Back to The Analytical Method (Steps)

Step 1 — Defining the Analytical Problem

Why This Step Matters

Most failed political analyses do not fail because of poor theory or weak data.
They fail because the analytical problem was never properly defined.

Students and early analysts often begin with:

  • a topic,
  • a case,
  • or a political controversy,

and immediately move into description, opinion, or theory selection.

This step exists to stop that impulse.

Before applying theory, before evaluating outcomes, and before writing arguments, political analysis begins with a clearly defined analytical problem—a question that demands explanation, not narration or judgment.

From Description to Explanation

A central distinction in political analysis is the difference between describing what happened and explaining why or how it happened.

Description answers:

  • What happened?
  • Who was involved?
  • When did events occur?

Explanation answers:

  • Why did this outcome occur?
  • How did certain actors or institutions shape the result?
  • Why did one path prevail over plausible alternatives?

Political analysis is concerned with explanation, not storytelling.

Example

Descriptive statement

The U.S. federal government and state governments responded differently to COVID-19.

This is accurate—but analytically useless on its own.

Analytical problem

Why did U.S. states adopt sharply divergent COVID-19 policies despite facing the same national public health threat?

The second formulation creates a puzzle that requires explanation.

What Is an Analytical Problem?

An analytical problem is not:

  • a topic,
  • a case name,
  • a moral concern,
  • or a policy preference.

An analytical problem is a puzzle:
a situation where the outcome is not self-evident and requires causal explanation.

Good analytical problems often emerge from:

  • unexpected outcomes,
  • variation across similar cases,
  • persistence of ineffective policies,
  • institutional constraints that limit obvious solutions.

Key test

If the answer feels obvious or purely normative, the problem is probably poorly defined.

Analytical Questions: “Why” and “How”

Most effective analytical problems are formulated as “why” or “how” questions.

Bad vs. Good Questions

❌ Bad question

Was the U.S. response to COVID-19 a failure?

This invites opinion and value judgment.

✅ Good analytical question

How did federalism shape policy coordination failures during the U.S. COVID-19 response?

❌ Bad question

Did sanctions work against Iran?

This collapses complex dynamics into a yes/no judgment.

✅ Good analytical question

How did sanctions interact with domestic political constraints and bargaining dynamics in the Iran nuclear negotiations?

❌ Bad question

Is welfare reform good or bad?

Normative, not analytical.

✅ Good analytical question

Why was Sweden able to reform its welfare state without dismantling its core universalist principles?

Common Mistakes at This Stage

1. Starting with opinion

“I believe,” “This policy was wrong,” or “This proves that…”
These belong after analysis—if at all.

2. Confusing chronology with explanation

Listing events in order does not explain causation.

3. Moralizing the case

Human rights violations, inequality, or injustice may be real—but analysis explains them before judging them.

4. Selecting theory too early

Choosing a theory before defining the problem leads to forcing the case to fit the lens.

Why This Step Comes Before Theory

Theory is an explanatory tool, not a starting point.

Without a clearly defined analytical problem:

  • theories become labels,
  • concepts are applied mechanically,
  • and analysis turns into jargon-filled description.

A well-defined problem guides theory selection, not the other way around.

Only once the puzzle is clear does it make sense to ask:

  • Which theory best explains this outcome?
  • What causal mechanisms are likely at work?

That transition is the focus of Step 2.

What You Should Have After Step 1

Before moving forward, you should be able to state—in one or two sentences:

  • what exactly needs to be explained,
  • why the outcome is puzzling or non-obvious,
  • and what type of explanation is required (institutional, strategic, political, or structural).

If you cannot do this yet, do not proceed.

Good analysis is slow at the beginning—and efficient afterward.

Before You Move On

Before proceeding to theory selection or causal analysis, pause and actively apply this step.

Try the following:

  • Select a political case you are familiar with (current or historical).
  • Write one analytical question that begins with why or how.
  • Make sure the question:
    • cannot be answered with a simple opinion or value judgment,
    • requires explanation rather than description,
    • points to a political process, institutional constraint, or strategic interaction.

If your question can be answered by saying “it was good,” “it was bad,” or “it happened because X wanted it”, return to this step and reformulate it.

You should move forward only when you can clearly state what needs to be explained and why the outcome is not self-evident.

Scroll to Top