“…Based on an understanding of the above studies, particularly by Lima and D'Ascenzi (2013), whose position is supported by international authors, such as Majone and Wildavsky (1984) and Barrett (2004), Ferreira and Medeiros' (2016) article, and the above-mentioned work on the existence of hybrid arrangements and activities of street-level organizations in the execution of public policies, we understand that some central concepts from literature on implementation can be revisited and a more fluid interpretation of the approaches that sustain them can be formed. Plans, regulations and structures can be designed as potentialities or groups of intentions to be continually interpreted, accepted and improved by the actors involved (LIMA and D'ASCENZI, 2013); the individual action can be understood as agency, explained not only by incentives but also values, ideas, ideologies and judgments, etc., as defended by Musheno (2012, 2015); and the interactions can be understood as constitutive of cooperative or confrontational relations (LOTTA, 2014(LOTTA, , 2018, among different types of actors, holding multiple roles and responsible for achieving contradictory objectives (CHUN and RAINEY, 2005;DIXIT, 2002). A critical re-reading of these concepts enables us to approximate the theoretical approaches on which they are based dialectically, thereby justifying a juxtaposition of the respective analytical dimensions, namely the structural, individual action and relational perspectives, and their dialectic synthesis in a single analytical model.…”