Hester Paanakker

values. Policy advisors are most negatively evaluated, followed by prison central managers, and then prison middle managers. Effects of Value Divergence Further analysis of the nature, form and level of value divergence shows that differing views on the frontline craft are not a matter of perception only: at the expense of genuine attention to and room for the values of frontline craftsmanship, many actors at management levels are sucked into the managerial logic of measurable outputs, quantifiable targets, and lean management. They often practice different values, or practice them differently, from the ones they preach. Virtually all respondents (54 out of 55) agree that the value divergence is most visible and most noticeable in value prioritization and value realization in practice. On top of that, just under 50% of respondents feel that the different levels do not only act out different values, but also genuinely believe that different values matter to frontline implementation. This means almost half of respondents are of the opinion that the divergence stretches even further and deeper than a dissimilar prioritization perspective only. Independent of the exact manifestation level, more than 90% of all respondents (spread out over different levels) perceive the value divergence to be large, grave, and problematic. The value divergence increases and aggravates –in actual sense, but even more so in perceived sense- the practical implementation problems at the street level. This includes problems such as workplace rotation, lack of time, lack of room to create the necessary bond with prison inmates, an enforced box-ticking mentality, and systems and tools that are inadequate to safeguard intrinsic frontline values. This way, value divergence forces prison officers to rearrange their work routines in favor of values of organizational management and to the detriment of realizing key values of penal craftsmanship and service delivery. In terms of frontline behavior and attitudes, and especially in the perception of respondents, this leads to (the aggravation of) job stress, job alienation, frustration with the organization, and general policy alienation. The results demonstrate that value divergence leads to ineffective governance, creates a state of organizational paralysis due to toxic relationships and stereotypes, and undermines the realization of public values in public service delivery at the frontline. 202 Summary in English