Managing Change in the Criminal Justice System

Managing Change in the Criminal Justice System

One organization within the American criminal justice system that has undergone significant changes during the last few decades is the parole board, which is the institution responsible for determining when a prisoner is eligible for early release. Historically, parole has been used by the criminal justice system to regulate overcrowded prison inmate populations, while providing rehabilitated criminals with a second chance to assimilate into society. Since the beginning of the 21st century, however, a confluence of increased security during the War on Terror, rising crime rates across the nation, and widely publicized instances of recidivism has spurred politicians and the public alike to call for the abolishment of the parole system. According to the United States Senate Research Center's brief on the shifting landscape of parole boards in the American criminal justice system, "while some states have abolished parole, systems similar to parole still exist throughout the United States" (Reimer, 1999), and this patchwork system of parole and non-parole states has led to widespread institutional and organizational adjustments. By examining the various methods of implementation used by state governments to adjust or abolish their parole board system, one can assess the relative efficacy of these efforts from the perspective of change management, which is one of the essential pillars of proper organizational leadership.

As organizational management expert Evan Bahe observes, "the successful implementation of change requires a well-planned strategy that utilizes the company's key players and follows the organization's culture" (2004), and it is clear that certain states have embraced this philosophy while others have failed to adopt proper change management techniques. The tide of parole board abolishment began in the 1970's, as prisoner release rates skyrocketed due to liberal governance, and at this time "prisoners released on parole had risen from 44% in 1940, to a high of 72% in 1977, (which) led some states to question the very foundations of the practice of parole" (Reimer, 1999). When the state of Maine abolished its parole board system in 1975, the bold move inspired many other states to implement similar changes to their criminal justice system, with a total of 14 states forgoing their parole powers entirely by 1999. By removing the apparatus by which a prisoner's sentence may be reduced or voided, these states forced the criminal justice system to implement systemic changes, with the judiciary now being asked to impose strict sentences, typically in conjunction with mandatory minimum terms and other sentencing guidelines. The abolishment of parole, while seemingly designed to improve the criminal justice system, has created a litany of organizational and logistical dilemmas for front-line stakeholders such as judges, and in Virginia for example, "the judge must remember to impose a split sentence with a term of probation, to follow prison, in order to have control of released prisoners" (Reimer, 1999).