This essay has been submitted by a student. This is not an example of the work written by our professional essay writers.
Previous research has noted the influence that organisational culture has on management of organisations. Using Denison's (1983: 5) words, a "strong" culture that encourages the participation and involvement of an organization's members appears to be one of its most important assets. At the beginning of the 1990's Meyerson (1991: 256) noted that: "culture was the code word for the subjective side of organizational lifeâ€¦". Nevertheless, organisational culture has long been acknowledged as an important element in managing organizations. But is that organisational culture homogeneous within various organizations or can an organization influence organisational culture preferences? On one hand, studies show that organisational culture is not a homogeneous construct, and that variations exist. They incorporate both the integration and differentiation perspectives, helping to understand and identify organisational culture. On the other hand, organizations' influence on ideal organisational cultural preferences are limited, if any (Kwantes & Boglarsky, 2004).
As Paoline (2003) explains, occupational cultures are a product of diverse situations and problems, which all members confront and to which they all equally respond. Police organisational culture, being a topic of study for more than 40 years (Paoline, 2004), originates from two environments of policing, occupational (in relationship to the general public) and organisational (in relationship to the formal organisation/supervisors) environment. Two of the most widely cited elements of the first environment are the presence (or potential) for danger and the unique coercive power and authority over citizens. The two biggest issues of organisational environment are unpredictable and punitive supervisory oversight on one hand and the ambiguity of the police work on the other (see Paoline, 2003).
Keeping this in mind, police and police officers among others represent the criminal justice system in general as well as a legitimate source of restraints in a free society. Thus, police have the responsibility of maintaining order, but within strictly limited legal constraints (Barker & Carter, 1994). The question that arises is what happens if police officers' behaviour is inconsistent with these legal constraints. Does police deviance occur? Following the everlasting Latin phrase 'Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?' (i.e., "Who will guard the guards?"), originally intended to the corruptible guard (custodes) of "Juvenal's woman that requires lock and key to stay putâ€¦" (Sosin, 2000: 201-202), the problem of police deviance becomes clearly evident. Barker et al. (1994) defined police deviance as police officers' activities that are inconsistent with officers' official authority, values, and standards of ethical conduct. 
The aim of this paper is to study and examine the level of police culture and deviance in the Slovenian police. In past, little work has been done on police organisational culture and deviance in Slovenia but the situation is improving lately. The Ministry of the Interior implemented many organisational changes in Slovenian police at various levels after 1991. This was primarily due to a professionalization of police organizations, which was a change in the existing organisational climate, historically connected in the centralized structures of central bureaucracy  of the former Yugoslavian system (Gorenak, 1996). Pagon & Lobnikar (1995) examined the sexual harassment issues among Slovenian police officers, whereas Pagon, Lobnikar & AnÅ¾elj (2005) closely studied the gender differences among police officers as regard to intolerance towards officers' improper conduct. GaÅ¡iÄ & Pagon (2004) examined the level of organisational commitment and its impact on personal turnover. More specifically, the authors examined the influence of demographic, managerial, and job characteristics on organisational commitment, and assessed the influence of organisational commitment on personal turnover.
Another study examined police officers' perceptions regarding organisational climate in the Slovenian police (Nalla, MeÅ¡ko, Lobnikar, DobovÅ¡ek, Pagon, Umek, & DvorÅ¡ek, 2007). More precisely, various dimensions of police organisational climate in large, midsize, and small police departments were examined. Nalla, Johnson, and MeÅ¡ko (2009) compared officers' attitudes in developed, emerging, and transitional economies between police and security personnel. Recently, Rydberg, Nalla, and MeÅ¡ko (2010) examined the perceived value of college education and experience to police work in emerging democracies.
