UK Data Archive Study Number 6927 - Police, the Media and their Audiences, 2006-2008
Police Service Corporate Communications: A Survey of forces in England, Wales and Scotland
Dr Rob C Mawby Centre for Criminal Justice Policy and Research University of Central England in Birmingham June 2007
1
Contents Acknowledgements
Page
Summary of findings
4
1. Introduction
7
2. Participating Forces
8
3. Findings 3.1 Baseline Information
9 9 9 10 11
3.1.1 Departmental names 3.1.2 Current structure 3.1.3 Budgets
3.2 Role and Responsibilities 3.2.1 Terms of reference 3.2.2 Communications strategies 3.2.3 Departmental responsibilities 3.2.4 Communications support for partners 3.2.5 Sponsorship 3.2.6 Corporate identity 3.2.7 Web/ e-communication 3.2.8 Marketing 3.2.9 Departmental responsibilities and changes in demand
3.3 Human Resources 3.3.1 Departmental management 3.3.2 Staff numbers 3.3.2.1 Headquarters staff 3.3.2.2 Departmental staff based in BCUs 3.3.2.3 Non-departmental staff with communications responsibilities 3.3.3 Police officers and communications 3.3.4 Professional skills
3.4. Operations 3.4.1 Operating hours 3.4.2 Methods of communicating 3.4.3 Facilities 3.4.4 External communication: the operating context 3.4.4.1 Contacts with the media 3.4.4.2 Contacts with other organisations 3.4.5 Evaluating the effectiveness of corporate communications 3.4.6 Measuring departmental performance 3.4.7 Communications consultancy 3.4.8 Constraints 3.4.9 Cross-force collaboration opportunities
12 12 12 12 14 14 15 15 15 16 17 17 19 19 20 21 22 22 23 23 24 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32
4. Further Information
33
Appendix: The 2006-7 Questionnaire
34
2
Acknowledgements I would like to thank all the police forces that participated in the survey and particularly the individuals who found time to complete the questionnaires. This is my third survey of police force communications departments and, once again, the process was facilitated by the Association of Police Public Relations Officers (APPRO). I am especially grateful to Ann Clayton and Colette Booth for their advice and support. I would also like to acknowledge the grant from the Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC) which has made this work possible.
Dr Rob C Mawby June 2007
3
Police Service Corporate Communications: A Survey of forces in England, Wales and Scotland Summary of findings This report documents the findings of a questionnaire survey of 42 police force communications departments. The survey took place between October 2006 and March 2007 and included police forces in England, Wales and Scotland. The key findings include: •
Department names: Across the 42 forces surveyed, the departments responsible for communications, media liaison and public relations operate under fifteen different titles. The most common name is ‘Corporate Communications’ (20 forces, 48%). Compared with previous surveys in 1996-7 and 2000-1, there are fewer names in use and the words ‘press’ and ‘media’ have given way to ‘corporate’ and ‘communications’, indicating the strategic direction in which police communications have been moving. (Section 3.1.1)
•
Ongoing restructuring: Previous survey reports of 1996-7 and 2000-1 documented that many communications departments were in a state of change. This has not proved to be a temporary state. The 2006-7 survey found that 31 departments (74%) had been established in their current structure since 2001. The 1996-2007 pattern is one of communications departments experiencing regular restructuring. (Section 3.1.2)
•
Structure and strategies: In 26 forces (62%) the communications function operates as an independent department. Twenty-five departments (60%) have clearly stated terms of reference and 30 forces (71%) have communications strategies. Twenty-two forces (53%) consider the current structure to be ‘effective’ or ‘very effective’. (Sections 3.1.2, 3.2.1 and 3.2.2)
•
Budgets: In 2006-7, the budgets allocated by forces to corporate communications activities ranged from £3,000 to £6.3 million. The previous survey (2000-1) recorded only one force with a budget over £1 million. There are now six forces whose budgets are £1 million or more. (Section 3.1.3)
•
Role: Communications departments have a role that involves wideranging internal and external activities and that is not restricted to dealing with media organisations. Departments support a range of partners including local police authorities, local community safety partnerships and other criminal justice agencies. (Sections 3.2.3 and 3.2.4)
4
•
The communications context: In the twelve months prior to the survey, the majority of forces had not experienced a growth in the number of organisations they communicated with, but 67% of forces had experienced an increase in the number of daily contacts with media organisations. (Sections 3.4.4)
•
Demand on services: During the twelve months prior to questionnaire completion, departments experienced an increase in demand across a range of key responsibilities. The services that most forces experienced an increased demand for were related to new media (maintaining websites and supporting e-policing) and to internal communications. Departments’ core business remains with media organisations, but communication with a wider range of organisations is now part of everyday operations. (Section 3.2.9 and 3.4.4.2)
•
Marketing: This remains a sometimes misunderstood concept. Nevertheless marketing tools and techniques are used to good effect. Marketing remains an area that could be better and further utilised by the police service. (Section 3.2.8)
•
Human resources: Forces are employing more people to undertake communications activities in 2007 than in 1996-7 and 2000-1. Headquarters departments are larger than recorded in the previous surveys. The most common number of staff employed in departments is six, followed by thirteen, compared with four and two in 2000-1. (Section 3.3.2.1)
•
BCU communications: More forces are placing communications staff in the BCUs. Twenty-five forces do this in 2006-7 compared with fifteen forces in 2000-1 and there are now 146 communications staff deployed across BCUs compared with 69 in 2000-1. These communications staff are supplemented by staff in the BCUs who take some responsibility for communications activities despite not being part of the communications department. (Sections 3.3.2.2 and 3.3.2.3)
•
Professionalisation: The trend towards moving police officers out of headquarters departments has continued. Only 2% of headquarters staff are police officers. The head of the communications department is a member of police staff in 38 forces (90%). The trend identified in the previous surveys of departmental management moving into the domain of communications professionals and away from generalist police officer managers is confirmed. There is no consistency in the grading of the heads of department across forces, though the post is considered ‘senior management’ in 37 forces (88%). (Sections 3.3.1 and 3.3.2.1)
5
•
Recruitment: It is now practice in 90% of forces to recruit trained communications professionals (compared to 86% in 2000-1). The numbers of professional communicators have increased significantly; there are now at least 408 communications professionals employed across the 42 forces (compared with 215 in 2000-1 across all 51 forces in England, Wales and Scotland). (Section 3.3.4)
•
Evaluation: Twenty-five forces evaluate the effectiveness of communications activities. Where evaluation budgets exist they are generally small, and there are limited resources to undertake evaluation activities. Consequently evaluation is practical and pragmatic rather than sophisticated. (Section 3.4.5)
•
Performance measurement: Forces measure the performance of their communications departments through a mixture of upward reporting, the monitoring of outputs and outcomes, and by working within the force framework for business planning and target setting. (Section 3.4.6)
•
Constraints: The constraint cited most frequently is that of a shortage of human resources (44 forces, 76%), the same constraint that was most cited in 2000-1. This suggests that although the police service has invested in increasing the numbers of people working in communications, the demands of the operating context have ensured that all available resources are consistently fully committed. (Section 3.4.8)
6
Police Service Corporate Communications: A Survey of forces in England, Wales and Scotland 1. Introduction This report documents the results of a survey of police force communications departments in England, Wales and Scotland. The survey forms part of a research project entitled The police, the media and their audiences which is being undertaken by the author, funded by a grant from the Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC).1 The planned questionnaire completion period was October 2006, but it proved necessary to extend this to allow more time for completion. The actual completion period was 4th October 2006 to 7th March 2007. The survey closed with a response rate of 86% of forces in England and Wales (37 of the 43 forces) and 63% of the Scottish forces (five of the eight forces). Therefore the survey represents 82% of the English, Welsh and Scottish forces. The returned questionnaires were coded and have been analysed using a statistical software package (SPSS for Windows Release 14). The questionnaire is appended to this report. The survey was developed and implemented in consultation with, the Association of Police Public Relations Officers (APPRO) and builds on previous surveys undertaken in 1996-7 and 2000-1.2 Many of the questions have been asked in each of the three surveys, other questions have been added as the surveys have developed, some at the suggestion of APPRO members. This does allow, therefore, some analysis of trends and themes in the development of police corporate communications over a ten year period. However, where this report does allude to such trends, it should be remembered that the responding forces are not identical for each of the three surveys due to the different response rates, This document identifies and comments on such trends, but its main purpose is to provide a descriptive report, intended for informational and comparative purposes. Copies are being disseminated to all participating forces. In summary this survey provides a comprehensive up-to-date analysis of how the police service is structuring and organising its corporate communication activities. The findings are detailed in the sections that follow.
