Cookie Policy

WeCops discussion – Police Officer promotion from sergeant to application for Senior PNAC

This WeCops chat had a steam of interest behind it before it even hit cyberspace at 9pm on Wednesday 8th December 2021.  Hosted by myself, DCC Rachel Kearton (Suffolk Police),Inspector Peter Partridge (Suffolk Police) and Ray Clare(Head of Education and Professional Development at the College of Policing), there was good engagement from contributors right across the different levels of policing, as well as outside of policing altogether.

The impetus behind running this chat had come from a WeCops debate earlier in the year that had raised questions regarding current processes at a time when the College of Policing is engaged in a review of the promotions system.

The pre-read took the audience through some of the reasons why this is a particularly important priority for the service at the moment.  The pressure that an extra 20,000 police officer recruits has added to current frontline supervisors is just one reason.  The demands and expectations of a changing policing landscape with new challenges such as covid restrictions has been (and continues to be) a very different working environment for policing, while the requirement for officers to have technical and digital skills grows constantly to deal with the increasing demand experienced.  All these and more bring a focus on the current suitability of the service’s selection of leaders.

So, we kicked off with the first question straight into the meat of the subject – what are the challenges officers face when considering promotion opportunities, and what does your force do to help?

Straight into the debate was @TheBigHon who identified the importance of time to study, having the right experiences and support from line management as key elements that forces need to provide to help those going for promotion.  This seemed a theme which resonated with many others, with @ANoddyHolder1 and @insp2238 stressing particularly the importance of identifying the right individuals to support.  With her experience of NPCC national responsibilities in reviewing the exam process for under-represented groups, @Kerrinwilson999 made a significant point however, that it is just as important for the process to be fair, a point reinforced by @PeteA86.  

Another issue of frequent comment for many was the importance of consistency, the various processes between different forces being highlighted by @ACQ91 and@InquisitivePlod as a frustration that, to them, makes little sense.  There was a desire among several for the College of Policing to introduce some form of standardisation across the process, similar to the consistent approach seen in student officer recruitment, which could then be enhanced by a local context by individual forces.  This was seen particularly as helping with officers wanting to move between forces, a growing trend which is only likely to become more and more frequent by our more mobile younger generation.

@LisaHogan2842 made a good point that preparing for a rank and preparing for a promotion process are different things, but should they be?  Perhaps the interview should be little more than a sign off on proven behaviours and abilities.   As @mike200hope said, perhaps people who get to the interview should already be assessed as ready for promotion.  

It was clear that some felt the exam was out of date and an unnecessary challenge in these days of digital access to information 24 hours a day.  It was particularly seen by some as an unequal obstacle for those with English as a second language or neurodiversity issues.  Many, such as @carmenwhittle, stated that some form of continual assessment, either before or after the exam, would be a richer form of all round ability to do the job.  

Positive support from forces is clearly out there, though.  @MsOHara71 talked of study days, access to learning materials and study classes.  Others mentioned coaching and mentoring, development courses to prepare for the exam and skills development workshops or an in-force leadership academy, such as we have developed in my own force of Suffolk. Most people agreed that promotion should be linked to some form of leadership pathway and ideally it should be progressive development throughout an officer’s career.

An interesting twist on the debate was the usefulness or necessity for detectives to return to uniform as part of their preparation for promotion processes.  Not all forces seem to require this (for example, it’s not required in Suffolk) but as @jbeputnam observes, it is perhaps unlikely that other industries require similar cross-discipline experience.  No one raised the need to have a custody sergeant role as a pre-requisite to promotion or road policing experience, but I wonder whether there are other specialisms which are seen more positively than some as broadening an individual’s promotion suitability.

@PC_RichieT was the first to challenge the old ‘serve your time’ approach and my feeling is we didn’t get all the views on processes which favour the time-served approach, even if subconsciously, depending upon whose ‘turn is next’.

The debate was ranging strong (and in truth I was still trying to respond to all the great responses to ensure none of the good ideas were passing me by) when the second question popped in - is the balance between knowledge, skills and behaviours right? What would be the best methods for promotion from Sergeant through to PNAC for chief officers? (PNAC = Police National Assessment).

