Hierarchy Optimized:

Supervisory Leadership in Complex Jail Systems

Marshall Stowers, PhD

Jail leadership in the twenty-first century faces a paradox: the same hierarchical structures that provide order and accountability in jails can also stifle adaptability, innovation, and morale. Jail Executives (JEs) operate in environments characterized by strict paramilitary hierarchies, where decision-making often follows a top-down approach. Hierarchical structures were built to ensure control, safety, and legal compliance, but they also generate rigidity that complicates leadership and organizational health.

In many ways, a hierarchy functions as a stabilizing spine. Like the backbone of the human body, it provides structure and support; without it, the system collapses into chaos. However, just as the spine requires muscles, tendons, and nerves to give it flexibility and responsiveness, so too must hierarchy be complemented by inclusive and adaptive leadership. A rigid spine without flexibility becomes brittle. A flexible body without structure cannot stand. Jail supervisors must learn to see hierarchy as the spine that provides alignment, while leadership theories serve as the connective tissue that enables movement and adaptation.

The role of hierarchy in jails has deep roots. Max Weber described bureaucracy as essential for ensuring predictability and order, and jails adopted this model as a means to maintain discipline and accountability. Similarly, the paramilitary influence: uniforms, ranks, and chains of command, was imported to mirror the military's emphasis on obedience and structure. This history explains why jails lean so heavily on hierarchy. However, history also demonstrates the risks: overly rigid bureaucracies falter in times of change, and overly militarized systems alienate those they govern. The lesson for supervisors is that hierarchy is necessary, but insufficient on its own.

This article draws on a qualitative phenomenological study that I conducted involving eight Jail Executives from diverse areas across the United States. The study examined how leaders experience success in large, complex, hierarchical jail environments. Through in-depth interviews, participants shared their challenges, successes, and leadership strategies, revealing critical insights for supervisors who must operate within these systems. Their words illustrate how inclusivity, adaptability, and professional development can optimize hierarchy’s stabilizing role.

Supervisors, often caught between upper administration and line staff, are uniquely positioned to either perpetuate rigidity or transform it into empowerment. The findings of this study guide how supervisors can reframe hierarchy not as an obstacle but as a framework (a spine) that, when infused with adaptive leadership, social learning, and self-efficacy, strengthens the entire organization.

Challenges of Jail Hierarchy

Participants consistently emphasized the challenges that arise within hierarchical jail environments. Among the most prominent were communication bottlenecks, systemic rigidity, staff burnout, resource limitations, and public scrutiny. One participant explained, “The biggest challenge is making sure that the message going from the top down is clear and consistent. If it gets diluted or twisted, that’s when you lose trust.” Supervisors must not only transmit information faithfully but also interpret it in ways that motivate their teams. This dual role makes them both gatekeepers and translators within the chain of command.

System rigidity was another concern. Several participants noted that rules designed to enforce discipline could become barriers to problem-solving. As one remarked, “The policies are there for a reason, but if you can't adapt them to the situation, you're setting yourself up for failure.” Supervisors often confront the dilemma of balancing strict adherence with the need for situational judgment. For example, an officer interacting with an inmate experiencing a mental health crisis may require flexibility in applying policies.

Burnout also loomed large. The pressures of long hours, exposure to trauma, and understaffing erode morale. Supervisors feel the weight of responsibility not only to keep operations running smoothly but also to support the mental well-being of their staff. “I've seen some of the best officers leave because they felt like no one had their back,” a participant reflected. For supervisors, addressing burnout requires vigilance, empathy, and proactive engagement. Without intervention, burnout metastasizes, spreading frustration and cynicism throughout a unit.

Resource shortages, whether in staffing, training, or funding, further exacerbate these issues. Supervisors frequently become the front line in “making do with less,” while ensuring standards are met. This may involve stretching staff across units, delaying necessary training, or managing with outdated equipment. As one leader lamented, “It shouldn’t take months to replace radios.” The drawn-out process eroded staff trust in leadership’s ability to meet even basic needs. “If they can’t get me a working radio,” one executive recalled an officer asking, “why should I trust them with my safety?”