1
ESRC grant number: RES-000-22-1921 Mawby, R.C. (1997) Survey of Police Service Media and Public Relations Offices. Stafford: Staffordshire University. Mawby, R.C. (2001) Survey of Police Service Media and Public Relations Offices 2000-2001. Stafford: Staffordshire University
2
7
2. Participating Forces Questionnaires were sent to all 43 Home Office forces in England and Wales, to the eight forces in Scotland, to the Police Service of Northern Ireland and to An Garda Siochana. We also sent questionnaires to the Ministry of Defence Police, British Transport Police and to the police forces in Guernsey, Jersey and the Isle of Man. 42 forces in total responded. They are: •
Thirty-seven of the 43 English and Welsh forces (86%). The nonparticipating forces were Northumbria and Humberside (who advised at the outset that they were restructuring and would not be completing the questionnaire) plus Cheshire, Kent, Merseyside and North Wales.
•
Five of the eight Scottish forces (63%). The non-participating forces were Central Scotland, Fife and Tayside.
The participating forces are: England and Wales England and Wales, contd 1. Avon and Somerset 23. Northamptonshire Police Constabulary 2. Bedfordshire Police 24. North Yorkshire Police 3. Cambridgeshire Constabulary 25. Nottinghamshire Constabulary 4. City of London Police 26. South Wales Constabulary 5. Cleveland Police 27. South Yorkshire Police 6. Cumbria Constabulary 28. Staffordshire Police 7. Derbyshire Constabulary 29. Suffolk Constabulary 8. Devon and Cornwall 30. Surrey Police Constabulary 9. Dorset Police 31. Sussex Police 10. Durham Constabulary 32. Thames Valley Police 11. Dyfed-Powys Police 33. Warwickshire Constabulary 12. Essex Police 34. West Mercia Constabulary 13. Gloucestershire Constabulary 35. West Midlands Police 14. Greater Manchester Police 36. West Yorkshire Police 15. Gwent Police 37. Wiltshire Constabulary 16. Hampshire Constabulary Scotland 17. Hertfordshire Constabulary 18. Lancashire Constabulary 38. Dumfries & Galloway Constabulary 19. Leicestershire Constabulary 39. Grampian Police 20. Lincolnshire Police 40. Northern Constabulary 21. Metropolitan Police Service 41. Lothian & Borders Police 22. Norfolk Constabulary 42. Strathclyde Police
Whilst the response did not match the outstanding responses to the previous surveys (100% in 2000-2001 and 96% in 1996-7), the response to the 2006-7 survey is extremely good for a postal questionnaire survey.
8
3. Findings 3.1 Baseline Information 3.1.1 Departmental names Number of forces Name of Department
Corporate Communications Press Office Media and Corporate Communications Corporate Communications and Marketing Media Services Press and Public Relations others: Communications Directorate Corporate Information Corporate Planning Directorate of Public Affairs Force Marketing Marketing and Communications Media and Marketing Media and Public Relations Media Unit TOTALS
England & Wales 17 4 3 2 1 2
Scotland TOTAL 3
20 4 3 2
1
2 2
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 37
1 5
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 42
Across the 42 forces, the departments responsible for communications, media liaison and public relations operate under fifteen different titles. The most common name is ‘Corporate Communications’ (20 forces, 48%). In addition there are three ‘Media and Corporate Communications’ and two ‘Corporate Communications and Marketing’ departments. In total, ‘Corporate Communications’ is included in the names of 25 of the 42 departments (60%) Departments’ titles provide some indication of their functions and aspirations. In the 1996-7 survey the most common names were, jointly, ‘Press Office’ and ‘Press and Public Relations’. In the 2000-1 survey, the most common names were ‘Press and Public Relations’ and ‘Media Services’. Compared with these earlier surveys, there is now less diversity in the range of names used; ‘press’ and ‘media’ have given way to ‘corporate communications’, indicating the strategic and corporate direction in which police communications have been moving.
9
3.1.2 Current structure There has been much restructuring of departments in recent years. Thirty-one of the surveyed departments (74%) had been established since 2001 and eight had been established since 2006. These findings confirm the results of the two previous surveys and together the three surveys suggest that communications departments tend to exist in a state of constant change and restructuring. (In addition to the forces shown in the chart below, two forces declined to participate in the survey as they were restructuring during the survey period).
23
25
No of depts established in this period
20 15 8
10 5
5
2
1
0 1990
1991-5
19962000
2001-5
2006-
Figure 1. Periods in which departments were established in their current structure
In 26 forces the corporate communications function operates as an independent department and in sixteen forces it forms part of another larger department. The over-arching department for twelve of these forces (i.e. 75% of them) is ‘Corporate Development/Services/Support’. The communications function operates as an independent department
Number of forces England & Wales
Yes No Total
10
Scotland
TOTAL
23 14
3 2
26 (62%) 16 (38%)
37
5
42
Respondents were invited to rate the effectiveness of the current structure and as the table below shows, although 53% of forces rate the current structure as ‘Effective’ or ‘Very effective’, the most common rating (40%) was ‘moderately effective’.
Effectiveness Very Effective Effective Moderately effective Not very effective Not answered Total
No. of forces England & Wales Scotland 7 12 3 15 2 1 2 37 5
Percentage TOTAL 7 15 17 1 2 42
17% 36% 40% 2% 5% 100%
Respondents also made suggestions relating to how the structure could be changed to improve effectiveness. Responses included: • • • •
•
• •
More staff (frequently mentioned) More resources for internal communications More resources to allow proactive work/marketing work Resources within the department for dedicated news desks (an interesting throwback to having a specific section doing what the original ‘press offices’ did; this indicates how departments have generalised and broadened their activities) A more corporate integrated approach to corporate communications o Bringing together in one department the communications related functions within the force o Several mentions of ‘streamlining’ communications functions and reporting lines A more direct reporting line to ACPO officers Changes to BCU communications arrangements, including: New BCU communications officers; additional BCU communications officers; direct line management of existing BCU communications staff; greater contact with BCUs.
