to them as "psychopathic."

    • Edit
      Burt Hazeltine

      I agree. Two many leaders are allowed to get away with these styles of managers. Psychopathic was never a term I had applied to most of them but after listening to the presentation I can see how it applies.

  • Edit
    Robert Vinson

    As leaders who supervise other supervisors, I think it is important we do not take the "easy way out" and allow shakedown or pragmatic styles of leadership, just because they may produce desired end results. I think it is important to be mindful of the long term health of the organization and team members, and insure that we "have the right people on the bus" (as Jim Collins says) in supervisory positions.

  • Edit
    Burt Hazeltine

    I used to think real, wise, good, and cautious were words that could be used to describe an officer that is good at their job. I am looking at these a bit differently now. I can look back at my career and think of times where I have been almost all of these. I hope that through years of experience and training that I can balance the need for social services with the need for justice.

  • Edit
    Kevin Balser

    The shakedown style is built on power and influence over others. They desire power over others and desire promotions early on in their careers. This type of leader is very focused on their advancement within the organization and will stop at nothing to attain their own goals. It is known that the team members. All of this causes a lack of trust within the teams and leads to poor productivity within the organization. These types of leaders should be identified early on by real managers and be dealt with swiftly.

    • Edit
      Andrew Peyton

      These leaders are a poison within the organization. They are self-minded and do what is necessary for them to achieve their personal goals, stopping short of nothing. They bring no real positivity to the team and are often the cause of morale issues.

    • Edit
      David Mascaro

      I agree with you emphatically on this Kevin and it if not dealt with, will ruin the morale of an agency.

  • Edit
    Darryl Richardson

    As I watched this module, I began to think of some of my old supervisors. I can now say that I have worked for some Pragmatic Bureaucrat leaders and some real management style leaders. I am lucky that recently my department has adopted a great leadership program that is working on building better leaders and more real management style leaders

  • Edit
    Andrew Peyton

    These leaders seem to always get by without having much of an impact. They do the bare minimum of what is required of them with little to no regard for others. It takes a strong group of people to bring to light these types of behavior and the way their actions affect the people under their command. Training programs will often help these people to see the error of their ways.

    • Edit
      Jose Alvarenga

      I agree that training may help but these leaders have to see their fault or training may not help. I would think a deeper reason for their style exists and must be confronted by their leaders. Its strange how these styles are easy to notice by subordinates but appears difficult for higher supervisors to notice and address.

  • Edit
    David Mascaro

    This type of Shakedown or Machiavellian style of leadership, as well as the Pragmatic Bureaucrat is what destroys the morale of agencies and drives good officers away. They are more concerned about their own careers that they lose sight of the mission and vision of the agency. It is all about them while the real leaders are carrying all of the water, so to speak. It is unfortunate and more often the result of political influence that these individuals posses which allows them to continue.

  • Edit
    Jose Alvarenga

    Allowing Pragmatic and Shakedown style of leaders may produce positive some positive results but cause more harm to the agency. These type of leaders want self advancement and don't think of others which create a problematic environment and damage s an agency. Allowing these type of styles to lead with ion the agency will cause low morale, higher turn over and over all mediocre productivity.

  • Edit

    As I watched this module, it seems as though the Shakedown method is a form of "bullying" or abuse of power. That style of leadership ruins morale and the team concept. Its' going totally against the concept of building a cohesive and trustworthy team.

  • Edit

    As I watched this module, it seems as though the Shakedown method is a form of "bullying" or abuse of power. That style of leadership ruins morale and the team concept. Its' going totally against the concept of building a cohesive and trustworthy team. The Shakedown style is not a method that will sustain the morale and integrity of an organization.

    • Edit
      Jacqueline Dahms

      Agreed Kevin. It is difficult to change someone using that managerial style. Upper management will likely do nothing until it has gotten completely out of hand and even then, there will only be a slap on the wrist. I have had many run-ins with a peer that continues bullying to get what he wants. Even when talked to by his supervisors remains defiant in changing how he does things.

  • Edit
    Jeff Byrne

    I feel there is a lot to be learned from pragmatic and shakedown leaders in the arena of what to stay clear of when it comes to leadership. I don't see how either style could be an environment of cultivating future leaders, encouraging innovation or have any kind of positive impact on morale.

  • Edit

    If I’m honest, I’ve seen myself in all three styles of leadership. We live in a dog-eat-dog world and if you don’t look out for yourself, who will? Success is not solely due to my nice attitude and concern for others, although that is a large part of who I am. I have had to advocate for myself and “pay homage” to those above me on the ladder. They make decisions that directly influence whether I move up that ladder or hold the bottom steady for others climbing up. I have worked on projects that reflect my skills and abilities because I know it will reflect well on me when promotional decisions must be made. Yet, I am real. I serve my subordinates as best I can. I balance these styles in a manner that focuses on others first, self-second, and those up the ladder last. Yet, sometimes that balance gets out of whack depending on the people above and my personal goals. I may sound like an ass here, but I’m trying to be real.

  • Edit
    Zach Roberts

    Like many others, this module has made me think of several of the leaders I have had over the years in my career. Many of the previous leaders I have had were Pragmatic Bureaucratic leaders. They were lost and acted like managers more than leaders throughout their tenures. This leadership style is extremely counterproductive and wears on the organization overtime. These leaders are for themselves and help those who they see as friends instead of those who are hard workers and have excelled.

    • Edit
      Jared Paul

      Zach,

      I think that pragmatic bureaucratic leaders are toxic in any organization, but especially in law enforcement. It can be difficult to complete tasks under the pragmatic bureaucratic leader.

  • Edit
    Jacqueline Dahms

    The managerial styles of the shakedown and pragmatic bureaucrat are problematic in organizations. Morale is lowered, staff feel trapped and look elsewhere to find fulfillment. Often times when problems arise and upper management is made aware the issue has manifested into poor staff performance. We essentially tie the hands of our staff, telling them to do better when we ourselves are not improving and turning a blind eye to the source of the problem.

  • Edit
    Donald Vigil

    I found the four seminal typologies to be quite interesting in this module. I agree with which ones officers tend to be in depending on their time on the job as it was spot on for me. After reflection, I realize that it's unfortunate that this is true, especially since the younger officers are the ones who have the most interaction and impact with citizens. After completing this module, I now know that I need to concentrate on the younger officers and help them to not fall into those typologies.

    • Edit
      Andrew Ashton

      Donald is correct in that the impact these types of leadership have on the younger generation of officers could be catastrophic. I think when you have "been around" and gained some experience you are better suited to deal with these types of personalities. Whereas if you are new into law enforcement this could pattern how you lead or worse force you out of the profession.

  • Edit
    Jared Paul

    I have not previously heard of the ladder leadership. When I was reading the ladder principle advice, I was a little shocked because it did seem to be very self-centered. It seemed that the advice is suggesting that if you are trying to promote within your organization you have to ignore the people below you and watch out for the supervisors above you. My problem with this advice is that, if you are promoted you have to supervise all the people you just ignored. That just doesn't seem like good leadership to me.

  • Edit
    Andrew Ashton

    As stated above, both Pragmatic Beurocrat and Shakedown leaders are toxic. I have personally worked for a Pragmatic Beurocrat supervisor and it fits him to the tee. I can tell you first hand it bred contempt, distrust, and there was little unity within the division at that time. I personally used it as the example of who not to be and grew from it.