The Research Methodology for Comparative Public Administration

There are four main reasons and purposes why we need to do comparative research in CPA (Newton and Van Deth, 2010: 1): 1. We cannot understand ourselves and our ways of doing things if we do not understand others, 2. We cannot understand others without knowing their culture, history, and administrative structures, 3. We cannot make useful inferences about politics in other countries without comparative research, 4. We cannot make objective generalizations without analyzing a greater number of countries.

Science is the result of the synthesis and comparison of various fields of research. In a broad sense, “comparison” refers to the comparison of  places, cultures, politics, and time. In a narrower sense, “comparison” is a method that means the comparison of “large macro-social units” (Ragin, 2014), such as societies, administrative systems, politics, or countries, which are used to explain and interpret macro-social variations. In addition, comparison can also be defined as the primary objective of comparative research to find similarities or differences between two or more units.

In CPA, system theory (structural functionalism) is one of the most popular analytical systems. It was first developed by social scientists in the early 1900s such as T. Parsons and M. Levy to analyze different societies around the world (Heady, 2006: 67). Political scientists then use this framework to examine political systems. This framework is composed of two parts: institutional structures, and the functioning of those institutional structures.

Functionalism is the view that society is a network of interconnected parts. It is well-known in comparative research because comparing functions can be very useful. However, there are some functions (e.g., interest articulation and aggregation, rulemaking and implementation, rule decision-making, and communication) that have more to do with administration than politics (Heady, 2006: 68-69). The functionalist approach accepts the institutional base, which means that different institutions in an administrative system are related to one another.

Fesler (1988), for example, argues that the state is composed of “large and small parts” that share five interdependent features. And these parts are functioning, holding different values, having a history and organizational culture, and maintaining power structures.

 The six dimensions of culture are Power Distance, Indulgence vs. Restraint, Long-Term vs. Short-Term ,Collectivism vs. Individualism, Uncertainty Avoidance, Masculinity vs. Femininity

This is the extent to which the members of a culture feel threatened by ambiguity or the unknown.

Political context is a broad term that includes political culture that refers to an individual’s attitude towards his or her position in the political system. Political culture is composed of several variables that play a role in the context of the political system. These variables include internal organizational structures and political attitudes. Political culture is a set of fundamental attitudes, beliefs, and behaviors that define a political system and influence political behavior among its members.

Jepperson and Meyer (1991: 216-217) classify government types in different countries based on two criteria: (1) the degree of institutionalization of the public function and functional relations and (2) the degree of authorization of social units as public actors.

The main focus of CPA research is to identify the units of analysis such as: (a)individual and group behavior and performance, (b)organization and its capacity, (c)nation-wide characteristics and performance (including the executive branch of the government) (Jreisat, 2011: 88). Choosing the most appropriate unit of analysis will also help to apply the particular approaches and methodologies in comparative research.

Thematic studies in CPA Research include various topics such as economic, social and political policies, corporatism, and public personnel systems. These studies require more data and are conducted by senior researchers. However, it is necessary to be careful about generalizations that may ignore the uniqueness and complexity of an issue. Bureaucracy and organizations are often used as main topics.

There are mainly three levels of analysis in comparative research: macro-level, mid-level (meso), and micro-level.

The micro-level analysis, on the other hand, focuses on individuals like public servants, bureaucrats, and other decision-makers and their behavior in the public institutions. This is because the behaviors, performance, and attitudes of these individuals affect the functioning of the government.

Selecting the type of data construct theories in comparative research, and this selection depends on the purpose of comparative research. Descriptive data, explanatory and analytical data, and also data for prescriptive and normative concepts are the most widely used data types in CPA research.

In comparative research, descriptive data is used to show the recent situation of the factors being compared as they exist without explaining causal relationships. It defines factors, identifies critical factors, broadens the scope of the analysis, and improves the accuracy of the analysis (Jreisat, 2011: 85).

The first step in CPA research is conceptualization of a research problem based on administrative models or theories. The second step is hypothesis formulation. The third step is the operationalization of concepts, factors and variables into specific measures depending on the unit of analysis. The fourth step is hypothesis testing by collected data which determines whether hypotheses are accepted or rejected. The final step is providing detailed f indings and discussions, and providing strategic goals and policy recommendations depending on these findings and discussions.

In CPA research, it is very essential to select an appropriate topic that is related to a recent research problem required to be analyzed within the administrative field of research. In this sense, after selecting the topic (research problem), the researcher should also explain the reason for selecting this topic, and why it is so important to research. In addition, the aim, scope, contributions, and limitations of the research should also be explained effectively.

There are some advantages of qualitative research:

• The scholar gains an in-depth understanding of the CPA field due to close interaction with the subject. Therefore, the researcher can identify problems that are often ignored (e.g., nuances and complexities) in scientific, more positive inquiries.

• Qualitative descriptions are used to illustrate potential cause and effect relationships, and dynamic processes.

• Qualitative analysis enables the data to be ambiguous/contradictory in order to reflect social reality.

• Qualitative research is narrative. Therefore, it is helpful to the researchers as they may be able to use qualitative reports to investigate research problems that may not be available to them, thereby gaining new insights.

There are also disadvantages of using mixed research methodology:

• This approach involves the collection and analysis of two sets of data, making it timeconsuming and labor-intensive.

• The results of this type of research may be ambiguous if the findings obtained from the two types of data sets are different.

• To conduct a mixed research methodology, it is necessary to understand several methods and how to integrate them correctly.

There are some methodological challenges for the researchers in the field of comparative analysis such as (1) irrelevant cases, (2) construct equivalence, (3) number of variables and cases, (4) causality, (5) value bias, (6) the impact of transnational factors, and (7) reliability and availability of required data