When Institutions Are Harmed from Within
Public institutions rarely falter because of a lack of policy, strategy, or vision. They falter when internal conduct undermines the very systems designed to advance them. In his most recent column in the Force Orders, Police Commissioner Dr Kevin Blake, invites members of the Jamaica Constabulary Force into that uncomfortable but necessary truth. He does so without naming individuals, and without retreating into abstraction. Instead, he frames integrity as a leadership obligation and progress as something fragile enough to be stalled by internal failure.
The Commissioner’s language is deliberate. He does not describe the organisation as being besieged from outside. He identifies the greater danger plainly: “Much of the challenges that we have faced, are caused by our very own.” He goes further, calling these challenges what they are; “self-inflicted.” This framing matters because it shifts the conversation away from defensiveness and toward responsibility. It places agency where it belongs. Institutions do not drift into crisis by accident. They are weakened when standards are compromised by those entrusted to uphold them.
What makes this intervention noteworthy is its timing. The column arrives at a moment when the Force is demonstrating measurable progress in crime reduction and institutional reform. The Commissioner recognises that success creates its own vulnerability. Momentum can be interrupted. Trust can be eroded. Focus can be lost. He warns that self-inflicted wounds “provide the greatest risk of distraction and disappointment.” This is a sober assessment. Progress invites scrutiny, and internal failures supply critics with narratives that distract from hard-won gains.
The Commissioner’s treatment of representation sharpens this point. He reminds members that representation carries ethical weight: “that which represents must be a reflection of that which is represented.” In disciplined organisations, symbolism and conduct are inseparable. Leadership roles do not merely confer authority; they communicate values. He states the standard clearly: “There is absolutely no place in representation for persons who lack integrity, discipline, credibility, and honesty.” The absence of qualifiers is intentional. Integrity is not negotiable, contextual, or situational.
The column also offers a glimpse into leadership decision-making under pressure. Dr Blake acknowledges that his actions generated “significant public discourse” and that “many ascribed several unpleasant motives” to his decision. He does not retreat from that reality. He explains it. “I would have been negligent to knowingly allow this to continue because of the fear of backlash and disapproval.” This sentence reveals a leadership ethic grounded in duty rather than popularity. It frames accountability as a moral obligation, not a public relations exercise.
Importantly, the Commissioner directs this lesson toward the future leadership of the Force. He addresses those who will one day occupy senior command and issues a clear charge: “as leaders we must never let popularity get in the way of right decisions, even when it is hard.” This is not rhetorical flourish. It is institutional instruction. Leadership, in this telling, is defined by the willingness to absorb discomfort in service of the organisation’s long-term integrity.
The column also rejects performative leadership. Dr Blake cautions that “leadership and representation must never be used as a stage for self interest and grandstanding.” He links credibility to restraint, ethics, and service. He is equally direct about those drawn to authority for the wrong reasons: “if your first order of business is self preservation rather than the interest of the organization and its members, you are better off staying away from leadership positions.” Few leaders articulate this boundary so explicitly. Fewer still do so in writing to their own institution.
What emerges from this section of the column is a portrait of leadership committed to organisational hygiene. Cleansing, in this sense more about is preventive care than punitive zeal. It is the deliberate removal of behaviours and actors that threaten institutional health. It is clear that, having achieved significant success in crime reduction, which the entire country has been clamouring for, Commissioner Blake is now moving to slay another beast that Jamaica has been clamouring for. The Commissioner is cleaning house.
The call to action is clear. Members are asked to protect the institution by protecting its values. They are urged to remain “focused, disciplined, and united around our shared mission.” They are reminded that integrity is demonstrated “even when no one is watching and especially when it is difficult.” These are not abstract ideals. They are operational principles.
In confronting self-inflicted wounds head-on, the Commissioner affirms that reform is sustained by courage within. Progress is preserved when leadership chooses clarity over convenience. Institutions endure when standards are enforced without fear. The challenge now rests with every member of the Force to meet that standard, protect the gains achieved, and ensure that the organisation’s future is shaped by those fit to lead it.