3.1.3 Budgets The questionnaire requested details of forces’ annual budgets allocated for communications, media and public relations activities. The data provided was somewhat patchy. The most complete data was provided for the ‘total’ budget; 34 forces (81%) provided details and these are summarised in the table below. Fifteen forces answered the question relating to ‘BCU level’ budgets; five of these indicated that this budget was ‘nil’ and in the other seven responding forces, the BCU level budget ranged from £26,000 to £360,000.
11
The details in the following table therefore provide a general indication of, and not an authoritative guide to, force budgets. It is interesting to note that six forces recorded a budget of £1 million or more. With regard to the percentage of the total force budget that the communications budgets represent, 26 forces provided figures. These ranged from 0.01% to 3.5%. Nineteen forces stated a figure of 0.5 % or less.
Number of forces
Force budgets (totals) for communication 2006-2007
England & Wales 3 4 5 1 5 2
up to £100,000 £101,000 to £200,000 £201,000 to £300,000 £301,000 to £400,000 £401,000 to £500,000 £501,000 to £600,000 £601,000 to £700,000 £701,000 to £800,000 £801,000 to £900,000 £901,000 to £1 million over £1 million TOTAL Lowest budget Highest budget
4 2 1 4 31 £3,000 £6.3m
Scotland TOTAL 1 1
1 3 £38,000 £1m
4 5 5 1 5 2 4 2 2 4 34
3.2 Role and Responsibilities 3.2.1 Terms of reference Twenty-five forces (60%) confirmed that their communications departments had clearly stated terms of reference. This compares with 76% of departments in 1996-7 and 71% of departments in 2000-1. This appears to suggest a trend towards fewer forces having clearly stated terms of reference. 3.2.2 Communications strategies Thirty forces (71%) have a written document that sets out long-term objectives for communications, media and public relations activities (e.g. a force communications or media strategy). Thirteen forces provided the year in which their strategy was developed. With one exception these had been developed since 2000. Other forces reported that their strategy was subject to annual update, was currently under review or in the process of being developed.
12
Force has a communications strategy
Number of forces Scotland
TOTAL
Yes
England & Wales 26
4
No
8
1
Under development
2
30 (71%) 9 (21%) 2 (5%) 41
Total
36
5
3.2.3 Departmental responsibilities Departmental responsibilities were described both widely, e.g., ‘all internal and external communications, reactive and proactive’ and in detail, e.g., ‘issuing press releases, appeals for information and crime prevention advice, facilitating interviews, responding to media enquiries, writing for website and force magazine, quarterly and annual reports, provision of media awareness training to officers and staff, formulation of media strategies for major cases/ incidents/ events, out of hours on-call cover’. The responsibilities listed on the completed questionnaires confirm that departments have wide ranging responsibilities that have strategic and operational, internal and external dimensions. These include: • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •
Dealing with media enquiries, reactive and proactive media liaison Proactive marketing of campaigns Promoting public reassurance messages Informing the public Managing media interest in incidents Protecting and promoting the force’s reputation Major incident and crisis communications Internal communications Delivering media training Facilitating interviews Partnership communications Responsibility for corporate communications strategies and media policies Public relations Marketing Corporate identity Merchandising Graphic design Audio-visual services Exhibitions and shows, events management Intra and internet development and management, e-communications
13
A number of responses captured the spirit of the overall role and responsibilities of communications departments. For example one response confirmed the department’s role as being: ‘to provide a communications related service to the force and a police-related information service to the media’. Another stated: ‘to offer communications services that support Force strategic objectives’. 3.2.4 Communications support for partners The percentage of communications departments providing communications, media and public relations support or consultancy to their local police authority (60%) is less than that recorded in 2000-1 (65%). Since the last survey, the percentage of departments that support local community safety partnerships has increased, from 53% to 60%. Only the English and Welsh forces confirmed that they provided support for other criminal justice agencies (57% of departments 24 forces). These CJ agencies are most commonly LCJBs, but are also MAPPAs, and in a few cases, YOTs, NHS, Fire and Rescue, the CPS and the probation service. Departments providing support to …
Number of forces
The local police authority Local community safety partnerships Other criminal justice agencies
England & Wales 23
Scotland
TOTAL
2
24
1
25 (60%) 25 (60%) 24 (57%)
24
3.2.5 Sponsorship Five departments (12%) are responsible for sponsorship activities, and three (7%) have a sponsorship officer. In fourteen forces (33%) there is a sponsorship officer in another department. Number of forces Sponsorship
Departments responsible for Sponsorship Departments with sponsorship officer Forces with sponsorship officer in another department
England & Wales 3 3 14
14
Scotland
TOTAL
2
5 (12%) 3 (7%) 14 (33%)
3.2.6 Corporate identity Thirty-four departments (81%) are responsible for corporate identity and in 23 departments (55%) somebody specifically takes responsibility for this function. Number of forces Corporate Identity
Departments responsible for corporate identity Person has specific responsibility for corporate identity
England & Wales 30
Scotland
TOTAL
4
21
2
34 (81%) 23 (55%)
3.2.7 Web/ e-communication Thirty-six departments (86%) are responsible for web/ e-communications. Number of forces Web/ e-communication
Departments responsible for Web/ ecommunication
England & Wales 31
Scotland
TOTAL
5
36 (86%)
3.2.8 Marketing Fourteen departments have a marketing officer (33%, compared with 22% in 2000-1) and three forces have a marketing officer in another department. The answers to the question asking how forces defined marketing suggest that it continues to be loosely or broadly defined, and in some cases, confused. Some thoughtful responses suggested that the police service in general has yet to embrace marketing as a concept that can be applied by forces to identify needs and to deliver a responsive and appropriate service. Responses on the whole suggest that pure marketing is not recognised or practised by individual forces; rather it is most often associated with positive public relations work, promotion of the force and its key messages, and ‘selling the brand’. Nevertheless, it is clear that a number of marketing tools and techniques, e.g., market segmentation, are used in the course of general communications work. Although greater numbers of human resources are allocated to marketing than in 2000-1, the comments on its definition and application suggest that the
15
practice of marketing has not advanced significantly since the 2000-1 survey;3 there has been little obvious progression in embedding marketing, despite some departments using marketing tools and finding them valuable.
Number of forces Marketing
Departments with a marketing officer Forces with a marketing officer in another department
England & Wales 13
Scotland TOTAL
3
1
14 (33%) 3 (7%)
3.2.9 Departmental responsibilities and changes in demand The questionnaire prompted forces to indicate whether their communications departments were responsible for a number of specific activities. Respondents were also asked whether demand for these services had increased, decreased or remained approximately the same during the preceding twelve months. The next table suggests that departments have experienced an increase in demand for their services across a range of responsibilities. Instances of decreases in demand are notably few, recorded by just three forces in two areas, namely preparing in-force guidance (one force) and producing the force’s annual report (two forces). It is interesting to note that the areas of increased demand most commonly cited are (a) new media (maintaining the force website and supporting e-policing) and (b) internal communications. ‘Other’ activities, not prompted for by the questionnaire (and not shown in the table), but volunteered by respondents include: • ‘Warning & informing’, emergency planning and training (24 forces, 57%); demand has increased in the last 12 months • Audio/visual film production, graphic design (seven forces 17%); again demand had increased in the last twelve months • Consultation and stakeholder communications • Media training.
