[00:00:00] Speaker A: Welcome back to the Guardian Mindset podcast from the DLG Tech Summit.
[00:00:05] Speaker B: So the purpose, as I said, the panel discussion is that we are very lucky here at Dega Law Group to have some partners that we, that, that it's our partners that sponsor us and support our application and we support their application. And, and what I like to do during the Technology Summit is definitely introduce our partners to our attendees, but also have a frank discussion about technology.
Now you've all been just for the, the panel as I start to invite them in and talk about, talk about who's here just to let everybody know. So everybody's had about a day and a half of training. We've done legal implications, we've talked about issues with Flock and we've talked about data issues, body worn cameras, videos, policies and procedures. And so now the challenge for me is to discuss our implementation problem.
I said a couple of things to set the threshold here and I guess the first thing I'll do is start bringing individuals in and conduct an introduction just so that we can get this started. So I'm going to start with Jessica Tyler, who is the Director of Public Safety or the Public Sector strategy. You change your title all the time on me and for Power DMS by Neil Gove. Hi Jessica, how are you?
[00:01:27] Speaker C: I'm great, Eric. How are you today?
[00:01:29] Speaker B: I am great. Now Power dms, as we've said, is a huge sponsor of DLG products and Jessica and I have been good friends back to her policing days back in there. And I think she's been in this panel now at least two or three times. Right?
[00:01:45] Speaker C: Yeah, my third year.
[00:01:47] Speaker B: You want to give a brief introduction for yourself and we can get started?
[00:01:51] Speaker C: Sure, yeah. Thanks again for having me here today, Eric. Great to be here with all the attendees. I'm a retired deputy chief out of New Mexico. Like Eric said, we met during my policing career. I spent the bulk of my career at the Bernalillo County Sheriff's Office where I worked my way up to the rank of Chief Deputy. Then I went over to the Albuquerque Police Department where I was hired as the major working on their DOJ reform. And I'm sure Eric can agree with me here, DOJ reforms and you know, police reform in general is, is no joke and so but had a great learning experience there and then retired out of Farmington PD as the deputy chief. I've been with Power DMS now for about four years and like Eric said, I've had the opportunity to hold a few different roles here. Came in on our accreditation and partnership team. And then I had the pleasure of serving as our general manager over our professional standard product as we launched those. And now I currently serve as the Director of Public Sector Strategy, running a team of executive advisors that we have here at Power GMS to be able to help people in your seat make decisions about technology and really talk about, you know, how the technology can work and solve problems for your organization.
And exactly like what Eric is saying about the topic on hand today, working about through the implementation challenges that we have when we're adopting technology. And so again, that's a little bit about myself, but great to be here with you all today.
[00:03:13] Speaker B: We couldn't have one of these without you, I don't think yet.
Let me reach out to Chief Mark Chambers from Westford, Mass. I know he's always just a dapper young man, Chief Chambers. I've had the opportunity to work with him. He's actually going into his second year as a FBI lead Executive Board member and being in my neighboring state of Massachusetts, we have a wonderful opportunity to interact and I wanted to get him on board to represent the small, medium sized police departments.
Welcome Chief. How are you?
[00:03:48] Speaker D: I'm well, Eric. Thank you very much for the invitation to participate.
So my name is Mark Chambers. I'm the chief of the Westford Massachusetts Police Department.
About 25,000 people here in my community in northeastern Massachusetts.
So I've been a police officer for 28 years and I've been the chief here in Westford for coming up on six years. Now. I still have a few left to go, but I've been in a unique position position over the past several years where I've been on the executive board for not only FBI LITA, but the Northeastern Massachusetts Law Enforcement Council, which is a mutual aid organization for a lot of our small and medium sized police departments here in Massachusetts. When we have an event that happens in one of those communities that we may need additional assistance, it's one of those organizations that can provide SWAT coverage, drone coverage, additional actual technology coverage. So I like I said, I've been in a unique position where I've been able to build my network through both of those organizations and really help helps me to understand what the challenges are that a lot of the agencies my size and in our area facing. So the introduction of technology is an ongoing conversation. Particularly that flock conversation has been dramatically impacting us here in Massachusetts. And I know that Connecticut and other departments within New England are experiencing the same thing. So looking forward to seeing how this conversation goes.
[00:05:12] Speaker B: We are. I just spent my early part of this week. Let's just go with getting yelled at, and then we can deal that.
Happy to have you, Chief. Welcome to the crew.
Tim Gately, who is the solutions architect at Versaturm.
And Tim, welcome.
[00:05:32] Speaker A: Hey, good afternoon from the West Coast.
[00:05:35] Speaker B: Good afternoon. At least it's not early, right?
[00:05:37] Speaker A: Correct.
[00:05:38] Speaker B: Lunchtime.
Listen, Tim, we've had members of your team interact with us. Our Use of force summit is 15 years old this year, and I think your team has been with us in the Blue Team application for almost a whole ride. And so we couldn't have this discussion without your team involved. And we want to give you an opportunity to introduce yourself and welcome.
[00:06:01] Speaker A: Well, thank you for the invite, and I totally agree with you. Blue Team, IA Pro, and VersaTM have been on this ride for a long time, helping agencies kind of build trust and effectively handle internal affairs matters.
Everyone, my name is Tim Gately.
I'm a retired chief of police out of Washington state. I spent 25 years as a police officer, detective lieutenant, captain, mostly in professional standards community outreach at Internal Affairs. For the last two years, I've been with Versaturm. I'm a strategic account manager. So I really just help our agencies better implement technology efficiently, provide better access to their data, and do things that help build community trust.
[00:06:46] Speaker B: Well, thank you. We appreciate it. And let me also open up to Chance Shiflet.
Chance comes to us
[email protected] and we have opened up a partnership with @rev pretty much for the last two years, and it's really been expanding because of our internal affairs training and the use of transcription and the Rev insight. And so we wanted to allow them an opportunity.
And, Chance, I'm aware that you're the head of product there, and so I'd like to give you an opportunity to say hi, give your background, and welcome to the Tech Summit.
[00:07:20] Speaker E: Well, thank you for having me first. Can you hear me? I guess.
[00:07:25] Speaker B: Good to go.
[00:07:26] Speaker E: All right.
[00:07:26] Speaker C: Okay.
[00:07:28] Speaker E: Thanks for having me.
Just honored to be part of the panel.
As you mentioned, my name is Chance Shiflett, and I lead product innovation here at Rev, and we were founded back in 2010, so we're not new to this by any means, and most of this community really knows us as a transcription service, human transcription.
We're also an investigative intelligence platform, so we help legal and investigative teams turn that caseload into evidence that they can search, verify, and cite. The one thing I really enjoy about my job as head of product is I get to choose which problems we solve and how we really help people and I don't do that from a lofty perch or from a conference room. I actually get to go out into the field and work alongside our customers and ensure that what we're building upholds their standards, their policies, and is ultimately defensible at the end of the day. And I'm really looking forward to this discussion. Typically during these sessions I learn a ton, contribute, probably a little less than the more experienced folks on the panel, but looking forward to the conversation today.
[00:08:50] Speaker B: I think as we bounce back and forth here, I think, you know, the, the expansion and bringing you up to speed with where we've been for the past couple days will be something that will be interesting to you. So thank you very much for representing Rev and, and being here with us.
All right, so next, let me bring back Chief Case.
