CC BY
61
UDC 35.351.071
DOI: https://doi.org/10.32689/2617-2224-2019-18-3-357-368
Perkhach Oksana Liubomyrivna,
PhD in Economics, Docent, Associate Professor of the Department of Administrative and Financial Management, Lviv Polytechnic National University, 79013, Lviv, Stepan Bandera str, 28a, 5th educational building, room. 2-b, tel.: + 38 (032) 2582630, e-mail: Oksana.L.Perkhach@lpnu.ua
ORCID: 0000-0003-4452-4685
Перхач Оксана Любомирiвна,
кандидат eKOHOMi4Hux наук, доцент, доцент кафедри адмтстративного та финансового менеджменту, Нацональний утверситет "Львюська полтехтка", 79013, м. Львiв, вул. Степана Бандери, 28а, 5-й навчальний корпус, км. 2-б, тел.: + 38 (032)2582630, e-mail: Oksana.L.Perkhach@ lpnu.ua
ORCID: 0000-0003-4452-4685
Перхач Оксана Любомировна,
кандидат экономических наук, доцент, доцент кафедры административного и финансового менеджмента, Национальный университет "Львовская политехника", 79013, г. Львов, улица Степана Бандеры 28а, 5-й учебный корпус, к. 2-б, тел.: + 38 (032) 2582630, e-mail: Oksana.L.Perkhach@lpnu.ua
ORCID: 0000-0003-4452-4685
Lukashevska Ulyana Tarasivna,
PhD student, assistant of the Department of Administrative and Financial Management, Lviv Polytechnic National University, 79013, Lviv, Stepan Bandera str., 28a, 5th educational building, room. 2-b, tel.: + 38 (032) 2582630, e-mail: ulya_brodka@ukr.net
ORCID: 0000-0003-0270-8734
Лукашевська Уляна ТараЫвна,
аспирант, асистент кафедри адмтктративного та фтансового менеджменту, На-щональний унюерситет "Львiвська полiтеxнiка", 79013, м. Львю, вул. Степана Бандери, 28а, 5-й навчальний корпус, км. 2-б, тел.: + 38 (032)2582630 , e-mail: ulya_brodka@ ukr.net
ORCID: 0000-0003-0270-8734
Лукашевская Ульяна Тарасовна,
аспирант, ассистент кафедры административного и финансового менеджмента, Национальный университет "Львовская политехника", 79013, г. Львов, ул. Степана Банде-ры, 28а, 5-й учебный корпус, к. 2-б, тел.: + 38 (032) 2582630, e-mail: ulya_brodka@ukr.net
ORCID: 0000-0003-0270-8734
ARCHETYPAL MODELS OF PUBLiC ADMiNiSTRATiON
Abstract. The article contains relevant information for the modern world. The paper describes the definition of public administration, its mechanisms and models. The influence of public administration on society is revealed. The formation of the public administration process, the historical stages of the development of an archetype model are considered. The archetypal mechanisms of public administration are developed on the background of the created model. The understanding of mechanisms of public administration is considered. It has been determined that public administration tools constitute effective means for mechanisms of development of public administration, their features are analyzed. The influence of public administration on society is revealed.
The necessity of development of mechanisms is proved. Different theories related to this topic are analyzed. The activities of public administration, methods and means of classical management, as well as developed a model of public administration described the basic elements are explored in the article. The theory of representatives of the school of scientific management is considered. The basic archetype models and their levels are developed. The processes of public management using an archetype model are analyzed. The existing conceptual and theoretical positions are summarized. The necessarily of new approaches of managerial influence is revealed. It is proved that public opinion and interests are the principles of the concept of public administration. The concepts of public administration as well as mechanisms are considered. The emphasis is on the mechanisms of public administration. The main features and principles of public administration are revealed. An archetypal model is also singled out, and a brief description is provided. The approach of public administration between state and public institutions to common goals and objectives is determined. It is established that the state should ensure and implement measures to strengthen social stability with the involvement of all strata of the population. Joint activity of the subjects of society requires new forms of cooperation.
