Before Investing in Technology, Understand the Problem
Making informed technology decisions through problem-solving, evidence-informed strategies, and practical policing.
Technology and artificial intelligence have become major topics throughout the law enforcement profession. Whether it's real-time crime centers, automated license plate readers, drones, camera systems, crime analysis platforms, or emerging AI capabilities, agencies have more technological options available than ever before.
Many of these tools offer tremendous benefits. They can help identify crime patterns, improve investigations, support officer safety, reduce administrative demands, and make better use of limited resources. These are advancements worth exploring.
But with so much attention focused on what technology can do, there's an equally important question that deserves consideration: Are agencies taking enough time to understand the problems they're trying to solve before deciding which technologies they need?
This isn't an argument against technology. Quite the opposite. Technology can be an extraordinary force multiplier, particularly for agencies working to become more proactive in preventing crime. But even the most impressive system may not be the right investment if it doesn't address the agency's actual needs.
Understanding Recurring Problems
Think about the recurring problems officers encounter every day: the same locations generating calls for service, the same types of incidents happening repeatedly, and sometimes even the same individuals involved. Officers respond, address the immediate situation, take appropriate action, complete their reports, and move on to the next call.
That's a necessary part of policing. But when problems keep recurring, it raises another question: Are agencies simply responding to the incidents, or are they taking the time to understand what's causing the problem to continue?
Consider a department experiencing repeated vehicle thefts. Knowing that vehicles are being stolen identifies the concern, but it doesn't necessarily explain what's contributing to it. Are thefts concentrated in certain locations or during particular hours? Are specific vehicles being targeted? Are offenders using similar methods? Could environmental conditions or security practices be creating opportunities for these crimes?
The answers matter because they can influence how an agency responds. Perhaps additional cameras or license plate readers would be beneficial. Maybe focused patrols, improved lighting, partnerships with property owners, or public education would make a difference. The most effective response could involve several approaches working together.
The point isn't to choose between technology and traditional policing strategies. It's to understand the problem well enough to determine how each can contribute to an effective response.
Technology can also help develop that understanding. Crime analysis systems can reveal patterns that might otherwise go unnoticed. Cameras and investigative databases can help identify connections between incidents. AI-assisted tools may help organize large amounts of information and highlight areas that deserve closer examination.
But technology doesn't tell the entire story. An officer familiar with a neighborhood may recognize something that isn't captured in the data. An investigator may identify a connection based on previous cases. Community members may provide insight into circumstances that police records don't explain. Combining those perspectives with technological capabilities can give agencies a more complete understanding of what's happening.
Importantly, agencies don't need to have every answer before using technology. Sometimes technology is precisely what helps uncover the answers. The key is using those capabilities with a clear purpose.
Connecting Technology to Effective Strategies
These ideas are closely connected to evidence-based policing and problem-oriented policing. One practical example is the SARA model: Scanning, Analysis, Response, and Assessment. SARA provides a straightforward process for identifying recurring problems, examining what's contributing to them, developing appropriate responses, and determining whether those responses are working.
Technology can support every stage of that process. During analysis, it can help identify patterns and possible contributing factors. During the response, it can support targeted operations or investigations. And during assessment, it can help agencies evaluate whether their efforts are producing meaningful results. But technology should support the strategy, rather than become the strategy itself.
Another consideration is whether departments are making full use of the resources they already have. It's easy to attend a conference, watch an impressive demonstration, and start thinking about how beneficial a new system could be. And sometimes that new system is exactly what's needed.
But before making another purchase, it may be worth examining whether existing equipment, software, personnel, or partnerships could accomplish more with additional training or better coordination. Are officers familiar with the capabilities already available to them? Are investigators and analysts sharing information effectively? Are supervisors incorporating these resources into operational planning? Sometimes meaningful improvements can be achieved without purchasing anything new.
When a new investment is warranted, agencies should consider the full picture. Beyond the initial purchase price, there's training, staffing, maintenance, policies, infrastructure, and the ability to sustain the system over time. A technology may perform exceptionally well during a demonstration. But its value ultimately depends on whether an agency can implement it effectively and use it consistently.
