this may occur only when the agency imposes final disciplinary action on the employee. However, relying solely on this form of reporting deprives a department of valuable opportunities to increase overall employee awareness of the standard of conduct expected of them. Furthermore, the department loses the opportunity to display openness and accountability concerning its internal affairs.

Some agencies, including the FBI, issue formal yearly reports on their disciplinary process. In June 2000, the FBI published its latest disciplinary program report, a comprehensive overview, for fiscal year 1999. The FBI prepares this report to increase the awareness of the standards of conduct expected of all of its employees. The report uses narratives and statistics to describe the FBI’s disciplinary program, and it contains general information, such as an organizational chart of OPR, as well as specific statistical data on the results of all internal investigations conducted during that fiscal year. Additionally, the report includes recent policy guidance and information on current developments within the FBI’s disciplinary program.10

Organizations must protect the privacy of employees subjected to the disciplinary process. However, agencies should not use privacy restrictions as an excuse for not having a comprehensive reporting program. Formal reports containing brief and generic descriptions of adjudicated misconduct can provide valuable guidance to employees and favorably impact the informal code of conduct in the organization. Absent a comprehensive formal reporting and feedback procedure, employees will have to rely on the informal process. An organization has little, if any, control over the content and accuracy of information flowing through the informal reporting process.

CONCLUSION
Law enforcement officials should welcome constructive comments and suggestions that can improve the institutional integrity of
their departments. Each agency operates in a unique environment; therefore, various methods of selfpolicing may work for different departments. However, an awareness of the four elements of the self-policing process may help improve a department’s disciplinary program and, thereby, strengthen the institutional integrity of the organization.

The FBI’s Office of Professional Responsibility concluded its fiscal year 1998 disciplinary report with a message concerning the core values of the FBI. Although specifically directed toward FBI employees, the message can apply to all law enforcement agencies. Core values include uncompromising personal and institutional integrity. Individuals who enforce the laws also must obey them, and they have an obligation to set a moral example for others to follow. A strong institutional integrity results from both an organizational culture that addresses and disciplines wrongdoing, as well as from its employees who actively support the task of fairly and expeditiously identifying and punishing misconduct within its ranks.11

Endnotes
1 The author developed his theory on the four elements of the self-policing process through his experience as a police officer and as an FBI special agent, including his assignment in the FBI’s disciplinary program as chief of the FBI’s Internal Investigative Unit 1, Office of Professional Responsibility.
2 Michael A. DeFeo, Office of Professional Responsibility, FBI, interview by author, September 2000.
3 Steve Otto, director of training, Dallas, Texas, Police Department, interview by author, September 2000.
4 James L. Gibson, John M. Ivancevich, and James H. Donnelly, Jr., Organizations—Behavior—Structure—Processes, 8th ed. (Burr Ridge, IL: Irwin, 1994), 320-323.
5 Bernard C. Parks, Los Angeles Police Department Board of Inquiry into the Rampart Area Corruption Incident, Executive Summary (Los Angeles, CA: Los Angeles Police Department, 2000), 3; http://www.lapdonline.org/pdf_files/boi/boi_exec_summary.pdf; accessed January 26, 2001.
6 Ibid., 4-5.
7 Supra note 3.
8 Supra note 5, 11.
9 Paul Hersey, Kenneth H. Blanchard, and Dewey E. Johnson, Management of Organizational Behavior, 7th ed. (New York, NY: Prentice Hall, 1996), 352.
10 U.S. Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of Investigation, Fiscal Year 1999 Report, Office of Professional Responsibility
(Washington, DC, 2000), 25-26.
11 U.S. Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of Investigation, Fiscal Year 1998 Report, Office of Professional Responsibility,
(Washington, DC, 1999), 25.