Hester Paanakker

highly similar target groups (male detainees awaiting the verdict on their case, prior to potential conviction), but at different departments throughout the facility (including those with special emphasis on heightened medication use or repeat offenders). Table 2.1 lists respondent characteristics. Men are overrepresented, which is a distinguishing feature of the prison officer population in general. Older employees with a considerable length of service are also overrepresented, an accurate reflection of this particular facility. Many of them have been working here their entire employable lives. All respondents were typical street level bureaucrats (Lipsky, 1980; Tummers et al., 2015), directly interacting with detainees, doing their work with a considerable level of discretion, and in charge of implementing and shaping prison policy on the frontline. Table 2.1. Respondent Characteristics Prison officials ( N=18) Prison officials ( N=18) Gender Male 15 Years of service <10 2 Female 3 10-15 6 Age 30-35 1 16-20 0 36-40 2 21-25 3 41-45 2 26-30 5 46-50 4 >30 2 51-55 4 56-60 5 Using an inductive approach, interviewees were asked for their view on what constitutes a good prison official. To avoid any bias (towards certain types of values), we did not ask for specific values, but purposefully asked broad questions such as ‘what does a good prison official look like?’ to bring to the surface value orientations towards public craftsmanship. The word ‘values’ itself was avoided, as it proved too vague a concept for respondents. Several control questions were asked in order to eliminate socially desirable answers, for example, questions about perceptions of ideal penal policy, descriptions of the job of prison officer, and questions about when they felt they were doing their job well. Respondents were entirely free to elaborate and to raise topics themselves in response to, and in addition to, the questions. Interviews were recorded and transcribed verbatim (131.706 words). 46 Chapter 2