In the present study we examine two things; the police officers' various perceptions of organisational culture and correlation between police culture and with police deviance in Slovenia. Historically, many things have changed in Slovenia in the last two decades (e.g., gaining independence from former Yugoslavia in 1991). Among other things, Slovenia also reorganized its police forces (Pagon, 2006). The Slovenian police became an autonomous body within the Ministry of the Interior in 1998. Today police tasks are performed on three levels: the national, regional and local level. Organisationally, the Slovenian police are composed of the General Police Directorate, regional Police Directorates and Police stations. The Police headquarters are situated in Ljubljana (Kolenc, 2003). Most recent reorganization of Slovenian police took one step forward, particularly in the field of prevention, detection and investigation of most serious forms of economic crime and corruption. Thus, the National Bureau of Investigation was established on 1 January 2010 as an autonomous operational body within the Criminal Police Directorate at General Police Directorate. Altogether, there were 7842 police officers and 766 detectives (criminal investigators) employed by the Slovenian police in 2009, which gave the ratio of 382 police officers and 37 detectives per 100,000 inhabitants. Their average age was 37 years, and nearly 80 per cent were males (Policija, 2009, 2010).
Denison (1996) explored the implications of similarities and differences between organisational culture and organisational climate. A comparison of the 1990s culture research with the organisational climate literature of the 1960s and 1970s shows curious similarities. This led Denison to conclude that these two research traditions should be viewed as differences in interpretation rather than differences in phenomena. For the purposes of this paper both the organisational culture and organisational climate literature was examined, thus focusing more on organisational culture.
In general, organisational culture can be understood as a (deep) structure of organizations (Denison, 1996), rooted in the values, beliefs, and assumptions held by organisational members (Weick, 1979; Denison, 1983; Brown & Starkey, 1994). It includes the sense of identity of its members, and influences commitment of its members to the organization beyond themselves (Willmott, 1993), linking police organisational commitment to other individual factors, including education, age and rank (Hunt & McCadden, 1985). Organisational culture consists of informal rules (Deal & Kennedy, 1983) with a "set of symbols, ceremonies and myths that communicates the underlying values and beliefs of that organization to its employees" (Ouchi, 1981: 41). When we speak about organisational culture, according to Sarros, Cooper, and Santora (2008: 147):"we are referring to the meaning inherent in the actions, procedures, and protocols of organisational commerce and discourse", whereas culture can also be described as "the normative beliefs (i.e., system values) and shared behavioural expectations (i.e. system norms)" (James, Choi, Ko, McNeil, Minton, Wright et al., 2007: 21).
Organisational culture influences employees both directly and indirectly (Boke & Nalla, 2009). Research from mainstream business organizaÂtions suggests that organisational climate influences productivity, effectiveness, performance (Denison, 1990; Denison & Mishra, 1995; O'Reilly, 1989), job satisfaction, (Jackofsky & Slocum, 1987), innovativeness (Lorsch, 1985) and, leadership and decision-making (Sapienza, 1985). Subcultures within larger organizations are shaped by conditions such as differential interaction based on structure, location, size, and division of labour; shared experiences, leading to common sense-making; and similar personal characteristics; and social cohesion (Louis, 1985; Trice & Beyer, 1993).
Police Organisational Culture
The conception of culture in police literature is primarily drawn from anthropological and sociological research (Chan, 1997). It started to develop around the 1970s, when researchers acknowledged the power of police culture in shaping police behaviour (Skolnick, 1966; Willson, 1968; Van Maanen, 1973, Manning, 1977), and its influence in general (Goldstein, 1977, 1990; Reuss-Ianni, 1983, Reiner, 1985, Kelling & Kliesmet, 1996). Essentially, police culture is a set of ideas, customs, accepted practices, information and rules of conduct, and core skills that define "good police work" and give meaning to police work (Boke et al., 2009).
As Paoline (2003) points out, the hazard of police work originates from two environments that police officers work in: (1) occupational, and (2) organisational environment. Occupational environment consists of officer's relationship to general society and two mostly cited elements of this environment are the presence or potential for danger, and coercive power as well as officer's authority over citizens (Bittner, 1974; Van Maanen, 1974; Reiner, 1985; Manning, 1995; Skolnick, 1994). The second environment consists of officer's relationship to the formal organization (i.e., supervisors). Two major issues police officers confront in this regard are unpredictable and punitive supervisory oversight, and the ambiguity of the police role (McNamara, 1967; Bittner, 1974; Manning, 1995).
