“The way to the top“ - uni-bamberg.deD-96052 Bamberg Dipl.-Pol. Andreas Gruber University of...

Dipl.-Pol. Andreas Gruber University of Bamberg Faculty of Social Sciences and Economics Feldkirchenstr. 21, F324a D-96052 Bamberg Phone: +49 (0)951 863-2752 Mail: [email protected]

“The way to the top“

Recruitment patterns of top politicians in Germany

Paper presented at the workshop

Recruitment and role perceptions of political elites in old and new democracies

University of Bamberg, 23 January 2007

Content

1. Introduction ……………………………………………………………………. 2

2. Research goals…………………………………...……………………………. 2

3. Research design and response rates …….........…..……………………….. 3

3.1 Elite identification………………………………………………………... 3

3.2 Research method and data collection…..…………………………….. 4

3.3 Response rates ……...………………………………………………….. 5

4. Findings ……………………………………….………………………………… 6

4.1 Social background………………….. ………………………………….. 6

4.2 Political careers – a stage-model .……………………………………. 8

4.2.1 Education and occupational career……..……………………… 9

4.2.2 Intraparty career..……………………………………………...… 12

4.2.3 Honorary offices at the local level.…………………..………..... 15

4.2.4 Cross over to professional politics……...……………………… 17

4.2.5 Recruitment to political top positions ………..………………… 19

5 Conclusion …………………………………….………………………………... 22

1. Introduction

When Angela Merkel was elected as the first female German Federal Chancellor, Roger Köppel, the

former editor-in-chief of the newspaper “Die Welt” wrote in a comment: “After the retirement of

Chancellor Gerhard Schröder Germany remains a biotope for exceptional political careers.” (Köppel

2005:1) By saying this he suggested, that both Merkel and her predecessor are offering examples of

political recruitment paths, which differ from an imaginary template. A different journalistic judgement

was given after the personal change in the executive board of the Social Democratic Party (SPD) in

April 2006. When Kurt Beck replaced Matthias Platzeck, some political observers attested the new

party chairman a “typical social democratic career”, some saw in him – regarding his political career –

an “exemplar of a social democratic politician”.

‘Typical’, ‘interesting’, ‘ordinary’, ‘dazzling’ – these words are often used to describe political careers.

Obviously there is an implicit understanding of a certain pattern, how politicians reach a top position.

When the rise of a politician differs from this supposed pattern, one tends to label a career as

exceptional. This contribution wants to point out the real or potential patterns in the political

recruitment of German top politicians. In the German case the term “career” is intrinsically tied to the

name of Dietrich Herzog. As Borchert and Stolz correctly have noticed, political careers – in a closer

sense – have been an exclusive domain of Herzog and his followers. In his famous study of 1975,

called „Political careers – selection and professionalization of political leadership groups“, he shed

light on the darkness of political career paths, using a semi-structured qualitative interview with 124

German top politicians. Herzog found out, that political careers are not a product of chance or a result

of individual talents. In fact careers of top politicians follow a certain pattern. He termed the dominating

type of career “standard career“, attributing 60 percent of the German political top personnel to this

type. Last but not least it is this picture of a “standard career“, which is back in someone’s head, when

one talks about a “typical career“.

It is obvious that by a closer scrutiny not every career, labelled ‘exceptional’ or ‘fancy’ by journalists

and political observers, need to be unusual in a scientific point of view. So the question of

extravagance of political careers can be regarded as an empirical one. These considerations frame

the research project “The way to the top – Recruitment patterns of top politicians in Germany”.

2. Research goals

The study has three basic goals. First, the group of Germany’s top politicians shall be analysed by

their socio-demographic composition in order to draw some conclusions to possibly relevant social

backgrounds. However, the pure composition of political elite tells little about the process of political

recruitment. Therefore, in a second step the career paths of German top politicians will be described in

detail by a six-stage model to figure out concrete patterns of political recruitment. These findings will

be compared with survey data from young members of parliaments on federal and state level,

because career patterns are not supposed to be constant over time. In this part of the analysis, the

question will be raised, if there are separate careers on the federal and the state level. The data used

in this analysis contain politicians on both levels. This allows the question, whether there is an

independent career arena on the level of the German states and how established the exchange

+++ Dipl.-Pol. Andreas Gruber +++ Recruitment patterns of top politicians in Germany +++

2

between these two levels of politics is. For that purpose, movements from the regional to the nation

level will be examined, using ‘centripetal ratios’ – reflecting movements to the centre of the political

system – and ‘centrifugal ratios’ for movements towards the region (Stolz 2003). The stage model –

and therewith the analysis of general career patterns – is the precondition for the third main aim of the

project – the verification of Herzog’s three types of careers (‘standard career’, ‘cross over career’, pure

political career). Since the calculating of this third part isn’t finished yet, this paper concentrates on the

first two goals.

3. Research design and response rates

3.1 Elite identification

The selection of top politicians in Germany was made by means of the positional method of elite

identifcation (Hoffmann-Lange 1992; Hoffmann-Lange 2003; Hoffmann-Lange 2004; Machatzke

1997). From the vast number of all possible professional political positions, these were picked out, for

which usually intraparty or parliamentary careers are required.

Table 1: Composition of the investigational group

n %

Member of the federal government 16 4.3 Federal executive

Parliamentary state secretaries 30 8.1

Executive board of the CDU/CSU parliamentary group 18 4.9

Executive board of the SPD parliamentary group 15 4.1

Board of the FDP parliamentary group 12 3.3

Board of the Left Party parliamentary group 13 3.5

Board of the Alliance90/Greens parliamentary group 11 3.0

Member of the Presidium of the German Bundestag 4 1.1

Chairpersons of the permanent committees in the German Bundestag 21 5.7

Federal legislative

Presidents, secretary generals and general managers of parties with mandates 6 1.6

Prime ministers of the states 16 4.3 State executive

State ministers and senators 142 38.5

State legislative Chairpersons of the parliamentary groups in the state legislatives 65 17.6

Total 369 100

From four basic functional groups (federal executive, federal legislative, state executive, state

legislative) 369 political top positions were selected in order to allow a comparision between these

functional groups, as well as between politicians at federal and state level (see Table 1). Herzog also

analysed high-ranking party functionaries like the heads of the divisions in parties’ national

headquarters. As this type of a professional politician became less important during the past decades

and as the memebers of the executive boards of parties in most cases are at the same time members

of parliament or have a high state office, this class of politicians was set aside. Due to practical and


3

theoretical reasons German top politicians on the European level like the vice president of the

European Commission Günther Verheugen, the newly-elected president of the European Parliament

Hans-Gert Pöttering or Martin Schulz, president of the socialist group in the European Parliament,

were not considered.

