Technology and the Human Factor in Corrections

Article Tools Print This Page | Comments(0) | Suggest a Story

By William Sturgeon

Published: 04/27/2009

Editors note: Corrections.com author, William Sturgeon, is an emergency preparedness and counterterrorism planning expert. He has more than 35 years of experience in the criminal justice field, and has managed security operations for sheriffs’ offices and correctional agencies across the United States.

“Match the technology with the specified application(s) and the human interface and it will increase the operational effectiveness substantially.”

On the face of it, the formula appears to be self-explanatory, but in real world applications, the elements of the formula can become cloudy, confused and disconnected.

The goal for this article is to develop an easy to use, real world, format that will insure that each element of the formula has been thoroughly considered. Technology has a vital place in corrections if used properly and within its designed specifications.

Prior to looking for technology, it is crucial that the correctional agency/institution conduct what I have termed a Technology Needs Assessment. This is a process whereby the exact requirements for the technology are clearly and specifically identified and can be articulated both verbally and in writing.

Too often technology failures and/or short comings in corrections are not the fault of the technology, but rather are the fault of those responsible for selecting the technology, because they did not do their homework. Also, there can be the “Penny wise and pound foolish” approach that is sometimes taken by agency’s and/or institution’s where the low bid philosophy wins out even if the technology can only partially perform the required tasks. Through the years I have developed a format to use to insure that every element of the model has been thoroughly considered during the Technology Needs Assessment process. It requires those involved with the selection of technology to get down to the real “nitty- gritty” of defining the actual performance requirements for the technology.

Sample questions that must be asked:

What exactly is the technology to do? (Be very specific and finite)
Example: Observe capture- hold, incapacitate, sound alarm, transmit pictures and sounds, lockdown entire institution/sections, etc.
With what degree of proficiency is the technology to perform (100% of the time with 100% accuracy, false alarm rate, etc.)?
Will its actions be recorded (Yes, no, how will it be saved, for how long, who will have access to it, etc.)?
What is the ‘exact human interface’ (Monitored by line staff, line supervisory staff, reviewed by senior staff, reset by staff, no interaction, all automated, etc.)?
Who will perform the tasks of this specific technology should it become inoperative (Line staff, supervisory staff, clerical staff, contract staff, etc.)?
Power source (Normal power source, tie into emergency power-issues/complications with operating for long durations on emergency power, etc.)?
Repair time/sources (Historical length of downtime and most common causes for downtime. In-house maintenance staff capable of repairing, outside contractor necessary for repairs)?
Training time and cost (Line staff, line supervisors, maintenance staff, etc.)
Lease or purchase equipment (This decision will depend on the equipment being considered and the length and terms of the lease, etc.)

It is important that each of the above-mentioned topics be carefully examined by a team of people who have a vested interest in all on phases of the application, expenses, training, and maintenance. I would recommend a team that includes the following personnel:

Line staff that will be using and/or depending upon the technology.
Line supervisors who will need to know how the technology works so that they can operate it, explain it to the staff, and know what actions to take if the technology becomes inoperable to insure that the security and safety etc., of the institution is never compromised.
The agency/institution’s technology representative to insure that the technology being considered is compatible with existing technology…other new technology being considered, and the ability for the technology to be repaired by on-sight personnel. Also, this person (s) should do the research into the reliability of the product for the application for which it is being purchased.
A representative from Purchasing for advice on how to develop and write requests for proposals. Also, to get advice on whether to lease or purchase equipment.
A member of senior management to champion the project and explain the rationale for purchasing this technology over some other type of technology or other method to the senior staff.

By having a comprehensive team like the one detailed above, it will help to insure that the agency/institution has done everything it could to insure that the technology would perform the tasks for which it was being purchased.

A mistake made by agencies is that their Technology Team or outside consultants makes all of the decisions concerning technology that will be used in the institutions. Very often these Technology Teams make their decisions in a vacuum or with limited ‘real world’ information as to the application, the amount of staff training necessary, false alarm rate, or on-site maintenance concerns.

Technology is here to stay. After at least a generation or two of rough going in the field of corrections, technology it is now being accepted. Perhaps it is the new generation of correctional professionals who have grown-up with computers or maybe it is because the computers and the software have become easier to use. Wherever the reasons, technology fulfills a number of vital rolls in every facet of corrections.

It is incumbent on those responsible for specifying the technology that they do their homework to insure that they are purchasing the correct piece of technology with the correct software, installation, training, and maintenance for the job. Although technology can be a great asset to corrections let me say this:

As good as technology is, it still needs capable human beings to operate and monitor it.
I believe, that having the wrong technology and/or technology that does not fulfill the requirements of the Technology Needs Assessment is worse than not having any technology at all.

Comments:

No comments have been posted for this article.

Login to let us know what you think

MARKETPLACE search vendors | advanced search