Again, quick off the mark was @TheBigHon pointing out that one vital skill for supervisors was ‘inspiring others’ however it was questionable as to whether current systems enable this to be assessed.  @PeteA86 noted that an acting position before the promotion would allow those invaluable skills time to grow, whereas @_Danny_S felt the interview should come first, to select those who would then benefit from further supervisory development before taking the rank.  @MountyinaCounty was one of several who thought there was merit in a 360-degree view from colleagues in selecting those for promotion.

The CVF seemed to me to provide an answer to some of the issues regarding consistency, however PDRs and portfolios of evidence didn’t feature as strongly as a way to record examples as I thought they might in the chat.  This for me would be a way to ensure development of skills, behaviours and knowledge were being documented, and also provide a CPD audit trail for transferring between forces, but perhaps there are low levels of confidence in their objectivity?  Some of the exam material was deemed irrelevant (such as depth of car tyre tread @DetectiveHelen!) but there was also a recognition that at least a basic knowledge of legislation was important.  

The five-year expiry date for exams was also discussed as a possible disproportionate hinderance to those to whom immediate promotion may not be so available, e.g. those with caring responsibilities.  I’ve never understood this one myself: some legislation changes over time, but much of it is ancient and remains unchanged.  For everything the service loses by requiring some to requalify, the intended up-to-date skills knowledge seems to be a poor gain.  Personally, I favour a modular approach for candidates to sit their exams according to their own schedule, with some expiring if necessary after a relevant period of time while others are mandatory modulesfor essential subjects.  

Unbelievably, it was time for the third question, although when it came we had already touched on a number of areas where the importance of ensuring progression by diverse groups had already been covered - how best can we support promotion and progression by under-represented groups in policing?  Given the debates that we had already covered by this stage regarding disability awareness, gender equality considerations, perceived discriminatory policies and practices, I wondered how much more would be left for this question to draw out.  The tsunami of continued comment just showed how much more there was to uncover.

@InspPartridge stressed a point that had been made during the hour by many, that a guided approach presents opportunities which can be tailored to individuals at each rank, supported by an in-force framework to ensure an equitable approach.  PALS works well in South Wales Police according to @ChiefInsp3774, while the staff support networks were seen as crucial in helping those from under-represented groups to overturn imposter syndrome in some cases.  @Adrian_TYSstressed the importance of using everything that positive action allows, as did @HaywireHarris, stressing the benefits of buddying, mentoring, networking, workshops, role models, using independent advisory groups for support, and consideration of the use of diverse community panels (@insp2238). @Jasunity2317 made an excellent point, however, that prejudice may run in community panels as well, possibly discriminating other protected characteristics such as working women.

An angle I hadn’t anticipated beforehand was the challenges that many of our neurodiverse colleagues face in the promotion processes they experience.  @JBDysexic and @jbeputnam in particularly added some context and understanding to this strand of the chat and I was left feeling there was so much more that we could have covered here.  The unique, ‘turn-it-on-its-head’ problem-solving abilities I observe among ND contacts are among the best I have seen anywhere, and this would have been an interesting exploration into the behaviours versus knowledge conundrum.

Also ripe for a wider discussion were a few comments towards the end about the importance of developing an inclusive workforce that understands that skills, qualities and behaviours come in different shapes and sizes for everyoneand policing needs a system which recognises all this diversity while focusing on developing individual weaker areas.  I love this approach, the challenge is finding a consistent system which allows for such complexity.

In the blink of an eye, the hour was up and it was time to draw to a close.  The chat information will feed into the College review, but I suspect the influence of the comments may have gone deeper and more broadly across policing as a whole inthe meantime.  I, for one, have take a huge amount away.

The three aims from the College’s review are:

There was certainly enough material from the hour to influence all of those aims.

I don’t know what the usual update is for a WeCops chat, but engaging 76 active contributors, tweeting 436 times in an hourand reaching 1.3 million people, sounds pretty phenomenal to me.  With such breadth and wealth of comment and opinion, the WeCops chat has gone a very long way towards informing the progression of all of the recommendations and more.  I am fascinated to see where this takes us next.

Rachel Kearton

DCC Suffolk