As a contrast group young members of parliaments at federal and state level were chosen. The young

MPs at the federal level were selected, if they were under the age of 35 on their election day. Young

state MPs were selected, if their age on election day did not exceed 30 years. By this means 136

young MPs were identified. The complete sample therefore includes 505 German politicians.

3.2 Research method and data collection

Data basically were surveyed by means of a highly standardised written questionnaire. It had to cover all

variables, which could possibly be important for the individual career path of the respondent. The

construction of the questionnaire based on Herzog’s ‘career research approach’. The final questionnaire

consisted of 20 pages and included all relevant stages and structures of potential political careers (see

Figure 1). It had to fit to careers at the federal level as well as to those at state level.

Figure 1: Career Research Approach according to Dietrich Herzog (1975)

Family Youth groups Educational institutions (school, university)

socialization systemPartiesParliamentsState institutions

Occupations

Associations, unions, clubs

Norms (party statutes, electoral laws, etc.)

selection system

Executive boardsGovernmentsLeadership positions

elites

(early) political socialization Political recruitment (party entry)

Political career

(honorary full time)

Elite recruitment

Activation Election to top positions

stru

ctur

esst

ages

The postal survey was following the Total Design Method (TDM) according to Dillman (Dillman 1978).

The questionnaire was pretested three times on Bavarian members of the Bundestags and the

Bavarian state parliament. In addition, the written form of the questionnaire was also programmed as

an online-questionnaire. Respondents had the choice between a postal returning of the questionnaire

at no charge or answering the questions online. For the online-questionnaire an own website was set

up (www.politische-karrieren.de). The first dispatch of the questionnaires took place in March 2006. At


4

the end of March a reminder was realised by sending the questionnaire to all persons having not

answered until that time. At the end of the fieldwork, an online reminder reached all non-responders,

pointing at the online-questionnaire. Fieldwork was finished until the end of April.

3.3 Response rates

In general, high response rates can rarely be expected in elite surveys. There are several reasons for

that. Political elites work 60 to 80 hours per week, so time is a rare ressource. In addition, politicians

represent a very interesting research object for many researchers. Hence, politicians are almost

overflown with surveys. Some politicians reported, that up to 20 questionnaires land on their desk

every month. Other politicians obviously had a strong attitude that surveys in general cannot be

trusted, treating information about their occupational or political career as a secret.

Table 2: Response rates

N (number of

cases) % responses % of sub

sample

Members of the federal government 16 4.3 2 12.5

Parliamentary state secretaries 30 8.1 9 30.0

Executive board of the CDU/CSU parliamentary group 18 4.9 3 16.7

Executive board of the SPD parliamentary group 15 4.1 4 26.7

Board of the FDP parliamentary group 12 3.3 5 41.7

Board of the Left Party parliamentary group 13 3.5 5 38.5

Board of the Alliance90/Greens parliamentary group 11 3.0 2 18.2

Member of the Presidium of the German Bundestag 4 1.1 2 50.0

Chairs of the permanent committees in the German Bundestag 21 5.7 6 28.6

Presidents, secretary generals and general managers of parties with mandate 6 1.6 1 16.7

Prime ministers of the states 16 4.3 5 31.3

State ministers and senators 142 38.5 57 40.1

Chairs of the parliamentary groups in the state legislatives 65 17.6 33 50.8

Total 369 100 134 36.3

Considering these circumstances the final response can alltogether be seen as a success. 134 of the

369 German top politicians sent back the questionnaire by post or answered it online – a response

rate of 36.3 per cent (see Table 2).1 According to the expectations the response rate among executive

politicians at the federal level was below average, reaching only 12.5 per cent in the sub sample

“members of the federal government”. Especially high response rates can be found among the 1 For comparison: Bernhard Wessels reached with his “Abgeordnetenbefragung 2003” (MP survey), conducted at the WZB in

Berlin, a response rate amounting to 34 per cent, also using a postal survey method (Wessels 2003). The „Heidelberger Elitestudie“ (MP survey), also working with written questionnaires, managed a response rate amounting to15 per cent (Bruns 2004).


5

members of the state government and leaders of the parliamentary groups in the state parliaments.

This leads to the result, that participation among top politicians at state level (42.6 per cent) clearly

exceededs participation at the federal level (26.7 per cent). The contrast group is obviously more

disposed to take part in elite surveys. Nearly 60 per cent of the young MPs returned a filled out

questionnaire (81 out of 136).

4. Findings

4.1 Social background

Although the analysis of social background variables is only of descriptive value, it may give a first

indication, which preconditions or social restrictions underlie the recruitment process. Therefore, the

variables age, sex, formal education and religion shall briefly be presented.

A short look on the age of top politicians gives evidence that German top politicians are in an

advanced age, showing an average of nearly 53 years (52.8). But there is a great difference in

seniority among the members of the political elite in Germany: 40 years lie between the oldest and

youngest high-ranking politician, only a small share is under the age of 45. Some party differences can

be observed too. Members of the three actual oppositional parties in the German Bundestag (Liberals,

Greens, Left Party) are on average younger than politicians of CDU, CSU and SPD. For example,

CSU-politicians are on average 56 years old, green top politicians only 50 years. The explanatory

potential of these numbers is limited. Theoretically they all could have reached this position at the age

of 18. However, from a more realistic point of view, the average age indicates that an intraparty or

parliamentary career is essential before climbing onto high ranks of the political system.

Figure 2: Gender distribution among German top politicians

18%

57%

77%

67%

6%

23%

33%

52%

94%

82%

48%43%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

CDU CSU SPD FDP Greens Left Party

femalemale


6

The gender distribution among the top politicians was quite predictable: Due to the fact, that only a

small share of the party members in Germany is female and only a share of 30 per cent of all MPs in

the Bundestag and the state parliaments are women (Hoecker 1998), the small share of female top

politicians (only 100 out of 369, 27 per cent) is not surprising. Just as well not surprising are the party

differences. Parties with a strong system of sex quotas in their nomination process show a higher

share of women (see Figure 2). The Greens and the Left Party, the parties with the strongest quotas,

have more women than men in top positions.