3
Mawby, R.C and Worthington, J.S. (2002) ‘Marketing the Police: from a Force to a Service’, Journal of Marketing Management, 18(9-10) pp. 857-76.
16
In-force activity
In-force communications training Preparation of inforce communications policy & guidance Communications support to ACPO Communications support to BCUs Communications support to individual officers Providing marketing consultancy to the force Maintaining the force’s website E-policing support internally & externally Producing the force newspaper Producing the force annual report Internal Communications
No of forces responsible (%)
40 (95%)
Forces experiencing increased demand ( %*) 28 (70%)
Forces experiencing decreased demand ( %*)
Demand remains the same (%*)
42 (100%)
29 (74%)
42 (100%)
27 (66%)
14 (34%)
40 (95%)
28 (72%)
11 (28%)
42 (100%)
21 (51%)
20 (49%)
32 (76%)
24 (82%)
8 (18%)
33 (79%)
31 (97%)
1 (3%)
27 (64%)
24 (89%)
3 (11%)
37 (88%)
14 (39%)
22 (61%)
27 (64%)
11 (41%)
38 (91%)
34 (90%)
12 (30%)
1 (3%)
2 (7%)
9 (23%)
14 (52%) 4 (11%)
* The percentages shown are for those forces that answered the supplementary question relating to demand; this number of forces is not always the same as the number that answered the question asking if they were responsible for the activity.
3.3 Human Resources 3.3.1 Departmental management In 38 (90%) of the 42 responding forces, the head of department is a member of police staff. In the four other forces, three departments are overseen by a chief inspector and in the remaining force, at the time of the survey, the department was under the temporary management of a police officer. This continues the trend identified in the two previous surveys of departmental management moving out of the hands of generalist police managers and into the hands of police staff professionals (the 1996-7 survey reported that 18% of departments had police officer managers, in 2000-1 the figure was 14%, and it is now 10%). 17
Regarding gender, 25 heads of department are male and seventeen are female. Departmental head
Police officer Police staff
Male Female
Number of forces England Scotland TOTAL & Wales 3 1 4 (10%) 34 4 38 (90%) Total 37 5 42 21 16 Total 37
4 1 5
25 (60%) 17 (40%) 42
The departmental heads who are police officers are of chief inspector rank. There is no similar consistency for police staff heads of department; the police staff grades provided by 25 forces detailed 24 different gradings. Responses included: ‘senior manager’ (three cases), plus single mentions of: principal, special, grade below director, Higher Management Grade F, Senior Staff Grade 4 (SSG4), Grade 10, chief inspector equivalent; plus a host of initials signifying grades: M1, PO9-12, L, K, JE11, PMG3, FSO, SM, PO20, A81, SM2, LC13, W13 (£41-44k), POF, L (approx £50k); finally one response simply provided the salary of the post - £44.5k. This lack of consistency across forces confirms the findings of the two previous surveys; there is no indication of greater consistency in 2007 than there was in 1996-7. Length in post for the head of department ranges from six months (three cases) to over 20 years (two cases). Sixteen heads (38%) have been in post for three years or less and eight heads have been in post for over ten years. Departmental head: Years in post 1 year or less Over 1 year and up to 2 years Over 2 years and up to 3 years Over 3 years and up to 4 years Over 4 years and up to 5 years Over 5 years and up to 10 years Over 10 years and up to 15 years Over 15 years and up to 20 years Over 20 years and up to 25 years Over 25 years TOTAL
Number of forces England Scotland TOTAL & Wales 5 1 6 (14%) 6 6 (14%) 3 1 4 (10%) 5 5 (12%) 2 2 (5%) 7 2 9 (21%) 3 1 4 (10%) 2 2 (5%) 1 1 (2%) 1 1 (2%) 35 5 40
In 26 of the surveyed forces (62%) the head of the department reports to one of the ACPO team. The proportion has decreased since the last survey; in
18
2000-1, 78% of heads of department reported to the ACPO team and the percentage was 71% in the 1996-7 survey.
Departmental head reports to:
The Chief Constable/ Commissioner Deputy Chief Constable Assistant Chief Constable
Number of forces England Scotland TOTAL & Wales 4 4 (10%) 15 2 17 (40%) 4 1 5 (12%)
Director or Head of: Corporate Development/ Corporate Planning/ Corporate Services/ Information/ Strategy & Organisation/ Finance
9
Departmental Superintendent
4
2
1 37
5
Currently in transition TOTAL
9 (21%) 6 (14%) 1 42
The head of department post is considered senior management in 37 forces (88%) and middle management in four forces. 24 heads (57%) sit on the force executive/ policy group, seven (17%) in a voting capacity.
Departmental head status:
Number of forces England Scotland TOTAL & Wales Senior management 33 4 37 (88%) Middle management 4 4 (10%) TOTAL 37 4 41
3.3.2 Staff numbers 3.3.2.1 Headquarters staff The total number of people employed in the surveyed headquarters communications departments is 550 (n = 41); 485 in England and Wales and 65 in Scotland. Whilst these numbers do not represent the total number of people employed in communications work across the police service, they do exceed the recorded 430 staff who were employed in headquarters departments across the 51 forces in England, Wales and Scotland in 2000-1. It appears therefore that in terms of human resources, corporate communications has been a growth area since 2000-1.
19
Of the 550 HQ staff, only thirteen (2%) are police officers, and they are distributed across ten forces. This confirms the established trend towards resourcing communications departments with specialists rather than generalist police officers. In the 2000-1 survey it was found that police officers represented 6% of headquarters staff in England, Wales and Scotland (27 of the then 430 staff). In terms of gender, males represent 38% of headquarters staff and females 62% (204/346). The proportion of full to part-time workers is 88%:12%. Disabled staff have a representation of 1%, and 3% of staff are from an ethnic minority. The headquarters departments vary in size. There are no single person operations, but one force has a two person operation and there are four forces with departments of three people or less. The largest department by far is the Metropolitan Police Service with 51 staff. The next largest, with a staff of 40, is Strathclyde. No of forces: England & Wales
25 20
No of forces: Scotland
15 10
10 5
10
6
5 1
1
4
3
1
1
0 r2
25
20
15
e ov
21
16
11
st f af
f
6
af st
f
f
af st
af st
ff
f af st
a st
10 6-
5 2-
Figure 2. Staffing levels of headquarters communications departments
The most common number of staff is six (found in five forces), followed by thirteen (four forces) and eleven (three forces). Just over half of the responding forces (22) have between six and fifteen people in their departments. Compared with the findings of the previous surveys, headquarters departments are larger. In 1996-7, 60% of departments had a staff of between 1 and 5 people, and in 2000-1, the most common number of staff was four. 3.3.2.2 Departmental staff based in BCUs In addition to the headquarters-based staff discussed above, the questionnaire asked whether any communications departments located their staff outside headquarters in the Basic Command Units (BCUs).
