As every law enforcement officer knows, the most dangerous part of any shift isn’t guns or knives — it’s cars. High speeds, fraught traffic stops, chronic fatigue, and split-second decisions combine with the unpredictability of the road to make vehicle-related incidents one of the leading causes of officer injury and death.
The recent Lexipol webinar, “Cops and Cars: Managing Risk Through Behavior-Based Supervision,” features a panel of experts including:
- Chief (Ret.) Mike Ranalli, Market Development Manager, Lexipol
- Chief Ken Wallentine, West Jordan (UT) Police Department, Senior Legal Adviser, Lexipol
- Laura Scarry, Chief of the Civil Division, McHenry County State’s Attorney’s Office
The panel discusses how leadership, human factors, and technology intersect to shape safer driving behavior. Building on Part 1 of the “Cops and Cars” webinar series, the presenters’ message is clear: Technology can help, but human supervision and culture make the difference.
Supervisors Drive Safety Culture Through Coaching, Not Punishment
A recurring theme throughout the webinar is that safety starts with supervisors, the front-line leaders who see officer behavior in real time. These leaders set the tone for the agency’s driving culture, says Chief Ranalli. “Supervisors must use vehicle data constructively — to identify risky trends and start conversations before a tragedy occurs,” he says. “These should be routine discussions, not post-incident interrogations. The goal isn’t punishment; it’s prevention.”
That distinction between coaching and discipline is critical. Chief Wallentine emphasizes that sergeants and lieutenants have the most influence over day-to-day safety decisions. “Leadership sets the tone,” he says. “If data is used only for discipline, it breeds resentment. But if supervisors clearly communicate that the goal is safety, not punishment, it becomes cultural.”
Behavior-based supervision, the panelists agree, relies on consistent communication, accountability, and positive reinforcement. Wallentine notes his agency uses telematics data — speed, seatbelt use, and braking patterns — to identify both risks and success stories. “We also reward good behavior,” he says. “Officers who terminate pursuits appropriately or demonstrate restraint can receive small recognition awards. Positive reinforcement works.”
Scarry, a former police officer and longtime attorney, adds that supervisors who take time to educate rather than reprimand create an environment where officers can acknowledge mistakes and improve. “Have these hard conversations early and often,” she says. “Encourage good habits. Recognize fatigue and complacency as risks. Keep safety front of mind.”
Coaching builds trust, in other words, and trust builds compliance. When supervisors focus on mentorship rather than punishment, safety becomes a shared value — not just an order handed down from on high.
Timely legal analysis on law enforcement-related cases: SUBSCRIBE NOW!
Technology Enhances Safety, but Can’t Replace Judgment
Modern patrol vehicles are increasingly equipped with tools that promise to make the job safer. These include dashcams, backup sensors, telematics, and Advanced Driver Assistance Systems (ADAS). But technology, the panelists caution, should complement (not replace) officer training and judgment.
Wallentine puts it bluntly: “Technology is a tool, not a substitute for training.” While ADAS features such as automatic braking and lane departure warnings have reduced some collisions, he explains, overreliance on them creates new risks. “We had officers depending on automated braking and shift-to-park features — until those systems failed, causing crashes,” he says.
Ranalli agrees technology’s value depends on how agencies use it. “Technology can’t replace human awareness,” he says. “Supervisors must use vehicle data constructively — to identify risky trends and start conversations before a tragedy occurs.”
Scarry underscores the importance of human judgment by quoting researcher Sidney Dekker: “You can’t beat the human out of human error.” She goes on to explain that while automated systems can help mitigate risk, they can’t account for human perception, fatigue, or emotion — all of which influence behavior behind the wheel. “If humans were capable of flawless decisions in high-stress moments, we wouldn’t need ADAS at all,” she says.
Equipment may fail, but critical thinking and good decision-making never go out of service.
