Hester Paanakker

of value prioritization and enactment in practice. They agree that views conflict most on how to prioritize values in street-level practice (what values should take precedence there) and on how to address and realize values in implementation (which concrete policy tools and measures should be used). Within this pattern, two views can be distinguished. 58% of respondents (32 out of 55) perceives that the divergence lies not in the shared interpretation of key values, but in their enactment in practice. They believe there is a shared belief in ideal values, but stress that the reality where values are actually prioritized and given shape in practice is a different one: On paper, we all agree to the same [values] I think. But whether that is also conveyed in similar ways is another issue. (Prison officer 3, facility 2) In theory, it is a most beautiful story and they make it look outstanding. However, its practical implementation is incredibly compromised . (Managing director 2, facility 1) This describes the most dominant view of a perceived similarity in value identification , but a perceived mismatch between different levels in value prioritization and enactment . On top of that, the other 40% of respondents (22 out of 55) perceive value divergence in both value identification and value prioritization and enactment. They believe the different levels pursue truly different values, aspirationally and in practice. Higher (policy and management) levels tend to see slightly more similarity in ideal values. Among prison officers the distribution is fifty-fifty (in both facilities). Table 6.1. Displaying dimensions of perceived value divergence per staff level Where respondents see value divergence as manifesting itself (N=54)* Divergence in value prioritization and enactment, but not in value identification Divergence in value identification as well as in value prioritization and enactment Policy advisors (4) Managing directors (5) Middle managers (7) Prison officers (16) Policy advisors (2) Managing directors (2) Middle managers (2) Prison officers (16) Total: 32 (58%) Total: 22 (40%) 142 Chapter 6