20
The answers to this question confirmed that more departments have placed staff in BCUs since the 2000-1 survey when fifteen forces in England and Wales did so. This figure has increased to 25 forces in England and Wales and one in Scotland (n=41). Therefore, 26 forces have now placed departmental staff in their BCUs. The number of locations outside headquarters ranges from one (three forces) to 21 (one force). A total of 146 staff are deployed in BCUs (compared with 69 in 2000-1) and only two of these are police officers. 32% of these staff are male and 68% female; 3% (four) are from ethnic minorities, none are disabled and the proportion of full to part-time workers is 78%:22%. These staff are generally deployed in a combined press/ public relations/ marketing role. However, some have an internal communications role or a neighbourhood/ local policing role. Management responsibility for these staff lies with the BCU in sixteen forces (62%). BCUs contribute towards funding these staff in thirteen forces; they contribute 100% in twelve forces and 50% in one force. Corporate communications departmental staff based in BCUs
Number of forces/ staff England & Wales 25
No of forces with departmental staff based in divisions No. of staff based in divisions
145
Scotland TOTAL 1 1
26 (62%) 146
In summary, therefore, staff employed across the 42 surveyed forces with the primary role to undertake corporate communications activities number 146 in divisional locations and 550 at headquarters – a total of 696 (compared with a total of 499 across the 51 forces in England, Wales and Scotland in 2000-1). 3.3.2.3 Non-departmental staff with communications responsibilities In addition to gathering data on the staff from the communications department, the questionnaire also asked whether non-departmental staff were tasked with some local responsibility for communications. Twenty-three (55%) of the 42 forces have given some non-departmental BCU staff some responsibility for local communications activities (compared with 57% of forces in 2000-1). In eighteen forces this work is in addition to their core activity. These people comprise both police staff and police officers. A minority are communications professionals. The numbers of police officers and staff fulfilling these roles differs between forces. One force has one person in this role, another force commented that members of its 31 Neighbourhood Policing Teams have communications objectives. The same force has ‘focus experts’ within BCUs and departments, who provide internal website and internet advice. 21
With regard to distribution, in sixteen forces all BCUs have such staff. In the other forces between 30% and 75% of the BCUs have such staff. Line management rests with the BCUs (22 forces) and one force reported that they had two staff in this capacity that were partly funded (50%) by Community Safety Partnerships. Non-Corporate Communications departmental staff with communications responsibilities No of forces tasking BCU staff with communications responsibilities
Number of forces England & Wales 20
Scotland TOTAL 3
23 (55%)
3.3.3 Police officers and communications In 33 of the 42 forces (79%) it is policy to allow all officers to liaise with the media. This authorisation is often subject to logical criteria, e.g., taking advice from the communications department, complying with legal and policy requirements, seeking clearance from a manager and speaking only about subjects within one’s responsibility and knowledge. Just two forces (compared with seven in 2000-1) mentioned that there were no restrictions only for those of the rank of sergeant and above; but even these mentioned that constables could communicate through the media when they were best qualified to do so. 3.3.4 Professional skills It is practice in 38 (90%) of the surveyed forces to recruit trained communications professionals (compared with 86% in 2000-1). At the time of the survey the specialists employed included journalists, public relations and marketing professionals. As the table below shows a broad range of other specialisms also exist. The numbers of communications professionals has significantly increased since the survey of 2000-1. Although the current survey provides the details for up to 42 of the 51 forces in England, Wales and Scotland, unlike the previous survey which covered all 51 forces, the recorded numbers of professionals have increased. There were 123 journalists in 20001 and now there are 161. Public relations specialists have doubled in the same period, increasing from 48 to 99. Marketing specialists have also doubled, from 20 to 46; and where there were previously 33 ‘other’ specialists, there are now 102.
22
Professional skills
Number of forces/ communications professionals
No of forces that recruit communications professionals No. of journalists employed No. of public relations specialists employed No. of marketing specialists employed Other specialists: photographers, AV TV technicians, web/intranet masters, new media specialists, DTP, graphic designers, media studies graduate, TV studio editor Total no. of communications professionals employed
England & Wales
Scotland
TOTAL
34
4
148 89
13 10
38 (90%) 161 99
43
3
46
83
19
102
363
45
408
3.4. Operations 3.4.1 Operating hours During weekdays the most common hours of operation are 0800 to 1700 (nine forces); these core hours of operation remain the same as those recorded in 2000-1, possibly indicating that there has been little further movement in core hours generated by technological or organisational developments in the media industries. As in 2000-1, the earliest starting time is 0630, but the latest finishing time is now 2300 rather than 2200 (one force only). Only one force, the Metropolitan Police Service, operates 24 hours per day every day. On Saturdays there are seven forces which open (the hours vary, but include: 0700 to 1500, 0800 to 1000, 0800 to 1300, and 24 hours). On Sundays, just three forces open, their operating hours being: 1000 to 2000, 0830 to 1730, and 24hours. During Bank Holiday periods five forces open, their hours varying from 24 hours to 0800 to 1500. Outside of normal operating hours 41 of the 42 forces confirmed that a 24hours call-out procedure operated. This operates in one force where there are just two press officers; consequently one of them is always on-call.
23
Number of forces Opening hours
No of forces open 24 hours per day every day No of forces that open on Saturdays No of forces that open on Sundays No of forces that open on Bank Holidays No of forces with 24-hours call-out procedure
England & Wales 1
Scotland TOTAL 1
6 2 4
1 1 1
7 3 5
37
4
41
3.4.2 Methods of communicating The table below confirms that the use of email as a communications method has increased. In 2000-1, 61% of English, Welsh and Scottish departments communicated through email; this has now increased to 95% across the surveyed forces. The use of ISDN has also increased; it was used by 41% of forces, it is now used by 48%. The use of the Telephone newsline has remained consistent (76% now compared with 79% in 2000-1). Communication methods Number of forces communicating this way
Email Telephone newsline ISDN Extranet Fax from screen Texts
England & Wales 35 30 16 8 7 6
Scotland 5 2 4 1 1 2
TOTAL 40 (95%) 32 (76%) 20 (48%) 9 (21%) 8 (19%) 8 (19%)
3.4.3 Facilities •
Twenty-four forces (57%) use computerised systems for call-logging and information management (compared with 33% in 2000-1)
•
Thirty-five forces (83%) record and archive all official press releases on a searchable computerised database (compared with 59% in 2000-1)
•
Seven forces (17%) have ISDN picture facilities (compared with 33% in 2000-1).
24
Facilities
Number of forces England & Wales
Scotland
TOTAL
21
3
24 (57%)
Forces that record and archive all official press releases on a searchable computerised database.
30
5
35 (83%)
Forces that have ISDN picture facilities.
5
2
7 (17%)
Forces that use computerised systems for call-logging and information management.
3.4.4 External communication: the operating context. Respondents were asked whether in the last twelve months (i.e. during the course of 2006), they were (a) communicating with an increased number of organisations and (b) whether the overall number of daily contacts with media organisations had increased. The majority of forces had not experienced a growth in the numbers of organisations they dealt with, the exceptions being radio stations (as in 20001), and Community Safety agencies, as detailed in the table below. However, a minority of respondents did report increases in the numbers of organisations dealt with, e.g., approximately one-third of the surveyed forces reported an increase in the numbers of criminal justice and government agencies that they were dealing with.
