Both true participatory management and the justice model suggests the alleviation of tensions among traditionally disparate elements of the prison community through the joint management of the prison. Discussion focuses on various participatory management approaches, including four models: token, quasi-governmental, governmental, and full participation. In the token model, only a small portion of the institutions' operations, rather than the entire institution, is affected by the council's decisions. In the quasi-governmental model, there is the appearance but not the essence of participatory management. True staff or inmate participation in the management of the institution does not occur. The governmental model is similar to the quasi-governmental model, except that inmates are represented on the council and do participate in the elections. The full participation model entails the greatest degree of shared decisionmaking among administration, staff, and inmates, and has never been put into operation, although there have been at least four examples in which several characteristics of the full participation model have been implemented. Even the limited record of success with these approaches suggests that implementation of participatory management may prove effective in reducing tensions within the prison, in significantly reducing the polarization between staff and inmates, and in providing an environment more conducive to the development of a sense of responsibility and positive growth among the inmates. In this respect, the implementation of participatory management might better prepare inmates to resume their responsibilities upon release from prison. Such an implementation is in itself a reform. However, because the full participation concept is antithetical to the dictatorial philosophy and structure of current management practices, it poses a threat to accepted prison practices. One table, 40 footnotes, and 19 references are provided.