There he is. Chief Case. How are you, sir? For most of you know, uh, Chief Case and is, is, we've worked hand in hand in Anchorage with Dago Law Group and I, and I'm very interested because as a young chief, he's very innovative. This is what we talk about, but often Sean and I have a lot of great discussions about the good, the bad and the confusing when it comes to the implementation of body of not only body worn cameras, but technology in general. So welcome, Chief. How are you, sir?
[00:09:43] Speaker F: I'm doing fantastic. How you doing, Eric?
[00:09:45] Speaker B: I am good, sir.
[00:09:46] Speaker F: I don't know if I'd say innovative, maybe just a little on the dumb side and crash into things and see what happens. And then we learn from that mistake. And I always enjoy having you along for the ride.
[00:09:55] Speaker B: You know why I have a job, right?
[00:09:59] Speaker C: Yeah.
[00:09:59] Speaker F: I've been with the Anchorage Police department for about 25 years. I'm Chief of police for the last little over two years. And you know, if you asked me 10 years ago, would I be investing a lot of time and energy and technology, I probably would have said no, because my world really revolved around use of force, the application of force, training, use of force, and everything else related to that. But over about the last three or four years, we have invested a lot of time and energy into the use of technology as we it starts rapidly evolving.
And so, you know, my, my message to the staff is if there's something out there that can help us better do our job, we're at least going to invest the time to see what that looks like. And so hopefully along the way I picked up a trick or two and stumbled once or twice. And some of that information can be helpful and relevant to, to everyone on Board here today.
[00:10:42] Speaker B: So great to see you as always. Chief Ben, you want to bring up everybody here and, and let me just give everybody a little bit of background, just for transparency. So for, for a day and a half, we've been focusing on the legal operational issues. It just happened to be that I spent the earlier part of this week dealing with some transparency issues from ALPRs.
And we've also talked about the fact that Flock has today issued a statement from the CEO that they will be changing a lot of their retention and application and security issues a little bit, probably because of the pushback that law enforcement has seen and also that community has given them. So the questions that I'm going to go through today, I'm just looking for perspective from each of you on how products are implemented and how, what, what, what challenges you've had along the way.
I, I want to start with the fact that I was at an IACP conference, tech conference earlier this year, and what I was surprised at is how many police executives came up to me and said, we feel a little bullied by the tech industry, meaning that there's so much stuff that we have to choose from and we have to be responsible for testing it and making sure it works. And then me, police chief, I have to go stand in front of my governing board and say, give me money for this, hoping that everything goes well.
And they were very concerned about that. So I want to start out with a very simple question, and I'm going to start with Jessica in the aspect of we've been together for a long time.
How has technology fundamentally changed police operations over the last few years or maybe the last five years? And what has been the most effective impact from your side, which started at the very basics of document management and document development and then expanded into a whole suite of applicable processes? I think that you got lucky in the fact that it was easy to use in the early stages, so adding new things to it didn't challenge industry as much as it might be on deciding to buy a piece of technology today that does something that we're not sure will meet our requirements. What's your thoughts on that, Jessica?
[00:13:11] Speaker C: I mean, great question, Eric. And, you know, I think that we're kind of at an intersection, if you will, in policing with the rise of technology, but also the rise of scrutiny and the increased expectations of what our public that we serve expects from us and the amount of oversight that we have.
Ten years ago, it wasn't common to have use of worse reporting. That was done on every use of Force. And so when you think about how both, again, the increase of what our public expects from us and what we have decided as a profession is a good practice, whether it be pursuit reviews, you know, use of force reviews, et cetera, and then also that increase of technology, I can see how some police chiefs might feel that way because we're, we're asking more and more of them. And so here@Power DMF, to your point, it made sense where our application, where people were already used to being able to sign in and look at their policies and have a tracking mechanism to be able to check, you know, version control and also have the policies readily available for our officers and supervisors to be able to access when they're out on a call that may be low frequency and high risk, it makes sense for us to be able to provide more to our customers. And so I think for, for us, one of the things that's been great to be able to provide our customers is more solutions with that single login. And I think we're seeing that and hearing that more and more as people, you know, we're asking our officers to do a lot and to have 10 different logins and 10 different, you know, passwords to do different things that they're being asked to do in their day to day operations is difficult. And so it's been nice to be able to provide them more solutions in one place. And so I think that, you know, and then of course with AI in the last, you know, couple years, that just adds the cherry on top, if you want to look at it in a positive way.
But that's one of the things that I think about a lot when I'm talking with agencies.
[00:15:10] Speaker B: Yeah, and we can bring up Tim and Tim on the same aspect of Versaturm starting out in the early days in acquiring companies and building the structure together.
The same kind of question, which is from your perspective as a police executive, now moving over to the technology realm, kind of like Jessica, how has technology fundamentally changed police operations and what do you think will be the next impact over the next five years?
[00:15:44] Speaker A: Fundamentally has changed is we no longer have problems collecting data. If you think about what our officers and detectives and professional staff are doing in the field. We have all these inputs from drones, record management systems, cad, all RMS citizens videos that are being submitted to us. So our challenge isn't collecting the information.
Our challenge is now how do we leverage everything we have to support command decisions, to support investigations, and then to build trust with our community. So I, I think that we will see in the coming years, next five years, the biggest impact is going to come from platforms that are connected so that people can link data together to drive a single operational picture and positive outcomes.
[00:16:33] Speaker B: Tell you just in the area with you with Jessica and Tim is that here at the DLG Learning center which has a very small. Our number one issue all day long is changing passwords. So you know, I can't imagine that at the level that you all have in that analysis.
Let me bring up Chief Mark Chambers and Chief you know I love my Massachusetts and a little but it's a slow progress out there.
And so how about have you watched from the east coast the fundamental change because it is a little more methodical, a little more union oversight, a little more labor related issues.
How have you seen technology fundamentally change and where do you think that greatest impact is going to come as we move forward?
[00:17:30] Speaker D: So one of the biggest changes that we've seen here over the past five years really is the expansion of the body worn camera Systems and the LPRs and the legislation that goes along with those up here in the northeast east coast and police reform has really kind of driven how a lot of those programs are managed. You know, half the time you're implementing a policy and and then the state comes out with their own recommendations. So you have to change your policy which goes into power DMS and some of those other policy management.
So that has been a major change is just trying to get your technology to line up with the state guidance and recommendations. That's been one of the biggest challenges that will continue to be a big challenge. As you know, you, the LPRs are a perfect example of probably what's going to be happening with every tech that comes out or continues to advance over the next five years.
It's going to go all the way into any of the investigative tools, mapping tools. You're seeing recent case decisions from the SJC about, you know, cell phone dumps and data dumps from towers. So there's a lot of these investigative tools that we continue to invest in and try to bring into our organization that now legislation continues or, or court decisions take away those investigative tools. So I think finding the balance of what we, what we can and cannot do that's not going to be readdressed by either the courts or you know, our legislators is going to be a very difficult challenge over the next several years because this, this is just going to continue to expand into every aspect of policing, even our report writing. I know you had Eric on at the point us earlier and he's an excellent resource for us here in Massachusetts because he keeps us from getting into too much trouble because he stays on top of that stuff. So it's great to have him as a, as a Mass Chief's legal counsel, but as we move forward, it's only going to get more complicated and it kind of goes hand in hand with our community engagement strategies up here and community policing. It's building that trust. So that way when we implement these new technologies, we have at least some form of support with the communities that we're working in. So I think those are going to be the biggest challenges.
