Law Enforcement & Emotional Intelligence
Law enforcement officers have two initial challenges when they begin each shift.
The first challenge is the societal bias and implicit prejudice against them.
The second challenge is accepting the bias and developing the tools to effectively neutralize it.
When your awareness is raised, you see the invisible, you hear the unheard, and you understand the incomprehensible. If you do not see, hear, or understand what is there, they will control you.
Dr. Richard Himmer
In a training conversation with a ranking office in King County, we were discussing the importance of empathy in police work. The office was resistant to any kind of empathy for crooks, felons, and law breakers. From the tenor of the conversation, one could hear decades of experience portrayed in his intonation, word choice, and historical bias towards those he deals with on a daily basis.
This same bias that comes from seasoned police officers, exists on the other side of the fence by those whose families of origin have taught them that the police are evil, racist, bias, and single out specific people for no reason. The reality is that both sides are engaging in cognitive distortions and implicit bias, however, only the police seem to be held accountable.
​
The research indicates that fewer parents actively teach or support principle-based parenting or discipline. Instead, too many parents go on the attack against anyone deemed as an authoritative position: teachers, school administrators, businesses, and law enforcement, for example.
​
For the past 6+ years, Chief Kelly Busey has been screening his officer candidates through an Emotional Intelligence (EI) assessment before they are hired on to the Gig Harbor Police Department. According to Chief Busey, it gives him an added layer of security knowing that his officers are emotionally equipped to serve and protect in the community.
​
After months of rioting and public outcry, Chief Busey wrote an editorial piece explaining his approach to the hiring process. His op ed article caught the attention of King 5 News in Seattle, WA and they invited him for an interviewed. He shared his approach and they reached out and interviewed Dr. Himmer as well.
Dr. Himmer recorded the entire interview, not knowing how the interview would proceed or how they would edit his answers. The following recording is the original footage from an interview with King 5 news on the subject of Emotional Intelligence and Law Enforcement. The reporter (Christin Aires) conducted the interview and the link is provided to view the final product.
​
The following segments were taken from the interview as a whole -- See Audio player below.
​
EI Assessment
The assessment comes from Dr. Dan Harrison and his team. The Harrison assessment gathers an inventory of 146 traits and behaviors from a 20-minutes online assessment. More than just an Emotional Intelligence (EI) assessment, Dr. Harrison bases the results on two theories.
Enjoyment Performance Theory
When we enjoy a task or behavior, we tend to do it more often and get better at it. This elicits positive feedback or a sense of satisfaction, reinforcing our enjoyment and tendency. The cycle repeats.
​
When we don’t enjoy a task or behavior, we tend to avoid it and we don’t get better at it. This elicits negative feedback or a sense of dissatisfaction, reinforcing our dislike as we avoid the task or behavior. The cycle repeats.
Neuropsychology
All behavior is based on beliefs and all beliefs are based on experiences. Our preferences are the manifestations of our beliefs. Therefore, behavior can be predicted based on one’s subconscious beliefs.
For example, if a person was adopted at birth and never processed the experience, they may perceive that they have no worth and are not lovable. This subconscious belief will drive dysfunctional behavior and compromise the person’s ability to make friends and have healthy relationships.
​
The Harrison assessment measures 146 traits and behaviors and when examined in context of each other, a set of balanced or imbalanced traits and behaviors emerge in the form of paradoxical graphs.
​
Each officer can receive specific training to balance behavior, including escalated events that happen so rapidly, their behavior is without cognitive thought. Therefore, the training prepares them for actual events to provide a higher probability that the officer will behave according to desired principles and guidelines and not be the focus of the nightly news.
Paradox Theory
A paradox is a seemingly contradictory statement, which may nonetheless be true. According to Paradox theory, a trait can be either constructive or destructive depending upon other complimentary traits. For example, when frankness is complemented by diplomacy, it takes the constructive form of being forthright and truthful.
​
However, without the complementary trait of diplomacy, frankness becomes bluntness. While frankness and diplomacy appear to be contradictory, they co-exist paradoxically, complementing and fulfilling each other.
Paradoxical behaviors in action
Picture a routine traffic stop. The officer follows protocol and the driver and the office began conversing about the alleged traffic infraction. The driver is angry. She’s had a bad day and is late for work. The officer just came from a fatal traffic accident and a young child, the same age as his boy, was killed. He’s having a bad day as well.
​
The officer’s preference for behavior is blunt (high frank and low diplomacy). He doesn’t connect with the driver or even care that she’s having a bad day. Frustration turns to anger and anger turns verbal violence. Furthermore, the officer has a low stress tolerance and goes to fight or flight without much invitation.
​
The officer’s bluntness floods the driver (fight mode) and the driver’s anger floods the officer (flight mode). He goes from blunt to evasive, which further escalates the driver. His evasiveness is highlighted with a chip on his shoulder and the driver, who records the encounter, has a popular YouTube channel and her post goes viral.
​
No context to the video is provided and another proof to support implicit bias against police officers is recorded.
​
All of this is predictable and preventable.
​
You are invited to experience a modified debrief with Dr. Himmer to experience first-hand the impact of the Harrison assessment and the 12 paradoxical graphs. The conversation will last about 30 minutes and is complimentary to Department leaders.
​
You will be sent an actual paradox report and Dr. Himmer will walk you through the process as though you were hiring, promoting, or training one of your officers.
​
Send Dr. Himmer an email and request an appointment.
​
Emotional Intelligence in Law Enforcement
Interview segment featured on King5.