Skolnick (1966) asserts that police develop a "working personality" as a consequence of their work environment, especially because of two essential elements of their work conditions-danger and authority. Skolnick claims, that potential dangers from routine police work can lead police officers to become suspicious towards citizens. Individual, organisational and environmental factors affect officers' understanding of their organisational culture. Police culture, so Paoline (2004), consists of five attitudinal dimensions: (mostly negative attitude towards) citizens, (also negative attitude towards) supervision, (unfavourable supervisors' focus on) procedural guidelines, role orientation (crime-fighter role, disregarding service, order maintenance, and community policing role), and policing tactics (in favour of aggressiveness and selectivity).
An interesting approach of understanding the police work and police culture is Cosner, Brickman, and Payne's (2004) view. According to the authors, there are two major dimensions that build up the police work environment: the salient dimension (with clear set of performance demands) and the implicit dimension (with subtle, less observable demands). Among the latter dimension's two elements (organisational culture and social climate), studied by Harrison and Stokes (1992) and Moos (1994), organisational culture consists of four types: power, role, achievement, and support.
Discrepancies between what police officers are officially supposed to do and what they actually do results in role conflict, often leading to the development of informal rules and shortcuts (Nalla et al., 2007). Supervisors and police line officers have different job priorities (Paoline, 2003). Supervisors implement the policies of organizations, while line officers do the 'street work' with limited resources and within the confines of environmental constraints. Thus, police management makes policy for organizations by manipulating discretion and using resources for only some of them (Nalla et al., 2007). As for role conflict, due to the nature of police work some police officers often experience role ambiguity. These include law enforcement, order maintenance and service (Paoline, 2003). The ambiguity (for officers) originates from supervisors, who expect officers to treat all situations on the street equally. Even though police officers can use discretion powers in daily work, the same style to each situation cannot always be employed (Skolnik, 1994). Hagan (1989) argues that in doing so police officers can distance themselves from organisational goals and policies. This distinction between organisational expectations and reality (on the street) results in stress and anxiety.
There are few mechanisms offering a way to deal with stress. Brown (2000) discusses features of formal and informal police culture, explaining how these can generate or dissipate sources of stress, helping or hindering officers to deal with negative consequences of stress. Paoline (2003) explains that two coping mechanisms coming from occupational environment are suspiciousness and maintaining the edge, while other two mechanisms come from officers' organisational environment - lay low (or 'cover your ass - CYA) and crime fighter image. This can results in many ways, officers can do their job on a minimally acceptable level, avoiding dangerous calls, and focus primarily on safety as they fear negative feedback from the management if they fail to meet organisational expectations. This can lead to 'street bureaucrats' by selective law enforcement (Nalla et al., 2007: 105).
Police deviance has been approached from different perspectives. Most typically acts like 'use of force' (Kania & Mackey, 1977; Sherman, 1980; Friedrich, 1980), 'misconduct' (Lynch & Diamond, 1983; Geller, 1984) and 'corruption' (Barker & Wells, 1982) have been used to define the subject. A broader perspective is represented by Barker and Roebuck's (1973) definition, where police corruption is understood as any forbidden act,  namely the misuse of the officer's official position for actual (or expected) material reward or gain. 
To confront the problems in defining police deviance and to address some issues that were not sufficiently encompassed Barker et al. (1994) conceptualized the deviance in a two-point typology: (1) occupational deviance, and (2) abuse of authority. Authors perceive occupational deviance as any deviant behaviour that is committed during the course of normal work activities or under police officer's authority (manifested in police corruption and police misconduct forms). Because it is concentrated on police officer's performance as a member of an organization, this type of deviance has an internal locus. On the other hand, abuse of authority has an external locus. In this case officer's behaviour toward citizens exceeds legal constraints, therefore being deviant regardless of his intent. Thus, the authors define this second element as any officer's action to violate legal citizen's right, to injure or insult them, or to manifest superiority over them in the course of normal 'police work' (i.e., manifested in legal, physical and psychological abuse). Another important distinctions exist between these two elements; namely distinction in motivation,  department's liability  and in peer tolerance, the latter being greater for abuse of authority than for occupational deviance (Barker et al., 1994). Interestingly, officers who report illegal or unethical actions about peers are perceived to be deviant (Cancino & Enriquez, 2004), because this conduct is regarded as undesirable from the police point of view. Therefore, the authors suggest that in order to preserve police culture both secrecy and solidarity must influence peer retaliation.
