IN TRADITIONAL PRISONS, CONTROL IS MAINTAINED BY MANIPULATION OF THE INMATE SOCIAL SYSTEM THROUGH A PROCESS IN WHICH STAFF MEMBERS APPLY RULES SELECTIVELY. IN TURN, STAFF MEMBERS ARE MANIPULATED BY THEIR SUPERIORS, WHO DEMAND LOYALTY BY SELECTIVELY APPLYING REWARDS AND SANCTIONS. DEMOGRAPHIC CHANGES, LEGAL AND PROCEDURAL GUARANTEES, AND THE POLITICIZATION OF PRISONS ARE AMONG STRUCTURAL CHANGES UNDERMINING THESE TRADITIONAL MECHANISMS. SUCH CHANGES HAVE RESULTED IN THE RISE OF INMATE POLITICAL GROUPS AS A FORCE IN PRISONS, FOLLOWED BY THE DEMISE OF POLITICAL GROUPS AND THE RISE OF PRISON GANGS SPECIALIZING IN BRUTE FORCE AND VIOLENCE. IN LIGHT OF SUCH CHANGES, THERE APPEARS TO BE A NEED TO SHARE DECISIONMAKING POWER AMONG INMATES, LINE STAFF, AND PRISON ADMINISTRATORS. SUCH PROGRAMS AS SOLEDAD PRISON'S INMATE CATALYST, AN EXPERIMENTAL GRIEVANCE PROCEDURE AT A MINIMUM-CUSTODY INSTITUTION, AND AN ETHNIC RELATIONS COUNCIL AT A MEDIUM-SECURITY FACILITY HOUSING 2,400 DRUG ADDICTS EXEMPLIFY THE PROMISE OF REDISTRIBUTED DECISIONMAKING AUTHORITY AS AN AVENUE OF CORRECTIONAL REFORM.