Occupational Socialization

 Frank can chose to support other detectives by remaining silent hence allowing the confession of the suspect to be admissible or refuse to offer such support due to possible legal outcomes.  In this case agreeing to the various events to be presented by the detectives at the court can amount to the crime of perjury in which Franks is an accomplice for knowing about it and opposing. In this case, the circumstance surrounding the case involves a defendant who was not aware of the nature if his offense while confessing and was never afforded his right to have counsel assistance. Hence, the confession was not voluntary. Perjury is considered to be a criminal act where one makes false statements on oath (Pollock, 2014). If frank keeps silence, he would be committing a criminal offense. Committing Perjury means that a person has been involved in miscarriage of justice and, hence gets involved in corruption of the legal process (Pollock, 2014). Frank will have been an accomplice miscarriage of the criminal offense.

For the new detective, it would it take time for him to effect any change at the workplace because they first have to understand the culture of his new organization, organizational behavior and decision making process.  The change process involves a shift from what is known to the unknown.  For a new member in an organization, learning the communication process, the prevailing relation between the leader and a member and how employees are engaged in the decision making process (Vlachoutsicos, 2013). Frank would be successful in introducing the work values and ethics in the organization if he understands the reaction of any change in his place of work.  It is common for a person to seek authenticity and truthfulness important virtues in the working place.  However, holding such values sets a person on a collision line with existing organizational culture where upheld values may be quite different. Ideally, a person would seek not to work in a place where existing values clash with theirs.  However, the real case involves trying to bridge the existing gap between a person values and those established by the organizational culture; since it rarely happens that one will be accorded the luxury to leave a position on the basis of principle (Vlachoutsicos, 2013). This involves being creative and manipulative through diplomacy so that you can get other organizational members to consider your perception and involved benefits. In case of Frank, he would have others understand the implication of perjury on rendering justice.

Administrators in the criminal justice must have knowledge on conflict resolutions within their organizations so team work on established tasks, objectives and goals can be achieved. Conflict resolution should involve first looking into the source of the conflict regardless of the nature of such conflict. This involves understanding if such conflict is pre-existing one or it has been introduced artificially (Stojkovic,  Kalinich, & Klofas, 2012). After understanding the source and nature of the conflict, the administrators should establish programs for conflict management that will set in ensure members involved places their grievance on the table for discussion.  This involves creation of a culture with acceptable and agreed upon culture that upholds the legal standards and allows for accommodative behavior. The administrators should then ensure such a program is implemented through structural and process interventions that prevent conflict and address them as they arise (Stojkovic,  Kalinich, & Klofas, 2012).

References

Pollock, J. M. (2014). Ethical dilemmas and decisions in criminal justice. Nelson Education. 263-267

 

Vlachoutsicos, C., (2013).When Your Values Clash With Your Company’s. Retrieved from: https://hbr.org/2013/01/when-your-values-clash-with-yo

Stojkovic, S., Kalinich, D., & Klofas, J. (2012). Criminal justice organizations: Administration and management. Cengage Learning. 331-335