[00:19:52] Speaker B: I agree with you in the fact that just this week, so, you know, as your sister state, you know, we have legislation coming out structuring retention protocols and security protocols and auditing protocols on automated license plate readers and, and then that is pushing national narrative. And the interesting part about how the legislators will then run with that and, and cause you all as police executive confusion because you just get to one level and, and they change it again on you.
[00:20:26] Speaker D: Yeah.
[00:20:27] Speaker B: All right, well, let, let me ask, let me bring up chance and chance.
So interesting at rev.
While you have been in the transcription services for a while in our relationship with Internal affairs and using REV Insight, which I, I, I love the product, but you're kind of new to the law enforcement game. You've been in the legal field forever.
But I want to put to you as the where do you think the impact of your product will have on the law enforcement government agency over the next five years? And what guardrails do you think will be necessary to keep us out of harm's way when we utilize your program
[00:21:14] Speaker E: over the next five years?
If we think about where we are today, right?
And it was said really well earlier, there's just this huge influx of evidence, right?
There's capture used to be a problem, it is no longer a problem. There's digital footprint everywhere. And where we are today with the rise of AI and technology and everything that we do, I think that there's one problem that I think everybody is really facing.
And we've all used ChatGPT, we've all used Claude, some form of that technology.
And what it does really, really well is right, you ask it to do something, it produces a document, right? You ask it to make an edit, it produces another document and an hour later you've gone through 15 different versions of the same document. You don't quite know where you started. You don't know if you're missing anything from where you began generating writing content is basically free now. But what's not free is the human review is the person that actually has to read and digest that content.
The same is true for the supervisors, for the judges, for the jury.
Everyone goes through that same struggle, and it's something that we see across every industry.
And so what's really key and how rev is helping anchor the work being done through AI is in citations. Right. It's going back to that source. It's being able to verify that transcript. It's keeping that human judgment the foundation.
[00:23:04] Speaker C: Right.
[00:23:05] Speaker E: We want to make sure that as AI arises and becomes more efficient, we don't lose the human decision making that happens within that knowledge and wisdom layer.
[00:23:17] Speaker B: Yeah. It looks like you've listened to a few of the articles that we've produced, and the fact that human factors in decision making are important.
So awesome. Thank you. Let me bring up Chief Sean Case.
And Chief, we've had multiple conversations, and I know I enjoy watching, you know, literally try every piece of technology that comes out, and then you're like my testic kind of guy. And so what I would love to focus on is how do police leaders distinguish between adapting technology because of its innovativeness versus it truly solves an operational problem.
Unfortunately, as a former police officer, we. We buy shiny objects. We like shiny objects, but are we buying it because it looks cool or sounds cool like we used to? And does that apply to technology?
[00:24:16] Speaker F: Well, I think generally, when we talk about police chiefs around the country, we. We aren't the most innovative creatures in the world.
You know, we're spending more time worrying about the. The wheels falling off the bus than, you know, innovative technology and other things. The other thing that limits us is we have this fascinating group of individuals that we all have to deal with, called IT techs, and they ruin everything for us. Every time we ask a question, we want something to be done with technology, their answer is no to everything.
And so it kind of limits our ability to truly be innovative. And so it really forces most police chiefs around the country to be in that operational kind of perspective and looking at things, what problem can this solve?
And. And I think when we get into what problems that we're going to solve, we really have to understand, and particularly the vendors that are out there.
You know, the vendors are selling a product, and sometimes it helps when they understand how these problems come to us. You know, in late 2022, I knew my world was getting flipped upside down. One of my captains walked in my office, and he handed me this great report and just slapped it on my desk and said, boss, what do you think?
Now I already mentioned that use of force is kind of my lane I like to stay in. And so that report had everything to do with use of force. And I found it fascinating and it was well written. And I looked at him and I said, where'd you get this from? He said, there's this great new thing that just came out called chat GPT and nobody wrote it. A machine wrote this. And that's when I knew we're hosed because. And it's time to get on the train and ride this thing. Because when you have a machine that can start educating our officers and we can't check and balance it on a thing like a use of force, that means they immediately start writing things that chat GBT and all these other platforms in their police reports and then eventually they get on the stand and how silly do they look? They look crazy.
And so when we talk about some of these products that are coming out, we have to understand that we have these wonderful, brilliant workers that do great things in our organization called drug cops.
And when drug cops are taking advantage of certain technology, that is a sign for disaster because they will find uses that you and I can't imagine in our wildest dreams.
[00:26:36] Speaker B: Yeah, we try not to tell our technology partners that we can break just about everything they build.
That's, that's the key. Now I know you have been very, you know, outside the normal application. You know, you've, you've, you got first responding drones and you have the technology at a high level.
What have you found to be the challenges with that?
[00:27:02] Speaker F: Well, right now, currently it's a challenge that everyone's seeing right now. Flock's killing us.
You know, I was, I was just at a community meeting last night till 8:30 at night and everything had to do with flock cameras. I don't have flock cameras. Okay. I don't have them at all.
They're not even in the state of Alaska where I think we're the only state they're not here. And everything, everything had to do with lock cameras and what they can or can't do.
So the big challenge is right now is that's impacting, as you mentioned, state legislation around the country and it's really starting to diminish what technology can be used.
Kind of an old school policing. When I say old school policing, I'm talking about 10 year old, 15 year old technology that we've been using for years and years that have solved cases after cases after cases. We're even talking about technology that some of we need a search warrant to use and there's legislation that, that legitimately is threatening the use of some of that technology. Like we have to go through a judge to use some of this and we have state legislatures that are like we want this blanket legislation because we're so afraid of the boogeyman. And I got to tell you, you can't outrun social media. And, and believe me, I spend many, many hours with the public and on social media and we're still behind the curve because it's hard to get ahead of that.
[00:28:19] Speaker B: Yeah, no, I get that. Let me bring up Chief Chambers. They give the same application on the police leadership expect perspective which is adopting technology to be innovative but at the same time the operational problems that that results.
You know, you know we look now at a give an example. We'll give an agency that doesn't have a body worn camera today. We think that they've lost their mind but they also don't have any of the headaches of retention and paying the bill and all of that. So as a police executive, especially of a medium or smaller agency, how do you balance that need for this, this technology versus the operational challenges that it will bring?
[00:29:05] Speaker D: So that, that's actually a great example Eric, because we don't have body worn cameras.
I know you, you mentioned earlier about union issues and dealing with unions up in the northeast and how strong they are. Our union is actually on board with it and we've actually tried to implement the body worn camera system over the past several years. But the problem is is just like any other technology that we recognize recognize would be useful for us. It is a trade off.
Everything is derived from our budget and with the way that our states are run with local aid coming from the state, we it hasn't increased in years. So any sort of innovation really comes with trade offs here. For our budgets, you know, $30,000 a year to run a run a body worn camera program, I would have to cut from somewhere else and I don't have to the ability to do that. So other than that it's capital expenses. So budget really kind of drives our ability to, to implement any new innovation.
Now if you know something were to come out and we were able to test it and over several months because we realized we may have a real blind spot that some of this tech is going to help us improve upon, we'd probably be able to make a case for it. But it's you know, like Sean referenced good old fashioned police work.
