Five ways to make a difference

Perceptions of practitioners working in urban neighborhoods

Catherine Durose, Merlijn van Hulst, Stephen Jeffares, Oliver Escobar, Annika Agger, Laurens de Graaf

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleScientificpeer-review

Abstract

This article responds to and develops the fragmented literature exploring intermediation in public administration
and urban governance. It uses Q-methodology to provide a systematic comparative empirical analysis of practitioners
who are perceived as making a difference in urban neighborhoods. Through this analysis, an original set of five
profiles of practitioners—enduring, struggling, facilitating, organizing, and trailblazing—is identified and compared.
This research challenges and advances the existing literature by emphasizing the multiplicity, complexity, and hybridity,
rather than the singularity, of individuals perceived as making a difference, arguing that different practitioners make
a difference in different ways. The authors set out a research agenda, overlooked in current theorization, that focuses
on the relationships and transitions between the five profiles and the conditions that inform them, opening up new
avenues for understanding and supporting practice.
Original languageEnglish
Article numberDOI: 10.1111/puar.12502
Pages (from-to)576-586
Number of pages11
JournalPublic Administration Review
Volume76
Issue number4
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Jul 2016

Fingerprint

governance
methodology
literature
Q methodology
Urban governance
Organizing
Intermediation
Hybridity
Empirical analysis
Multiplicity
Research agenda
Singularity

Cite this

Durose, Catherine ; van Hulst, Merlijn ; Jeffares, Stephen ; Escobar, Oliver ; Agger, Annika ; de Graaf, Laurens. / Five ways to make a difference : Perceptions of practitioners working in urban neighborhoods. In: Public Administration Review. 2016 ; Vol. 76, No. 4. pp. 576-586.
@article{b8792a46c598424684aeda2b2dbd6d74,
title = "Five ways to make a difference: Perceptions of practitioners working in urban neighborhoods",
abstract = "This article responds to and develops the fragmented literature exploring intermediation in public administrationand urban governance. It uses Q-methodology to provide a systematic comparative empirical analysis of practitionerswho are perceived as making a difference in urban neighborhoods. Through this analysis, an original set of fiveprofiles of practitioners—enduring, struggling, facilitating, organizing, and trailblazing—is identified and compared.This research challenges and advances the existing literature by emphasizing the multiplicity, complexity, and hybridity,rather than the singularity, of individuals perceived as making a difference, arguing that different practitioners makea difference in different ways. The authors set out a research agenda, overlooked in current theorization, that focuseson the relationships and transitions between the five profiles and the conditions that inform them, opening up newavenues for understanding and supporting practice.",
author = "Catherine Durose and {van Hulst}, Merlijn and Stephen Jeffares and Oliver Escobar and Annika Agger and {de Graaf}, Laurens",
year = "2016",
month = "7",
doi = "https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.12502",
language = "English",
volume = "76",
pages = "576--586",
journal = "Public Administration Review",
issn = "0033-3352",
publisher = "Wiley",
number = "4",

}

Five ways to make a difference : Perceptions of practitioners working in urban neighborhoods. / Durose, Catherine ; van Hulst, Merlijn; Jeffares, Stephen ; Escobar, Oliver ; Agger, Annika; de Graaf, Laurens.

In: Public Administration Review, Vol. 76, No. 4, DOI: 10.1111/puar.12502, 07.2016, p. 576-586.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleScientificpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - Five ways to make a difference

T2 - Perceptions of practitioners working in urban neighborhoods

AU - Durose, Catherine

AU - van Hulst, Merlijn

AU - Jeffares, Stephen

AU - Escobar, Oliver

AU - Agger, Annika

AU - de Graaf, Laurens

PY - 2016/7

Y1 - 2016/7

N2 - This article responds to and develops the fragmented literature exploring intermediation in public administrationand urban governance. It uses Q-methodology to provide a systematic comparative empirical analysis of practitionerswho are perceived as making a difference in urban neighborhoods. Through this analysis, an original set of fiveprofiles of practitioners—enduring, struggling, facilitating, organizing, and trailblazing—is identified and compared.This research challenges and advances the existing literature by emphasizing the multiplicity, complexity, and hybridity,rather than the singularity, of individuals perceived as making a difference, arguing that different practitioners makea difference in different ways. The authors set out a research agenda, overlooked in current theorization, that focuseson the relationships and transitions between the five profiles and the conditions that inform them, opening up newavenues for understanding and supporting practice.

AB - This article responds to and develops the fragmented literature exploring intermediation in public administrationand urban governance. It uses Q-methodology to provide a systematic comparative empirical analysis of practitionerswho are perceived as making a difference in urban neighborhoods. Through this analysis, an original set of fiveprofiles of practitioners—enduring, struggling, facilitating, organizing, and trailblazing—is identified and compared.This research challenges and advances the existing literature by emphasizing the multiplicity, complexity, and hybridity,rather than the singularity, of individuals perceived as making a difference, arguing that different practitioners makea difference in different ways. The authors set out a research agenda, overlooked in current theorization, that focuseson the relationships and transitions between the five profiles and the conditions that inform them, opening up newavenues for understanding and supporting practice.

U2 - https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.12502

DO - https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.12502

M3 - Article

VL - 76

SP - 576

EP - 586

JO - Public Administration Review

JF - Public Administration Review

SN - 0033-3352

IS - 4

M1 - DOI: 10.1111/puar.12502

ER -