Data about the educational level of German top politicians confirm the often stated trend that

politicians are becoming more and more academic (Golsch 1998). The share of politicians with a

general university entrance qualification outbalances comparable data from parliamentary research

projects. Golsch assessed this share among members of the German Bundestag with 67.5 per cent

(Golsch 1998). Among German top politicians 91 per cent possess such a qualification; among the

young MPs even 94 per cent (see Table 4).

Table 3: Educational qualifications

Top Politicians Young MPs

N % cum. % N % cum. %Without secondary general school certificate 0 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 0.0

With secondary general school certificate 1 0.7 0.7 1 1.2 1.2

With intermediate school-leaving certificate 6 4.5 5.2 2 2.5 2.5

With entrance qualification for a Fachhochschule¹ 5 3.7 9.0 2 2.5 5.0

With general university entrance qualification 122 91.0 100 76 93.8 100

Total 134 100.0 81 100.0

¹ Specialized college of higher education.

Other variables also indicate an extraordinary high educational level of the political elite. 87 per cent of

the top politicians have an university degree, 8 per cent a specialized college of higher education

degree (‘Fachhochschulabschluss’). Nearly one third has a doctor’s degree, 5 per cent post-doctoral

lecturing qualifications. High educational level could be considered without a doubt as a strong

precondition for a political career.

With regard to religious affiliation a trichotomy has become apparent. To an equal share top politicians

are protestant, catholic and without denomination (see Figure 3). Not surprisingly the two Christian-

democratic parties CDU and CSU and the bourgeois FDP show the highest shares, whereas the

Greens and the Left Party are predominantly atheistic. This pattern occurs very similarly among the

young MPs. Only within the two ‘C-Parties’ church attendance is still relatively high. About 50 per cent

of the CDU-politicians and three-fourths of the CSU-politicians could be regarded as constant

churchgoers. Among the young MPs this share is notably lower and possibly an indicator for an

ongoing secularisation.


7

Figure 3: Religious affiliation among top politicians

50%

46%

4%

27%

73%

31%

23%

46%

54%

39%

8%

8%

92%

8%

92%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

CDU CSU SPD FDP Greens Left Party

No denomination

Catholics

Protestants

4.2 Political careers – a stage-model

Political careers can certainly not be planed in detail like careers as a lawyer or a doctor. Two of the

main reasons are the absence of a coercive apprenticeship and the uncertainty of personal

recruitment by means of elections.

Figure 4: A six-stage-model of political careers

(early) Political socialization

(early) Political socialization

Characteristics-Acquisition of political values and norms-Formative effects in the parents’ house-Political idols

Main variables

-Political activities of the parents-Discussions about politics in the parents’ house

Education and occupational career

Education and occupational career

Intraparty career

Intraparty career

Honorary positions at the local level

Honorary positions at the local level

Cross over to professional politics

Cross over to professional politics

Recruitment to political top positions

Recruitment to political top positions

Characteristics-Education and occupation in parallel to the intraparty career or to political positions in local affairs

Characteristics-Party entry as a precondition - Acquisition of political skills-„Ochsentour“

Characteristics-Local political positions as an option -Achieving political recognition at the local level

Characteristics-Politics as a revenue and a full time job-Termination of the private occupational career

Characteristics-Achieving political top positions-Elite recruitment in a narrow sense

Main variables

-School, apprenticeship and university degrees -Age when entering the first full time job-Occupational sector and political affiliation of this sector

Main variables

-Age when joining a political party-Motives for entering parties-Role of the parties’ youth branches and other intraparty groups-Distance between joining party and first party function- Intraparty ascension

Main variables

-Share of local politicians - Age when achieving local positions -Distance between party entry and this position -Tenure of the local politics stage

Main variables

-Age when becoming a professional politician-Kind and level of the first full time position-Tenure of the intraparty career until cross over

Main variables

-Positions prior to the recruitment on the top position -Kind and tenure of the parliamentary qualification phase

Stage 1

Stage 3

Stage 2

Stage 4Stage 5

Stage 6


8

On the other hand, a successful political career is not a result of random processes. The way to the

top of the political system is characterised by a sequence of occupational and political positions. This

upward movement can be described in a stage-model (see Figure 4).

These stages will be presented below, focussing on intraparty careers. (Early) political socialisation

precedes the actual political career and will therefore only be outlined very briefly. Herzog assumed

that individuals learn political values, obtain first knowledge about political positions and promotion

prospects and generate motivations for a possible political career (Herzog 1975: 44). Hence,

politicians were asked about the political activities of their parents, the importance of political

discussions in the parents’ house and the effect of peer groups as a factor for joining a political party.

Two thirds of the top politicians didn’t mention a politically engaged mother or father. One third

reported that talking about politics didn’t play a major role or no role at all at the parents’ house. One

third saw peers as decisive factor for joining a party. A political career therefore seems to be possible

without major socialisation influences.

4.2.1 Education and occupational career

According to Golsch, a politician’s level of political professionalization is determined by the correlation

of his professional and his political activities. The shorter the period he spent in his private job and the

earlier he came to be a professional politician, the more dominant the political component in his

career, and the higher his level of political professionalization (Golsch 1998:123). For Herzog as well,

the relation between professional and political career was the core of his analysis and essential for his

classification. Thus, asking for the professional background of high-ranking politicians and its duration

before turning to politics is indispensable for examining political careers.

As mentioned before, high-ranking politicians usually can provide a university degree. The striking fact

about it consists in the remarkable spectrum of fields of studies. Although law is the most frequent

subject that does by no means imply that there is a lawyer’s monopoly, as they make up not even a

third (31.5 per cent) of the top politicians. The 2nd, 3rd and 4th place are taken by social sciences,

psychology (16.1 per cent), economics (15.3 per cent) and the branch of philology, philosophy and

linguistics (13.7 per cent). Among the next generation of politicians there are more social scientists

than lawyers. Obviously the rule “no matter what, as long as you studied at all” applies equally to both

age brackets. Nonetheless, there are some differences between the parties to be found here:

bourgeois parties reveal a higher percentage of top politicians with a degree in law.

The age at entry to professional life varies between 17 and 35 years. The consequences of the

increasing academicalization are shown by the average age at entry of nearly 26 years. How long the

later top politicians remain in their first job obviously depends, although not only, on the level of the

political system. Federal politicians enter a professional political office for the first time at a medium

age of 37 (36.9) years, whereas politicians at state level are about three years older (40.2). On the

average, high-ranking politicians enter professional politics at an age of 39.3 years, thus having spent

about 13.5 years in their previous professions. The party affiliation is equally important: Leading

politicians of the CDU and the SPD have spent more time in their previous private professions. For

example, politicians of the SPD have been working for averagely 15 years before turning to


9

professional politics, whereas politicians of the Greens averagely quit their previous professions after

only 10 years.