Medium
Newspapers Radio stations TV stations News agencies CJ agencies Govt agencies Community Safety agencies Other partners
Number of forces experiencing an increased number of organisations England & Wales YES NO 9 21 18 12 8 22 9 21 11 18 11 19 17 13 7
Scotland
18
25
TOTAL
YES 2 2 1 1 2 3 2
NO 3 3 4 4 3 2 3
YES 11 (26%) 20 (48%) 9 (21%) 10 (24%) 13 (31%) 14 (33%) 19 (45%)
2
2
9 (21%)
24 15 26 25 21 21 16
NO (57%) (36%) (62%) (60%) (50%) (50%) (38%)
20 (48%)
Twenty-eight forces (67%) confirmed an increase in overall contacts with media organisations. Number of forces Overall daily media contacts England & Wales YES NO Has the overall number of daily contacts with media organisations increased over the last 12 months?
24
5
Scotland YES NO 4
1
TOTAL YES
NO
28 6 (67%) (14%)
3.4.4.1 Contacts with the media Each force was asked to indicate how many media organisations it communicated with on a day-to-day basis and how many contacts there were during an average day with each form of media. Media
Newspapers
Radio stations TV stations
Press agencies
No. of media organisations which depts have contact with
Average contacts per day per force
Lowest no. 0
Highest no. 60
Most Common 3-4
0
10
0
3
0
6
2
9
0
4
0
3
0
10
4
5
0
10
1
2
2
15
3
10
National Regional National Cable Satellite Local
0 1 0 0 0 1
6 5 5 1 2 4
0 2 1 0 1 2
3 5 2 1 2 5
Regional National
0 0
5 3
1 1
3 2
Local daily Local Sundays Regional daily Regional Sunday National Daily National Sunday Local
26
21
The table above shows the range in the numbers of media organisations and also the average number of daily contacts. For example, the table shows that for national daily newspapers, at least one force does not have regular contact with them, at least one force deals with ten national daily newspapers, but most commonly forces deal with four national daily newspapers. The average number of daily contacts between a force and national daily newspapers is five. In terms of local radio stations there is at least one force that has contact with two stations on a daily basis, and there is at least one force which routinely deals with fifteen national radio stations. The most common number of national radio stations that forces have regular contact with is three (eight forces). Forces were also asked whether the number of daily contacts with each form of media had increased, decreased or remained similar. Few forces recorded any decreases in the numbers of contacts and there were indications that some forces were experiencing an increase in the daily numbers of contacts with local daily newspapers, local radio stations and regional television stations. A follow-up question asked forces to estimate the average daily number of contacts with journalists (including telephone calls and emails). The answers ranged from ten to 150 contacts, with ten forces clustering in the range of 3560 daily contacts. 3.4.4.2 Contacts with other organisations Pre-survey discussions with APPRO members suggested that communications departments were having greater contact with non-media organisations, e.g., other criminal justice agencies, partner agencies and government agencies. To capture the extent of these communications, respondents were asked to estimate the numbers of CJ, partner and government agencies that they regularly communicate with. The results are shown in the next table. This suggests that whilst departments’ core business remains with media organisations, communication with a wider range of organisations is now part of everyday operations. Organisation
No. of organisations which depts have contact with
Average contacts per day per force
Regional
Lowest no. 0
Highest no. 4
Most Common 1
National Local
0 0
2 5
0 1
1 2
National Community safety partners
0 1
6 10
1 5
1 3
CJ Agencies Govt Agencies
27
1
3.4.5 Evaluating the effectiveness of corporate communications Twenty-five forces (60%) evaluate the effectiveness of force communications activities (compared with 67% in 2000-1). Fifteen forces (36%) do not. Evaluation
Number of forces
Forces that evaluate the effectiveness of their media and public relations activities
England & Wales
Scotland
TOTAL
24
1
25 (60%)
In-house evaluation of campaigns is undertaken by 24 forces. The methods used include: • The monitoring of media coverage and press cuttings • Assessing key messages in media coverage • The rating of media coverage as positive/ neutral/ negative • Seeking feedback from targeted audiences through, e.g., questionnaires (including on-line), phone surveys and cold calling • Measuring the take-up of a service or the attendance at events • Counting the number of Internet/intranet hits, obtaining website feedback • Conducting staff opinion surveys • Best Value reviews, debriefs, ‘performance challenge’ • Calculating equivalent advertising costs • Monitoring changes in crime figures. Fourteen forces had commissioned independent evaluations. These included: • A review of media office practices • An academic (psychologists) review of a violence campaign and focus group evaluation of a drink-driving campaign • A door-to-door survey following the distribution of newsletters • On-street interviews, phone surveys • A survey of local media regarding the service they expected • People surveys by an independent research group • Evaluation of awareness and comprehension of messages. Twenty forces declared their annual spend on evaluation; twelve forces have no budget. In the other eight forces the budget ranges from £3,000 to £45,000.
28
•
Six forces (14%) calculate the equivalent advertising cost of editorial coverage.
•
Twenty-two forces (52%) evaluate the quality of messages in editorial coverage. This is done by: o Assessing key messages in the headlines and body of articles o Scoring coverage as positive/ neutral/ negative o ‘Echo’ media evaluation o ‘Magenta’ monitoring o Building-in tracking messages o Informal review and assessment o Performance indicators.
•
Twenty-three forces (55%) evaluate the outcomes of marketing communications. To do this: o Nine forces (21%) use increased intelligence submissions as an evaluation indicator o Fifteen forces (36%) use crime rates as an evaluation indicator Other methods used: o Monitoring changes in public attitude/ behaviour through surveys o Using a range of indicators – feelings of safety, recognition of local police o Phone surveys o Take-up of packs and services o Feedback through the web o Consulting the force’s Citizen’s Panel.
Additional comments and observations were invited on outcome measurement. The comments received covered three main points, namely: 1. Funding for evaluation is scarce 2. More recognition and resources for evaluation is needed 3. Some forces would like to undertake more sophisticated evaluation, but funds and resources to do so are limited. 3.4.6 Measuring departmental performance An open question asked respondents how their force measured the performance of the communications department. Thirty-seven forces entered an answer. Three of these advised that departmental performance was not measured. Where performance is measured, the methods deployed include: • • • • • •
Using a balanced business scorecard which tracks departmental contribution based upon a traffic light system Three year Smart objectives and plan ACPO review and BCU commanders’ assessments Policing plan targets, HMIC baseline assessment criteria, BCS improvements Quarterly/ annual performance targets Target setting by unit plus personal performance reviews (PDRs) 29
• • • • • • • •
Annual inspections Business Plan PIs and Service Level Agreements (SLAs) with BCUs Focus performance reviews Head of Department reports to Force Performance Board/ chief officer group Positive/ neutral/ negative and reactive/proactive outputs Delivery of products to deadlines Quality of publications, number of events, number of media releases, percentage of positive coverage Five forces had no formal performance measures.