Responsible Use and Human Judgment
Artificial intelligence adds another important dimension to these discussions. AI has the potential to help officers, investigators, analysts, and administrators work more efficiently. It can assist with information processing, administrative responsibilities, and analytical tasks that might otherwise consume considerable time. For departments struggling with limited staffing and growing workloads, those possibilities are especially appealing.
But AI-generated information isn't automatically accurate simply because it came from an advanced system. Data can be incomplete. Results can contain errors. Suggested relationships may require verification. And in law enforcement, mistakes can have serious consequences.
That's why human judgment, professional experience, and accountability remain essential. Agencies also need to consider privacy, civil rights, data security, transparency, and appropriate oversight when adopting new technologies. These responsibilities shouldn't discourage innovation. They should help ensure that innovation is implemented responsibly.
The objective is to strengthen the work of law enforcement professionals, not replace the judgment and accountability that effective policing requires.
Practical Options for Agencies of Every Size
Of course, not every department has the same resources. A large agency might have a dedicated real-time crime center, crime analysts, technical specialists, and substantial funding. A smaller department may have only a handful of officers, with limited money or personnel available for specialized technology.
But smaller agencies still face recurring crime and public safety problems. And they deserve opportunities to benefit from modern capabilities. Fortunately, not every department needs to own or operate every available system.
Regional crime analysis centers, neighboring agencies, state and federal partners, universities, and shared-service arrangements may offer valuable support. For some departments, establishing a relationship with a regional crime analysis center or improving information sharing with neighboring jurisdictions could provide more immediate value than purchasing another piece of equipment.
The goal shouldn't be to acquire as much technology as possible. It should be to make practical investments and partnerships that improve the agency's ability to serve its community.
Measuring What Matters
There's one more consideration that deserves particular attention: How do agencies know whether the technology is actually working?
Modern systems can generate impressive numbers. Alerts, searches, detections, investigative leads, and other activity can all be measured. Those figures may be useful, but they don't necessarily tell us whether the system is accomplishing what was intended.
For example, if a technology was purchased to improve investigative efficiency, agencies should examine whether it's helping investigators work more effectively. If the objective was to reduce administrative demands, they should look at whether it's saving personnel time without compromising accuracy or quality. And if the investment was intended to reduce a recurring crime problem, they need to examine whether that problem has actually improved.
More activity doesn't always mean better outcomes. A system might generate hundreds of alerts without significantly affecting the problem it was intended to address. On the other hand, technology may provide tremendous investigative or administrative value without directly reducing crime. Both possibilities deserve a fair assessment based on the original purpose of the investment.
This is where the Assessment phase of SARA becomes especially important. Understanding what worked, what didn't, and what needs to change helps agencies make better decisions about future strategies and resources.
Moving Forward With Purpose
The technological advancements taking place throughout law enforcement are exciting, and agencies should continue exploring the opportunities they provide. AI, real-time information sharing, crime analysis, and modern investigative tools can make a meaningful difference in how departments operate and protect their communities.
But realizing those benefits requires more than understanding what a product is capable of doing. It requires understanding the problems agencies are experiencing, recognizing what information and resources they need, and determining how technology can support effective strategies.
Before making the next technology investment, consider a few fundamental questions. What problem are we trying to solve? What do we know about it? What don't we know? And what do we still need to understand?
Those questions won't always lead to a technological solution. But they can help agencies make more informed decisions about when technology is needed, how it should be used, and what they should expect it to accomplish.
Technology will undoubtedly continue shaping the future of policing. And that's something the profession should embrace. But ultimately, the goal isn't simply to acquire more advanced capabilities. It's to make better-informed decisions, address problems more effectively, and create safer communities.
References and Further Reading
National Institute of Justice. Harmonizing Police Technology Acquisitions with Policing Strategy. https://nij.ojp.gov/topics/articles/harmonizing-police-technology-acquisitions-policing-strategy
College of Policing. SARA Model. https://www.college.police.uk/guidance/problem-solving-policing/sara-model
College of Policing. Problem-Solving Policing. https://www.college.police.uk/guidance/problem-solving-policing
National Institute of Standards and Technology. Artificial Intelligence Risk Management Framework (AI RMF 1.0). https://www.nist.gov/itl/ai-risk-management-framework
International Association of Chiefs of Police. Artificial Intelligence Resource Hub. https://www.theiacp.org/working-group/artificial-intelligence-resource-hub
Comments