Early sentencing reform, beginning in the 1970's, criticized indeterminate sentencing as resulting in sentencing disparity rooted in the wide discretion of sentencers. Following the institution of legislative determinate sentencing systems, legislatively authorized sentencing guidelines composed the sentencing reform of the 1980's. Sentencing guidelines tend to be more specific and refined than legislatively defined sentences. The guidelines system is more detailed regarding aggravating and mitigating factors and provides more specific weights for these factors. The Minnesota and Washington guidelines systems have been particularly effective because they monitor sentencing practices and recommend substantive modifications to avoid unintended consequences, such as prison overcrowding. The danger in some current sentencing reform efforts is that they will slight substantive issues to address correctional management issues. A future sentencing structure that establishes sanctioning levels measured in some generic scale of units for offender categories would coordinate a richer array of sentencing options with a broader array of correctional resources. 35 references.