Staffing shortages deserve special mention. Jails across the country are losing experienced officers at a faster rate than they can be replaced. Supervisors are responsible for filling gaps, training recruits, and ensuring safety. Additionally, generational divides complicate the issue, as younger staff often expect more collaborative leadership and clearer career development paths. In comparison, older staff may resist cultural shifts. Supervisors must bridge these expectations while preserving order. Retention becomes as critical as recruitment, and supervisors carry the burden of keeping talented officers engaged when the broader system feels unsupportive.

Technology adoption also presented challenges. Leaders described the slow rollout of digital tools, such as electronic logs or body-worn cameras, often paired with insufficient training. Supervisors were tasked with enforcing compliance while simultaneously teaching staff to use unfamiliar systems and software. These dual roles stretched supervisors thin, reinforcing the sense that they must solve problems without adequate resources.

Compounding these operational challenges is the reality of public scrutiny. Executives acknowledged that communication intended to reassure often backfired. Messages filtered through multiple levels were stripped of candor, becoming so formal and polished that they lost credibility. One executive reflected, “By the time we got information to staff or the public, it was so sanitized no one believed it.” Instead of fostering trust, these communications deepened skepticism both internally and externally. In a profession already under intense public scrutiny, this gap widened the mistrust between leadership, staff, and the community.

Defining Success in Hierarchy

Despite these challenges, leaders expansively defined success. Security and order were essential, but success extended beyond control. Supervisors play a critical role in shaping a culture that values adaptability, morale, and dignity. “Success is when your people go home safe at the end of the day,” one executive explained. However, others emphasized broader measures, including reducing turnover, promoting staff pride, and encouraging innovation within established guidelines. One participant noted, “If you leave the place better than you found it, if your staff are more confident and capable because of your leadership, that's success.”

Supervisors were seen as pivotal in shaping this legacy. They are close enough to line staff to mentor and inspire, yet positioned within the hierarchy to influence culture and policy. Success for supervisors thus becomes less about individual authority and more about cultivating environments where others thrive. One executive summarized it this way: “My greatest accomplishment isn't my title, it’s seeing people I’ve led become strong leaders themselves.”

Success was also tied to adaptability. During the COVID-19 pandemic, leaders explained that success had to be redefined daily. Procedures changed rapidly, and supervisors had to manage uncertainty. One reflected, “We couldn’t stop the pandemic, but we could adapt fast enough to protect staff and inmates.” Supervisors who modeled adaptability signaled to staff that flexibility could coexist with structure, just as a flexible spine enables the body to withstand strain without breaking.

Executives also spoke of legacy as the ultimate definition of success. “My measure of success is seeing sergeants grow into captains, and captains into chiefs,” one said. “If they carry forward a better culture, then we've succeeded.” This generational perspective reminds supervisors that their actions today ripple forward, shaping jail culture for decades to come.

Some defined success through immediate operational outcomes such as incident-free days, efficient headcounts, and compliance with audits. However, others warned that focusing only on these short-term metrics risks missing the broader picture. “You can run a tight ship for a year,” one leader explained, “but if your staff are leaving in droves and your culture is toxic, that's not success. It’s collapsing in slow motion.” This distinction is vital for supervisors: true success combines the immediate with the enduring, striking a balance between performance and people.

Another participant noted that success also means sparking innovation at the ground level. “If your sergeants and lieutenants are coming to you with new ideas, that's a sign you've succeeded,” the executive said. Encouraging initiative within the hierarchical structure proved essential for long-term organizational health. Staff pride and willingness to innovate became critical markers of a thriving culture.

Leadership in Action

The study's findings underscored the importance of three interlocking leadership theories for navigating hierarchy: Adaptive Leadership (Heifetz et al., 2009), Self-Efficacy (Bandura, 1997), and Social Learning Theory (Bandura, 1977). Together, these frameworks provide supervisors with tools to transform challenges into opportunities for growth.

Adaptive leadership requires leaders to distinguish between technical and adaptive challenges. As one participant described, “Sometimes the answer isn't in the book. You have to help your staff figure out new ways to get through problems while still staying inside the rules.” Supervisors can model adaptability by encouraging problem-solving and creating space for staff to propose solutions, thereby reducing rigidity and building trust. For instance, one executive allowed supervisors to design alternative unit schedules, giving them ownership while cutting overtime.

