Bureaucratic Harm: Moving Carceral Organizations: From Coercive to Enabling Formalization

• In Event: Disruption and Regrouping: Learning about Prisons and Moving Beyond What’s Always Been

Abstract

Much of the existing literature classifies carceral systems into pre-established organizational categories ranging from total institutions (Goffman, 1968) to militaristic hierarchies (Schlosser, 1998), to social control/punitive structures (Lerman, 2013). One common feature among these typological categories is bureaucracy. However, the bureaucratic form is typically labeled, but is rarely challenged, examined, and/or understood. This paper uses organizational theory to consider bureaucratic formalization (e.g., formal rules/procedures) within prisons/jails by framing carceral bureaucracy using Adler and Borys (1996) typology of enabling and coercive bureaucracies. Using data from in-depth, conversational interviews with 423 prison/jail staff collected in 24 U.S. prisons/jails between 2012 and 2024 the findings suggest that despite some differences, many prisons/jails operate as highly mechanistic institutions with high and coercive formalization. Yet—and perhaps most promising—with a focused and intentional shift away from coercion, prisons/jails could begin to function as enabling bureaucracies—where workers perceive challenges as opportunities, the ability to contribute to best-practices, an understanding of organizational context and decision-making, and risks as the potential for learning. The paper concludes with both practical and theoretical implications for reconceptualizing carceral bureaucracies to improve employee recruitment, retention, and well-being and create work and living spaces that enhance, rather than deteriorate, human lives.

Author

• Danielle Rudes, Sam Houston State University