It, it's A very difficult trade off because even you know, in the health and wellness space, when you're trying to implement new technology to, to provide your officers under that space, sometimes that's affordable and you can, you know, those, those smaller type programs, but when you get into the larger programs like lprs or, or body worn cameras and drones, you're really, you're at the mercy of trying to find the funding for, for those types of products.
You know, the one time expenses are a lot easier to stomach than, you know, a thirty thousand dollar year subscription fee. So yeah, that's, I get that. You know, so if we, if we can make it work within the budget, we, we do it or if we can find, you know, if that innovation, that innovative technology is going to make us that much better, maybe we can make enough of an argument. But on these wishes and wants like you know, Blue Voice, basically Google for cops, great product, we tried to implement it, we look at officer usage, but then you get to the subscription fees and it's all right, well what's the trade off? And is that trade off worth it? And you know, oftentimes we're finding that it's not. So
[00:31:40] Speaker B: I get that, I get that. Let's bring up Jessica, Tim and Chance and from a vendor perspective and listen, I think all of you have amazing products and happy to partner with you, you know, to bring good products to our, to our environment, our clients. And the biggest issue that we're facing with so much vendors in the market space that the question is what advice do you give a chief when considering a major technology investment with limited financial resources. And a lot of you have had to work with police departments to get budget approval and get in the next budget and show them the prospects. And so let's start with Tim. You know, what would you consider,
[00:32:32] Speaker A: what
[00:32:33] Speaker B: advice would you give a chief in considering new technology with limited financial resources?
[00:32:39] Speaker A: Well, first I want to double down on what the chief from Anchorage said, which was focus on solving a problem, not the solution first.
You know, as vendors and I've sat on both sides of the table as a chief of police and now helping solve those problems. We often have people come to us and say, hey, I want to purchase X piece of software. And our first question from Versaturm is always, what problem are we trying to solve first? Let's make sure we're going to solve your problem. And then for the financial investment and the chiefs focusing limited financial resources, focus on total value, not the purchase price. Consider how implementation, training, maintenance, integration, staffing requirements are going to fall out from that.
Prioritize situations that improve the day to day operations of your staff and reduce duplicative work. And then finally, I would just say invest in platforms that connect your systems, something that's also scalable. We don't want you in a scenario where you're not able to get at your data and connect some of these decision making points together. And we want it to scale as you grow, as technology changes and as the needs of your community change.
[00:33:52] Speaker B: No, that's a, that's a good point.
Jessica. From your perspective in both sitting in both seats and, and having to buy with no money and now trying to sell to people who are trying to meet that financial burden, what's your thoughts?
[00:34:10] Speaker C: Yeah, I mean, I definitely agree with Tim that you want to be looking at what problem are you solving? The other conversation we have a lot is what return are you going to get on that investment?
What risks might be you mitigating? Because oftentimes, especially when it's things around policy, use of force, internal affairs, investigations, we're seeing agencies as, you know, pay out so much money or spend so much time even just during discovery processes. So helping police agencies and leaders understand how can our product make you more effective and efficient in the jobs that you're doing and helping us or allowing the software to solve that problem, but also looking at what savings are you going to potentially be making by utilizing the product in an effective way and also ensuring that our agencies and our customers are actually utilizing the product to its fullest. I think we're, you know, all very used to having systems that you buy and maybe you only use a portion of it or it's like you and Chief Case were saying, you know, like you get the shiny new object. It's really great. And it's like the new, the new fun thing and people are using it initially and then usage drops off and so reinforcing that usage and showing people how it's making you more effective and efficient and then also like I said, ultimately reducing risk for our agencies and our officers and helping them in turn build that community trust.
[00:35:30] Speaker B: Yeah, Chance, I'm going to give you a second here from the product development side. And I bring up, I was sitting in a meeting earlier this week with three large companies and one of the questions legislators were asking was can you give us the data how many times this system has solved a crime or how many times this has led to the saving of a child or the, or the solving. And, and I kind of looked at my police executives and said, that seems like a lot of work on top of the work you already have. But, but proving the need is, seems to be the community saying, if we're spending X number of dollars, what's the benefit? So chance on your side when you're developing this next level of product, especially for the investigators and the force investigators and the IA investigators, how do you take that, that, that into count? And as you decide what you're going to build into the system, because of the technology, because the, because of the value that you'll get out of that technology.
If I can finish speaking.
[00:36:42] Speaker E: Well, I think it was said really, really well earlier.
You want to start with the outcome, right? What's the problem to solve? And even in product and build, you know, there's, there's this, this, this saying where, you know, a customer says, you know, I, I want the red button. You're going like, okay, you. You want the red button? Great, let's. Let's build you the red button. And we, you know, we, we build it for them fast. We build the most beautiful red button there could, could ever be, right? And it's exactly what they asked for. And then they come back and they say, you know what?
The red button doesn't do what I needed it to do.
Oh, did I lose, folks?
[00:37:26] Speaker B: We got you.
Okay.
[00:37:30] Speaker E: I was muted. I was a jerk.
[00:37:33] Speaker B: You hit the red button. That's what happened.
[00:37:35] Speaker E: Yeah, yeah, the red button. And so you want to stay away from that trap. It's something that we all tend to lean in towards. And so when you're building something, you want to make sure that it absolutely solves the problem and it absolutely has a measurable impact.
And when it has a measurable impact, that's when it's really easy. Not necessarily easy, but it gives you the ammunition that you need to go and defend that decision. And ultimately good decisions the community benefits from, Right? And so it's just showing them how they benefit that's important.
And this is probably something we're going to touch on later.
And you kind of weaved it in there, but it's a continued effort. It's not something you do one time, especially not in the realm of AI that we are now. You can't just do it once. You have to continue the parade.
[00:38:30] Speaker B: I noticed when I wrote this question before saying next five years, that's probably pretty dumb because five years in our life is probably 40 years of technology life.
So let me go back to my police executives.
Your meeting last night in acceptance of technology and the success of technology often Relies on community trust and the building of community trust in deploying new technology.
How do you get the community to embrace a piece of technology that they might say, well, I don't need this to capture data, or I don't need a form online to fill out every time there's a use of force, or hey, can't you keep your policies in a file cabinet? Like, what do we need this for? Why are you spending our money on this?
[00:39:33] Speaker F: Well, first thing is you got, you got to know what's really driving some of the fears and concerns and desires of the public. And that's where you start the conversation. You know, a lot of times when we try to get support of the community on anything that we want in law enforcement, you know, we're just the facts people. We figure if we go in there with a bright, shiny PowerPoint presentations with a lot of facts and data, that the public's gonna go, well, doggone, you sold me. That's not what happens. It's not what happens at all. They're reading an article from the New York Times from two weeks ago and that, that's their largest concern.
I got a question last night at this meeting. How are you going to keep cops from using license plate reader technology to stalk their girlfriends? Like, that's, that was one of the main questions that I got. It's a real question because they, there was, that was an article that was, that was recently, recently published that had that, that case scenario in it. And so when you start to talk about how we want, why we want this technology and how we're going to use this technology, it's not, this is why the police department uses technology.
We communicate with the public on why this is going to help your community, your neighborhood, why this is going to help you feel safer, why this is going to make our city, our town, our, our jurisdiction, a better place to live.
And you know, right now in, in our local jurisdiction, we've got, you know, a little bit of a problem with violent crime.