Self-efficacy highlights the belief in one's ability to succeed. Supervisors can strengthen their team members' self-efficacy by providing training, offering constructive feedback, and recognizing achievements. “The best thing you can do for your officers is show them they can handle it,” one leader reflected. “Confidence is contagious.” When supervisors model competence and resilience, they reinforce staff belief in their own capabilities, leading to improved performance and lower turnover. One jail leader described how simply recognizing a successful de-escalation during a briefing lifted morale across the unit.

Another supervisor recalled helping a rookie officer during their first high-stress incident. Rather than taking over, the supervisor coached the officer step by step, reinforcing decisions and offering encouragement afterward. “That officer walked away believing he could handle the next one,” the supervisor explained. “If I had stepped in and done it for him, he would have lost confidence.” This illustrates how supervisors can build durable self-efficacy by guiding rather than overshadowing.

Social Learning Theory reinforces the role of modeling. Jail environments are observation-rich: officers continuously learn behaviors, attitudes, and values from their supervisors. “They're watching everything you do,” one participant noted. Supervisors who demonstrate fairness, consistency, and professionalism set the tone for the entire unit. Informal mentoring and leading by example proved as impactful as formal training. A supervisor who consistently treats inmates and staff with respect, even during stressful moments, communicates volumes about expected behavior.

One executive described breaking a cycle of toxic supervision by assigning respected mentors to guide younger officers. “We had lieutenants who thought yelling was leadership. By pairing rookies with supervisors who knew how to listen, we shifted the culture within a year.” Such examples highlight the transformative power of positive modeling, demonstrating how supervisors can recalibrate their culture by embodying professionalism in every interaction.

Another case involved a comprehensive training exercise that combined adaptive leadership, self-efficacy, and social learning. During a simulated disturbance drill, supervisors were not only asked to coordinate responses but also to mentor junior officers through the decision-making process. Leaders reported that officers gained confidence in their own abilities, learned by watching experienced supervisors, and adapted protocols on the fly. “We came out of that drill stronger as a team,” one participant said. “It was practice for the real thing, and everyone grew from it.” These three frameworks are not abstract academic theories; they directly inform daily supervisory practices. Whether navigating a staffing crisis, managing conflict, or guiding new officers, supervisors can lean on adaptive strategies, instill self-confidence, and model professional behavior that cascades through the hierarchy.

One participant tied all three theories together in describing leadership during a facility-wide lockdown. “We had to improvise, we had to keep people believing we could get through it, and we had to show them what right looked like. That combination got us through without losing anyone.” Adaptive leadership, self-efficacy, and social learning, when practiced together, transformed what could have been a collapse into an affirmation of resilience. Supervisors who embrace this triad provide staff with clarity, courage, and confidence in the face of uncertainty.

Synergy: Optimized, Not Overthrown

The integration of adaptive leadership, self-efficacy, and social learning produces synergy that strengthens rather than undermines hierarchical systems. This challenges the misconception that inclusivity and hierarchy are at odds. As this study found, hierarchy is optimized, not overthrown, by inclusivity. One participant summarized, “When you involve your people in decisions, even little ones, they feel valued. That doesn’t weaken your authority. It makes the team stronger.” Inclusivity at the supervisory level builds buy-in, reduces resistance, and encourages ownership of outcomes. A hierarchy that ignores voices becomes brittle. One that integrates them becomes resilient.

Executives cautioned against imbalance. Adaptation without confidence left staff fearful. Confidence without modeling faded. Modeling without adaptation solidified outdated practices. Only through synergy could supervisors lead beyond hierarchy while still preserving their stabilizing role. One leader emphasized, “If you leave out one piece, it doesn’t hold together. You have to bring them all together for it to work.”

Implications for Supervisors

For supervisors in jails, the implications of this study are clear. Leadership in hierarchical systems demands more than mere compliance; it requires the intentional cultivation of both people and culture. First, supervisors must view themselves as culture-carriers. Their behavior sets the tone for their units. Demonstrating adaptability, fairness, and professionalism sends signals that resonate throughout the organization's hierarchy. Every action becomes a form of modeling that teaches staff what is acceptable and valued.

