Public Safety Dept Reduces Alarm Responses

The issue being examined involves the City of Fremont which is located in Alameda County. The city is the 14th largest city in California and has a population of approximately 210,000. In the recent rough economic state of affairs, the city has elected to stop responding to residential and commercial burglary alarms unless they verified as legitimate. The city estimates that about 98.5 percent are false and the responses that follow are essentially a waste of time. The reason for this is because it costs a significant amount of money to respond to these types of calls.

The Chief of the that police department, states that this is not something that he wants to do but has do. This decision creates a huge problem for the residents and businesses within the City of Fremont. In any given community there is certain expectation that public safety will make an attempt to keep them and their properties safe. When a public safety organization chooses to elect policies of this nature, the trust in essence diminishes and the community may see a rise in vigilante behavior.

One of the obvious problems this decision poses is the message being sent to the various criminal enterprises that exist in the world. When criminals know and understand that the police will not respond to alarms or take certain actions, they may be more inclined to break in to homes, businesses and commit criminal acts more often. The city's research shows that the average time checking the grounds is 27 minutes. Additionally, only about 66 alarms out of 7,000 are actually legitimate. The dollar estimate is $688,000 in wasted funds to deal with a problem that in some's opinion is a waste of time. With other departmental resources being cut, the city is in a very tough position to remain logistically functional and still provide a well accepted resources to its residents. My opinion in regards to this matter is that the city should attempt to come up with viable solution that can accepted by the community so that impact is not that harsh. That solution however, calls for a deeper investigation into what can possibly be done.

Reframing refers to the manner in which organizations are run and constructed. These frames are in essence the foundation that they are built upon. It was stated, " the world simply cannot cant be made sense of, facts cant be made sense of, facts cant be organized, unless you have a mental model to begin with. That theory does not have to be the right one, because you can alter it along the way as information comes in. But you can begin to learn without some concept that gives you expectations or hypothesis" (Bolman et al, p. 10). This statement suggests in order to order to understand systems you must have a clear idea of what it is you are trying to accomplish. It's a mind map of a kind so that you can put the ideas on paper and create something.

It was further described that "a frame is mental model-a set of ideas and assumptions that you carry in your head to help you understand and negotiate a particular territory" (Bolman et al p. 11). This statement essentially reconfirms that the frame is what you make of it. A company may experience difficulty without a proper start and if attempts of restructuring are commenced without an idea of what the final goal is. In the case of the Fremont Police Dept, they experienced a form of re-framing in updating their alarm response policy. They felt that saving money was the most beneficial even though it would cause citizens to feel uneasy.

The Fremont Police Dept., engaged in a process known as frame breaking. What are you going to do when a situation is in front you? Do you have the ability to think outside of the box? An example of frame breaking was depicted by an armed robbery incident that took place in Washington D.C. The armed gunmen appeared at the home and demanded money or threatened to start shooting. Someone had the ability to change their thinking and took the robber off course by offering him some wine. By treating the robber nice and offering him drinks and food, the robber felt bad and ultimately left the area. This was a great example of using techniques to deflect and diffuse a potentially violent scenario.

It was stated, "as organizations have become pervasive and dominant, they have also become harder to understand and manage." (Bolman et al, p. 21). Additionally, it was stated, "our basic premise is that a primary cause of managerial failure is faulty thinking rooted in inadequate ideas. Managers and those who try to carry to help them too often rely on constricted models that capture only part of organizational life" ( Bolman et al. p. 21).

This statement is an example of of the Fremont Police dept. transitioning to a model that is basically solving one problem while creating another. I can on the other hand say, that the shift was a clear example of how the reframing process works and this is the main point that is being conveyed.

The political frame is also very relevant in attempting to decipher the decisions that were made to implement the new alarm response procedure. Politics can be defined as who gets what, when and how. There is someone who makes decisions about a certain task or a group of people that in essence lobby for what they want and changes they would like to see. There were several political assumptions that I saw as relevant in dealing with this incident. Those assumptions were identified as 1. "organizations are coalitions of assorted individuals and interest groups. 2. Coalition members have enduring differences in values, beliefs, information, interests, and perceptions of reality. 3. Most important decisions involve allocating scarce-who gets what. 4. Scarce resources and enduring differences put conflict at the