And so that's, it's a legitimate problem with violent crime. And per capita we're up there.
And so the conversation always starts when we started looking at this technology over a year ago, well over a year ago, and talking to the community, it was, we're going to get this technology and we're going to focus all of our retention rates, even very, very short retention rates, because we need the technology when the crime's happening right now.
And long before there was a flock blow up and we started having these talks about legislation we already had a 14 day retention in our policy because that's the way we sold to the public. Not because they were yelling and hollering at us about privacy, is because they wanted the message to be tailored to what about violent crime. Let's add some technology, let's be able to view cameras, let's be able to view license plates and habits on license plates. Let's put drones up over so we can have an immediate impact on the 911 call for service right now. So you know you're getting the best when you call 911 now later on down the road we'll get to the investigation and how we can go back in time, maybe further than 14 days. But that's where the conversation started and really that's what's keeping me out of trouble right now is when I go back to the community and they say, hey, what about what I just saw on social media? I can say, remember what our policy is and remember why we drafted our policy that way. And it was before this big, big scare.
[00:42:19] Speaker B: Now as I bring back, bring up Jessica, Tim and Chance, one of the areas that I focus on is, and as you notice in this presentation, some of the hot topics are not in here. And there's a reason for that. And the challenge is, I think while things that fly in the sky are fun, we all have a relationship because of the importance of use of force, reporting, investigative mechanisms, policy development, training, the core law enforcement applications.
Now the question for you, for you, and I'm going to start with Jessica, is as all of these shiny objects start to take away the financial means to keep the core liability protectors in place, how does companies like NeoGov and Versaturm and at Rev, how do they convince the public that, yeah, we're not, we might not be giving you a drone that's going to first respond to a scene, but the value of our product has been time tested over court cases and liability because we were able to answer core questions about updated policy, core investigations and updated use of force analysis.
So what's your thoughts on that, Jessica?
[00:43:45] Speaker C: Yeah, I mean, I think, you know, we say it all the time and you know, it's like those things, the policy, the compliance, the use of force, investigations, although chief tapes might disagree, those aren't like the sexy parts of the department. Those aren't the sexy jobs within the department. But they found the foundation set the foundation for strong police practices. And I think our communities can really appreciate that. And so making sure that we're investing our money in that foundation and then being able to have kind of, you know, one or two new shiny toys to help increase, you know, face the other criminal investigations, etc. Is really important. And so again, you have to kind of take care of the core function of the house, which of course is going to be, you know, your policy, your training, your supervision and then looking at things now, of course, like I said, with just, you know, an, we're always going to have that focus on use of force investigations and citizen complaints, IA investigations, et cetera. And so I think it's really important that if you shore up that foundation within our police organization, the communities will appreciate that. And I think, you know, in turn you're going to have less payouts on litigation, which is going to hopefully then free up other budgetary funds to be able to then invest in other areas technology.
[00:45:03] Speaker B: And you guys had done a good job with your forward facing policies in the being able to use the mechanism to transition to the community. You know, a lot of times the community doesn't have the knowledges of the, of the early warning systems. And you can bring, you know, Chief Chambers up too. Ben, I don't want to leave him out of this conversation here. He's probably like, hey, how come I'm not on here?
I'm not controlling the cameras, Chief.
So the.
I'll go to chance second, which is how do we, how do we focus assisting the police executives with, with building the community trust to, to get the financial funding they need to buy the equipment that is not as sexy as the, the drone or the auto or the license plate reader.
[00:45:55] Speaker E: Yeah. You know, a lot of the stuff that has a big impact is the unsexy. Right. And if you have a budget, that's probably where I would recommend starting. Focus on some place that is not sexy, that.
But you stand to make measurable gains. And that's, that's what a vendor partnership should look like. Right. We're not, we're not sellers. We're not dropping something off at your doorstep and be like, all right guys, good luck.
That is like the worst relationship that you could to ask for. So it really is a partnership because, for example, Rev's been in the transcription business for years. Right. And we have this whole transcription service line. Well, when it comes to AI transcription, there's a lot at stake there. There's a lot of measurement, there's benchmarking, there's accuracy.
[00:46:46] Speaker C: Right.
[00:46:47] Speaker E: And the vendors, we know how to do those things better than, you know, the departments or the agencies. And so it's it's that relationship. It's our responsibility to work with everyone in that way so we can help help them overcome those challenges together. Because just dumping it on your doorstep and expecting everything to everybody figure out, you wave your magic wand and everything's good, that that's not real.
[00:47:14] Speaker B: Yeah, And I think we're going to talk a little bit about that because we know that that does happen to the point where people, a police executive, thinks they're doing something correct for their agency, buy something beneficial, and then years later, it's still in the box, it's not being addressed the way it's supposed to. And Tim, I think in the, especially in the Blue team mechanism, which is where we've had our most contact, is the ability to articulate that data and collect that data for liability prevention.
Does that get lost in the shuffle of the technology arena when we're. When we're looking at arguments that we're seeing today about cameras and fancy pieces, do we lose that core liability protection that maybe people won't renew with you because they're going to use their money someplace else?
[00:48:07] Speaker A: No, not at all.
Because as we all have discussed, the community is going to decide whether or not our technology succeeds.
When you use an example like Blue Team and IA Pro, we start with the why, we explain the problem we're trying to solve. And in this case, it not only solves that problem of accountability, but it also leads into the public benefit of safety, service continuity and accountability. And then we have to, right from the start, as police executives and as software solution providers, define and be transparent about what our technology does and what it doesn't do, how our data is stored and then what safeguards we're putting in place. Right. And it doesn't matter if we're deploying a drone or any other technology.
The trust is going to come from consistent policies, appropriate oversight, and then our ability to measure and report out to the community or the council or to an interest group or to oversight what those measurable results are.
So that's where I see us going. We kind of start and end with trust, explain the why, be transparent and then measure our results and be real, clear and consistent with our policies, our oversight and how we communicate transparency.
[00:49:27] Speaker B: Yeah, I couldn't have said that any better. Thank you. Because I don't want agencies to lose sight. I mean, you know what we do. Last thing I want is agencies to lose sight of the things that make them operational, operationally functional, under a legal space, correctly, which is what we're paying attention to.
Chief Chambers, let me, let me ask you this, and I'm going to ask Chief Case too, but what's the, what would you say single biggest or biggest mistake agencies make after purchasing new technology?
So you're on the. The vendor has sold you, you've decided to sign on, and then all of a sudden you get a box delivered and that's it.
And now you know, what have you seen as the failures that have occurred after that process?
[00:50:21] Speaker D: So I would say, I would say probably two things, Eric.
First and foremost is probably not training your personnel how to fully use the new tech.
So whatever, whatever you're bringing in, you want to make sure that you're taking full advantage of all the different things that that technology can do to address your problem.
And a lot of times some the training that they get is, you know, you open the box, you show them the basics, and you expect them to figure out the rest.
And then the second, I would just say making sure that you audit the usage.
I know Sean had, had just mentioned the article that he read about the officer that was stalking his girlfriend. That actually happened in our neck of the woods in Massachusetts. There's a fresh article out about that today.
So making sure that you audit any of the technology, so that way you're tracking the access, what it's being used for, so that way you can document and provide the transparency that your community is going to be looking for. Especially if you're implementing anything that's even slightly controversial, you have to make sure that you're auditing in accordance with either your policy and whatever agreement you've had with the community before you started implementation.