One should also keep in mind Tittle's control balance theory in police deviance where, as Hickman, Piquero, Lawton, and Greene (2001: 498) summarize: "â€¦the amount of control to which one is subject relative to the amount of control one can exercise (the control ratio) affects both the probability of deviance as well as the specific form of deviance."
Theories about police deviance are covered by three categories: sociological theories focusing on situational factors (the conduct of suspects, the context of suspect-police encounters, gender, race, and socioeconomic status); psychological theories emphasizing officers' attitude and personality traits;  and organisational theories exploring the role of organisational culture (Armacost, 2003). According to Armacost, theoretical and empirical studies on policing suggest that organisational factors might be an important determinant of police deviance and an important and often neglected part of the solution. The organisational context includes both the culture of policing in general and the culture of particular police organizations. Police brutality as a part of police deviance is a systemic problem that requires a systemic solution. And harm-causing conduct by institutional actors can have a significant organisational component. Therefore police culture has a powerful and determinate influence on the behaviour of individual police officers.
This study is drawn from a large survey designed to assess police officers' perceptions on various dimensions of organisational culture. Data were collected in June 2006 in all 11 Police Directorates in Slovenia. Participation was voluntary. One thousand questionnaires were distributed to police officers of which 847 police officers responded (almost 85 % response rate). The sample was random stratified.
The questionnaire was divided into two sections. The first section was designed to collect socio-demographic information on police officers, including age, gender, years of experience, prevailing work, etc. The second section was designed to evaluate perceptions about organisational culture. It includes 89 statements on a five-point Likert scale from 1 (meaning 'Absolutely disagree') to 5 (meaning 'Absolutely agree').
The current study has adopted Zeitz, Russell, and Ritchie's (1997) dimensions  and also included several different dimensions designed to suit the Slovenian context. In the preliminary study (Banutai, MeÅ¡ko, & Å ifrer, 2009) the researchers conducted factor analysis using varimax rotation and they were able to identify five factors of police organisational culture (Management - cooperation & support, Management - trust & encouragement, Officers' commitment (responsibility), Work challenges, and Citizens - police officers relationship). Using those factors a discriminant analysis for several characteristics (gender, age, years of police experience, and prevailing work) was also performed.
For the purposes of this study, we conducted regression analysis (Enter method) to find out if any of those five factors of police organisational culture can predict police deviance. The dependent variable used is the statement "I will never report against my fellow officer even if he has violated rules (-)" (measured on a five-point Likert scale from 1 - 'Absolutely disagree' to 5 - 'Absolutely agree').
In addition, the researchers performed several one-way analyses of variance to find out the differences regarding gender, age, years of police experience, and prevailing work in police deviance. The dependent variable used was again "I will never report against my fellow officer even if he has violated rules (-)".
Characteristics of the sample
The socio-demographic characteristics of the police officers are presented in Table 1. The most respondents are under 30 years old (43.5 %), and only 0.9 % are over 50 years old. Most of the police officers are men (87.3), only 12.7 % are women. Most of the respondents finished high school (89.6%). Approximately one third (32.1 %) of respondents have been working in the police force for less than five years, 7.5 % have been working there practically all their careers. Most work at the state border (38.1 %) followed by patrolling (25.9 %). Only 5.6 % of respondents' parents or relatives also served in the military/police force. By its structure, the sample is very close to the entire population of police officers  , and it is sufficiently large.
