The IPLDP attempted to reset the operational policing sub-culture by providing new-to-role officers with the knowledge, understanding and competencies to deliver 'society's validated expectation of what a police officer needs to know, to do and be disposed to do in the 21st century' (Elliott et al., 2003, p2).
An evaluation of the IPLDP provision for a specific East Midlands constabulary was undertaken in 2010 (Alcott, 2010).
It was possible to identify which operational officer had dealt with which surveyed incident and, as a result, it was possible to attribute qualitative customer feedback to specific officers, both those educated through the IPLDP and their pre-IPLDP colleagues.
In order to examine the relationship between the identified shortfall in performance by IPLDP educated officers and the operational shift team sub-culture, I conducted a small scale qualitative research study which attempted to draw upon the experiences, thoughts, views and perceptions of a group of six operational IPLDP educated officers selected by way of a purposive sampling process (Alcott, 2011).
Analysis of the data identified a number of potential themes which uncovered an array of potential blocks that appear to have possibly hindered and frustrated the implementation of the IPLDP (ibid, 2011, pp38-48).
Taken together, this reported need for 'peer acceptance' within the shift 'family' represents a strong force, which arguably may push new-to-shift student officers inexorably towards the prevailing shift sub-culture and away from the aspired practice of the IPLDP. Together, these issues indicate a degree of shift sub-culture internalisation by student officers and could arguably reinforce and propagate the views, opinions and practices of existing shift members and may be a contributing factor as to why the performance of IPLDP student officers appears to norm with that of pre-IPLDP trained officers.
The respondents identified two main issues relating to the observed shift hierarchy, which impacted directly on their learning from the IPLDP. First, they reported that many pre-IPLDP trained officers demonstrated a resistance to and dislike of the IPLDP, especially the concept that officers should be required to be educated at university as a prerequisite of becoming a police officer.
This focus and engagement with continual professional development appears contrary to the experience of the Police Service, as evidenced by the IPLDP and the Prison Service, demonstrated by Kauffman (188, p198), where it is suggested that the operational culture ranks time served experience 'capital' over up-to-date practice knowledge 'capital'.
Much of the reported sub-culture making up a typical operational shift team may, by this point, have been internalised by student officers such that their emerging practice reflects and carries on the prevailing shift team sub-culture, unchanged by the interventions of the IPLDP. Over the past few years, changes in the initial training of probation and offender management staff within NOMS in response to the development of the Offender Management Model (OMM) appears to have paralleled many of the issues that have been identified as impacting on the introduction of the IPLDP.