[00:51:38] Speaker B: And we're going to talk about auditing because it's 100% and it definitely looks like the more technology you bring on, the more work you're making in the operation of that chief case.
What have you seen to be a big mistake or mistakes of agencies after they purchase new technology?
[00:52:02] Speaker F: I think it goes back to the, the fundamentals and the basic. And I think you, you probably know what I'm about to say quite well.
Everything comes back to three things. Policy, training, supervision, and whether you have a cute and sexy.
[00:52:13] Speaker B: You know he's watching.
[00:52:15] Speaker F: I absolutely know he's walking.
How you doing, dad?
[00:52:19] Speaker B: Say hi, Chief.
[00:52:20] Speaker F: Yeah, hi, Chief.
And so it comes down to you got to have a policy on how you're going to use this. You got to have the training has already been mentioned. And the supervision, I'll put that in the cat. Same category as audit. You know, the audit portion is part of the supervisor's responsibility In. In, you know, I have a use of artificial intelligence policy, and we have training that goes along with it. And you have to get signed off on your. On your training before you can use any piece of artificial intelligence technology that we have available within the organization.
And it wasn't. A couple days ago, I had someone hand me something that they wanted to show me that they produced on the clock using artificial intelligence. And I looked at him and I said, hey, did you go through the training just out of sheer curiosity, Let me be a patrol supervisor for a second. And he looked at me and he was like, I'll be right back, boss.
So we got to make sure we fully train. We put a policy on that, and we make sure our supervisors are engaged. If, if your employees, you know, are pretty well, let's. Let's just go to policy management, power dms. I mean, how often do I look at my supervisors and go, they give you a dashboard, for crying out loud. And when you have five names on there and they have 17 policies they haven't signed off on, that now becomes a supervisor program problem, not an officer problem. Like that is. That is your failure now, boss. You know what I mean? So back to the basics.
[00:53:45] Speaker B: Yeah. And Jessica, we. We have this conversation all the time. We've had clients that have.
That have both worked both the policy and the in. In the power DMS side, and they've purchased the product, and two years later, I'm calling you going, they don't even have logins for the product. They're not even. They paid the bill, but they're not even using it. So what have you seen, Jessica, as the mistake after agencies purchase these products?
[00:54:11] Speaker C: Yeah, I mean, I would say one is underutilization, and two, I think that brings up a key point and to chief cases statement right there. You know, it comes back to accountability of our supervisor sometimes, because the last thing we want to do is implement a piece of technology that looks to help reduce liability or risk, and then it actually can end up increasing it because it's even worse sometimes. Right? If you have that supervisor and he knows that his officer hasn't signed off on 20 policies, and then something happened, and you say, you know, did they sign off on these policies? Were they aware of this policy change? And you have a mechanism to track that, and then you're not actually following through with it.
But I would say, I mean, and I always tell our customers that, you know, get the most out of the software. And then the other thing I think that I See, mistakes that people make is not having succession planning. You have that internal champion that really knows the product well and if maybe your master admin and has been the champion for those products and then you don't have a succession plan for when that master admin leaves or goes into another role where then they're not going to have that. And so that's something that we work really hard on here at Power DMS is trying to find better ways to be able to support those new admins. But if I could give any advice to agencies, you know, just like with anything else, have succession planning for who's going to be in charge of the pieces of technology that are utilized within your agency.
[00:55:32] Speaker B: Yeah, that is a great, great point.
And I don't know about all the rest of you, but I see that all the time you work really well with one individual. They understand the product, they understand what to do and how to do it.
They, they, they bail and nobody picks up the slack on where it is on its application.
And Tim, I want to throw that same question for you and I think unfortunately I kind of move back and forth so they take all the good stuff. But on the implementation side, is there anything in addition to mistakes that you see agencies, and more importantly for you, as in having products that lead to an early warning system that could lead to reviews and maybe discipline? It shouldn't lead directly to discipline, but do you see improper use based on that?
[00:56:27] Speaker A: Not improper use, but definitely. When we think of this from the perspective of implementation, let's make sure when we purchase new technology we're not creating another silo. We don't want to make information hard to find or hard to manage. We have a whole group of professional staff in records, in evidence, in communications.
Let's not make it harder for them to find and manage our own data. And then let's not assume, and you know the chiefs have already stated this today, let's not assume technology is going to solve the problem. We still need training, we need policy updates and any new technology is a change management process.
So what's our strategy around how we implement change relative to our software? And then finally, finally, you know, a lot of our systems, you spoke to it early intervention Blue team, IA pro eipro. A lot of versa term systems are inherently connected, but we can do a much better job at that. We need to make sure that all systems of record, our cad, our records management, our evidence manage, all our core systems need to talk to all these separate systems we're implementing to solve a problem.
It's easy to buy a solution and solve a problem and then end up siloed, not managing that change process and then not looking at how we strategically connect these together so that we can still have operational efficiencies.
[00:57:53] Speaker B: Yeah, and Tim, you know, you brought it up, so I don't want to, I don't want to put you in the, in the hot seat for it, but this is something that I notice all the time. I walk into agencies and they have, man, five, six, seven different products that they're utilizing. And, and it looks to me, and from a complete unknown application.
Why, why can't these systems get to a point where they can interact and is seems like they're sold in silos. And so that, and, and by the way, I'm sure my police chiefs would agree with me, we don't have the skill sets to make those silos talk to each other.
[00:58:35] Speaker A: This is a question for product, no doubt. No, I'm kidding, I'm kidding. But I do want to hear product.
[00:58:41] Speaker B: We're going to get there, don't worry.
[00:58:43] Speaker A: But as vendors, as solution providers, versa term, we need to do better. We need to do better at providing solutions that are connected and there's some money involved and there's some time involved with that. Right. APIs don't, automatic connections don't write themselves overnight.
And that's not product's fault by any means. And it's not decision makers in police departments fault. But now that we know about this, now we need to pause, pump the brakes on deploying new technology and making sure that all our core systems connect and work together. And that's what I know a lot of people in my company at least spend their time thinking about and doing. And I think I'll be happy to hear from product on this. Yeah, I think artificial intelligence is going to help in this area. It's really going to help us leverage
[00:59:30] Speaker B: chance we put you on the spot. How's that?
[00:59:31] Speaker D: Thanks.
[00:59:32] Speaker B: We gave you plenty to warm up. You're good to go.
[00:59:35] Speaker E: Happy to dive in to the deep end there.
You know, there's been this, this mindset over the last decade or so where, you know, you want to keep your customers silent, you want to keep them in your system.
And so what a lot of people do is they build this system and they close it off and they don't reveal any public APIs. They don't make it so that it's easy to connect with them. You got to get on the phone, you got to make a business case, you got to Say hey, can we do something? Or you got to find a workaround.
And that's not always great because they can easily shut it down. So it is one of those really tricky things where it comes back to, you know, as, as we're building software, we really have to be comfortable with being good at something and knowing that we're not going to be good at everything and where there's opportunity for partnership or for connections, I think we should be comfortable having those conversations and being open to others, others building towards our system.
But it's just something that every company I think struggles with and we absolutely need to get better because customers deserve it.
[01:01:02] Speaker B: And I think that if we don't individually, we're going to get taken out individually unless we can bridge together to form a necessary solution.