In summary, departmental performance is measured through a combination of: (a) upward reporting; (b) monitoring of outputs and outcomes; and (c) working within the force framework of business planning and target setting. 3.4.7 Communications consultancy The types of consultancy commissioned by forces in the past twelve months are summarised in the table below. Other forms of commissioned consultancy, reported as single instances, included: Best Value (BV) review, film-making, political lobbying and function review.
Types of consultancy commissioned in the last twelve months
Number of forces England & Wales 10
Scotland
Web development
9
1
Media relations
8
Corporate identity
4
Marketing
3
Public relations
3
Internal communications
30
TOTAL 10 (24%) 10 (24%) 8 (19%) 4 (10%) 3 (7%) 3 (7%)
3.4.8 Constraints The constraint cited most frequently by departments was a shortage of human resources (32 forces, 76%), the same constraint that was most cited in 2000-1 (78% of forces). Some responses emphasised this constraint and its impact on work prioritisation, staff stress levels, and staff retention. It is perhaps also significant that there has been an increase in the numbers of forces that feel lack of support from senior management is a constraint (5% of respondents in 2000-1 compared with 29% in 2007). The table below shows the constraints which impact on communications departments. Constraint
Number of forces recording the constraint England & Wales 29
Scotland
TOTAL
3
32 (76%)
27 9
3 3
30 (71%) 12 (29%)
9 9
1 1
Lack of cooperation from police officers
8
1
10 (24%) 10 (24%) (five responses named local authorities, plus single mentions of: CDRP, LCJB, Home Office, ACPO, LRF partners) 9 (21%) (there is no pattern of particular ranks or roles)
Lack of cooperation from media organisations Not enough autonomy No major constraints
7
1
8 (19%)
6
2
8 (19%)
9
2
11 (26%)
Lack of human resources Lack of money Lack of support from senior management Lack of equipment Lack of cooperation from other organisations
This question provided an opportunity to list other constraints. Several comments were made concerning a lack of understanding within forces of communications and its value to the organisation, and a lack of corporate drive to place communications higher in force priorities. One response linked these to the high turnover of senior officers resulting in a lack of consistency.
31
3.4.9 Cross-force collaboration opportunities The final, open-ended question asked respondents to reflect on the context of change in the police service, including debates around local, regional and national policing services. Respondents were invited to comment on whether, in this context, there were any ways in which force communications departments might collaborate or work more efficiently. To achieve economies of scale and consistency of approach, the following suggestions for possible collaboration were made: • Collaborative publication design and production, e.g., crime reduction literature templates, shared campaigns plans, shared buying of print and advertising • Regional campaigns around key themes, e.g., domestic violence, antisocial behaviour, drink-driving. • Cuttings services • Commissioning of research • Shared media law training • Joint web and e-policing development . Other suggestions for collaboration included: • Counter-terrorism and major incident planning and handling • The development of regional specialisms. Finally, several comments were made relating to organisation and coordination: • The recommendation of a more active advisory and co-ordinating role for APPRO • The observation that a more effective ACPO communications structure would facilitate more effective force-level communications • The commendation of the existing quarterly regional heads of department meetings; these were opportunities to spread effective practice, to share issues and to discuss national APPRO feedback.
32
4. Further Information If you require any further information concerning this survey, please contact: Dr Rob Mawby Reader in Criminal Justice Centre for Criminal Justice Policy and Research School of Social Sciences UCE Birmingham Perry Barr Birmingham B42 2SU Tel: 0121 331 6624 Email:
[email protected] Website: http://www.lhds.uce.ac.uk/criminaljustice/
33
Appendix: The 2006-7 Questionnaire
34
The 2006 survey of police service communications, media, and PR offices Please complete the questionnaire by circling the answer, ticking the appropriate box or entering an answer in the space provided.
Please enter the name of your force ____________________________________
SECTION 1: BASELINE INFORMATION 1, What is the name of the department responsible for communications, media liaison, and public relations? ________________________________________________________________ 2. In which year was this department established under its current structure?
______________
3. Within the force’s organisational structure, does the communications, media and public relations function operate as an independent department?
YES
NO
If NO, is it part of another department? YES If part of another department, please state which ____________________________________________________________ If available, please attach both: (a) a force structure chart showing where communications, media and PR sits within the organisation and (b) a departmental structure chart. 4. How effective do you believe the current structure to be? Not very effective Moderately effective Effective Very effective 5. Is there anything about the current structure that you would like to change in order to improve effectiveness? ___________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________
35
6(a). Please indicate your force’s annual budget allocated for communications, media and public relations activities: Staff budget – Headquarters: £_________ Staff budget – BCU level: £_________ Budget - other: £_________ Total Budget: £_________ (b). What percentage of the total force budget does the total of these costs represent? _______ 7. What are your department’s normal operating hours? Monday to Friday ______ to______ Saturday ______ to______ Sunday ______ to______ Bank holidays ______ to______ 8. Is there a 24-hour call-out procedure?
YES
NO
YES
NO
SECTION 2: ROLE & RESPONSIBILITIES 9. Does the department have clearly stated terms of reference?
10. Please briefly describe the department’s responsibilities. Please attach terms of reference or other relevant documentation if preferred. ___________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________ 11. Does your force have a written document that sets out long-term objectives for communications, media and public relations activities (e.g. a force communications or media strategy)? If YES, since when? (please attach a copy of the most recent version if available).
YES NO ________
12. Does the department provide communications, media and public relations support or consultancy to: (a) the local police authority? YES NO (b) local community safety partnerships? YES NO (c) other criminal justice agencies YES NO If YES, please specify which agency/ies ______________________
36
13. Is the department responsible for the following activities? (a) Sponsorship If YES, does the department have a Sponsorship Officer? If NO, does the force employ a Sponsorship Officer in another department?
YES YES
NO NO
YES
NO
(b) Corporate identity If YES, is there a member of the department with specific responsibility for corporate identity?
YES
NO
YES
NO
(c) Web/ e-communication?
YES
NO
14(a). How is ‘marketing’ defined by your force? ______________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________ 14(b). Does the department have a Marketing Officer? If NO, does the force employ a Marketing Officer in another department?
YES
NO
YES
NO
15. Who does the Head of the department report to? (e.g. Chief Constable/ Deputy/ ACC/ Supt/ head of specific dept./ Other) ________________________________________________________ 16. Does the Head of the department sit on the Force Executive/Command Team? If YES, is this (a) as a voting member? or (b) in an advisory capacity?
YES YES YES
NO NO NO
17. Within your force is the Head of the department post considered as: (a) senior management? (b) middle management?
YES YES
NO NO
37
18. Please indicate whether the department is responsible for the in-force activities listed in the table below. Please also tick the appropriate box to indicate whether demand for these activities has increased, decreased or remained stable during the last 12 months. Responsible for?
Demand has increased
In-force activity Yes
No
a) Providing inforce communications training b) Drafting in-force communications policy and guidance c) Providing communications support to the force command team d) Providing communications support to BCUs e) Providing communications support to individual officers f) Providing marketing consultancy to the force g) Maintaining the force’s website h) providing epolicing support internally & externally i) Producing the force newspaper j) Producing the force annual report k) Internal communications l) Other responsibilities: please specify (1) (2) (3)
38
Demand has decreased
Demand remains the same
SECTION 3: STAFFING PROFILE 19(a) Is the Head of the department i) a member of police staff? YES ii) an officer? YES Please indicate the grade or rank of the post ____________________________________________________ YES YES
(b) Is the incumbent i) male? or ii) female?
