Revitalizing Historiography in Public Administration

Abstract

Notwithstanding the popularity in public administration of empirical, behavioral, and quantitative research, interpretive methodologies similarly help advance scholarship. For the latter, history is probably the most traditional, a research technique long predating public administration as an academic discipline. The article evaluates the status of historiography in the contemporary literature and makes the case of history’s ongoing value to public administration. It assesses the pros and cons of traditional primary sources and recommends triangulation of sources to strengthen historical narratives. Some relatively underutilized approaches to reinvigorating historiography include case studies written for classroom use, old textbooks, and counterfactual scenarios. In general, public administration history would benefit from revisionism, studying lost alternatives, and skepticism toward the given narrative and conventional wisdom.

Keywords:

• historiography
• history
• public administration
• United States

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Mordecai Lee

Mordecai Lee, PhD, is Professor Emeritus at the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee. He is the author of ten books and more than 60 articles in scholarly journals, many on the history of American public administration. Before joining the academy in 1997, Mordecai had been legislative assistant to a member of the US Congress, elected to the State Senate of the Wisconsin State Legislature, and executive director of a faith-based NGO advocating for social justice and equal rights.