Table 4: Years in private occupations before cross over

Top politicians Young MPs

N % cum. % N % cum. %

0 to 5 years 29 21.6 21.6 64 79.0 79.0

6 to 10 years 31 23.1 44.8 13 16.0 95.1

11 to 15 years 29 21.6 66.4 4 4.9 100.0

16 to 20 years 13 9.7 76.1 0 0.0 __

21 years and longer 32 23.9 100.0 0 0.0 __

Total 134 100.0 __ 81 100.0 __

The low average of 2.7 years spent working in another profession before becoming a politician in the

group of the young delegates is not surprising, as the assumption of office at an early stage was the

primary criterion for selection. Furthermore, as mentioned above, nearly all of them have studied or,

as in some cases, had not even finished their studies when they first entered professional politics. The

11 young politicians of the green party could not look back on any professional background; the new

generation of SPD, CDU and FDP has been working for averagely 3 years.

Table 5 combines the professional background and the number of professional branches before

assuming a professional political office or mandate. It is striking that leading politicians without any

kind of working experience constitute a clear exception. Only four people became politicians right from

the start. For about half of the top politicians the change to politics occurred after having gained

experiences in one working field, for a minority only after having known four or five professional

branches. The largest group of today’s high-ranking politicians originates from the sector of “science,

education and media”, but also bureaucracy and law constitute a major recruiting field. This includes

the free-lancing lawyers as well, who make up the largest part of this group. Nine out of ten leading

politicians look back on an uninterrupted career. Only 10 per cent have left professional politics for a

certain time and have later on gained another political office or mandate. Regarding the percentage of

professional politics compared to the total working life, the leading politicians show a differentiated

distribution. 12 per cent of them revealed a professional politics’ percentage of their total working life

of 80-100 per cent, whereas half of the young MPs can be found in this category (see Table 6).


10

Table 5: Occupational sector before cross over

Full time politician after

From the beginning full time

politician 1 sector 2 sectors 3 sectors 4 sectors 5 sectors Total

Occupational sector before cross over N % N % N % N % N % N % N %

No professional experiences 4 3.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 4 3.0

Full time in the sector of politics (without mandate) 0 0 1 1.6 5 17.9 5 18.5 3 33.3 1 0.0 15 11.2

Administration and military 0 0 8 11.5 8 32.1 6 22.2 0 0.0 1 0.0 23 17.2

Justice / Lawyer 0 0 15 18.0 2 7.1 4 7.4 0 0.0 1 50.0 22 16.4

Private enterprises 0 0 7 18.0 2 7.1 6 29.6 2 25.0 1 0.0 18 13.4

Organizations and ‘third sector’ 0 0 9 14.8 4 14.3 3 11.1 1 8.3 0 0.0 17 12.7

Science, education, media 0 0 22 36.1 5 17.9 3 11.1 1 8.3 0 0.0 31 23.1

Others, interruptions 0 0 0 0.0 1 3.6 0 0.0 2 16.7 1 50.0 4 3.0

Total 4 3.0 62 45.5 27 20.1 27 20.1 9 6.7 5 3.7 134 100.0

Examining the employment status of today’s politicians previous professions, the dominating

categories are employees (37.3 per cent), civil servants (34.3 per cent) and freelancers (17.2 per

cent). Only one of the top politicians, before assuming his first professional political office, worked as a

labourer, none of them was a homemaker. Nearly 7 per cent had not yet or only just finished their

apprenticeship or studies, just as nearly half of the younger politicians (46.9 per cent).

Table 6: Proportion of professional politics in the whole professional life


N % cum. % N % cum. %

0 - 20% 22 16.4 16.4 15 18.5 18.5

21 - 40% 29 21.6 38.1 12 14.8 33.3

41 - 60% 32 23.9 61.9 5 6.2 39.5

61 - 80% 35 26.1 88.1 10 12.3 51.9

81 - 100% 16 11.9 100.0 39 48.1 100.0

Total 134 100.0 __ 81 100.0 __


11

4.2.2 Intraparty career

Politcal parties play undoubtedly the key role in recruiting the political elite. They are the prevailing

instruments for selecting political leaders (Herzog 1975: 65). Therefore, a focal point in the survey was

set on the successive ascension of the later top politicians. The dominance of political parties in the

recruitment can be read off with a single number. Out of 369 top politicians only seven were not

member of a political party. These seven neutral politicians were members of state government, often

appointed as experts in policy fields like sciences or culture.

Joing party age, motivations for entering and party changes

The very beginning of climbing upward in one’s party is the decision to join a party. Top politicians

became party members by the age of 27 on average. However, more than half of the political elite

joined their party before their 25th birthday, 30 percent were 20 years or younger. Some party

differences can be stated. Green top politicians are on average 30 years when entering party and,

therefore, the oldest ones. Liberal politicians join party at the age of 24 years, the lowest count of all

parties (see Table 5).

Figure 5: Joining party age

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42 44 46 48 50 52 54 >55

Age at entering party

cum

. per

cen

t

CDU (mean: 27,4) CSU (mean: 24,6) SPD (mean: 27,5)FDP (mean: 24,3) Greens (mean: 30,9) Left Party (mean: 26,5)

The young MPs have an average age of 19.7 years, when they get their membership-book. 60 per

cent were 19 years or even younger.

The most mentioned reason for joining a political party were political incidences in the field of domestic

policies like the question of atomic energie. Upcoming, won or lost elections, favoured or controversial

candidates were also frequently reported. In the second place among the joining motives politically

active friends and peers were mentioned, followed by the wish of getting politically engaged, political


12

ideas or programmes. The wish to become a political professional or to run for an intraparty function or

mandate obviously didn’t play a role to enter a party. Among the young MPs political incidences are

also the most mentioned motive, and thereby the German reunification on first place with 50 per cent

of all answers.

Among top politicians the changing of political parties is a very rare phenomenon. Only six members

of the political elite have changed sides during their career.2 Among young MPs only three crossed

over to another politicial party. Party change therefore can not be seen as an option to promote the

personal political career.

