By Nils Antkowiak
In corrections, promotion is often understood as recognition for good work in a current role. It usually reflects experience, reliability, commitment and operational knowledge. From the outside — and often for the person being promoted — it looks like a clear step up. That is true. But it is not the whole truth.
A promotion in corrections is also a step into a different role with different expectations. The hard part is not only earning the promotion. The harder part is growing into the role after the title changes.
A newly promoted leader suddenly participates in different meetings, hears different information and becomes responsible for decisions that reach beyond the former post, shift or unit. Those decisions may involve staff performance, staff culture, complaints, safety risks and the reputation of the institution. The person is no longer simply part of the culture. He or she is now responsible for shaping it.
When good staff members struggle after promotion, the issue is often not a lack of technical knowledge or professional commitment. The problem is that the new role has not been clearly explained, practiced or supported. Agencies should not leave that transition to chance.
When former strengths become new risks
The transition can be especially difficult for staff members who were promoted because they were active, reliable and trusted by their peers. They earned trust by being close to the work, helping others and knowing how things really function on the unit or shift. Those qualities remain valuable. But after promotion, they must be used differently.
One risk is trying too hard to prove, “I am still one of you.” Another risk is moving too far in the opposite direction and trying to prove to senior leaders, “You made the right choice. I can lead.” Both reactions are understandable. Both can damage trust if they turn into role confusion.
The most dangerous version is presenting two different selves: one version upward and another version downward. A newly promoted leader who tries to please former peers and senior leadership at the same time may lose credibility with both.
Another common trap is retreating into familiar operational work. It feels useful and safe, but it can become micromanagement when the leader keeps doing the work of the former role instead of building capacity in the new one. The opposite problem is also possible: trying to change too much too quickly simply because one now has the authority to do so.
The first task after promotion is therefore not to demonstrate authority. It is to understand the new role clearly enough to exercise authority with consistency, fairness and professional distance.
The first weeks are watched closely
The first weeks after promotion are often marked by excitement and a healthy sense of pressure. But other dynamics make this period especially sensitive. A newly promoted leader is watched more closely than before.
Former peers may want to know whether the person has changed. Some may also look for opportunities: access to information, influence over decisions or a more favorable interpretation of rules. Senior leaders are watching as well. They want to see whether the right choice was made, whether the person can be trusted with responsibility and whether the individual is ready for the new role. Inmates may also pay attention to changes in behavior, inconsistency or uncertainty.
Newly promoted leaders should therefore expect questions, jokes, criticism, small tests and occasional power plays. But they should not interpret every question as a challenge to their authority. Not every disagreement is a test. Not every joke is disrespect. Overreacting can make a new leader appear insecure, unfair or overly focused on status.
At the same time, it would be naïve to act as though nothing has changed. Some situations do require a clear boundary. Good leadership in this phase means staying calm, recognizing patterns and responding consistently. Not every situation requires a show of authority. But some situations require the leader to make the boundary clear.
This is also the time when early guidance matters. Newly promoted leaders should have a place to clarify expectations, boundaries and role conflicts before small situations become visible leadership problems.
The hard cases reveal the role
The role change becomes most visible when sensitive situations have to be handled. This is especially true when complaints involve former team members, whether the complaint comes from another staff member or from an inmate. In those moments, the newly promoted leader must make fair, fact-based decisions.
The challenge is not only to avoid favoritism. It is also to avoid overcorrecting. A leader should not be more lenient with a former friend, but also should not be deliberately harder on that person just to prove independence. Old friendships, old conflicts and informal impressions from the former role must be recognized and carefully managed.
Even when the decision is fair, criticism may still follow. That is why documentation matters. A decision that affects former peers should be well documented and based on observable facts, policy and institutional responsibility. Documentation will not prevent every accusation, but it can help make the decision understandable.
The same principle applies to performance evaluations, promotion discussions and internal information. Former colleagues or friends may ask for insight into upcoming decisions, personnel issues or internal assessments. The newly promoted leader should be prepared for that moment before it happens. A calm response is better than improvising under pressure.
The boundary also runs in the other direction. A newly promoted leader should not use friendships to collect informal information from the team or place former peers in the uncomfortable position of reporting on colleagues. That may feel like staying connected to the unit, but it can quickly undermine trust and damage relationships.
One useful principle is simple: A good friend does not pressure you to misuse your new role, and a good leader does not pressure friends to serve the new role informally. Setting that boundary is not a betrayal of friendship. It is part of exercising the new responsibility properly.
Agencies also have a role here. These conflicts should be discussed proactively with newly promoted leaders, not only after something has gone wrong. Senior leaders can and should expect judgment, discretion and backbone. But they should also help new leaders anticipate predictable conflicts instead of letting them walk into them alone.
Too much visible intervention can make a new leader look weak. Too little support leaves the person exposed. The goal is not to take over the role but to help the individual grow into it with clarity, confidence and accountability.
Promotion should not be a sink-or-swim moment
The successful transition into a higher position does not depend solely on the character of the person being promoted. The agency is not solely responsible for the success of that transition, but it plays an important role in creating the conditions for success.
After the promotion decision, the real development of the new leader begins. In some agencies, this may start even earlier through leadership training or preparation programs. Training is important, but it is not enough by itself. A new leader does not only need more technical knowledge. They need a clearer understanding of the new role, the new expectations and the predictable conflicts that come with the position.
That understanding is built through conversations about real situations, not only through formal instruction. Newly promoted leaders should have a structured and confidential place to discuss role conflicts, boundaries and difficult personnel issues. A mentor program can help. So can regular check-ins with senior leadership. A general, “Come by if something happens,” is often not enough.
Where possible, agencies should also consider whether the new leader should immediately supervise the same team from which he or she was promoted. Moving to a different shift, unit or facility can reduce loyalty conflicts and give the new leader more space to develop in the role. Even a short period of shadowing leaders at another facility can be valuable. It helps the person observe different leadership styles instead of simply copying the habits of the former team.
The goal is not to overprotect the new leader or make the person appear weak. The goal is to support, prepare and strengthen the individual so the new role can be exercised with confidence, discretion and accountability.
Practical steps for the first 90 days
The first months after promotion should be treated as a practical role transition, not simply as a test of personality. Newly promoted leaders can take several concrete steps:
- Clarify expectations with senior leadership before conflicts become visible.
- Establish boundaries around confidential information and informal influence early.
- Avoid presenting one version of yourself to senior leaders and another to former peers.
- Avoid using friendships to gather information from the team.
- Delegate operational tasks instead of retreating into familiar work.
- Resist the urge to change everything immediately to prove your authority.
- Document sensitive decisions carefully, especially those involving former peers.
- Seek feedback before small role conflicts become larger leadership problems.
- Identify a mentor or senior leader for confidential discussions.
Agencies should support this transition without taking the role away from the person. The goal is not toughness, popularity or distance for its own sake. The goal is professional reliability: being fair to former peers, clear with senior leadership, consistent with inmates and loyal to the mission rather than to informal expectations.
Promotion changes the title. Leadership begins when the person grows into the role.
About the author
Nils Antkowiak is a senior corrections professional with extensive operational leadership experience in custodial settings, particularly in long-term imprisonment and high-security environments. He previously served as acting prison director and deputy director in several large correctional facilities in Germany and currently holds a senior leadership position in an international detention facility in The Hague. His professional focus includes custody management, institutional safety, and structured transition from custody to the community. Connect with Nils on LinkedIn.