NCJ Number
92864
Journal
Federal Probation Volume: 47 Issue: 4 Dated: (December 1983) Pages: 24-31
Date Published
1983
Length
8 pages
Annotation
This research examined the following issues; (1) the potential for prison industries' to adopt or purchase franchised technologies, (2) the potential for private-sector operators to manage franchised prison industries, and (3) the potential for interstate industries' cooperation.
Abstract
As examined in this research, franchising refers to business - format franchising. This involves the franchisee using the franchisor's operating manuals and standards, quality control methods, marketing strategy and plans, and communication system whereby the franchisor and franchisee regularly interact. The research design grew out of the belief that answers to the research questions could best be provided by the State policymakers responsible for prison industries management and oversight. Intensive interviews to test receptivity to the franchising idea were conducted with key corrections and industries officials in five States selected because of their reputations for innovation and effectiveness in operating prison industries. The States were Connecticut, Oklahoma, Ohio, Florida, and California. Telephone survey responses from about 30 States confirmed that the study States were not unrepresentative. The several franchising options studied included both private-sector involvements and cooperative relations with other States' prison industries programs. Viewed in the context of the transition period in which prison industries find themselves, differences in receptivity to franchising may represent how far different industries programs have come rather than franchising's likely potential for the future. Currently, organizational factors limit industries' willingness and even ability to accept franchising in any form; however, the study found that industries' historical dependency on the larger correctional agency served seems to be lessening. Prison industries are gaining their own organizational identities through a combination of enabling legislation and managerial leadership. They must develop an industries' organization that will synthesize model program elements. An important first step has been the recruitment of private-sector experienced managers. A necessary second step is the introduction of private-sector actors to add both political influence for correctional accommodation with industries and technological or capital formation assistance. Six footnotes are provided.