Accolades for something other than an inclusive decision?

[Shane Turnidge]

Hi folks,
Many, if not most of us, have received accolades from management such as, commendations, positive documentation, or awards for prominent identifications.
Has anyone ever received an official accolade (from management) for something other than an inclusive decision?

Shane Turnidge

[josher89]

My guess is probably not because what does an exclusion actually mean? They could have handled the item/touched something in the scene and just didn't leave a print.

Take that a step further and what does an ID mean? Unless it's in the victim's blood, it means they handled the item/touched something in the scene but (generally) we don't know when they touched/handled it.

[Michele]

My agency has. We had a newer LPE (new to our agency) who did not feel that an AFIS candidate had enough to ID but had too much to ignore. Since she brought it up, we discussed it in-depth (with practitioners, investigators, attorneys, a judge, and different agencies) and ended up changing the possible conclusions that could be reported out. I'm guessing it was in 2015 that we began reporting out what we call 'investigative leads'. To us, this is an AFIS inconclusive that has too much consistency to ignore. The information may not be enough to arrest a person or enough to press charges, but it could help detectives investigate a person further, and they may find more solid evidence.
I don't know that we ever officially thanked Amanda (or others that were involved), but I think they know that we appreciate them bringing up anything that can improve our practices.
Michele

[Shane Turnidge]

That's the sort of thing I'm looking for Michele.
Even though it still leans towards a reported inclusion, it appears to be an accolade for a quality decision.

My working hypothesis on this just as josher89 states, that our industry almost exclusively rewards inclusive decisions and not inconclusive or exclusion decisions. You can probably imagine what the potential consequences of that are, particularly with people that recognize the importance of cognitive bias.
I'm hoping my hypothesis is wrong.

I really believe that as an industry, we should be rewarding quality decisions whatever the outcome. In HR there used to be a saying, "what gets measured is what gets done". The problem with solely rewarding inclusions is, that it is only that outcome that gets measured.

Shane Turnidge

[Snyder22]

I had a police chief write a letter to our director after I testified last year. The trial went long, so I ended up eating lunch with several officers. The chief had given them money to pay for my lunch, which I declined to avoid any potential appearance of partiality - especially because I hadn't testified yet. He wrote a letter stating that he was impressed with the ethics/character displayed (or something to that effect). And to confirm that we knew he wasn't trying to influence anything, just wanted to be hospitable (which was how I had understood it all along, was just being cautious)! I thought it was really nice that he took the time to send that in.

That wasn't from management directly, but they did pass it along.

Other than that, I do think most of the positive feedback we get is on identifications.