NO NO
NO NO
(c) How long has the incumbent held this post? ____________________________________________________
20. How many staff are there in the department? (please answer this question in relation to departmental staff based at headquarters only) (a) How many of these are police staff? (b) How many of these are police officers? (c) How many are: i) male? ii) female? iii) minority ethnic? iv) disabled? v) full-time? vi) part-time?
__________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________
21. In addition to the headquarters-based staff, are any of the department’s staff based in BCUs? YES If YES, (a) where are they located and in what numbers? (please enter the relevant locations and numbers in the table below) Location
NO
Total number of staff
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 (b) How many of these are police staff? (c) How many of these are police officers? (d) How many are: i) male? ii) female? iii) minority ethnic? iv) disabled? v) full-time? vi) part-time?
39
__________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________ __________
(e) In what roles are these staff deployed? i) Press officer role? YES ii) Public Relations role? YES iii) Marketing role? YES iv) Combined role? YES v) Other? Please specify _______________ ___________________________________
NO NO NO NO
(f) Do the BCUs have any line management responsibilities for these staff? ___________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________ (g) Do the BCUs contribute to the funding of these staff? If so, what percentage of funding do they contribute? ___________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________ 22. In addition to the staff already detailed above, are there any force personnel who are not your departmental staff, but are BCU staff with some responsibility for local communications, media and/or public relations activities? YES NO If YES, (a) Do they undertake communications work as: i) their core role? or ii) in addition to their core activity? (b) Are they i) police staff? or ii) police officers? (c) Are they communications professionals? (d) How many of these staff are there? (e) Do all the BCUs have such staff? If NO, what proportion of BCUs have such staff? (f) Does your department have any line management responsibility for these staff?
YES NO YES NO YES NO YES NO YES NO _________ YES NO ________ YES
NO
23. Is it force practice to recruit trained journalists and marketing and public relations professionals? YES NO If YES, how many of each does the force currently employ? (a) Journalists ________ (b) Public relations specialists ________ (c) Marketing specialists ________ (d) Other specialists ________ please indicate specialism(s) and numbers _________________________________________ _________________________________________ 24. In addition to the above mentioned personnel who have a clear role in communications activities, is it policy in your force to allow all police officers and police staff to liaise with the media?
YES
Please advise of any restrictions in place (e.g. is media liaison restricted to officers above a certain rank?) _______________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________
40
NO
SECTION 4: OPERATIONS 25. In the table below please indicate the number of organisations you communicate with on a day-to-day basis. On average how many times per day do you have contact with them? Has the number of daily contacts from the different types of media increased over the last 12 months? Organisation
Numbers communicated with on daily basis
Total contacts per day (average)
Has the no. of daily contacts increased over the last 12 months?
a) Newspapers Local daily Local Sundays Regional daily Regional Sunday National daily National Sunday b) Radio stations Local National c) TV stations Regional National Cable Satellite d) News agencies Local Regional National e) Criminal Justice agencies Regional National f) Government Agencies Local National g) Community safety partners4 h) Others (please specify)
4
By this, we mean local authorities, other emergency services, youth services, housing services, voluntary organisations, etc.
41
26. Has the number of organisations you have contact with increased in the last 12 months? (a) Newspapers YES NO (b) Radio stations YES NO (c) TV stations YES NO (d) News agencies YES NO (e) Criminal justice agencies YES NO (f) Government agencies YES NO (g) Community safety partners YES NO (h) others YES NO 27. Has the overall number of daily contacts with media organisations increased over the last 12 months?
YES
28. What is your average daily number of contacts with journalists (including number of telephone calls dealt with, emails received)?
________
29. Do you communicate with media organisations via (a) Email? (b) ISDN? (c) Fax from screen? (d) Telephone newsline? (e.g. voicebank) (e) Texts (f) Extranet
YES YES YES YES YES YES
NO NO NO NO NO NO
30. Does your department use computerised systems for call-logging and information management?
YES
NO
31. Does your department record and archive all official press releases on a searchable computerised database?
YES
NO
32. Does your department have ISDN picture facilities?
YES
NO
33. Do you evaluate the effectiveness of your force’s communications activities? YES If YES, (a) Do you undertake in-house evaluation of campaigns? YES If yes, what methods do you use? _______________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________ (b) Do you commission independent evaluations? YES If yes, please provide details of the type of evaluation _______________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________ How much annually do you spend on evaluation?
42
£___________
NO
NO NO
NO
(c) Do you calculate the equivalent advertising cost of editorial coverage? YES
NO
(d) Do you evaluate the quality of messages delivered in editorial coverage? YES NO If yes, how do you do this? _____________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________ (e) Do you evaluate the outcomes of marketing communications? YES NO If yes, do you do this through monitoring .... (i) Increased intelligence submissions? YES NO (ii) Changes in crime rates? YES NO (iii) Other, please specify _______________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________ Please detail below any additional comments, observations or issues regarding outcome measurement _____________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________ 34. How is the performance of the department measured by the force? _____________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________ 35. In the last twelve months has your force commissioned consultants in any of the following areas? Yes Internal communications Marketing Media relations Public relations Corporate identity Web development Other: please specify
43
No
36. What are the major constraints, if any, that your department faces in undertaking its activities? (a) Lack of human resources YES (b) Lack of money YES (c) Lack of equipment YES (d) Lack of support from senior management YES (e) Lack of co-operation from police officers/staff YES Please specify if this is characteristic of: i) any particular ranks _______________________________________________ ii) any particular roles _______________________________________________ (f) Lack of co-operation from media organisations YES (g) Lack of co-operation from other organisations YES If yes, which ones? _____________________________ _____________________________ (h) Not enough autonomy YES (i) Too much autonomy YES (i) There are no major constraints YES (k) Other constraints (please specify) ________________________________________________ ________________________________________________ ________________________________________________ ________________________________________________
NO NO NO NO NO
NO NO NO NO NO
Finally, in the context of change in the police service, including debates around local, regional and national policing services, have you any comments on how force communications departments are structured at present and how they might collaborate and/or work more efficiently? In your view, what alternative arrangements, if any, might benefit from being explored? ___________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________
44
Thank you for completing the questionnaire. If you have any comments on the questions or wish to comment on aspects not covered, please use the space below or the reverse of the form. ___________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________ Please return the questionnaire, together with any accompanying documentation to: Ann Clayton Director of Media and Marketing West Yorkshire Police PO Box 9 Laburnum Road Wakefield WF1 3QP
Once the questionnaires have been completed and returned, they will be collated and analysed by Dr Rob Mawby from the Centre for Criminal Justice Policy and Research, UCE Birmingham, who conducted similar surveys in 1996/7 and 2000/1. The results will be disseminated to all participating forces. Please enter below your contact details (for dissemination of the findings and in case we need to contact you to clarify any comments on the completed questionnaire). Name
__________________________________________________
Address
__________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ __________________________________________________
Email
__________________________________________________
Telephone
______________________________________________
45