Collective Leadership and Context in Public Administration: Bridging Public Leadership Research and Leadership Studies

This article challenges the view that public leadership research should maintain a separate perspective in the study of public leadership. It discusses the benefits of further embedding the public leadership research domain within leadership studies, constructing a cross‐fertilization that contributes to advance both. The article maps key concerns in relational leadership theories, contrasting them with current work in the public leadership research domain and offering suggestions to close the gap. It highlights public leadership scholarship's competitive advantage to contribute to theorizing about leadership, given the importance of context for building contemporary theories of relational leadership.     

Survey Research in Public Administration: Assessing Mainstream Journals with a Total Survey Error Framework

Survey research is a common tool for assessing public opinions, perceptions, attitudes, and behaviors for analyses in many social science disciplines. Yet there is little knowledge regarding how specific elements of survey research methodology are applied in practice in public administration. This article examines five mainstream public administration journals over an eight‐year period regarding current methodological practice, organized around the total survey error framework. The findings show that survey research in the field of public administration features mainly small‐scale studies, heavy reliance on a single data collection mode, questionable sample selection procedures, and suspect sample frame quality. Survey data largely are analyzed without careful consideration of assumptions or potential sources of error. An informed evaluation of the quality of survey data is made more difficult by the fact that many journal articles do not detail data collection procedures. This study concludes with suggestions for improving the quality and reporting of survey research in the field.     

Trends in the Study of Public Administration: Empirical and Qualitative Observations from Public Administration Review, 2000–2009

What are the apparent research and methodological trends in PAR’s content over the past decade? From the perspective of the journal’s 70‐year history, with its aim to “mesh” practitioner and academic knowledge creation, topical coverage since 2000 reflects striking continuity, emphasizing many of the “bread and butter” administrative issues such as planning, human resources, budgeting, and public management. A marked increase in coverage is apparent in the application of more sophisticated quantitative statistical methodology, as well as in the number of female authors, while the number of practitioner authors declined sharply. Throughout the first turbulent decade of the twenty‐first century, three intellectual themes stood out: evaluations of New Public Management, connections between practitioners and academicians, and responsiveness to immediate social, economic, and political challenges. Given the constant demand for usable knowledge, scholars seem to have marginalized attention to the historical context and epistemological foundations of the study. The central challenge in the years ahead will be to effectively use research methods in response to the big questions of government and society that defy measurement. Since many [empiricists], especially the younger, do not know very much about epistemology, they tend to be quite dogmatic about the one set of canons that dominate them. —C. Wright Mills, 1959     

RNICE Model: Evaluating the Contribution of Replication Studies in Public Administration and Management Research

Replication studies relate to the scientific principle of replicability and serve the significant purpose of providing supporting (or contradicting) evidence regarding the existence of a phenomenon. However, replication has never been an integral part of public administration and management research. Recently, scholars have called for more replication, but academic reflections on when replication adds substantive value to public administration and management research are needed. This article presents the RNICE conceptual model, for assessing when and how a replication study contributes knowledge about a social phenomenon and advances knowledge in the public administration and management literatures. The RNICE model provides a vehicle for researchers who seek to evaluate or demonstrate the value of a replication study systematically. The practical application of the model is illustrated using two published replication studies.     

西方公共行政效率研究的新趋势

以效率和效益的关系为切入点,着重分析西方公共行政效率研究发展的新趋势和成果,并探索这些新的变化对中国当前公共行政改革有重要的借鉴意义.     

Public Administration Research from a Practitioner Perspective

Recent research has questioned both the rigor and theoretical development of public administration research. The proposed solutions have generally endorsed a more academically oriented research agenda. Authors have discussed practitioner needs, but the focus has been on the appropriateness of different research methods rather than the types of knowledge needed. We seek to contribute to this ongoing debate by comparing the knowledge needs identified by members of the International City/County Management Association (ICMA) with 15 years of research in Public Administration Review . We found much published research matching the needs of ICMA members, but it focused on a relatively narrow range of topics. We recommend incorporating a concern for relevance into efforts to improve public administration research. This will help to ensure that we build a knowledge base that makes a substantial contribution to practice.     

公共行政学本土化的路径选择

我国公共行政学经过近30年的历程,取得了可喜的成就。与此同时,也产生了许多需要重视和解决的问题。其中存在主要问题之一是公共行政学的本土化问题。公共行政学的本土化关系到我国公共行政学的发展前途与命运,推进公共行政学的本土化进程,需要从我们强化公共行政学研究的本土化意识,推进公共行政学研究的理论创新,重视公共行政学的应用研究等方面进行。     

基于作者共被引的公共行政研究状况图谱分析——以《Public Administration Review》为研究对象

一门学科的发展离不开优秀专家学者的倾力支持，在公共行政学的形成和发展过程中，同样有一批优秀的公共行政学者推动了公共行政不同分支领域的衍生与发展。运用作者共被引和信息可视化方法，对权威期刊《公共行政评论》（Public Administration Review）于1975--2008年间发表的论文引文中被引频次前50名的学者进行分析。研究结果展现了公共行政领域的主要学术流派，并验证了公共行政研究确实是在沿着范式转移的轨迹更迭交替着。而这种变迁是相对的，大部分时间内，不同范式之间以及和其他学术流派之间是共存、互动甚至交融的。研究还发现，网络化治理正凭借其多中心和网络化的组织基础以及服务治理的先进理念迅速崛起，它将成为公共行政新的研究范式，而基于网络理论的公共行政理论大整合也将很有可能成为公共行政未来的研究热点。此外，实证结果与公共行政范式分类的高度相似性也充分表明了作者共被引和信息可视化方法的科学和有效，它的确为学科范式研究提供了一条定量研究的新思路和一个宏观分析的新视角。     

中国公共行政学研究的评估与反思

中国公共行政学自20世纪80年代恢复以来,在二十多年的时间内,公共行政学研究以加速度的节律迅速发展,在学科建设、人才培养以及公共服务方面皆具规模,但也存在着巨大的身份危机。通过对二十年来我国顶尖大学学报上的公共行政学研究主题、研究方法、基金来源、作者单位、研究阶段等要素的测量与统计,以评估与反思中国公共行政学知识体系的生产与变迁,为促进中国公共行政学的科学发展,构建公共服务型政府探寻出一条可能的新路径。     

公共管理学的研究方法体系：内涵与构成

公共管理学的研究方法体系,是研究主体在研究公共管理的现象和规律时,所采用的一组相互联系、相互作用的特定方法的有机整体.公共管理学的研究方法体系可分为三个层次:方法论、一般方法和具体方法.方法论对一般方法和具体方法具有宏观的指导作用,而一般方法是在方法论指导下,研究公共管理时的最一般的思维原理和分析方法,具体方法是方法论、一般方法的进一步深化和具体运用.方法论、一般方法和具体方法三者存在"相互交融、彼此贯通"的关系,共同推进着公共管理学研究的发展进步.