And so chiefs, the hottest topic of the week with even the CEO of Lock dropping today, in my discussions earlier this week and both of you had is that, and this comes with data management in the aspect of location data, CSLI data, body worn camera and alprs or even, even standalone, we know there's three things that people are concerned about and that is data collection and access, data retention and auditing features and making sure, in fact you don't know this unless you've read it. But earlier today the Flock CEO said more cops will get arrested and fired once we fix our auditing feature.
And, and I, I hope that's not true because I, I have more faith in the industry that, that I think it's more of a philosophy than is an application. We know there's about 70 cases of misuse with 6,000 agencies using this. We've seen officers arrested in the last couple weeks and as you said, Chief Chambers, you, you got a local one.
But how do you as the CEO of your organization put this auditing function in play? Because I think retention is an arguable application. There's always the difference between legislative and application.
But auditing, what do you require in your agency to meet that community's expectation of auditing?
And Chief case, let me start with you. Sorry.
[01:03:02] Speaker F: Well, very different systems you're asking about here. And there's kind of a, there's different rules based on what the community expectation is depending on where you're at. Like for me, you know, it's interesting because body worn cameras in my community, nobody, nobody cares how long we retain the data. Nobody cares what we use the data for.
I actually have, speaking of unions and strong unions, there's some union requirements on when and how I can audit that information. Within the body worn cameras. On the flip side of it, you go to the other end and you talk about ALPR data. And now obviously the community is really, really interested in how long that data is being retained as well as, you know, various different camera systems if you're running a real time crime center. And ultimately I think the very first thing that we have to do, Chiefs, this is a leadership question right off the bat, like this is a leadership question. We, we can't get our hackles up and go in full defensive mode. We have to understand the writing on the wall right now and where this is going. And we have to be the ones that step up in front and try to determine by policy what we're going to do to solve this problem before the legislators do what they're going to do and whether they make a good decision or a bad decision for us, we need to be the first ones that are saying this is the policy decision that I'm making based on my jurisdiction and I'm going to stand behind that. Now if you got to shorten it up in terms of a retention or an audit schedule that you have, like, that's great.
But we can't just kick and fight because we're going to lose this battle. We're going to lose it from the legislatures and we're going to lose it from the public and we're losing from the media.
So for us it's all about, and I mentioned that the retention is 14 days is where at and that audit cycle has to be happening on a monthly basis.
And then there has to be information that we put out either quarter, quarterly or annually, depending upon what information in a form of some sort of public dashboard on what that audit even looks like. So we know very clearly sharing information with federal agencies right now is a huge concern in various that will get
[01:05:00] Speaker B: you right on the radar very quickly. But they are very clear to say no federal access to this system anyway.
That's one thing that has been very clearly identified.
[01:05:13] Speaker F: But what we do is when we get requested information from a federal agency, we report that in our, in our public dashboard. We report when we provide information to a federal agency. So we can say, hey, we did it 87 times this year, this quarter, this month.
And these were the types of crimes very, very vaguard. We're not going to get in fine detail, but we can assure the public that we vetted this before we provided that information and that data to the federal agencies. Like it or not.
We just have to, we have to make that decision and I, I will tell you that the federal agencies that we work with on a regular basis, they absolutely understand the position that we're in. You don't get pushback from. They don't look at you like you're, you know, you, you know, you're now Satan. They look at you and they go, I, I feel bad for you. I feel bad for you. I understand.
And they are ready to, to help.
[01:06:05] Speaker B: Well, Chief Case, you know where Chief Chambers and I come from in the analysis that's there. I was Chief Chambers. I don't know if you have. Do you have Flock in your area?
[01:06:15] Speaker D: No. Well, we have it in our area. My community does not. We explored it about two years ago and met immediate resistance. And it wasn't a hill I was willing to die on. But we have had some success stories with, with agencies in our area using Flock.
[01:06:31] Speaker B: Now, the one thing that's surprising to me is that agencies don't make a little bit of a discussion point with their community to say, hold on. We have had auditing features in play to our computer systems for decades.
Whether it's NCIC or collect or just any auditing feature, we have those features in play, and they don't seem to care, I guess is the great word. And so how do you convince a legislature in Massachusetts that you don't need legislative oversight, that you, as the police executive, can handle that process?
[01:07:19] Speaker D: Yeah, if anybody can figure that out, I'd be happy to jump on board with it. In Massachusetts.
No. So I think it's laying the groundwork before you implement any of these programs, whether you have a master service agreement that aligns with your policy, and when you do the audit, you have to make sure that you're documenting it and providing that transparency to the public.
But what goes along with that is also being accountable. So if you also release information, if you find any abuse, I think that goes a long way. You know, you, you take the hit at, at first, but it goes to show the accountability and transparency that we're all striving to achieve with our communities. So I think if you lay the groundwork beforehand, you show that you're following those policies and, and the agreements that you put in place beforehand, no matter what type of system it is, whether it's. Even if it's just within your own agency where you're auditing your, Your detail and overtime systems, you stick with. You stick with that, that schedule that you have, and you provide the transparency in the data when it's needed, or if you find violations, you openly accept the fact that, you know, we missed something and you improve. I mean, like you said, NCIC, CJIs, we're already doing those audits and answering those types of questions and making sure that we can prove that, that we've followed our policy, everybody's been educated on the policy and just maintaining that documentation and, and you hope that there's enough other agencies that are, that are following along. Like Chief Case said, with, with leadership, it's, you got to make sure that your people are, are, are being responsible for what they need to be responsible for and then hold them accountable as well. So I think it's just, it's, it's building that reputation and that, that level of trust and accountability with, with the legislators and, and with your communities.
So hopefully they're, they trust that you're going to do the right thing. But, you know, that that does come with a certain responsibility to disclose when we find these things. Instead of, you know, circling the wagons and, and, you know, trying to, you know, try to cover it up or sweep it under the rug. We, we, we really have done a pretty good job over the past several years of, of acknowledging our shortcomings, but also trying to show them that everything we do at this point is very structured. Everything is rules, everything is, it has to be procedures. So that's the way it is, you know, so it's just being accountable to your own rules and being, and being open about it.
[01:09:57] Speaker B: Yeah. Thank you, Chief. That's awesome. Chance, before I do my last round robin here, I do have a question for you, Chance. And the reason why is, I'm sure Power DMS and versaturm are using AI. But for you, we've been working very closely with you guys in your insight, meaning that as Chief Case said, we want to prohibit the use of artificial intelligence in the development of any report.
Here at Daga Law Group, we produced our first policy on that two years ago that artificial intelligence could not be part of, of the decision making of an officer for probable cause, reasonable suspicion, or use of force. But interestingly for the rest of you, in the Rev.com application in the internal affairs function, they have a closed insight where we can put material into it in a large investigation and use that for the help of strangers structuring that documentation. I use it in my team and, and we're looking at, you know, we're bringing, we're, we think there's a value to it because that's where the value of AI is, is volumous material. Right.
But Chance, with our concerns on AI and not letting that leak out into writing for our cops who don't like writing as it is, is how do we, what do we put that auditing and that protection in the system like yours so that that AI is not used to replicate the work, the work that should be done in investigative reporting?
[01:11:39] Speaker E: Yeah, I think that's a really good question. I mean, human judgment has to remain at the heart of everything, right? It full stop, that's human, has to be able to make the decision.