First party office, level of first engagement and the process of intraparty ascension

Only a fistful of systematic analyses exist dealing with the internal climbing up of politicians within their

party (Wiesendahl 2004: 126). One reason is the difficult collection of information about the party

offices of politicians. MPs’ handbooks and biographies often report not more than outstanding offices

within the party. The question, in which position and on which level politicans start their career within

their party and how the process of intraparty ascension looks like, often remains unanswered. These

topics will be discussed in the following chapter.

Top politicians take over their first party office very briefly after joining the party.3 One third of the high-

ranking politicians were in party positions from the very beginning, after five years this share raises up

to nearly 60 per cent. On average it takes a top politician 5.7 years until entering the first position

within the party. Green top politicians need least time for this first office, CDU and FDP show higher

means (see Table 7).

Table 7: Duration between party entry and first party office (means in years)


N mean SD N mean SD

CDU 40 5.4 5.0 22 2.3 2.9

CSU 10 4.1 4.2 4 0.8 1.0

SPD 32 4.6 4.8 12 1.7 1.6

FDP 13 6.6 6.1 13 2.3 3.1

Greens 9 3.1 5.1 11 2.5 2.3

Left Party 12 12.2 9.0 10 1.6 2.8

Others __ __ __ 1 3.0 __

Total 116 5.7 5.9 73 2.1 2.5

The high average within the Left Party is dued to the fact, that five top politicians entered the SED

early in their life, but went in party positions within Left Party not until the 1990s. Among young MPs 2 Four top politicians of the Left Party saw in the transition from the communist SED to the new built Left Party a party change.

But this was not treated as a genuine party change, because the Left Party is considered as the factual successor of the SED.

3 Nearly eight per cent of the top politicians declared, that they had no party function in their political career. Five per cent didn’t answer this question.


13

only slight differences between the parties can be found. The average is situated with 2.1 years clearly

under the value for the top politicians.

Table 8: Ascension processes within parties

Years before taking office average tenure

Number of cases

% politicians with this

office mean SD mean SD

Chairperson 3 2.2 17.7 12.7 6.0 5.0

Vice Chairperson 7 5.2 12.7 7.5 3.4 2.2

Secretary general 2 1.5 5.0 5.7 1.0 0.0

Member of presidium 17 12.7 14.6 7.9 3.4 3.6

Federal level

Member of the executive board 33 24.6 11.6 9.4 6.3 6.6

Chairperson 29 21.6 10.6 9.4 6.2 3.8

Vice Chairperson 22 16.4 9.6 7.2 5.7 4.8

Secretary general 7 5.2 10.3 9.7 4.1 2.1

Member of presidium 25 18.7 14.4 10.0 6.7 4.4

State level


Chairperson 25 18.7 11.2 7.8 7.3 4.9

Vice Chairperson 14 10.4 13.0 6.5 8.6 5.5 District level


Chairperson 53 39.6 8.6 7.8 10.0 5.6

Vice Chairperson 20 14.9 5.9 5.6 7.8 5.4 County or

sub district level


Chairperson 33 24.6 5.3 6.6 7.6 5.8

Vice Chairperson 14 10.4 2.2 2.8 5.5 4.8 Local level


Regarding the levels of intraparty engagement, it is noticeable that more top politicians had offices on

the state level than on the local or county level.4 Nearly 80 per cent of all top politicians reported

4 The catch-all parties SPD, CDU und CSU have a 5-level party organisation: The federal level (‘Bundesebene’), the state level

(‘Landesebene’), the district level (‘Bezirksebene’), the sub district or county level (‘Kreis- und Unterbezirksebene’) and the local level (‘Orts-und Stadtebene’). The other parties often have sections only on three levels: federal, state and county or town.


14

offices on the state level of their party, the county or sub district level was mentioned by 71.2 per cent,

the local level (sections of the party in towns and municipalities) by 62.9 per cent, the federal level by

53.0 per cent and district level by 44.7 per cent. Thereby some clear party differences can be

oberserved. The catch-all parties CDU, CSU and SPD have a more decentralised structure than the

three smaller parties FDP, Greens and Left Party.

The reached level ist only one side of the coin telling litte about rising processes within the party. A

closer look to the frequencies of single offices within a party, the means of time lags between these

positions and the average tenure of every office traces the intraparty rise of German top politicians

(see Table 8). The most mentioned offices were ‘member of the executive board on state level’,

‘chairperson on county or sub district level’ and ‘member of the executive board on local level’. These

important positions have different start-up times. While top politicians are members of the executive

board on the local level already half a year after joining the party, the climbing to the chair position of

the party on the county level takes on average 8.6 years. After averagely 10 years they reach the

executive board of their party on the state level. As a general rule it can be said: The higher the

position, the longer it takes to get it. So data verify the so called “Ochsentour”, the long-winded,

persevering ascension through and by local and regional functions or offices.

The offices “executive board on state level’ and ‘chairperson on county or sub district level’ are

obviously strategic positions within a party. This can also be read off by the average tenure of these

offices, namely 10 years. The strategic character of these positions is undoubtly a consequence of the

German electoral system. By these two offices office holders safeguard their influence on local

selectors for candidacies to offices and mandates. ‘Chairperson on county or sub district level’ is very

important for candidates running for a direct parliamentary mandate. With high positions within the

party organisation on the state level politicians secure their places on the party lists. This thesis is

confirmed by other survey results. Top politicians were asked, if there indeed exists a strategic office

within their party, that has been essential for their personal career. More than half of all top politicians

and young MPs answered in the affirmative. With regard to the given answers, the two named

strategic positions became apparent again. More than one third of all noted offices fell into the

category ‘Chairperson on county or sub district level’, one fifth mentioned offices in the state executive

board, thereby very often the chairposition. In the third place top politicians identify supra-regional

offices within the youth branches as very helpful, among the contrast group these offices even rank

first. Data clearly indicate that the youth sections of the political parties are a strong career vehicle,

which is a quite striking difference to Herzog’s analysis. The detailed results concerning the youth

branches and the importance of the membership in other intraparty groups cannot be explicated due

to space constraints in this paper.

4.2.3 Honorary offices at the local level

Experiences in coping with practical problems in a manageable political area, clear contention with the

specific interests of the voters and direct responsibility to them – due to these points offices and

mandates at the local level have an outstanding reputation as a ‘school of politics’ qualifying local

office holders for higher ranks in the political system (Herzog 1975: 85). According to Herzog there is a


15

second reason for holding offices on the basis. As local positions within the party, engagement in local

affairs can be regarded as an instrument to maintaining influence on local selectors. The survey data

confirm this thesis. Nearly two thirds (63.0 per cent) of the top politicians had held or are still holding

honorary offices on the local level. In comparison with Herzog’s study (55 per cent), this value has

increased.

