Farehandt and Grier (2003) say, “Skeptical arguments depend on doubt. Doubt happens when we cannot rule out a possibility; in other words, if we have doubts, we are not sure.” In a jail setting, officers cannot show uncertainty or hesitation. These signs show a lack of confidence, which could cause trouble. Also, correctional officers’ confidence affects how they see fairness and work quality (Bello & Matshaba, 2022; Chan, 2021). These issues could hurt trust, which is essential for safe jail operations. Therefore, if we do not deal with skepticism—which is common in jails—in a positive way it could damage trust and make our jails less safe.

The potential negative consequences of skepticism, lack of authoritativeness, and apathy in the jail system are significant. As Haynes et al. (2020) emphasized in their research, “Trust is a vital component of the effective functioning of organizations.” This research group further examined the relationships between three types of trust (coworker, supervisor, and management trust). The study revealed that “Trust in coworkers was significant for correctional officers only and that trust in supervisors and management had a more substantial impact on job stress for all correctional staff” (Haynes et al., 2020). Supervisor and management trust can also significantly contribute to employee burnout (Lambert et al., 2012). These findings underscore the seriousness of the situation and the urgent need for immediate action to prevent further erosion of trust and safety in the jail system. The focus on emotional intelligence and its influence on these crucial relationships is warranted and urgently required.

Using Emotional Intelligence

DeCelles and Anteby (2020) found a crucial assumption in previous research suggesting that workers, such as those in the corrections system, tend to become emotionally detached from the people they are responsible for (e.g., incarcerated individuals). This emotional distancing is a way for workers to shield themselves from the emotionally demanding aspects of their jobs. However, it makes it difficult to feel and act compassionately. This detachment is often referred to as apathy, which is seen as a lack of emotion. This underscores the importance of studying the impact of empathy in the field of corrections.

Correctional leaders can use emotional intelligence to address subordinates’ apathy. This involves perceiving, understanding, and managing emotions, allowing for better communication, trust-building, and motivation. Leaders can reduce stress and turnover through empathetic listening and support while fostering a more collaborative culture. Therefore, emotional intelligence is crucial for correctional leaders to help their subordinates overcome apathy and improve communication.

Conflicts between jail staff and their leaders have typically been handled by following the chain of command’s principles and applying them subjectively. Many jail systems are similar to paramilitary organizations because they must ensure that directions are followed quickly, especially during emergencies. Now the question is whether a command-and-control structure meant to address emergencies is still practical, as such emergencies are becoming less common due to more progressive, rehabilitative, restorative, and reentry activities. Ironically, a widely held belief used to promote positive outcomes in jail environments can also improve the relationships between supervisors and subordinates in jails. This belief is that building relationships based on empathic principles provides a stronger foundation.