Keywords: public management, archetype model, mechanisms of public administration, society, governmental management.
АРХЕТИПН1 МОДЕЛ1 ПУБЛ1ЧНОГО УПРАВЛ1ННЯ
Анотащя. Стаття мютить актуальну шформацш для сучасного CBiTy. У po6oTÍ представлено визначення пyблiчного управлшня, його мехашзми та
модель З'ясовано вплив публiчного управлшня на сусшльство. Розглянуто формування процесу публiчного управлшня, юторичш етапи розвитку ар-хетипно! моделi. На фонi створено! моделi розроблено архетипнi мехашз-ми публiчного управлiння. Розглянуто розумiння механiзмiв публiчного управлiння. Визначено, що шструменти публiчного управлiння становлять ефективнi засоби механiзмiв розвитку публiчного управлiння, проаналiзо-вано !х особливостi. Розкрито вплив публiчного управлiння на суспiльство. Доведено необхщшсть розвитку механiзмiв. Проаналiзовано рiзнi теори, що стосуються ще! теми. Описано дiяльнiсть публiчного управлiння, методи та засоби класичного менеджменту, а також розроблено модель публiчного управлшня, розглянуто базовi елементи. Висв^лено теори представникiв школи наукового менеджменту. Розроблено основш архетипнi моделi та !х рiвнi. Проаналiзовано процеси публiчного управлшня iз застосуванням ар-хетипно! модель Узагальнено наявш концептуальнi та теоретичш положен-ня. Показано необхiднiсть нових пiдходiв управлiнського впливу. Доведено, що сусшльна думка та iнтереси е засадами концепцп публiчного управлiння. Висвгглено значення поняття публiчного управлiння, а також мехашзми. Ак-центовано увагу на механiзмах публiчного управлiння. Розкрито основш оз-наки та принципи публiчного управлiння. Виокремлено архетипну модель, а також стисло 11 схарактеризовано. Визначено шдхвд публiчного управлiння мiж державними та громадськими iнституцiями до сшльних цiлей та завдань. Встановлено, що держава повинна забезпечувати та втшювати заходи на змщнення сощально! стiйкостi iз залученням усiх верств населення. Сшльна дiяльнiсть суб'eктiв сусшльства потребуе нових форм спiвробiтництва.
Ключовi слова: публiчне управлiння, архетипна модель, мехашзми пу-блiчного управлiння, сусшльство, державне управлшня.
АРХЕТИПНЫЕ МОДЕЛИ ПУБЛИЧНОГО УПРАВЛЕНИЯ
Аннотация. Статья содержит актуальную информацию для современного мира. В работе представлены определения публичного управления, его механизмы и модели. Выяснено влияние публичного управления на общество. Рассмотрено формирование процесса публичного управления, исторические этапы развития архетипной модели. На фоне созданной модели разработаны архетипные механизмы публичного управления. Рассмотрено понимание механизмов публичного управления. Определено, что инструменты публичного управления составляют эффективные средства механизмов развития публичного управления, проанализированы их особенности. Раскрыто влияние публичного управления на общество. Доказана необходимость развития механизмов. Проанализировано различные теории, касающиеся этой темы. Описана деятельность публичного управления, методы и средства классического менеджмента, а также разработана модель публичного управления, описано базовые элементы. Освещены теории представителей школы научного менеджмента. Разработаны основные архетипные модели и их уровни. Анализируются процессы публичного управления с
применением архетипной модели. Сделан обзор концептуальных и теоретических положений. Показана необходимость новых подходов управленческого воздействия. Доказано, что общественное мнение и интересы являются основами концепции публичного управления. Освещено значение понятия публичного управления, а также механизмы. Акцентировано внимание на механизмах публичного управления. Раскрыты основные признаки и принципы публичного управления. Выделена архетипная модель, а также предоставлена краткая характеристика. Определен подход публичного управления между государственными и общественными институтами к общим целям и задачам. Установлено, что государство должно обеспечивать и воплощать меры на укрепление социальной устойчивости с привлечением всех слоев населения. Совместная деятельность субъектов общества требует новых форм сотрудничества.