Table 9: Offices and mandates on the local level


Number of cases

% politicians in local affairs

Number of cases

% politicians in local affairs

CDU 46 0.67 22 0.95

CSU 11 0.73 6 0.83

SPD 36 0.56 13 0.54

FDP 13 0.77 13 0.54

Greens 13 0.54 11 0.36

Left Party 13 0.62 14 0.64

Others / no party 2 0.50 2 0.50

Total 134 0.63 81 0.67

Young MPs are also strongly involved in local affairs, over two thirds are or have been local office

holders. Members of the bourgeois parties CDU, CSU and FDP show a higher share of politicians with

local offices. Together with the Greens the Socials Democrats have the lowest numbers, an analogy to

Herzog’s findings. Top politicians were on average 32.4 years, when being elected in a local council

for the first time, young MPs only 24.6 years (see Table 10).

Table 10: Age by first election in a local council


Number of cases mean SD Number of

cases mean SD

CDU 31 29.84 8.08 21 23.81 2.96

CSU 8 33.38 4.50 5 27.20 2.86

SPD 20 31.95 7.58 7 24.29 3.95

FDP 10 38.00 10.60 7 27.86 3.44

Greens 7 33.29 7.09 4 21.25 2.22

Left Party 7 33.29 7.99 9 24.89 4.28

Others / no party 1 42.00 __ 1 20.00 __

Total 84 32.37 8.16 54 24.63 3.69

Nearly half of the top politicians reported a membership in the council of his or her town or municipality,

almost 30 per cent were members of the council on county level. These shares can also be found among


16

the young MPs. In addition, politicians were not just members in local parliaments. 55 per cent of the top

politicians and the half of the young MPs had a leading position in local councils, often as chairperson or

vice chairperson of the parliamentary group. Interestingly, there was no politician in the sample having

been an honorary mayor.

4.2.4 Cross over to professional politics

The following lines deal with a key element in the political career of a top politician – the changeover to

a full time professional occupation. One might call this process ‘professionalization’ in an individual

meaning of this expression like Herzog proposed it: Professionalization consists in the way, how

politicians cross over from a political amateur to a political professional status (Herzog 1990: 33). The

circumstances of this transition are a matter of particular interest. Therefore, the average age when

crossing over, the kind and level of the first full time political position and the status of intraparty

careers at the point of crossing over will be described below.

Regarding the age of crossing over top politicians, data reveal a comparably high average of 39.3

years. This means, the political elite works about 15 years in private occupations before changing

sides. On average, they are at this time party members for about 13 years. Young MPs’ values

strongly differ. They were averagely 12 years younger, when they became political professionals.

Party differences are similar in both groups. SPD and CDU-politicians are the oldest ones, Greens are

comparably young.

Table 11: Age at cross over


N mean SD N Mean SD

CDU 46 39.0 8.76 22 28.5 3.42

CSU 11 36.5 6.47 6 27.8 2.32

SPD 36 41.5 8.41 13 29.0 4.24

FDP 13 37.4 7.59 13 28.1 4.39

Greens 13 36.8 9.44 11 24.5 3.59

Left Party 13 38.5 9.18 14 25.5 4.40

Others / no party 2 53.5 4.95 2 25.0 5.00

Total 134 39.3 8.65 81 27.3 4.15

With regard to the first full time position it is noticeable, that three quarters of the top politicians started

their career as a political professional as member of parliament. For a share of 15 per cent a

ministerial office marked the beginning as full time politician, 9 per cent started out as elected civil

servant in local affairs like mayors (see Table 12).


17

Table 12: First full time political position


N % cum. % N % cum %

Member of the Bundestag 36 26.9 26.9 36 44.4 44.4

Member of a state parliament 63 47.0 73.9 45 55.6 100.0

Member of the European Parliament 2 1.5 75.4 __ __ __

Minister on state level 21 15.7 91.0 __ __ __

Elected civil servant in local affairs 12 9.0 100.0 __ __ __

Total 134 100.0 81 100.0

Even more interesting than the starting point are the positions within the party, when politicians

became professionals. In table 13 the average time lags between the beginning of intraparty offices

and the cross over to professional politics are presented. Closer scrutiny reveals interesting

differences between these various positions.

Table 13: Time lags (means) between the beginning of intraparty offices and the cross over

N mean SD

Begin: Chairperson 3 11.67 7.57 Begin: Vice Chairperson 7 9.57 4.89 Begin: Secretary general 2 6.00 0.00 Begin: Member of presidium 17 11.65 6.85

Federal level

Begin: Member of the executive board 33 6.67 7.63 Begin: Chairperson 29 6.38 8.00 Begin: Vice Chairperson 22 4.82 6.11 Begin: Secretary general 7 2.71 10.13 Begin: Member of presidium 25 7.08 6.92

State level

Begin: Member of the executive board 50 2.32 7.20 Begin: Chairperson 23 6.17 7.42 Begin: Vice Chairperson 12 3.42 6.39 District level Begin: Member of the executive board 25 -4.04 8.33

Begin: Chairperson 53 1.17 6.03 Begin: Vice Chairperson 20 -1.65 6.87

County or sub district level

Begin: Member of the executive board 42 -6.62 7.08 Begin: Chairperson 30 -4.27 6.78 Begin: Vice Chairperson 13 -6.77 8.90 Local level Begin: Member of the executive board 43 -11.88 7.32

XX qualification offices XX strategic offices XX safeguarding / rewarding offices

Positions with a negative sign can therefore be regarded as qualification offices. Later top politicians

pass through these positions in order to increase their level of awareness and their personal


18

recognition. The above mentioned strategic positions ‘Chairperson on county level’ and ‘member of

the executive board on state level’ are located closely to zero. This is theoretically plausible. These

two crucial offices are either captured short before the cross over or immediately within a short period

after becoming full time politician. Offices with a positive sign are averagely reached after crossing

over. A possible interpretation leads to the assumption that these offices ensure the intraparty

standing of the later top politicians and safeguard their influence on important selectors. Higher offices

could also be seen as a reward for a so far succeeding political career. In table 14 offices and

mandates on the local level were analysed similarly. These data can be interpreted just the same way.

