Buradasınız

Anasayfa » Content

ABD, İNGİLİZ VE TÜRK POLİSİNDEKİ TERFİ KRİTERLERİNİN KARŞILAŞTIRILMASI

A Comparison of Promotion Criteria in USA, British and Turkish Police

Journal Name:

  • Polis Bilimleri Dergisi

Publication Year:

  • 2012

Key Words:

Keywords (Original Language):

Author Name
Abstract (2. Language): 
When looked at the promotion criteria that are performed by different police organizations, although some similar and different ones have been used, it is seen that promotion process still keeps its importance as a controversial issue in policing. Despite in American and British police, written examination, seniority, performance evaluation grades, promotability estimate, education, marksmanship, assessment centers, and oral interviews are used as promotion criteria to measure the performance for promotion, working years in that rank, seniority, high-graded performance evaluations, written exams, and management training courses are used in Turkish National Police. Research has showed that candidates should completely be integrated to promotion process; selections should be performed by of the local authority, candidates for some certain departments should be selected according to some special criteria. In this article, it is stressed that candidates should feel being in the competition atmosphere and assessment centers’ evaluations should be included to increase the quality of promotion process.
Bookmark/Search this post with
Abstract (Original Language): 
arklı polis teşkilatlarında uygulanmakta olan terfi kriterlerine bakıldığında, her ne kadar bazı benzer ve farklı olanları mevcut olsa bile, polislikte terfi sürecinin halen tartışmalı bir konu olarak önemini koruduğu görülmektedir. ABD ve İngiliz polisinde yazılı sınavlar, kıdem, performans değerlendirme puanlaması, terfi tahminleri, eğitim seviyesi, nişancılık, değerlendirme merkezi incelemeleri ve sözlü mülakatlar gibi terfi kriterleri olarak kullanılmasına rağmen, Türk Polisi’nde ise mevcut rütbedeki fiili çalışma süresi, kıdem, performans değerlendirmeleri, bazı rütbelere göre belirlenmiş yazılı sınavlar ve yöneticilik hizmetiçi eğitimi gibi kriterler kullanılmaktadır. Araştırmalar, adayların terfi sürecine tamamen katılmaları, seçme işleminin yerel otorite tarafından yapılması ve bazı birimlere alınacak adayların birtakım özel kriterlere göre seçiminin yapılması gerektiğini ortaya koymaktadır. Bu makalede, adayların bir yarışma atmosferi içinde olduklarını hissetmeleri ve değerlendirme merkezi incelemelerinin terfi sürecine eklenmesiyle kalitenin artırılacağı vurgulanmaktadır.
FULL TEXT (PDF): 
PDF icon arastirmax-abd-ingiliz-turk-polisindeki-terfi-kriterlerinin-karsilastirilmasi.pdf
  • 3
27-44
  • Turkish

REFERENCES

References: 

Büker, Hasan, (2010), “How important is it to experience how a line offi-cer feels for police supervisors? Outcomes of an uncommon two-track promotion system in the Turkish National Police”, Police Practice and Research, V.11, N.1, pp.61-77.
Cordner, Gary W. and Scarborough, Kathryn E., (2010), Police Admin-istration, New Providence, NJ: Matthew Bender & Company, Inc.
Delattre, Edwin. J., (1996), Character and Cops: Ethics in Policing, Washington: American Enterprise Institute.
Delice Murat, Hekim Hakan, Harmancı Fatih ve Altıntaş, Hamza, (2012), 360O Polis Liderliği ve Eğitimi: İdeal liderlik özellikleri ve eğitimi-nin her rütbeden polisin gözüyle değerlendirildiği bir alan araştır-ması, Ankara: Adalet Yayınevi.
Emniyet Genel Müdürlüğü (EGM), (2011), http://www.egm.gov.tr/hukuk/Emniyet Hizmetleri Sınıfı Rütbe Terfi Yönetmeliği (Erişim tarihi: 29.3.2011).
Gaston, Kevin C. and King, Lillian, (1995), Management development and training in the police: A survey of the promotion process. Jour-nal of European Industrial Training, V.19, N.7, pp.20-33.
Golden, James W., (2000), Productivity ve performance evaluation, Do-erner, William G. ve Dantzker, Mark. L. (Ed.). Contemporary police organization and Management: issues and trends (pp.89-115), Woburn, MA: Butterworth-Heinemann
Gruber, George P., (1992), “A career management structure for the Hou-se of Commons Security Services”, Canadian Police College Jour-nal, V.16, N.3, pp.212-224.
Hurley, Joseph J., (2001), “Personnel assessment centers”, Law & Order, V.49, N.10, pp.175-179.
Kohlan, Richard G., (1973), “Police promotional process in fifteen juris-dictions”, Public Personnel Management, V.2, N.3, pp.167-175.
Monappa, Arun and Saiyadain, Mirza S., (2001), Personnel Management, New Delhi: Tata McGraw-Hill Publishing Company.
National Policing Improvement Agency (NPIA), (2011), http://www.npia.police.uk/en/docs/NPPF_Operating_Manual_Nov_2011.pdf (Erişim Tarihi: 1.12.2011).
44 Polis Bilimleri Dergisi: 14 (3)
Paulionis, A. N., (1973), “The value of practical promotional examinati-ons for the police and fire ranks”, Public Personnel Management, V.2, N.3, pp.179-182.
Sauls, John G., (1994), “Preferences in hiring and promotion: courts im-pose heightened scrutiny”, FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin, V.63, pp.17-22.
Shimberg, Benjamin ve Di Grazia, Robert J., (1974), “Promotion”, Stahl, O Glenn and Staufenber, Richard A. (Ed.), Police personnel admi-nistration (pp.101-124), North Scituate, MS: Duxburry Press.
Thornton, George C. and Morris, David M., (2001), “The application of assessment center technology to the evaluation of personnel re-cords”, Public Personnel Management, V.30, N.1, pp.55-67.
Thurston, L. Cosner, and Baumgart, Wayne. C., (2000), “An effective assessment center program essential components”, FBI Law Enfor-cement Bulletin, V.69, pp.1-5.
Whipple, Trevor S., (2011), “Police training: distinguishing between academy training, field training, and in-service training”, Gaines, Larry K. ve Worrall, John L. (Ed.), Police Administration, Clifton Park, NY: McGraw-Hill Publishing Company, pp.275-321.

Thank you for copying data from http://www.arastirmax.com