Table 1 Characteristics of the sample (N = 847)
31 - 40
41 - 50
Years of work in the police force
6 - 10
11 - 15
16 - 20
21 - 25
front desk officer
Have your parents/relatives served in the military/police force?
* Valid percent.
ANALYSIS AND RESULTS
Factor analysis was conducted in the preliminary study. The researchers used 28 statements (items loadings over 0.45). KMO was 0.936, and Cronbach's Alpha was 0.917.
The dimensions of organisational culture at Slovenian police that emerged from factor analysis are:
Management - Cooperation & Support (Police management tries to make this organization a good place to work; My supervisor cooperates well with police officers),
Management - Trust & Encouragement (Creativity is actively encouraged in this department; My superiors encouraged me to pursue higher education for professional development),
Officers' Commitment (Responsibility) (Officers in the police department are aware of its overall mission; There is a strong commitment to quality of work at all levels of the police department),
Work Challenges (The job requires me to use a number of complex or high-level skills; Police officers have to be sensitive to the community's needs in which they work), and
Citizens - Police Officers Relationship (Police officers have reason to be distrustful of most citizens; If a police officer is kind to people they usually abuse him/her).
The first four factors explain 54.6 % of total variance. Additional analysis of management factor gave two sub factors: cooperation & support; trust & encouragement. These two factors explain 58.6 % of total variance. Factor loadings, means and standard deviations are presented in Table 2.
Table 2 Factor analysis
Factor 1: Management - trust & support
Factor 1a: Management - cooperation & support
Police management tries to make this organization a good place to work.
My supervisor cooperates well with police officers.
Top police managers in my department set clear goals for quality improvement.
My supervisor is cooperative and a good team player.
Police managers here try to plan ahead for changes that might affect our performance.
Police managers in this organization follow up on suggestions for improvement.
My supervisor gives credit to people when they do a good job.
Police officers in my unit analyze their work to look for ways of doing a better job.
Factor 1b: Management - trust & encouragement
Officers in my work unit are encouraged to try new and better ways of doing the job.
We are encouraged to make suggestions for improvements in our work.
Creativity is actively encouraged in this department.
Those who come up with new ideas get rewarded in this department.
My superiors encouraged me to pursue higher education for professional development.
My supervisor shows complete trust in officers' ability to perform their tasks well.
Managers in our department reward police officers who perform very well.
Within reason. officers in this organization can say what they want without fear of punishment.
Overall. I have trust in the top management of (the Slovenian) police.
Factor 2: Officers' commitment (responsibility)
Officers in my unit know their primary duty is to serve the people in the community.
Officers in my unit think of the citizens when they do their work.
Police officers in my work unit believe that quality improvement is their responsibility.
Officers in the police department are aware of its overall mission.
There is a strong commitment to quality of work at all levels of the police department.
I trust my fellow officers to do what is in the best interests of the organization.
Factor 3: Work challenges
The job requires me to use a number of complex or high-level skills.
Police officers have to be sensitive to the community's needs in which they work.
I have new and interesting things to do in my work.
Factor 4: Citizens - police officers relationship
Police officers have reason to be distrusting of most citizens.
If a police officer is kind to people they don't abuse him/her.
In Table 3 correlations between factors are presented. The most significant correlation (0.772) is between Factor 1a (Management - cooperation & support) and Factor 1b (Management - trust & encouragement). Positive correlation (0.460) is also between Factor 1b (Management - trust & encouragement) and Factor 2 (Officers' commitment), and (0.454) between Factor 1a (Management - cooperation & support) and factor 2 (Officers' commitment). Very interesting is a negative correlation (but very small -0.068) between Factor 2 (Officers' commitment) and Factor 4 (Citizens - police officers relationship).
Table 3 Correlations (Pearson Correlation)
F1a: Management - cooperation & support
F1b: Management - trust & encouragement
F2: Officers' commitment (responsibility)
F3: Work challenges
F4: Citizens - police officers relationship
** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
* Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).
