Hester Paanakker

of the facilities as well as policy advisors place more emphasis on acting in line with the penal mission, whereas middle managers and prison officers stress “getting one’s daily chores and tasks done” and “ensuring daily peace and quiet at detainee units”. Despite some differences in emphasis within or between values, the views of the different groups are remarkably consistent when comparing them with each other on an aggregate level: respondents alike conjointly put forward a compact set of no more than four values they feel constitute the street-level penal craft. Fourth and conversely, the interviews reveal that the seeming value convergence is however more powerfully explained by the fact it has a theoretical character only: ideologically, staff agree on the normative meaning of penal values, but different levels view the attainment of these values in real life practice quite differently. This indicates a shared value identification and understanding, and, in theory, perhaps even a shared value prioritization, but diverging value enactment in practice. Both by managers and street-level prison officers, the way values are translated to practice is supported to a much lesser extent: The big complaint you always hear from prison officers: people at headquarters are just randomly making things up. And that is not in tune with what we do in practice (respondent 7, managing director). …that is a paper reality only and in practice I feel it does not work that way. […] The implementation […] only manifests itself in performance indicators. We have to comply with those norms, because that thing is for that bag of money (respondent 53, prison officer). 4.7.2 Mutual Perceptions and Stereotyping With Respect to Values of Craftsmanship In contrast to the seeming relative convergence of the actual views of the different groups, the mutual perceptions of each other are characterized by divergence, conflict and stereotyping. 108 Chapter 4