打开公共行政的“黑盒子”:解释性研究的需要

IF 4.3 2区 管理学 Q1 POLITICAL SCIENCE Public Administration Pub Date : 2023-09-21 DOI:10.1111/padm.12959
María Verónica Elías
{"title":"打开公共行政的“黑盒子”:解释性研究的需要","authors":"María Verónica Elías","doi":"10.1111/padm.12959","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Important research questions in public administration and management cannot be studied through the scientific method. A fundamental example is how public administrators utilize their discretion and judgment in their everyday work. Inquiring into the process of administrative practice has been characterized as “opening the black box” of public administration and policy implementation—that is, how people in public administration and management situations do what they do. This paper argues that expanding the menu of worthwhile research approaches from quantitative empiricism, the current “gold standard” in public administration, to include interpretivism makes it possible to view inside the black box of administrative process. After a brief narrative describing how the field lost the balance between quantitative and interpretive approaches it once had, the discussion lays out the philosophical grounding and methodology of interpretive research and offers phenomenology as illustration of how such an expansion will benefit both administrative theory and practice.","PeriodicalId":48284,"journal":{"name":"Public Administration","volume":"19 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":4.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Opening the “black box” of public administration: The need for interpretive research\",\"authors\":\"María Verónica Elías\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/padm.12959\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract Important research questions in public administration and management cannot be studied through the scientific method. A fundamental example is how public administrators utilize their discretion and judgment in their everyday work. Inquiring into the process of administrative practice has been characterized as “opening the black box” of public administration and policy implementation—that is, how people in public administration and management situations do what they do. This paper argues that expanding the menu of worthwhile research approaches from quantitative empiricism, the current “gold standard” in public administration, to include interpretivism makes it possible to view inside the black box of administrative process. After a brief narrative describing how the field lost the balance between quantitative and interpretive approaches it once had, the discussion lays out the philosophical grounding and methodology of interpretive research and offers phenomenology as illustration of how such an expansion will benefit both administrative theory and practice.\",\"PeriodicalId\":48284,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Public Administration\",\"volume\":\"19 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-09-21\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Public Administration\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/padm.12959\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"管理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"POLITICAL SCIENCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Public Administration","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/padm.12959","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"POLITICAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

公共行政与管理中的重要研究问题无法通过科学的方法进行研究。一个基本的例子是公共行政人员如何在日常工作中运用他们的判断力和判断力。对行政实践过程的探究被认为是公共行政和政策实施的“打开黑盒子”,即公共行政和管理情境中的人如何做他们所做的事情。本文认为,将公共行政的“金标准”——定量经验主义的研究方法扩展到解释主义的研究方法,使我们有可能看到行政过程的黑盒子内部。在简要描述了该领域如何在定量和解释方法之间失去平衡之后,讨论列出了解释研究的哲学基础和方法论,并提供现象学作为例证,说明这种扩展将如何有利于行政理论和实践。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Opening the “black box” of public administration: The need for interpretive research
Abstract Important research questions in public administration and management cannot be studied through the scientific method. A fundamental example is how public administrators utilize their discretion and judgment in their everyday work. Inquiring into the process of administrative practice has been characterized as “opening the black box” of public administration and policy implementation—that is, how people in public administration and management situations do what they do. This paper argues that expanding the menu of worthwhile research approaches from quantitative empiricism, the current “gold standard” in public administration, to include interpretivism makes it possible to view inside the black box of administrative process. After a brief narrative describing how the field lost the balance between quantitative and interpretive approaches it once had, the discussion lays out the philosophical grounding and methodology of interpretive research and offers phenomenology as illustration of how such an expansion will benefit both administrative theory and practice.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
7.80
自引率
17.10%
发文量
75
期刊介绍: Public Administration is a major refereed journal with global circulation and global coverage. The journal publishes articles on public administration, public policy and public management. The journal"s reach is both inclusive and international and much of the work published is comparative in nature. A high percentage of articles are sourced from the enlarging Europe and cover all aspects of West and East European public administration.
期刊最新文献
Algorithmic formalization: Impacts on administrative processes Making nonpunitive accountability matter: Exploring behavioral effects of nonpunitive accountability in a conjoint experiment Why do politicians perceive the same financial conditions differently? How to extend pilot innovation in public services: A case of children's social care innovation Street‐level bureaucrats' perceptions of “the job”: Deviation from professional particularities and micro creation of public value
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1