Introduction

Compstat tributes are extensive. Compstat has been described as “perhaps the single most important organizational/administrative innovation in policing during the latter half of the 20th century” (Kelling and Sousa 2001: 6). A Criminology and Public Policy Journal editor recently termed Compstat “arguably one of the most significant strategic innovations in policing in the last couple of decades” (Criminology and Public Policy 2003: 419). The authors of a major study note that Compstat “has already been recognized as a major innovation in American policing” (Weisburd, Mastrofski, McNally et al. 2003: 422). In 1996, Compstat was awarded the prestigious Innovations in American Government Award from the Ford Foundation and the John F. Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University. Former Mayor Giuliani proclaims Compstat as his administration's “crown jewel” (Giuliani 2002: 7).

Why the praise, what are they specifically praising and is this praise warranted? These questions constitute the core of this chapter which maintains that Compstat praise, criticism, and replication are frequently based on a superficial understanding of its proper development, implementation, and many dimensions. The literature inadequately reflects how Compstat's successful implementation and maintenance is often incomplete when it lacks substantial organizational revamping and proper managerial preparation. This contributes to an insufficient appreciation of Compstat's array of attributes. In addition, there is often a lack of understanding of how any particular Compstat may reflect the organizational and managerial arrangements of an individual law enforcement agency at any specific time.