What, how, and why to mix research methods in the study of career patterns?

Political careers have become more diversified in multi-level systems over the last decades. In ‘classic’ federations (e.g. the US, Canada, and Germany), regional offices have become attractive positions with the process of professionalization. In newly regional political systems (e.g. Belgium, Spain, and the UK), the regional level has been quickly perceived by ambitious candidates as a professionalized political arena. Overall, regional positions in multi-level contexts are no longer conceived as amateur positions or mere stepping stones towards the national level. Despite the growing literature on the topic, several methodological questions remain nonetheless opened. This paper discusses the benefits and limitations of a mix-methods research design relevant for the study of elites’ career patterns. Specifically, the paper presents how and why mixing two quantitative and qualitative methods: survival analysis and life story interviews (for the purpose of illustration, the paper relies on empirical data: 1.831 careers and 84 life stories). Firstly, I introduce separately the added-value of each research methods (I especially discuss the benefits of these approach to collect and analyze longitudinal data in a context of multi-level system). Secondly, I demonstrate how these two methods permit to better understand elites’ career patterns in the context of multi-level systems.