From Call Taker to Problem Solver: Reinforcing What Proactive Really Means
- Michael Burgess
- 1 day ago
- 2 min read
“Be proactive” is one of the most common phrases in policing — and one of the most misunderstood.
In too many agencies, proactive becomes shorthand for more stops, more tickets, more arrests, and higher activity counts. The problem is: activity isn’t the same as impact. You can stay busy all shift and still return tomorrow to the same addresses, the same people, and the same problems.
That’s why I wrote my recent Police1 article — to help put proactive policing into plain language and focus it on what matters most: preventing the next call, not just responding to the last one.
Read the full Police1 article here:
The real shift: from response mode to prevention mode
When we say “problem solver,” we’re talking about a practical mindset and workflow:
Identify patterns (repeat places, repeat people, repeat situations)
Use everyday information (CAD/RMS + officer knowledge + partner input)
Match strategies to the drivers of harm
Make changes that reduce opportunity, deter repeat behavior, and create lasting improvements
This is evidence-based policing in the real world — not academic theory, not buzzwords, and not a “special unit only” function. It’s a way of thinking that patrol, investigations, supervisors, analysts, and partners can all contribute to.
Supporting insight: why “hotspots” work when they’re done right
One of the biggest takeaways I try to reinforce whenever I teach or consult is this: hotspots are not about “flooding an area.” They’re about focusing limited resources where harm is most concentrated and being intentional about what you do once you’re there.
In practice, that means:
Showing up at the right times (risk is not evenly spread across the day/week)
Using a balance of visibility + engagement (not just enforcement)
Capturing street-level intelligence through conversations, door knocks, and business/resident input
Turning what you learn into targeted action, not just “extra patrol”
Supporting insight: you can’t arrest your way out of place-based problems
Another point worth reinforcing: many repeat-problem locations are not “crime scenes” — they are opportunity structures. Poor lighting, abandoned spaces, nuisance properties, unmanaged conflicts, easy access, and a lack of guardianship create predictable conditions for repeat harm.
That’s where CPTED and situational fixes matter:
Lighting and visibility improvements
Cleanup/repair and physical order
Property owner accountability
Access control (where appropriate)
Clear rules and consistent place management
These fixes don’t replace enforcement — they make enforcement smarter and more sustainable.
Supporting insight: the best “proactive work” blends prevention, deterrence, and partners
Sustainable improvement usually comes from combining:
Prevention (reduce opportunities and drivers)
Deterrence (clear expectations + focused enforcement on key drivers)
Partnerships (mental health, substance use services, housing, code enforcement, community leaders, etc.)
That blend helps agencies move away from short-term “pushes” and toward long-term problem reduction.
Supporting insight: leadership and supervision decide whether this sticks
This approach only becomes culture when supervisors and command staff treat it as legitimate work:
Rewarding problem-solving, not just activity
Tracking simple outcomes that show progress
Removing barriers that keep officers trapped in “call-to-call-only” mode
Helping officers see that proactive work reduces repeat calls and risk over time
Read the full article
If your agency is dealing with repeat locations and repeat harm — and wants to build a practical, realistic way to break the cycle — I encourage you to read the full article on Police1:
Comments