Ключевые слова: публичное управление, архетипная модель, механизмы публичного управления, общество, государственное управление.
Problem statement. The processes that occur in modern society characterize different areas of influence. Today, science considers approaches to the stabilization of such processes as social, political and economic environment. The use of management tools in the field of public power involves a new relationship between the public and the government and is based on the national archetype. Referred to in article models of public management are based in the socio-economic model and the archetypal paradigm, the subject of this article is relevant and their research is important.
Analysis of recent researches and publications. Researchers, namely: E. Barker, D. Cole, G. Lascy, C. Manning, W. Robson, G. Finer made the greatest contribution to the study of state-political institutions, forms of government and political systems. Representatives of the school of scientific (classical) management, namely: L. White, F. Taylor, G. Munie, F. and
L. Gilbert, G. Emerson, G. Ford believed that the system of public administration should be focused on achieving the goal with maximum efficiency at minimum cost. It was typical for them to recognize the existence of the closest connection between the theory of public administration and the science of management of private enterprises.
The purpose of the article is to study the historical stages of development of archetypal models of public administration and their institutional foundations.
Presentation of the main material. Public administration is based on the universal foundations of archetypes, in particular the idea of natural law. The founders of this idea are Aristotle, Stoics and Cicero, the idea of the state as the guarantor of natural law, the idea of the Constitution of the law and the state in the act of the free will of man and the ideas of the people, which are inherent in the sovereign right and power.
Public administration combines power, business and society, creates the basis for building a solidarity society and should correspond to the postulates of civil society.
The formation of the public administration process meets the challenges of the present, is disclosed to the whole society and requires the definition of methodology as a system of knowledge about the method, which is understood as a set of practical instructions. Compliance with these instructions ensures that the desired results are achieved.
The difference between public administration and other management
concepts is that it is based on the fol-lowings [1]:
• Self-diagnosis of the problem;
• Self-formulation;
• Self-determination of the best policy option;
• Self-determination of the problem;
• Self-proposing solution to the problem;
• Self-acceptance of the action plan;
• Self-control and self-esteem; and
• Involves the involvement of archetypes of democracy.
Archetypal management models represent a sequence of actions, the implementation of which ensures the
Historical Period characteristics of Public Administration Archetypal Model
1 2 3
9-7 thousand years BC -About the 18th century The ancient Greeks (Plato) paid particular attention to the organization and management of production processes, and cared for a clear specialization of workers. socrates gives an understanding of management as a special field of human activity. He said that the main thing in management is to put the right person in the right place and achieve the tasks assigned to him/her Philosophical
1776-1890 the coup in industrial relations is associated with the Industrial Revolution that began in the middle of the 18th century. the Industrial revolution involves the allocation of three levels of governance: upper, middle and lower. there was a master at the production. At this stage in the development of governance, there was a tendency to shift from the principle of supervising workers to the principle of organization of labour on a scientific basis only. great contribution to the formation of science of management was made by the British political economists, namely: William Petty, adam smith (they analysed the forms of division of labour and gave a description of the duties of the peasant and state) and robert owen (before the others, he noticed and appreciated the role of the human factor in production, his ideas of humanization of production management, and improvement of working conditions) Industrial
1856-1960 Management science is constantly evolving. Life forced to look for more systematic approaches to management. the emergence of large-scale productions ensured the work of Systemic
Historical Stages of Archetypal Model of Public Administration Development
[1; 2; 7; 8]
1 2 3
large groups of people, which meant that owners could no longer observe the activities of all workers. For these purposes, the best workers were trained so that they could represent the interests of the owners in the workplace. These were the first managers
1960 -Nowadays Later management theories were developed mainly by representatives of the school of Management science (Quantitative schools: Acoff, Goldberger and Klein). the formation of the school is associated with the development of mathematics, statistics, engineering sciences and other related fields of knowledge Engineering and Informational
public administration of the relevant authorities or their officials through the gradual transformations in the state of public administration objects [2]. An important component of the management model are the principles, their compliance ensures the creation of conditions for the effective manifestation of objective laws.