Use Vehicle Data to Educate, Not Discipline
The widespread adoption of telematics data in patrol vehicles, measuring everything from acceleration to braking, has transformed how agencies monitor officer driving. Yet the success of these programs, the panel warns, depends entirely on how the information is used.
“Supervisors must use data to educate, not discipline,” Ranalli says. “Are officers wearing seatbelts correctly? Are speeds appropriate for conditions? Are nonemergency responses being driven like emergencies?” He stresses that these questions should lead to coaching conversations, not punitive write-ups.
Wallentine echoes that sentiment: “The key is using data for education, not punishment.” He explains that when officers believe telematics exist to catch them doing something wrong, they stop trusting the system. But when the same data is used to recognize improvement or reward restraint, attitudes shift. “If supervisors clearly communicate that the goal is safety, not punishment, it becomes cultural,” he says.
Scarry adds that data-driven supervision must remain within the chain of command — not transferred to HR or external investigators. “If HR becomes the driver of ‘safety investigations,’ it can easily shift from learning to punishment,” she says. “These should remain coaching opportunities, focused on education and compliance.”
By treating telematics as a learning tool instead of a surveillance system, agencies can use technology to foster growth rather than fear, turning data into a catalyst for safety, not discipline.
Leadership Must Emphasize Safety Over Strict Enforcement
In a profession built on courage and accountability, many officers feel internal pressure to drive faster, push through fatigue, or stay in risky pursuits. The panelists agree leaders must counter that instinct by explicitly valuing safety over apprehension. Ranalli underscores the sentiment with a sobering reminder: “Nothing on the other end of that call is worth me having to tell your spouse you’re not coming home.”
Crashes, he warns, are the greatest liability in law enforcement — not shootings. “High speeds and fatigue kill far more officers,” he says. “Supervisors should remind their teams of that reality.”
Scarry adds that command staff play a vital role in normalizing safety as the highest priority. “For the supervisors attending today, thank you,” she says. “You are the front-line leaders who make the most impact.”
Wallentine points to programs like Below 100 — a national initiative promoting the principles of slowing down, wearing your seatbelt, and keeping in mind that complacency kills. “Supervisors should monitor pursuits live, intervene when needed, and encourage tactical breathing — what I call ‘combat Lamaze’ — to help officers make calmer decisions under stress,” he says.
Together, the panelists emphasize that officer safety must be a nonnegotiable part of agency culture. Accountability, after all, begins with leadership.
Behavior-Based Supervision Prevents the Predictable
The panelists close the discussion by connecting supervision and training back to human performance science — a field that quantifies how perception and stress affect decision-making. Officers often face visual and cognitive distortions during vehicle encounters, Ranalli points out, including the perceptual phenomenon known as looming, where an approaching object appears to expand exponentially in size: “When something is coming straight at you, your brain perceives it as growing in size faster than it actually is, which heightens the sense of threat and triggers tunnel vision.”
Recognizing these physiological factors, Ranalli argues, allows agencies to better design training and policies that reflect how officers truly react under pressure. Wallentine adds that understanding human behavior isn’t just theoretical — it’s practical. “If it’s predictable, it’s preventable,” he says, quoting risk management expert Gordon Graham. “Predictable situations, like cars accelerating toward officers, must be part of scenario-based training.”
The science behind behavior-based supervision, the panelists agree, is about understanding risk rather than assigning blame. By anticipating how humans behave under stress, agencies can prepare their officers to make better choices before tragedy strikes.
Changing Mindsets, Saving Lives
At its core, the message of the webinar isn’t about technology, liability, or even policy — it’s about leadership. The conversation reminds law enforcement professionals that safety culture doesn’t evolve through memos or mandates. It’s built by people, one decision, one conversation, and one coaching moment at a time.
Ranalli closes with a thought that encapsulates the spirit of the discussion: “It’s all good … until it isn’t. That’s the mindset we have to change.”
In the end, the key to safer patrol operations isn’t in the dashboard, the camera, or the cloud. It’s in the behaviors, supervision, and leadership that turn awareness into action.
