Manager's Briefcase
Research Brief: Kentucky Circuit Court Judicial Perceptions of Efficiency and Culture
by Julia Hylton Adams, JD, Deborah Williamson, PhD, and Adam K. Matz, MS

Like many court systems across the states, the Kentucky Court of Justice (KCOJ) has faced continued financial hardship amidst the economic downturn of the last several years. In the past two years the KCOJ, a unified court system, has relinquished over 100 positions as a direct result of budget cuts (Hiatt, 2010). Such cuts are likely to continue as the courts face a $10 million deficit going into the next fiscal year. Recognizing the need to do more with less, the Administrative Office of the Courts (AOC) began critically examining the courts' services, competencies, and capabilities. In the report Judicial Perceptions of Efficiency and Culture: A Research Brief and Needs Assessment Matz, Adams, and Williamson (2010) examined circuit court judicial perceptions of collective efficacy, accessibility, resources, delay, and culture. Using a specially developed survey incorporating Ostrom, Ostrom, Hanson, and Kleiman's (2007) Court Culture Assessment Instrument (CCAI), all Kentucky circuit court judges were asked questions related to five guiding research questions; 1) are circuits working cooperatively to maximize efficiency, 2) are courts meeting the needs of the public, 3) are resources allocated to the courts adequate, 4) is delay a problem within the courts, and 5) can the courts be characterized by a specific cultural orientation?

To date there has not been an attempt to examine KCOJ circuit court judges perceptions of the courts' operation. Relying on the court research literature, the KCOJ Circuit Court Culture Survey (CCCS) was developed by the AOC Research and Statistics unit. Pretested with a select group of circuit and senior judges, the survey was administered to all circuit judges. To keep costs low, the initial survey roll-out was administered to all circuit judges who attended the KCOJ's annual 2009 Judicial College. Relying on a variation of Dillman's survey methodology (Babbie, 2007), follow-ups consisted of several e-mail and mailed reminders resulting in an impressive 76.2% response rate (N=109). We summarize our research findings in the following paragraphs.

1. Are circuits working cooperatively to maximize efficiency? Overall, circuit court judges had high ratings of court staff cohesion. Aggregately speaking, circuit judges agreed their circuit strives to improve case management efficiency, features strong leadership, ample input in the development of new KCOJ policies and procedures, and a keen desire to improve case management practices. On the other hand, however, there is some concern circuit judges feel there is ambiguity in what the KCOJ or their circuit's long-term goals are. This sentiment is further echoed by a lack of intra-agency collaboration and cultural congruence.
2. Are courts meeting the needs of the public? Overall circuit court judges generally agree the courts are adequately accessible to the public, litigants with disabilities, individuals who speak different languages, and pro se litigants. In terms of quality, judges agree the court treats all individuals with respect and provides enough time and attention to each case. On the other hand, however, some judges felt their circuit failed to disseminate pertinent information to the public. There was also some concern judicial staff were uncomfortable with the handling of pro se litigation.
3. Are resources allocated to the courts adequate? Circuit court judges agreed courtroom staff were more than competent for their respective jobs, but were generally underpaid for their service. Some judges expressed dissatisfaction with the allocation of judicial staff across the state.
4. Is delay a problem within the courts? Results concerning delay were mixed with most judges agreeing delay was not a problem, but some indicated to the contrary and some were unsure. However, most judges agreed trials began on the first scheduled trial date. Overall, judges felt their circuit had shown improvement since their appointment to the bench. When asked what leads to delay judges cited a lack of attorney preparation, excessive caseload, difficulty acquiring witnesses, police, and others for testimony, and scheduling conflicts. When asked what would improve case flow, judges cited the need for a more comprehensive, fully-functional, case management system as a top priority. In addition the judges indicated a need for more training, and better staff/resource allocation.
5. Can the courts be characterized by a specific cultural orientation? Relying on the Court Culture Assessment Instrument (CCAI) developed by Ostrom and colleagues (2007), the KCOJ circuit court was classified by the circuit judges as predominantly autonomous with a desire to be more hierarchical and networked in nature across each of the six work areas examined including case management style, judge-staff relations, judge-clerk relations, change management, courthouse leadership, and internal organization. It's important to realize while judges would prefer more structure and collaborative involvement in the court process they still wish to maintain a level of freedom, or autonomy, in their circuit as well. In other words, the research implies the courts wish to be unified but not uniform.

The research conducted by Matz and colleagues (2010) indicates there is a need for clearer goals for the KCOJ as an organization. The results imply circuits exist independently of each other, perhaps to a detriment to each other. Judges generally agree the courts would benefit from a more unified, collaborative, structure. One solution sorely needed is a better functioning case management system. Some judges and clerks have referred to the current system as "antiquated" and differences in local court record-keeping practices have created inconsistencies, not to mention the incompatibility between the various case management systems utilized by the AOC. The results of this study suggests there is a need for more training for judges and courtroom staff, special training for judges and staff concerning pro se litigation, improved compensation for deputy clerks and judicial staff, an improved allocation of judicial staff and resources, and a need for a modern case management system. For questions and comments or to see the complete report please direct all correspondence to .

left to right: Julia Hylton Adams, JD; Deborah Williamson, PhD; Adam K. Matz, MS

Copyright 1999-2012, National Association of State Judicial Educators
Contact Web Developer