Do you believe your court could benefit from a planning effort that sets a vision for the future? Have you undertaken planning exercises that seemed comprehensive at the time but became obsolete due to unforeseen external factors? Was there a change in leadership in your court jurisdiction that shifted the priorities of your court planning effort? Were new laws enacted, or was a technology developed that impacted your court’s workload? If you answered yes to any of these questions, you may be interested in learning how a PEST analysis can be used to take a deep dive into factors that could impact your court.
What is a PEST Analysis?
Simply put, PEST analysis is a strategic planning tool to identify and examine macro-environmental factors that impact an industry. PEST analysis provides a four-point framework for studying aspects outside the organization's control, or in this case, the judicial system. The following four categories of factors are examined: Political, Economic, Social Technological.
The diagram below depicts how the PEST framework can be applied to planning within the judicial system.
Changes in these factors over time can present for your court (I’ll explore these more closely in my next blog). By using PEST analysis, the planner acknowledges that setting a vision for a court is a dynamic and fluid process that factors outside the court's control can profoundly impact. Conducting a PEST analysis can be a valuable tool in guiding strategic planning in an ever-changing arena. Isn’t it time to get ahead of the curve?
Political Factors Impacting Court Planning
Political factors impacting court planning include three general categories: political leadership, legislation, and industry regulation.
All of us who have established our careers in or around government, whether at the federal, state, or local level, are keenly aware that changes in elected officials can dramatically impact a court's mission, goals, and priorities. While some changes in political leaders result in only a slight shift in direction, others can completely change the trajectory of the judicial system.
For instance, Rudy Giuliani's election to Mayor of New York City in 1994. Mayor Giuliani famously subscribed to the “broken windows theory” of criminology, which suggests that maintaining an orderly appearance of an urban area encourages citizens to behave in an orderly fashion. The theory asserts that misdemeanors and felonies fall along the same continuum of crime and, to prevent more serious offenses, a zero-tolerance policy for petty crimes must be enforced.
A new police commissioner was appointed under Mayor Giuliani, and police began enforcing laws regarding public drinking, panhandling, vandalism, public urination, and littering – misdemeanor crimes that had historically received little attention from law enforcement. The court system was flooded with misdemeanor cases throughout Giuliani's two-term administration and beyond. In fact, between 1993 and 2011, misdemeanor cases in New York City doubled. By using PEST analysis, it’s possible the court could have anticipated some of the potential downstream impacts even before Giuliani was elected and taken additional steps to weather the change.
Changes in legislation and policies can also profoundly impact court operations. For example, some states have decriminalized marijuana possession to some degree. At the same time, other jurisdictions have developed policies that either disregard marijuana possession or set thresholds for prosecution based on possession quantities. Legislation and procedures related to marijuana have resulted in a lower – or changing – caseload in many court districts.
Another example of changes in legislation is the federal Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act of 2005 (BAPCPA), which made significant changes to the bankruptcy code, making it more difficult for consumers to file for bankruptcy under Chapter 7. Bankruptcy filing levels surged before BAPCPA as consumers flooded the courts to file under the less stringent guidelines than those contained in BAPCPA. Bankruptcy courts were forced to add staff to handle the boom in caseload. However, there has since been a dramatic decline in bankruptcy filings nationwide, and bankruptcy courts have had to adjust accordingly. Other changes impacting a court’s workload include sentencing guidelines and court venue revisions.
Industry regulation is another external political factor that should be considered in a PEST analysis. It is not uncommon for regulators to require courts to establish new practices regarding courthouse construction, space utilization, and planning methodologies. Identifying these potential changes allows the court to consider their potential impacts and to plan.
Economic Factors Impacting Court Planning
Economic indicators, such as unemployment, consumer confidence, inflation, income and poverty levels, and income inequality, have long been correlated with crime rates. It is essential to analyze these data to understand how the variables may change over time, thus driving caseload trends in the future. For example, an increase in unemployment and poverty rates and a decrease in income levels are often tied to growth in both property and violent crimes. These economic indicators can directly impact judicial planning efforts.
I recently visited a court district in Virginia that had historically relied upon agriculture and natural resources to drive the local economy. However, the area has recently undergone notable economic growth. Ten colleges and universities in the region have provided a valuable resource for companies involved in research and development, and the area has seen a tremendous amount of investment, resulting in job growth and a business-friendly climate. This growth has led to a population surge as laborers relocate to the area for highly skilled jobs. The court planning team identified the likelihood for potential growth in civil cases due to the changing economic landscape and is planning for this by increasing resources that can handle civil matters.
