Hester Paanakker

Subsequently, and despite these acknowledgements, most studies proceed with attempts to systematically order the public values spectrum in multidimensional classifications from the belief they ‘must be sorted to allow stringent analysis’ (L. B. Andersen et al., 2012, p. 716). Long lists of universalistic approaches to (categories of) values are the result (Charles, De Jong, & Ryan, 2010; Haque, 2011). For instance, Huberts contends that the overall importance and meaning of his seven core governance values (democracy with responsiveness and participation, accountability and transparency, lawfulness, incorruptibility and impartiality, effectiveness and efficiency of process, professionalism and civility, and robustness) is essentially and inherently universal by nature, even if corresponding behavior and policies may differ slightly according to the specific context at hand (Huberts, 2014, pp. 213-214). Others strongly dispute the assumption of universality (Paanakker et al., 2020), as does this chapter. There are many other generic value constellations: those based on public-versus-private spectra (Van der Wal, 2008; Van der Wal, De Graaf, & Lasthuizen, 2008), different value sources (organizational, individual, public, and so on, Van Wart 1998), different scopes of impact (such as democratic values and ethical values, Pollitt 2003), different modes of governance and corresponding organizational designs (such as user-focused values and rule-abidance values, Andersen et al. 2012), inherently different types of values (performance versus procedural values, De Graaf & Paanakker 2015, or Hoods’ families of thèta, lambda and sigma values (1991)), and many other categorizations (see Rutgers, 2008). The most frequently referred to seem to be Beck Jørgensen and Bozeman’s seven public values constellations, that include values associated with the relationship between public administration and politicians, values associated with intra-organizational aspects of public administration, and, the focus of our analysis, values associated with the behavior of public sector employees (Beck Jørgensen & Bozeman, 2007, pp. 367-368). We add the perspective of public craftsmanship in specific professional work contexts to narrow this down further. To capture the full range of value orientations among public sector officials, an applied and work-specific approach that includes contextual professional values can add to our knowledge on which values matter most. The professional angle is also touched upon by many scholars. For instance, Van Wart (1998) distinguishes the profession as one of the sources from which important public sector values emerge. More recently, Andersen et al. found professionalism to be one of seven key value dimensions in public sector organizational designs, consisting of independent professional standards , having professional drive, and professional commitment as a motive (2012, p. 721). Likewise, Beck Jørgensen and Rutgers found, in an empirical examination of central public 41 Craftsmanship at Street Level