Furthermore, in a preliminary study (Banutai et al., 2009) a discriminant analysis for several characteristics was performed. There were significant differences regarding gender and years of police experience in all factors, except work challenges. Significant differences were also revealed regarding prevailing work in all five factors. No significant differences emerged regarding prior parents/relatives police employment.
Previous research suggests gender differences when it comes to police work. The perception, that female police officers are better in situations where 'emotional labour' of police work is needed, can be found (Fielding & Fielding, 1992). As policing remains atypical employment for women, some even argue (Breakwell, 1986) that women might fail to conform to gender expectation in job choice and risk suspicion, and having a partner or a child makes them even more vulnerable. Given the fact that police organizations are historically male-dominated, men often do not accept women as equal members of the team. Sometimes it can escalate to the point where policewomen are subject to sexual harassment (Smith & Gray, 1983; Pagon & Lobnikar, 1995; Brown, 1998; Holdaway & Parker, 1998; Pagon, 2002).
With regression analysis we tried to find out which, if any, of the five factors are predictor variables (independents) of police deviance. The dependent variable used is the statement "I will never report against my fellow officer even if he has violated rules (-)" (measured on a five-point Likert scale from 1 - 'Absolutely disagree' to 5 - 'Absolutely agree'). The results of the regression analysis show that the regression model is statistically significant, but the R2 is rather low (0.083). Their B weights and p-values are presented in Table 4.
Table 4 Summary of Regression analysis
Predictors - Factors
F1a: Management - cooperation & support
F1b: Management - trust & encouragement
F2: Officers' commitment (responsibility)
F3: Work challenges
F4: Citizens - police officers relationship
Table 4 shows that four factors are statistically significant: Management - cooperation & support, Officers' commitment, Work challenges, and Citizens - police officers relationship (considering low value of R2). The analysis revealed that among all independent variables, Citizens - police officers relationship had the greatest influence on police deviance, followed by Officers' commitment (negative influence), Work Challenges and Management - cooperation & support. In other words, a higher level of management's cooperation and support, work challenges, citizens-police officers' relationship, with a lower level of officers' responsibility, result in lower level of police deviance.
Analysis of variance
We performed several one-way analyses of variance to find out the differences regarding gender, age, years of police experience, and prevailing work in police deviance. The dependent variable used was again "I will never report against my fellow officer even if he has violated rules (-)". There were significant differences regarding all characteristics:
Male police officers (mean is 3.45) are found to be less deviant than female ones (mean is 3.05).
Older police officers are found to be less deviant than younger ones (M: under 30 years old 3.09, between 31 an 40 years old 3.52, between 41 and 50 years old 3.86, and over 51 years old 4.0).
Police officers with more years of police experience are found to be less deviant (means: under 5 years 3.06, 6 to 10 years 3.24, 11 to 15 years 3.56, 16 to 20 years 3.66, 21 to 25 years 3.66, and over 26 years of police experience 3.98 years), meaning also that older police officers tend to be less deviant than their younger colleagues.
'Traffic police officers' are found to be the most deviant of all (3.00), followed by 'patrolling police officers' (3.10), 'community policing officers' (3.11), 'state border officers' (3.16), 'front desk officers' (3.40), 'criminal investigation officers' (3.46), and 'management officers' (3.90).
These results are in accordance with theory and research that confirms the link between organisational commitment and police occupational deviance. As Haarr (1997: 796) determined, patrol officers routinely engage in one or more 'general' types of police deviance  . Officers with low level of organisational commitment tend to engage in work avoidance and manipulating activities against the organization. Those with medium levels of commitment also tend to engage in any of those four 'general' types of deviance. Officers with high level of commitment to the organization tend to engage in deviant activities for the organization (violating rules and regulations to do their job), because of the external locus also known as abuse of authority (Barker et al., 1994), and a willingness to accept informal rewards.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION
This paper examines the correlation between police deviance and police organisational culture in Slovenia. Although the primary study was not specifically designed to measure police deviance and it's correlation with police organisational culture, the findings of the present study partially hold the theory. Results indicate that organisational culture is statistically important, but rather a weak predictor of police deviance (low R2). The analysis of present study reveals that the relationship between citizens and police officers had the greatest influence on police deviance, followed by work challenges and management, more precisely cooperation and support between peers and subordinates. Interestingly, the results indicated negative influence of officers' commitment and responsibility on police deviance, meaning a high level of police officers' commitment and responsibility results in lower level of conformity. These data support the argument by Haarr (1997) that organisational commitment in a policing organization has a significant influence for explaining police officers' various patterns of deviant behaviour. Researchers interested in studying police culture and deviance may consider alternative approaches for further research on other elements of organisational culture and its influence on different levels of organisational commitment, including opposing attitudes towards police deviance.