It is also essential for a PEST analysis to consider the changing health of the regional or national economy and the impact on a court’s budget over time. A healthy economy is often tied to expansion in several critical areas, including judges and personnel, enforcement initiatives, caseload, and facilities. On the contrary, a struggling economy often leads to losses in these vital areas.
For example, during the Great Recession in 2008, many investigative and prosecutorial agencies were forced to operate under a hiring freeze, meaning fewer cases made it through the pipeline to the courts. With strapped budgets, some court districts even took the extreme measure of not hearing civil cases to conserve resources for criminal cases. Planning efforts undertaken by court jurisdictions may have yet to consider that the nation would experience an economic downturn as significant as the Great Recession. However, by utilizing a PEST analysis, court consultants can help courts plan for economic peaks and valleys and develop contingency plans to mitigate threats that result from inevitable downturns.
Social Factors Impacting Court Planning
On a national level, violent and property crime rates have experienced dramatic declines over the past two decades. Social scientists have theorized about the causes of the declines. Much research points to the relationship between external social factors and crime rates.
The historical and projected population growth rate and density are some of the most notable social factors that must be considered in court planning. I recently visited a court on the West Coast where the western portion of the district, although densely populated, was experiencing a period of slowed population growth due to a lack of affordable housing. As a result, the district's eastern portion was undergoing a period of explosive growth as the population shifted east in search of more affordable housing. This trend was projected to continue. Although the court had historically placed most of its resources in the West, we worked with the court to develop a plan to “beef up” its resources in the East to address the growing need.
Age and gender distribution are critical social factors to consider in court planning. Males in their late teens to early twenties are closely associated with a higher incidence of crime. One study found that 2% - 3% of the nationwide decline in crime during the 1990s was attributable to a decrease in residents between the ages of 15 and 29. On the other hand, growth in the elderly population is often linked to issues such as wills, mental health matters, guardianships, financial exploitation, and claims regarding eligibility for government services. A court needs to understand its population's current and projected age distribution.
Immigration patterns are also external factors that must be considered, as studies have shown that previously impoverished areas with a higher concentration of immigrants have undergone a revitalization, resulting in a decline in crime rates. Understanding social preferences in a given population is critical, such as changing attitudes toward alcohol, drugs, and crime.
Changing demographic patterns often necessitate changing initiatives by the court. For instance, a district with growing mental health or drug addiction issues may develop specialized reentry court programs tailored to the offenders' specific needs. Reentry courts are non-adversarial programs that incorporate evidence-based initiatives to reduce recidivism. The programs typically include close supervision of the offender and treatment plan; assistance with education, training, and employment; and sanction alternatives to promote rehabilitation.
Technological Factors Impacting Court Planning
Technology innovations, including those accessed by both the public and court personnel, can tremendously impact court planning. For instance, when courts adopt policies that allow for – or even mandate – electronic filing of cases, many needs related to operations, personnel, and space can change within a court system. Personnel require training in the new technology and are often transitioned away from intake roles to managing electronic records. Furthermore, document storage space can often be substantially downsized, and the size of intake areas within the clerk’s office can typically be reduced.
Advances in technology also allow court personnel to be more mobile, potentially opening the door for telecommuting. Change management is often required to get the staff on board with new telework policies. The space needs of the court may change as employees spend a portion of their time working remotely. Spaces may need to be reconfigured to reduce the number of private offices and provide more flexible workspaces that support changing work practices.
Utilizing electronic presentation technology in a courtroom can change physical requirements within a courtroom, as well as training needs for judges and staff. Conducting a PEST analysis can assist the court in identifying some potential technological advancements and how they may impact the court in the future.
Is a PEST Analysis Right for Your Court?
If any of these statements apply to you…
- I want to set a vision for my court but don’t know where to start.
- I want to be prepared for unexpected factors that could impact the operations of my court.
- I want to get a handle on data showing where my court is heading.
- I want to be proactive in planning for the needs of my court rather than reactive to external factors outside of my court’s control.
…it may be wise to engage the services of a court consulting firm to walk you through the PEST process. While no one can predict the future, developing a game plan will certainly help point you in the right direction.
