Parties can be analyzed through three distinct organizational faces.

Evidence

To assess the different types of party organizations in postcommunist politics, it is useful to begin with the three “faces” of the party: the party in public office, the party central office, and the party on the ground. … According to earlier cross-national research on party organization in Western Europe (Katz and Mair, 1993), the party in public office is understood as the representatives of the party in parliament and/or government and the party central office is “the national leadership of the party organization which, at least in theory, is organizationally distinct from the party in public office, and which, at the same time, organizes and is usually the representative of the party on the ground” (Katz and Mair, 1993: 94). — John T. Ishiyama, Party Organization and the Political…, 31

Categorization

• DEFINE: Sets up the Katz and Mair three-faces framework used to classify successor party organizations.
• XREF: connects to: Reform took hold through three linked layers of party insiders — Anna M. Grzymala-Busse, Redeeming The Communist Past: The…, 320; Organizational identity splits into just two dimensions, not the theorized three — Roderick M. Kramer, Geoffrey J. Leonardelli, Robert W. Livingston, Social Cognition, Social Identity, and…, 1844

Related

• Organizational identity splits into just two dimensions, not the theorized three (similarity 0.82)
• Successful party transformation requires early, sequenced organizational change before programmatic change. (similarity 0.78)
• Postcommunist successor parties are genuine organizations, not clubs. (similarity 0.78)

Broader Connections

• Organizational identity splits into just two dimensions, not the theorized three #contradicts (0.85) — Roderick M. Kramer, Geoffrey J. Leonardelli, Robert W. Livingston, Social Cognition, Social Identity, and…, 1844