So when I think of the role that AI plays, right? There's. If we think of the pyramid, you've got raw data, then you've got information, which is the organization of that raw data. And then you've got knowledge and then you got wisdom, right? AI is really good at turning that raw data into information that we can digest, that we can use. And it's that knowledge layer that you're talking about.
You're building a document with the AI. It's not the AI that's building, it's document. That's. That's really the key concept to maintain throughout. Because you're right, a lot of the agencies we work with, they don't want rookie cops creating reports because frankly, they don't even know how to write a good report yet. And even some of the ones that do write good reports, they're, you know, kind of okay at it. But I mean, you put something into AI and all of a sudden, well, I mean, you put something into AI and it looks pristine, right? It looks like somebody with an English degree wrote the report.
[01:12:56] Speaker B: Commas in the right place, semicolons. It's amazing.
[01:13:01] Speaker E: Yeah, the EM dashes that everybody loves, right.
[01:13:04] Speaker B: Nowadays, key indicators of AI.
[01:13:08] Speaker E: Key indicators, but it really is.
Can also be used as an instructional tool because what you do is you can have somebody write a report and ask it to measure it, to grade it, if you will. And so there are ways in which you can use AI to better fit those policies and ensure that they're not using it and submitting it, that they're creating it on their own, or they're creating it in a way that does not run the risk of putting them on the stand with something that is completely indefensible.
[01:13:52] Speaker D: Yeah.
[01:13:52] Speaker B: All right, last couple different questions here, round robin so that you don't answer. All have to do the same question. I'm going to start with Tim, from a vendor perspective, what do you wish agencies understood before purchasing your technology?
[01:14:07] Speaker A: Yeah, this is what I do every day. I help agencies understand the important question, which is not only what does our technology do do, but what problem are we solving? So let's aim for solving a problem first. Let's make sure implementation is going to depend on how the agency adopts, trains, integrates.
You know that change management piece I was speaking to before so that they gain as much functionality as possible from any new software they bring on and then choose a partner that's going to improve your organization.
Connect data systems together, have some long term outcomes you want to achieve and let's do that together. Let's problem solve together.
That's what I hope for all the agencies that work with us.
[01:14:57] Speaker B: Thank you.
And Jessica, if you could leave in law enforcement leader with a nugget when training with one principle about implementing technology in today's world, what is your experience?
What would that one thing be?
[01:15:16] Speaker C: Oh gosh, one thing is hard but I would just say probably change management. Just like anything else within your organization, if you have good change management practices within your organization that's going to help you implement new software successfully.
[01:15:31] Speaker B: Excellent. And chance, I'm going to ask you the same thing. In the aspect of purchasing a unique piece of software like you have, what is the thing that you wish the users knew before they decide to jump on board with your technology?
[01:15:50] Speaker E: Something that I wish they knew before that.
Well, honestly that I think everybody kind of hit the nail on the head. It is around change management. It's about who's going to own the adoption. Right. I think that's really the key, key conversation that needs to be had before any purchase happens. Because it can't be an IT person.
Nobody in IT wants to own the day to day. They all give you access, they set it up, they say here.
And so really making sure that you've got those key contacts on the other side and that they are going to be set up for success from day one.
That's the key.
[01:16:33] Speaker B: Yeah, I mean most people who want to own it probably shouldn't.
That's our takeaway.
Chief Chambers, on the perspective of a law enforcement executive, what's your concerns at the rate of technology that's coming in?
The over reliance on technology in the law enforcement application?
We got young officers who are not as experienced and never really did the old school police work which, which we all love but now they don't have to.
They, they have all this technology.
Is there a, is there a negative to that?
[01:17:18] Speaker D: Yeah, there's definitely a negative to that. I mean I look at my two kids in college and see what they've done.
One barely relies on AI and another one uses chat GPT to write all of his papers. So that certainly is a concern because, you know, it, it's been brought.
[01:17:33] Speaker B: Which one's going to be the cop?
[01:17:35] Speaker D: Neither. Neither, I should say.
So I think, I think we're gonna, we're running into the same problem with our younger officers. They rely on, on AI for a lot of things, even if they're just looking up some basic information and they don't always have the necessary skills to cross reference to make sure the information that they're receiving is accurate. And I think we're going to continue to see that reliance on, on technology and AI moving forward.
So that's going to be a constant battle is amending policies as new, new decisions come out and then making sure that our, our officers are, are adhering to those policies because it's very difficult. You know, except for the semicolons and dashes and bolds and italics that get generated, they're all very well.
[01:18:28] Speaker B: So you've read your son's reports?
[01:18:31] Speaker D: Oh yeah, yeah. He, he can probably figure out basic math and that's about it at this point. So that, that's going to be a major challenge because I just, I think that, you know, older generations know how to not only integrate technology, but they also still have the experience of being able to find information the old school way. They, they can go to paper resources or you know, vet the information sources through other, through other means. Where I think a lot of our younger officers take digital information as gospel.
[01:19:05] Speaker B: In Chief case, I'm going to end with you and I'm going to put you on the spot a little bit just because I know you only a couple years in the position as police chief, but you've been working your way up for a long time and I've watched you very closely in the past couple of years implement a lot of technology that you tested and tried and, and I actually love the way you did it because if it didn't work, you just cut it and like it's not working.
And that takes a lot to do. A lot of times police executives are not good at saying this is not working and getting rid of it. So if you were to take your experiences in evaluating and implementing technology, is there a lesson learned that you could share to the younger police executives that are, that are being, coming up into the police executive role and being sent, hey Chief, let's look at this, let's buy this. We should get this.
[01:20:02] Speaker D: Yeah.
[01:20:02] Speaker F: I think the most important thing is that you establish a good test period which A lot of IT companies don't like you to do. We want access to what the product is and we actually want to test it in our field before we commit to a long term contract. And you have to be willing to look at tech companies and walk away from the table and go, it's not negotiable. Because what ends up happening is we spend a lot of money on technology, we implement it, and then there's a whole host of things we wish it could do. We find things that are going to cause us challenges down the road. One of them, obviously, that's right now we're facing is what the audit capabilities are. And once you sign the contract on the dotted line and you go back and say, hey, I need you to enhance the auditability, those companies are going to look at you and go, no, like you, this is the product that you purchased. And so building in that test capability.
I'm also a big fan of working with smaller startup companies in some situations. When you're talking about the newer technology, not the kind of base foundation technology that we've been using for long periods of time, like records management and those sorts of things, but this new stuff that's coming out, particularly as it relates to AI, get involved with some of those younger, those newer startup companies, they're the ones that are going to allow you to test out their product. They want to know what you have to say and establish that good test team, those officers that are out in the field, your IT people, your detectives, the people that are going to be using that product and have them use that product, break that product and keep in close contact with them so that you know that when you sign that contract, you are getting the product that you want and you're going to be able to answer the tough question down the road and you're not going to have to do what I did, which is sometimes cut technology off and you just waste a little bit of money. But if it's not going to work for you, you can't keep it around because it's going to cause problems.
[01:21:50] Speaker B: Excellent. Hey, to all of you, thank you for being the professionals that you are and willing to share your time and represent your entities.
I think that this was a very beneficial discussion. My phone's already blowing up with good contact. So I would like to take a moment and thank you all and hope that we could do this again in the future.
[01:22:13] Speaker C: Thank you all for having us there. Thank you.
[01:22:15] Speaker B: Be safe and be well. Thank you.