Second, supervisors should actively build staff confidence. Recognizing achievements, providing coaching, and empowering staff to solve problems enhances morale and retention. In high-stress environments, confidence becomes a survival tool. Supervisors who build confidence equip staff to withstand the pressures of jail work without succumbing to burnout.

Third, supervisors must embrace inclusivity as a strength. Soliciting input, involving staff in problem-solving, and valuing diverse perspectives enhance decision-making and build commitment. Inclusivity does not erode hierarchy; it optimizes it.

Finally, supervisors should recognize the legacy of leadership. Success is not defined solely by immediate outcomes, but by the development of capable and confident staff who carry lessons forward. As one leader reflected, “If the people you mentored are leading better than you did, that’s the real measure of success.” This legacy ensures that the stabilization provided by the hierarchy remains strong for future generations of jail leaders.

Practical takeaways for supervisors include:

Begin each shift by reinforcing expectations and recognizing prior successes.
Create space in staff meetings for officer input.
Model fairness even under stress.
Treat each decision as an opportunity to teach as well as to govern.

Supervisors might consider maintaining “leadership logs” where they reflect daily on how they modeled adaptability, built confidence, or encouraged inclusivity. Over time, these practices create intentional habits that shape culture.

A simple action checklist can guide supervisors:

Model adaptability daily: show staff that flexibility and structure can coexist.
Build confidence: delegate meaningful responsibilities and celebrate competence.
Practice inclusivity: invite input, acknowledge ideas, and integrate feedback when possible.
Mentor for legacy: invest in the next generation, ensuring culture improves over time.

By doing so, supervisors improve hierarchy, ensuring it functions not as a cage but as a backbone.

Conclusion

The findings of this study highlight that while hierarchy is an inescapable feature of jail systems, it need not be an obstacle to leadership success. For supervisors, the challenge is to embrace hierarchy as a framework to be optimized through adaptability, inclusivity, and empowerment.

Supervisors hold the keys to transforming rigid structures into resilient organizations. By modeling professional behavior, instilling confidence, and inviting participation, they create environments where staff and organizations thrive. In doing so, supervisors do more than maintain order; they contribute to a culture of safety, dignity, and innovation that strengthens the entire jail system.

Hierarchy is not the enemy. It is the stabilizing spine of jails, providing structure, order, and accountability. However, like any spine, it requires both flexibility and strength to function correctly. When supervisors approach hierarchy as a backbone to be optimized through intentional leadership, it becomes the very tool by which they can achieve lasting success and leave a legacy for the profession.

The lesson for supervisors is clear: when hierarchy is paired with adaptive practices, it becomes a source of resilience rather than rigidity. Every decision, every modeled behavior, and every act of empowerment contributes to strengthening the structure of jails. If future generations inherit a system where hierarchy supports rather than stifles, then today’s supervisors will have achieved their most significant legacy.

At a national level, the implications are profound. Jails are under greater scrutiny than ever before, and public trust is at a fragile state. Supervisors who learn to enhance hierarchy will not only improve their own facilities but also contribute to the credibility and legitimacy of the profession itself. As one executive concluded, “What we do today will define whether jails are respected tomorrow.”

_____________________________

Marshall Stowers, PhD, has been employed at the Greenville County Department of Public Safety for 24 years. He began his career as a Detention Officer in February 2001 and was promoted through every rank at the Greenville County Detention Center before being promoted to Deputy Director (DD). He holds a BS degree in Criminal Justice from the University of South Carolina and an MBA degree from Anderson University (SC). He has recently completed a PhD in the Leadership program at Anderson University. For any additional inquiries, DD Stowers can be reached at mstowers@greenvillecounty.org

References

Bandura, A. (1977). Social learning theory. Prentice Hall.

Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. W. H. Freeman.

CNA (2022). Jail staffing crisis: Trends and recommendations. CNA Institute for Public Research.

Heifetz, R. A., Grashow, A., & Linsky, M. (2009). The practice of adaptive leadership. Harvard Business Press.

Stinchcomb, J. B., & McCampbell, S. W. (2007). Jail administration and change management. CRC Press.

Stowers, M. (2025). Correctional leadership tools for success: Leading in complex hierarchical systems (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). [Anderson University].