Table 14: Time lags (means) between offices in local affairs and cross over

N mean SD

Begin: Town council 61 -5.56 7.70

End¹: Town council 61 3.67 7.78 Begin: Parliament on county level 38 -2.61 7.19 End: Parliament on county level 38 5.79 7.92 Begin: Parliament on district level 5 -7.80 10.92

Membership in local

parliaments

End: Parliament on district level 5 1.20 11.61

Begin: Chairperson parliamentary group 23 -2.39 6.54 End: Chairperson parliamentary group 23 3.87 6.76 Begin: Deputy mayor 2 -1.50 4.95 End: Deputy mayor 2 3.50 4.95 Begin: Other functions 9 0.11 4.57

Leading positions in the council of town or municipality

End: Other functions 9 5.00 4.92

Begin: Chairperson parliamentary group 9 -1.44 6.09 End: Chairperson parliamentary group 9 4.56 6.09 Begin: 'Kreisbeigeordnete/r' 2 2.00 2.83 End: 'Kreisbeigeordnete/r' 2 7.00 2.83 Begin: Deputy district chief executive 2 0.50 9.19 End: Deputy district chief executive 2 7.00 7.07 Begin: Other functions 3 -9.00 7.55

Leading positions in

parliament on county level

End: Other functions 3 -4.33 4.04

¹ The ‘end’ values can only be regarded as an approximation, because actual incumbents got the value ‘2006’. Date therefore underestimate the tenure.

4.2.5 Recruitment to political top positions

The final stage of the presented model consists in the recruitment to a top position in the political

system. Only such offices were taken into account that fit the criteria for selection as top positions like

listed in table 1. On average, German politicians were 45.8 years old, when they reached a high-

ranking political position. The ‘way to the top’ took them averagely six years after crossing over. Data

reveal some party differences. Top politicians with a membership-book of the catch-all parties CDU,

CSU and SPD needed more time to climb up into a high position than members of three smaller

parties FDP, Green Party and Left Party. The age distribution indicates that entering a top position is


19

in general possible for young politicians, but seldom (see Table 15). More than 70 per cent were

recruited between 40 and 60 years. Regarding the position in the political system, that is the first high-

ranking office for the top politicians, it’s not surprising that nearly 70 per cent report the first top

position at the state level (chairpersons of the parliamentary groups or state ministers), as there are

more state politicians in the sample than federal politicians.

Table 15: Age at recruitment to a political top position

Top Politicians

N % cum. %

30 or younger 6 4.5 4.5

31 - 40 29 21.6 26.1

41 - 50 59 44.0 70.1

51 - 60 37 27.6 97.8

61 - 70 2 1.5 99.3

71 or older 1 0.7 100.0

Total 134 100.0 __

Table 16 and 17 trace the career paths of top politicians on federal and state level. Obviously, a clear

career ladder exists within parliaments. Again, the average time lags between the cross over and the

beginning of intraparliamentary positions are quoted. Later top politicians go through these

parliamentary offices in a patterned succession. First they become spokespersons for their

parliamentary group in a specified policy field. If they prove themselves in this position, they often

become parliamentary secretaries, commonly denoted as ‘managers of the parliamentary group’.

Further steps are chair positions of parliament’s permanent committees and vice chairperson of the

parliamentary group. The top positions ‘chairperson of the parliamentary group’, ‘parliamentary state

secretary’, ‘federal minister’ and finally ‘federal chancellor’ mark the end of the career ladder on the

federal level. Top careers in the German states take course in almost the same manner.

Table 16: Elite recruitment process at federal level

Federal politicians

n % mean SD

Federal Chancellor __ __ __ __

Federal ministers 7 17.9 10.43 6.13 Parliamentary state secretaries 11 28.2 11.00 6.80 Chairpersons parliamentary group 3 7.7 20.67 1.16 Deputy chairpersons parliamentary group 15 38.5 12.87 4.52 Committee chairperson 7 17.9 9.71 6.16 Parliamentary secretaries 9 23.1 6.44 4.04 Spokespersons of the parliamentary groups 22 56.4 6.23 4.48 Mandate Bundestag 38 97.4 2.42 5.15 Mandate state parliament 11 11.6 1.73 4.97


20

Table 17: Elite recruitment process at state level

State politicians

n % MW SD

Prime Minister 5 5.3 13.20 5.17 State ministers 64 67.4 7.20 7.14 State secretaries (with cabinet rank) 8 8.4 7.38 4.44 Chairpersons parliamentary group 43 45.3 7.77 6.42 Deputy chairpersons parliamentary 22 23.2 6.05 5.89 Committee chairperson 12 12.6 3.58 3.94 Spokespersons of the parliamentary groups 41 43.2 2.98 3.68 Mandate state parliament 70 73.7 1.97 4.97

Due to lack of space the interesting question, whether there are separate careers on the federal and

the state level of the political system, must remain unanswered. Only the analysis of certain types of

careers is able to give a satisfying answer to this question. However, including top politicians at state

level into the survey makes it possible to describe centrifugal and centripetal ratios according to Stolz

(Stolz 2003). For him a centripetal ratio is built up by the share of top politicians on federal level with

experiences in a mandate or executive office at state level. On the other hand, centrifugal ratios reflect

the share of top politicians on state level, who have been MPs or held executive offices on federal

level. Table 18 displays these two measures.

Table 18: Centrifugal and centripetal ratios of German top politicians

Federal politicians State politicians

(N=39) (N=95)

n % n %

Candidacy for a state parliament 18 46.2 26 27.4 Candidacy for the Bundestag

Mandate in a state parliament 11 28.2 14 14.7 Mandate in the Bundestag

Executive office on state level 1 2.6 3 3.2 Executive office on federal level

Office or mandate on state level 11 28.2 14 14.7 Mandate or office on federal level

Centripetal ratio¹ Centrifugal ratio²

28.2% 14.7%

1) Centripetal ratio: Share of top politicians on federal level with experiences in a mandate or executive office at state level

2) Centrifugal ratio: Share of top politicians on state level with experiences in a mandate or executive office at federal level

Borchert and Golsch (Borchert/Golsch: 1999) used these measures in their numerous studies,

detecting a decrease in Germany’s centripetal ratio from 25 per cent in 1965 to 15 per cent in 1998.

They identified the ongoing professionalization of the state parliaments since the 1970s as main


21

reason for this major shift, making regional politics as a separate career option more attractive (Stolz

2003: 230). Data, used for this paper, cannot be completely compared to these findings, as Borchert

and Golsch only included parliamentarians in their sample. The centripetal ratio of 28.2 per cent in the

presented group of German top politicians is nearly twice as high as in the mentioned studies.

