In today’s rapidly evolving technology environment, public safety agencies face an overwhelming array of solutions to problems they may or may not be facing. Technology in various forms has moved from being a support function to a necessary strategic tool.
However, the cost of technology solutions is outpacing budget limitations. Technology also brings operational risks and further public expectations for transparency and efficiency. A thoughtful strategic plan that is guided through research and best practices allows public safety organizations to manage those risks, optimize value, and ensure the trust of their communities.
One of the first questions that agency leadership must ask is, “Do we want to be on the leading edge of technology or the cutting edge of technology?” Both options have their merits. The leading-edge products—the new innovations to the market—are high risk but may have a lower price tag that is appealing to budget conscious leaders because their true value has not been established. Cutting-edge technology is established and has proven its usefulness through the early adopters. The price tag starts going up as the foundational success builds. While these solutions may be less risky, because there is evidence that a product works, the budget constraints grow. In both cases there may be nonexistent or immature policy wrapped around said technology, and there can be great peril in a “rush to operationalize it” risk exposure.
Agencies are now confronted with a perfect storm of resource and operational challenges. Persistent shortages of personnel and the increasing complexities of crime demand new and creative approaches, some with force-multiplying and significant cost savings considerations. Communities are expecting faster responses, data-driven accountability, and frequent engagement to satisfy the thirst for transparency without which public safety organizations encounter defunding or budget diversion pressure. It is difficult for most agencies to add additional officers to satisfy these needs due to budgetary and hiring challenges.
This is where technology emerges as a force multiplier. Automated systems and advanced analytics may take some burdens off an officer’s checklist by reducing routine paperwork and administrative tasks. Digital evidence tools and modern communications systems decrease case flow bottlenecks. With a solid foundation of strategic leadership, agencies can navigate the opportunities and challenges of technology selection and implementation. At the core, these decisions need to meet the operational needs of the daily work and the long-term goals of the organization.
Today, experts continually offer advice with clear philosophical and academic connections that, when applied diligently, do offer beneficial and reliable results, but the process is so sterile and technical that it doesn’t resonate with leaders sitting under time constraints and work volume pressure. The pressure to deliver results and solve problems can drive leaders to seek new technology through contacts, vendors, trade shows, conferences, and media, subsequently making an unfortunate reflex or impulsive decision, or leave them strategically unresponsive.
Marketing is defined by the American Marketing Association as “the activity, set of institutions, and processes for creating, communicating, delivering, and exchanging offerings that have value for customers, clients, partners, and society at large.”1 In other words, those with a “solution” to a problem must somehow find a way reach those in need of their “solution.” Many providers simply have a one-size-fits-all solution that is looking for a problem. Leaders that connect with any marketing while in search of solutions to their problem du jour need a way to determine if the marketed and attractive “solutions” they find are viable and appropriate to their situation, need, and means to procure them. This demands REAL due diligence in the specification development and procurement process,, frankly, most public safety organizations are not tooled to accomplish this process and are loathe to accept substantial additional overhead for their operation. To help with this process of vetting, obtaining and validating new technologies they might find to be a boon, the authors offer CELEBRATE.
CELEBRATE: A Decidedly Nontraditional Approach to Technology Procurement
Leaders are always looking for new ways to accomplish their missions whether they work in corporate marketing or public safety. Finding technology to meet needs is not difficult; finding the precise technology to address specific needs is. Regardless of the process, effective marketing can grab attention, no matter how strategic the leader is or how well developed their strategic foundation has become. When marketing succeeds, all attention swings to the new “solution.” Given this happens frequently, how can leaders turn the discovery process to their advantage?
Confess: Admit that you have a need. And when you find a technology solution that seems to meet that need, admit you have “fallen in like,” (have an apparent attraction to and infatuation with) a possible solution. “Any type of open and truthful disclosure reduces stress and helps individuals come to terms with their behavior.”2 Such confession, with training and practice, can also smoothly activate an externally objective process of our own creation: one that emphasizes practicality before indulgence and legitimate confirmation over capitulation to an initial emotional connection. So, indulge it, and then get down to business. Leaders must set boundaries in terms of operations, security, and time . If the first few dates are going relatively well with practical constrained encounters, you can move to the next phase and more investment on your part. Further, don’t be afraid to sign a prenuptial agreement or nondisclosure agreement.
Evaluate. Take stock; make two lists with brief theories needing confirmation: one that lists those characteristics of the solution that caught your eye and tend to confirm the validity of the attraction, and one that suggests exactly the opposite. These are lists that must be proven and confirmed before you allow any close solution relationship to progress, a more relatable form of an applicable academic strategic process called “Agency Alignment and Value Proposition.” For public safety, any acquisition should have a documented strategic fit that shows how it supports current needs and long-term objectives. Whether it is reducing crime, improving officer safety, or addressing a community demand, it needs to have concrete reasoning for the expenditure. This is due diligence. Do not allow this to become painful. Draw lines in the sand, and take appropriate action to continue or break up.
Logic. Activate your logical and analytical left-brain.3 Connect with objective and factual evidence about how this solution works to meet your specific need. Employ a version of the scientific method that resonates with you to provide factual answers that may at least somewhat satisfy other, more initially unimpressed stakeholders you will invite to enter the process (Technology Assessment).4 It should provide factual answers to questions like: “Does the technology actually WORK or is it still in beta testing?” “How long has the solution been in service and what is its track record?” Logic is better when it is quantitative. This does not mean there cannot be assumptions and unknowns, but limit your investment until you see the math.
