One strategy is to develop a punishment system for officers who do not follow departmental policies. One disadvantage of this system is that it is reactive, which means it does little to prevent deviations from policy in the first place. It also involves administrators in determining whether the violation was accidental or intentional. An alternative approach is to focus on the content of the general orders themselves and the system that is in place to develop and disseminate them. Sociologist Arthur L. Stinchcombe has recently identified some basic principles that underlie successful implementation of formal policies in organizations. His model, which can be effective with law enforcement agencies, contains three components: cognitive adequacy, communicability, and a trajectory of improvement. General orders are cognitively adequate to the extent that they are based upon a simple and accurate depiction of the situations to which they are to be applied. Cognitive adequacy requires accuracy, simplicity, and clarity in the crafting of general orders and can be improved by taking a number of steps. The process of creating orders must be an inclusive communal activity that involves both those who do the work and management, who oversees the work. A second requirement for general orders is that they be communicable. General orders are more communicable when they are credible, resistant to degradation of their meaning over time (durable), and when a suitable system exists to transmit the order to all relevant officers through a cognizant learning process. The credibility of an order is enhanced when it is perceived as coming from a legitimate source. Trajectory improvement, the final requirement for general orders, involves flexibility of orders. A rigid system that does not permit timely revision and updating will eventually be viewed as dated and irrelevant to current conditions. Three additional features are required if general orders are to work. First, it should be clear that the variables of cognitive adequacy and communicability work in conjunction. Second, it should also be clear that formal rules such as general orders presuppose a set of informal processes to be effective. Third, there should be recognition of limits to what can be formalized, since many scenarios are complex and composed of distinctive combinations of elements that require creative and innovative responses that cannot be captured in a formalized general order.