Question must remain unanswered, if this is a result of a new development in the relationship between

these two main levels in the political system.

5. Conclusion

In the outline to this workshop, the question was raised, whether there is a uniform trend towards a new

type of professional politician without prior occupational experience in other fields. This question can in

principal be denied for the group of the top politicians, but not for the young MPs. These aspiring young

political professionals indeed feature the outlined type of career. As a second conclusion it can be

claimed that political top careers take course in more or less clear-cut patterns. Top politicians have an

outstanding educational level. They climb up stepwise within their parties, which play in general a key role

in the whole recruitment process. In parallel they cover offices and mandates on the ground of the

political system, gaining influence on party’s local selectors and improving their political skills in the so-

called ‘school of politics’. Positions on the lower levels in the party organisation and offices in local affairs

are kept, even if politicians cross over to professional politics. This happens after a private occupational

period of 13.5 years on average, which is an argument against the presumed new type of professional

politicians. After a learning period in parliament and an ongoing intraparty rise they enter high-ranking

political offices averagely with nearly 46 years – and finish their ‘way to the top’.


22

References

Borchert, Jens/Golsch, Lutz, 1999: Deutschland. Von der Honoratiorenzunft zur politischen Klasse, in Borchert, Jens (Hrsg.): Politik als Beruf. Opladen, 114 – 140.

Borchert, Jens/Stolz, Klaus, 2003: Die Bekämpfung der Unsicherheit: Politikerkarrieren und Karrierepolitik in der Bundesrepublik Deutschland, in: Politische Vierteljahresschrift 44:2 (2003), 148 – 173.

Bruns, Werner, 2004: Heidelberger Elitestudie 2004, in: http://www.soz.uni-heidelberg.de/1_1_1/assets/download_543390.pdf; 31.12.2006.

Dillman, Don A., 1978: Mail and telephone surveys. The Total Design Method. New York.

Golsch, Lutz, 1998: Die politische Klasse im Parlament. Politische Professionalisierung von Hinterbänklern im Deutschen Bundestag. Baden-Baden.

Hackel, Wolfgang, 1978: Die Auswahl des politischen Nachwuchses in der Bundesrepublik Deutschland. Die Junge Union als Sprungbrett für politische Karrieren in der CDU. Stuttgart.

Heinrich, Roberto/Lübker, Malte/Biehl, Heiko, 2002: Parteimitglieder im Vergleich: Partizipation und Repräsentation. Kurzfassung des Abschlussberichts zum gleichnamigen DFG-Projekt, in: http://www.uni-potsdam.de/u/ls_regierungssystem_brd/material-ss04/projektbericht_parteimitglieder.pdf; 31.12.2006.

Herzog, Dietrich, 1975: Politische Karrieren. Selektion und Professionalisierung politischer Führungsgruppen. Opladen.

Herzog, Dietrich, 1982: Politische Führungsgruppen. Darmstadt.

Herzog, Dietrich, 1990: Der moderne Berufspolitiker. Karrierebedingungen und Funktion in westlichen Demokratien, in: Wehling, Hans-Georg (Red.): Eliten in der Bundesrepublik Deutschland. Stuttgart u.a., 28 – 51.

Hoecker, Beate, 1998: Zwischen Macht und Ohnmacht: Politische Partizipation von Frauen in Deutschland, in: Hoecker, Beate (Hrsg.): Handbuch Politische Partizipation von Frauen in Europa. Opladen.

Hoffmann-Lange, Ursula, 1992: Eliten, Macht und Konflikt in der Bundesrepublik. Opladen.

Hoffmann-Lange, Ursula, 2003: Das pluralistische Paradigma der Elitenforschung, in: Hradil, Stefan/Imbusch, Peter (Hrsg.): Oberschichten – Eliten – Herrschende Klassen. Opladen, 111 – 118.

Hoffmann-Lange, Ursula, 2004: Die Elitenstruktur moderner demokratischer Gesellschaften, in: Gabriel, Oscar W./Neuss, Beate/Rüther, Günther (Hrsg.): Konjunktur der Köpfe? Eliten in der modernen Wissensgesellschaft. Düsseldorf, 25 – 40.

Köppel, Roger, 2005: Merkels Moment, in: Die Welt vom 22.11.2005, 1.

Krabbe, Wolfgang R., 2001: „Rekrutendepot“ oder politische Alternative? Funktion und Selbstverständnis der Partei-Jugendverbände, in: Geschichte und Gesellschaft 27 (2001), 247 – 307.

Krabbe, Wolfgang R., 2002: Parteijugend in Deutschland. Junge Union, Jungsozialisten und Jungdemokraten 1945-1980. Opladen.

Machatzke, Jörg, 1997: Potsdamer Elitestudie – Positionsauswahl und Ausschöpfung, in: Bürklin, Wilhelm/Machatzke, Jörg/Schnapp, Kai-Uwe/Rebenstorf, Hilke/Welzel, Christian/Sauer, Martina/ Kaina, Viktoria: Eliten in Deutschland. Rekrutierung und Integration. Opladen: Leske u. Budrich.

Niedermayer, Oskar, 2006: Parteimitgliedschaften im Jahre 2005, Zeitschrift für Parlamentsfragen 37:2 (2006), 376 – 383.


23

Stolz, Klaus, 2003: Moving Up, moving down: Political careers across territorial levels, in: European Journal of Political Research 42:2, 223 – 248.

Wessels, Bernhard, 2003: Abgeordnetenbefragung 2003. Kurzfassung und Dokumentation der Ergebnisse, in: http://www.wz-berlin.de/zkd/dsl/pdf/ber-fin1-all1.pdf; 31.12.2006.

Wiesendahl, Elmar, 2004: Elitenrekrutierung in der Parteiendemokratie. Wer sind die Besten und setzen sie sich in den Parteien durch?, in: Gabriel, Oscar W./Neuss, Beate/Rüther, Günther (Hrsg.): Konjunktur der Köpfe? Eliten in der modernen Wissensgesellschaft. Düsseldorf, 124 – 141.


24

“The way to the top“ - uni-bamberg.deD-96052 Bamberg Dipl.-Pol. Andreas Gruber University of...

Documents

Transcript of “The way to the top“ - uni-bamberg.deD-96052 Bamberg Dipl.-Pol. Andreas Gruber University of...