<p>The aim of this paper is to examine how mid-level executive officers within Swedish Police respond to subordinates autonomous behaviour, mainly according to Lipsky´s theory on street-level bureaucracy. Questions focused on are:</p><p>1. Which personnel related obstacles, are preventing the executive officers?</p><p>2. How do executive officers counter obstacles?</p><p>3. If possible, based on the result of the study, which are the conclusions about existing countermeasures?</p><p>The papers´ aim is not to suggest which obstacles should be removed, nor if countermeasures are good/bad. Main aim is to identify how obstacles are countered. Theory and method are built on framework of Case Study. The method is built on theoretic examination of obstacles to examine concepts´ size and then interviews to confirm the obstacles and identify countermeasures. Conclusion of the first question is that obstacles are omnipresent in the governmental and societal systems. Conclusion of the second question is that obstacles are countered by friendly approach and to ally oneself to staff and personnel. Conclusion of the last question is that a mid-level executive through his allying enhances some behaviour, as long as more-wanted behaviours are produced with quality. This has effect upon society when combating crime, but is probably not likely to measure effectively.</p>

The aim of this paper is to examine how mid-level executive officers within Swedish Police respond to subordinates autonomous behaviour, mainly according to Lipsky´s theory on street-level bureaucracy. Questions focused on are: 1. Which personnel related obstacles, are preventing the executive officers? 2. How do executive officers counter obstacles? 3. If possible, based on the result of the study, which are the conclusions about existing countermeasures? The papers´ aim is not to suggest which obstacles should be removed, nor if countermeasures are good/bad. Main aim is to identify how obstacles are countered. Theory and method are built on framework of Case Study. The method is built on theoretic examination of obstacles to examine concepts´ size and then interviews to confirm the obstacles and identify countermeasures. Conclusion of the first question is that obstacles are omnipresent in the governmental and societal systems. Conclusion of the second question is that obstacles are countered by friendly approach and to ally oneself to staff and personnel. Conclusion of the last question is that a mid-level executive through his allying enhances some behaviour, as long as more-wanted behaviours are produced with quality. This has effect upon society when combating crime, but is probably not likely to measure effectively.