Exercise. Run a creative table-top exercise attended by interested and engaged stakeholders to test how the solution performs in simulated situations based upon the factual data obtained to this point (Stakeholder Engagement). This intellectual effort can objectively highlight obvious solution strengths and reveal weaknesses that cool initial infatuation and shine a bright light on practical performance issues, both in the solution and in stakeholder use of the solution. If the solution performs well add other issues for consideration like: “When would be the best time to purchase?” “When would be the best time to deploy?” “What is the best way to implement this solution?” “Does the solution lend itself to a cost-effective implementation?” (Cost and Return on Investment (ROI) Analysis). Go through all the best questions, and insist that the group work to identify legitimate, fact-based answers before moving forward.. Test, Test, Test! If it is a car, drive it. At the very least, talk to someone who is like you who has recently driven it!
Breathe. Impulse-driven acquisitions rarely turn out well. Take a step back and take a few deep breaths; pause the process for an hour or two, maybe even overnight, so you can calmly think over the information you have gathered. Resist the temptation to allow the need for an immediate solution to drive an emotional or impulsive decision.
Develop and stick with a disciplined process the majority of stakeholders agree upon ahead of time that will point the way ahead. A majority of positive indications encourage further engagement. A majority of negative indications encourage an admission that “it was not to be” and recommends that you continue the search in a different direction. A lot of people are emotional buyers. Moreover, we can be emotionally attached to things and services and then find out the math later.
IF the relationship still has potential—R.A.T.E.
Read. Read the product materials in fine detail. Read the initial contracts the solution creators ask you to sign. This helps to identify the level of commitment the creators give to their product and how much performance risk they are willing to accept (or expect you to accept!) as the relationship advances (Risk Management). Indemnification clauses and other contract small print can reveal much about creator confidence, or over-confidence, in their products as well as the level of long-term support they intend to provide. Ask for and call any references they offer; listen to what these engaged leaders actually say about the technology (Do they like it more or less now that it is in service? Does the tech work as advertised? Does the tech and its creator benefit more than customer?), and what the respondents say between the lines without actually using words. What was their install experience (were there unexpected bumps and hidden costs?) and how well does the provider learn from and improve upon the customer experience? Are the references pleased with their choice or do they wish they had decided differently? Sometimes the problem is not with the product, it is your specification that is unique and renders the product a square peg for your round hole. Really scrub your specs and determine how they are each articulated in your RFPs.
Answers. When performance and contractual questions arise, intentionally, patiently, and carefully seek and require satisfactory answers to vital and even routine questions, like customer experience and support issues. Will the solution creators be there once you have signed on the dotted line and then experience challenges? Do they offer perpetual support or do they charge extra for continued support? Do you have and are you ready to commit funding and resources to successfully purchase and deploy this new technology? Make sure that your service level agreements (SLAs) anticipate this and you are not stuck in your own contractual ambiguity!
Test. in your real world. If the solution makes it this far, test the solution by putting it into the hands of trusted and engaged stakeholders to use, assess its performance, and document the realities of how well the solution objectively and practically meets the identified need. Taking a phased approach to implementation prevents catastrophic results during full implementation. We are a community of investigators making our way to prosecution. We understand authentication, so apply it here!
Exercise. Decision time, you need to CHOOSE. Do you commit or not? If the decision is to commit, go all in to make it work. Keep in mind, nothing is perfect, and only time will tell if a new tool will truly meet your needs.
Finally, once the solution is in place, review the solution annually. Tech truly changes over time, and not always in ways that are beneficial to its users. Go back to your specs. Did you anticipate lifecycle management? Change management? Will the technology survive change by design? When it ceases to meet “the need,” it’s time to look for a new solution—well before the “old” one’s efficacy declines beyond recovery. Ready to CELEBRATE yet again?
Conclusion
Strategic technology adoption is required for public safety organizations the world over. It is a necessary and dynamic process that every organization, no matter the size, must embrace with intentionality. Thoughtful and deliberate planning that creatively includes stakeholder engagement, extensive evaluation, risk assessment and value proposition, will result in operational improvements and resilient systems. The community will also appreciate the resulting benefits of better and more proactive engagement from the organizational leadership.
There is also a need to refer to the IACP Technology Policy Framework. The tenets found there need to be integrated at a high level. If agencies spend millions of dollars and follow the recommendations above only to have the governing bodies or community refuse to allow the full use of a chosen technology (or any use at all), the result involves much wasted time and money because the policy was not developed or enhanced alongside procurement.
The future of policing is not just about having the right tools; it is also about employing the right tools strategically. The right planning, thoughtful investment, and a culture of continuous and timely improvement (CELEBRATE) can ensure the technology of today and tomorrow become a bedrock of safe, efficient, and accountable policing. d
Notes:
1American Marketing Association, “Definitions of Marketing.”
2James W. Pennebaker, “Does Confessing Secrets Improve Our Mental Health?” Scientific American, March 1, 2016.
3Robert H. Shmerling, “Right Brain/Left Brain, Right?” Harvard Health Blog, March 24, 2022.
4“The Scientific Method is a process used to validate observations while minimizing observer bias. Its goal is for research to be conducted in a fair, unbiased and repeatable manner.” M. Ryan and Angela O’Callaghan, “The Scientific Method,” Extension | University of Nevada, Reno (2022).
Please cite as
James Emerson et al., “Strategic Tech Procurement for Public Safety: Decisions to CELEBRATE,” Police Chief Online, April 8, 2026.
