<style type="text/css"> .wpb_animate_when_almost_visible { opacity: 1; }</style> Enap catalog › Details for: Wrestling with intellectual diversity in public administration :
Normal view MARC view ISBD view

Wrestling with intellectual diversity in public administration : avoiding disconnectedness depth, and relevance

By: NESBIT, Rebecca.
Contributor(s): MOULTON, Stephanie | ROBINSON, Scott | SMITH, Craig | DEHART-DAVIS, Leisha | Feeney, Mary K | GAZLEY, Beth | YILIN, Hou.
Material type: materialTypeLabelArticlePublisher: Cary : Oxford University Press, jan. 2011Subject(s): Gestão do Conhecimento | Teoria Administrativa | Técnica Administrativa | MetodologiaJournal of Public Administration Research and Theory 21, 1, p. i13-i28Abstract: Public Administration (PA) is a field characterized by great diversity in theoretical approaches and methodological tactics. This wide scope lends itself to potential epistemological and methodological fragmentation, which prevents scholars from adequately appreciating and building on each other's work. Although many scholars value PA's theoretical and methodological diversity, this intellectual diversity brings some important trade-offs that must be acknowledged. We see three future challenges for the field as (1) supporting the application of diverse and rigorous methodological approaches, (2) continuing to encourage theoretical diversity and theoretical depth, and (3) promoting relevance without compromising methodological rigor and theoretical depth. We believe that a self-conscious, deliberate focus on balancing these goals will strengthen and connect public administration. In this article, we suggest several practical strategies for accomplishing this, such as embracing the public focus of our research, working in interdisciplinary teams, and being more explicit about methodological assumptions and approaches in our writing
Tags from this library: No tags from this library for this title. Log in to add tags.
    average rating: 0.0 (0 votes)
No physical items for this record

Public Administration (PA) is a field characterized by great diversity in theoretical approaches and methodological tactics. This wide scope lends itself to potential epistemological and methodological fragmentation, which prevents scholars from adequately appreciating and building on each other's work. Although many scholars value PA's theoretical and methodological diversity, this intellectual diversity brings some important trade-offs that must be acknowledged. We see three future challenges for the field as (1) supporting the application of diverse and rigorous methodological approaches, (2) continuing to encourage theoretical diversity and theoretical depth, and (3) promoting relevance without compromising methodological rigor and theoretical depth. We believe that a self-conscious, deliberate focus on balancing these goals will strengthen and connect public administration. In this article, we suggest several practical strategies for accomplishing this, such as embracing the public focus of our research, working in interdisciplinary teams, and being more explicit about methodological assumptions and approaches in our writing

Minnowbrook III : a special issue

Special issue editors: Beth Gazley and David M. Van Slyke

Volume 21

Supplement 1

January 2011

There are no comments for this item.

Log in to your account to post a comment.

Click on an image to view it in the image viewer

Escola Nacional de Administração Pública

Escola Nacional de Administração Pública

Endereço:

  • Biblioteca Graciliano Ramos
  • Funcionamento: segunda a sexta-feira, das 9h às 19h
  • +55 61 2020-3139 / biblioteca@enap.gov.br
  • SPO Área Especial 2-A
  • CEP 70610-900 - Brasília/DF
<
Acesso à Informação TRANSPARÊNCIA

Powered by Koha