From Implementation to Governance: What Changed—and Why

When body-worn cameras were first widely adopted, the primary challenge facing law enforcement agencies was implementation.

Agencies needed policies written quickly. They needed training delivered at scale. They needed programs stood up under public, legal, and political pressure. Much of the early work in this space—ours included—was focused on helping agencies meet those immediate demands.

Over time, however, the nature of the challenge changed.

Body-worn camera programs matured. Video volume increased exponentially. Supervisory workloads expanded. Review expectations varied across units. Public-records and discovery demands intensified. Accountability requirements became more complex. At the same time, new technologies—particularly AI-assisted review tools—began entering the conversation.

The central question agencies face today is no longer how to deploy body-worn cameras.

It is how to govern them.

Training alone does not solve this problem.

Policy alone does not solve this problem.

Technology alone does not solve this problem.

The most significant risks agencies now encounter stem from inconsistent review practices, unclear supervisory expectations, undocumented decision-making, and governance models that do not scale with volume or complexity.

In other words, the risk has shifted from implementation failure to governance failure.

Effective governance requires more than rules or tools. It requires clear operating structures that define how footage is reviewed, how supervisors exercise judgment, how decisions are documented, and how accountability is sustained without replacing human discretion.

This is particularly true as agencies consider AI-assisted video review. While these tools offer potential efficiencies, they also introduce new governance questions related to transparency, consistency, bias, and oversight. Without clear policy, supervisory frameworks, and human-in-the-loop controls, technology can amplify risk rather than reduce it.

As the profession has evolved, so too has the work required to support it.

The focus today must be on helping agencies design governance models that preserve professional judgment, apply policy consistently, and withstand legal, public, and operational scrutiny over time. Training and subject-matter expertise remain important—but they are most effective when they operate within clearly defined governance structures.

For additional context on how this thinking has shaped our work, see Our Shift in Focus.