Event report of findings from a new N8 PRP Agile Evidence Review. 

On 21 April 2026, the N8 Policing Research Partnership hosted a webinar to launch the publication of a new Agile Evidence Review report, Measuring Police Culture. The webinar was attended by 42 participants from universities, policing organisations, and policy bodies across the UK and Ireland.

The report, funded by N8 PRP, was conducted by Naomi Davis‑Crane (Liverpool John Moore University) and examined the measurement of police culture in terms of the methods available, their limitations and benefits, and whether they can inform ‘culture change’.

Agile Evidence Reviews (AERs) bring together research evidence, grey literature, and relevant guidance to provide a rapid, high-level overview of what is currently known on a priority policing topic. N8 PRP produces AERs to support evidence-informed decision-making, improve access to research, and help identify gaps where further study is needed.

The Contention of ‘Culture’

Davis‑Crane opened the session by outlining how the project had developed in response to the National Policing Culture and Inclusion Strategy, which emphasises the importance of measuring and monitoring culture. This prompts the question, is it possible to measure culture in policing organisations? As Davis-Crane noted, “the moment you start talking about cultural measurement, you get into quite a contentious situation with academics.”

The AER drew on a systematic review of academic literature to assess the range of available methods for evaluating organisational culture, their strengths and limitations, and their suitability for tracking cultural change. The review found that while a number of quantitative tools exist, they struggle to capture the depth and nuance of culture, particularly in relation to subcultures. As the report highlights, quantitative instruments “are inherently limited in the depth of insight which may be derived”.

Quantitative, Qualitative, and Mixed Methods

Davis‑Crane explained that quantitative surveys offer advantages such as scalability, anonymity, and replicability. However, their structured nature makes it difficult to surface the complex, multi‑layered characteristics of police culture. Many tools were originally designed for corporate environments, raising questions about their applicability to policing.

Qualitative approaches such as interviews, workshops, and ethnographic observation provide richer insights into values, beliefs, and behaviours. Yet they are resource‑intensive, heavily shaped by researcher interpretation, and lack the replicability needed to track change over time. As Davis‑Crane noted, qualitative methods generate “a large volume of data for analysis” and require significant organisational trust and psychological safety to be effective.

Mixed‑method approaches offer potential by combining breadth and depth, but they demand substantial time, access, and resourcing, often beyond what policing organisations or external researchers can sustain.

Culture vs Climate: A Promising Alternative

One of the most thought‑provoking contributions of the webinar was Davis‑Crane’s argument that organisational climate may offer a more practical route for monitoring change. While culture reflects deeply embedded values and assumptions, climate captures day‑to‑day attitudes and behaviours. These elements that are more observable, measurable, and malleable.

Climate encompasses factors such as role clarity, leadership support, conflict management, and esprit de corps. These can be assessed through regular staff surveys and engagement mechanisms already familiar to policing organisations. Davis‑Crane suggested that climate may provide “a more readily accessible means of assessing organisational behaviour” and a more realistic basis for evaluating interventions over time.

Are Measures of Culture Useful for Tracking Change?

The central conclusion of the AER was that measures of culture alone are unlikely to be effective tools for informing or tracking cultural change. Culture is too complex, too multi‑layered, and too intangible to be captured through a single instrument or method. As Davis‑Crane summarised, culture “exists in the interactions between people and the interactions with their organisational environment,” creating “substantial barriers to tracking culture in a linear fashion”.

Looking Ahead

Despite these challenges, the speakers emphasised the value of continued collaboration between policing and academia. Future research may focus on discrete cultural elements, such as trust, cynicism, or comradeship, rather than attempting to measure culture wholesale. The panel also highlighted the importance of understanding how forthcoming police reforms may shape both culture and climate.

Participants left with a clearer understanding of the limits of cultural measurement, and the opportunities that lie in more targeted, realistic approaches to organisational learning and change.

Read the report

The report, presentation slides, and a recording of the presentation are available at:

Measuring Police Culture

Related