This paper discusses the current theories about the referenced studies on bureaucracy, in the light of the appropriateness of research design adopted. Aimed to expose the constituent elements of different analytical approaches to the bureaucratic dynamics, by identifying the ontological and epistemological profile of selected theories, in order to reduce tensions between problem / knowledge inherent in scientific research, as identified by Popper. The study consisted of a survey of the literature referenced, where we adopted the discourse - analytical method in order to answer the research question, namely, what is the ontological and epistemological pattern most appropriate to anchor organizational studies, and what research design best explains the workings of bureaucracies? From the methodology undertaken was identified as the main finding of this study, that the theories of “fourth generation”, framed in current analytical realism, appear more consistent to explain the organizational dynamics. The results point to break the dichotomy qualitative and quantitative studies on the organizational to anchor research on bureaucracy, in the field of Political Science, standards ontological and epistemological theories called fourth generation. The results point to break the dichotomy qualitative and quantitative studies on the organizational to anchor research on bureaucracy, in the field of political science, standards ontological and epistemological theories called fourth generation. The nature a research design “hydride” as the current analytical realism and enables research in which the nested analysis fits, thus adds significant theoretical advances in explaining behavior formal institutions to enable the mapping of empirical regularities ally identifying specifics of the subjective dimension of stakeholders.
bureaucracy; organizational studies; research design; Realism; nested analysis