Among others, the results also imply that male police officers are likely to be less deviant than their female counterparts. In other words, male police officers are more likely to report a fellow officer if he has violated rules. This may reflect the predominantly male population and the role of women in the police organization. On the one hand, according to Garcia (2003) it is well known that policing has always been defined as a masculine occupation, therefore female police officers often have to put greater effort into their work to get accepted. This could also result in higher tolerance for police deviance and not reporting against fellow officers so strictly. But on the other hand, many researchers (Garcia, 2003: 341) have found that no matter what behaviours women in police display or what tasks they have accomplished, they are still not equally accepted. Interestingly, Hickman et al. (2001) find gender to be a significant predictor for the deviance behaviour in certain cases. To be more specific, male police officers were less likely to report a fellow officer who engages in physical abuse. But since gender was not significant predictor in other cases like driving under influence (DUI), no general conclusion regarding the willingness to report such behaviour could be made.  Generally speaking, Hickman at al. (2001) summarize that there are two basic types of control for use in managing police deviance: (1) external controls (courts, government, citizen oversight etc.), and (2) internal controls (use of rules and bureaucratic measures). They offer one method for reducing the risk of police officers' deviant behaviour, namely a more prosocial police force with clearer role which should also lead to a more balanced control ratio.
As the results of present study show, the relationship between citizens and police officers tends to be the highest predictor of police deviance. In other words, the high level of community (and problem-oriented) policing results in low level of police deviance. Work challenges and management relations within policing organization (referring mostly to cooperation and support between peers and subordinates) also turned out to be an important predictor of police deviance. As Goldstein (1994) acknowledges, the review of police incidents often depends on witnessing police officers, which rarely accuse or report against a fellow officer. There are various reasons why police officers will remain behind the 'blue curtain'. Some of the reasons are common 'enemies', interdependency among officers, false allegations, difference between formal policy and field practise, and occupational immobility.
It is very important that police leaders subscribe to the same informal code, as do subordinates. Goldstein (1994) also stresses the importance of police chiefs' reputations for fairness in regards to investigation and review of alleged wrongdoing. In doing so police chief can anticipate the impact of his actions on suspected officers as well as on the public, which might result in unhappy personnel and low morale in the department. By placing police officers into community or problem-oriented policing, officers tend to find useful newly gained autonomy, leading also to increased job satisfaction and police performance (Greene, Hickman, Henderson, Stokes, Pelfrey, & Piquero, 1999; Hickman et al., 2001).
Among other results, the findings also indicate that older police officers with more years of working experience tend to be less deviant than younger and less experienced officers. Significant differences also revealed that police officers in traffic tend to be the most deviant among police officers, and police chiefs are found to be less deviant. This may reflect the frequency of communication with general population during police work, the years of experience (resulting in police ranks) and the nature of the system's mechanisms for accountability. It might be that the less street work and more office work results in lower level of police deviance. It could also be interpreted as a matter of opportunity, where police officers have more public contact that may equal more opportunity for deviance. Generally speaking, there is a need to consider the efficiency of these findings in the international context of other police organizations; attention should be given to additional research.
In summary, this research demonstrates a link between police organisational culture and police deviance. It provides somewhat new insight into the complexity of police deviance. Because the data were collected in 2006, there is a need to consider the validity of interpretations for the current situation in Slovenia where police reform is underway. We believe that this study may serve as useful lens to further study various deviant behaviours of police officers.