Unveiling Power Dynamics: Qualitative Research as a Liberatory Tool in Public Administration, Part 2

As qualitative researchers, we embark on this introduction to Part 2 of the special issue with a shared commitment to exploring the transformative potential of qualitative methods within the field of public administration. Our motivation stems from a recognition of the multifaceted and multiplicative challenges facing contemporary public administration. Qualitative methods have the capacity to disrupt the status quo and move us toward a more just and equitable society. In line with Guba and Lincoln’s (1994) discussion of critical research approaches, we view qualitative methods as essential tools for advocacy and activism, capable of reshaping entrenched power structures and centering marginalized communities. Given the importance of studying power, we focus our introduction to this second set of articles on the ability of qualitative research (and researchers) to unveil, understand, and perhaps even undermine existing power dynamics.

Understanding power is crucial in the study of governance for numerous reasons. Power shapes the distribution of resources, opportunities, and decision-making authority. As Lukes (1974) articulates, power operates not only through overt coercion but also through more subtle mechanisms of agenda-setting and persuasion. Consequently, a nuanced understanding of power relations allows scholars and practitioners to interrogate who holds influence and how it is exercised and to examine the implications for governance processes and outcomes. Power operates at multiple levels, intersecting with systems of oppression, and thus individuals experience power differently based on their intersecting identities (Collins, 2000).

Furthermore, power influences the degree of inclusion and participation of groups in governance processes. As Pateman (1970) points out, power asymmetries can lead to the marginalization of certain groups, constraining their ability to voice concerns and shape policy agendas. Thus, analyzing power dynamics enables researchers to assess the extent to which governance systems foster democratic ideals of equality, representation, and deliberation. Making sense of power dynamics is key to understanding and addressing the perpetuation of oppressive systems (McCandless & Guy, 2020). Furthermore, power shapes the effectiveness of governance interventions and policies (Fung, 2006; Ostrom, 1990). Here, we focus on how qualitative methods may be used to center marginalized voices, challenge dominant narratives, and interrogate power dynamics.

Examining power dynamics sheds light on the potential for transformative change within governance systems (Love & Stout, 2022). Understanding power requires looking beyond formal institutions to uncover hidden mechanisms of power and resistance (Gaventa, 1980). By mapping the sources and channels of power, scholars can identify points of leverage for challenging entrenched inequalities and fostering more inclusive and accountable forms of governance.

Tools for understanding, making sense of, and challenging entrenched power are indispensable for analyzing governance processes, promoting democratic ideals, enhancing policy effectiveness, fostering transformative change, and advancing inclusive forms of citizen participation. As the authors in this special issue highlight, when grounded in their liberatory potential, qualitative methods offer researchers more nuanced frameworks for studying power in governance and informing efforts to create more just and equitable societies.

Articles in the special issue

In this second part of the special issue, we have grouped the articles thematically to highlight their collective contributions to advancing qualitative research as a liberatory tool in public administration ethics. These articles delve into diverse topics and employ a range of methodologies, demonstrating the versatility and efficacy of qualitative approaches in addressing complex ethical challenges.

Centering marginalized voices

Chen and Mandiberg (2023) present an analysis of Relational, Emergent, Transformative, and Change-Oriented Organizations (RETCOs) within the context of public administration reform. By identifying RETCOs as a distinct organizational type, the authors advocate for the recognition and representation of these organizations in public administration research and practice, thus challenging traditional power structures and amplifying the voices of marginalized stakeholders.

Similarly, Serrano et al. (2023) offer a reflexive examination of their qualitative research process with older persons experiencing homelessness, using the lens of space as a framework for attending to positionality, transformation, and power dynamics. In this paper, the authors shed light on the intricacies of conducting research with marginalized communities and underscores the importance of reflexivity in qualitative inquiry.

Barboza-Wilkes and Le (2023) advocate for diary designs as part of a triangulated research strategy, challenging positivist approaches. They show how centering marginalized voices through storytelling and diaries allows for examining nuanced processes and everyday experiences. Using original data from the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, they explore emotional labor among public-sector employees. Diaries increase self-monitoring, alter coping mechanisms, and give participants a voice in the research process. Their findings suggest compassionate, liberatory research designs blending methodologies to center participant experiences while considering ethical impacts.

Challenging dominant narratives

Benton (2023) contributes to the discourse on the citizen–state encounter by highlighting the limitations of quantitative methods in capturing the nuanced dynamics of interpersonal interactions. Through a qualitative analysis of African Americans’ historical antecedents with the police, the author challenges dominant narratives and advocates for a more nuanced understanding of power dynamics within the citizen–state relationship.

Ressler et al. (2023) highlight the importance of equity-oriented data for achieving racial equity in public institutions, challenging prevailing narratives about healthcare access and outcomes. They examine how children’s hospitals use such data to understand racial/ethnic disparities and make equity-focused decisions, revealing the need for shared analytic frameworks and “nervous” conversations between data producers and users. Qualitative interrogations of data use can overcome barriers to equitable outcomes, while fostering reflexivity and critical mindsets. The authors emphasize the relational aspect of equity-focused data use and the role of qualitative methods in improving organizational practices and relationships for promoting racial equity.

McDougle and Alexander (2023) propose an innovative approach to integrating philanthropy education into the public affairs curriculum, centered on experiential philanthropy and autoethnographic filmmaking. By foregrounding love as the guiding principle of public service, the authors challenge traditional notions of philanthropy and empower students to engage in meaningful acts of social change. Through their approach, the authors provide a tool for challenging the dominant narrative about who has power in philanthropy.

Critical analysis of power relations

skaidra (2023) interrogates the role of performance audits in the context of immigration enforcement, arguing that data laundering obscures the systemic abuses inherent in immigration enforcement practices. Through a critical analysis of governmental auditing practices, the author challenges dominant narratives and advocates for a more adversarial approach to accountability in public administration.

Similarly, Tomkinson (2023) explores the potential of Freedom of Information (FOI) mechanisms as liberatory tools for analyzing power dynamics in public administration. Drawing on their experience with Canada’s Access to Information regime, the author highlights the transformative potential of FOI requests in exposing tensions within government institutions and empowering marginalized communities.

The articles included in this special issue exemplify the transformative potential of qualitative methods as liberatory tools within the field of public administration. By centering marginalized voices, challenging dominant narratives, and interrogating power dynamics, these authors showcase pathways toward a more inclusive and ethical approach to public administration research and practice. We hope that this special issue will inspire further exploration and dialogue on the role of qualitative methods in advancing social justice and equity within the realm of public administration.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).