For mechanisms that involve the implementation of archetypal models of public administration, it is envisaged to take into account both the management principles and those relating to a particular branch, related to the laws of the functioning of the economy or the social sphere or of certain spheres of its life [3]. First of all, procedural mechanisms implemented by the President of Ukraine, the Verkhovna Rada (the Supreme Council) of Ukraine, the bodies of state executive power, the bodies of justice and local self-government bodies should be included in the archetype model of public administration [4].
Since archetypal models of public administration carried out by public authorities and local governments at different levels of government have their own peculiarities and are rather complex, separate process mechanisms for them should be developed. Exam-
ples of such mechanisms are the mechanism of regulation of social and labour relations by the Ministry of Labour and Social Policy of Ukraine, the mechanism of health care management by the relevant head office of the regional state administration and the mechanism of management of communal property of the city, etc. [5].
To date, the development of archetypal models of public administration is carried out through the development and implementation of appropriate management mechanisms that create the conditions for the actual and effective resolution of those present in this area of discrepancy.
The mechanisms of public administration are special methods that ensure the regulatory influence of public administrations on the socio-economic territorial systems of different levels (villages, urban villages (settlements), districts in cities, cities, districts, regions, the Autonomous Republic of Crimea and the whole country) in order to provide decent living conditions for people residing in the state and citizens of Ukraine temporarily residing abroad.
The activities of public administration repeat the methods and means of classical management: administrative,
economic and socio-psychological. These elements are part of the mechanism of public administration of social and economic processes, and public administration represents the unity of such components as public administration, interaction of public authorities and local self-government with citizens, implementation of control procedures and management process. Based on the needs of the time, this complex mechanism is being improved [6].
An archetypal model of public administration must contain all elements and components of public administration, take into account the influence of factors of the external and internal environment, and also are based on the principles of civil society [7].
The basic elements of public administration are divergent in relation to basic archetypes. The consideration of the conceptual foundations of public
administration archetypes is necessary [8]. Such governance is based on the archetypes of democracy and is gaining publicity at the state level.
The model of public administration is a set of forms, methods and administration tools. By themselves, forms, methods and tools do not provide the desired effect on the object [9]. Another scientist believes that the model of public administration is a system of interconnections of economic phenomena that arise under certain conditions under the influence of the initial impulse, and also contains a certain sequence of economic phenomena: its constituent elements simultaneously serve the input and output phenomena, as well as the whole process, which occurs in intervals between them [10].
According to D. Lerner [12] and other scholars, the greatest benefit of managerial science can be in solving
The institutional framework of an archetypal model of public administration:
• The state; • system of executive bodies; • Non-governmental organizations (NGo); • subjects of economic activity; • society, etc. • a social contract treating civil society as a result of a convention of social phenomena (institutions); • Law(s); • The set of legal norms regulating the organizational structure of the system of executive bodies and the processes of its functioning and development, etc.
Types of an archetype model of public administration :
Economic Model (Model of public management of banking, monetary, foreign currency, investment, innovation, credit, tax and insurance, etc.) Motivational Model (set of command-administrative, socio-economic and other incentives that encourage civil servants to work in a highly efficient manner) Organizational Model (objects, subjects of public administration, their goals, tasks, functions, methods of management and organizational structures, as well as the results of their functioning)
Fig. 1. institutional Foundations and Typology of archetype model of Public Administration
mid-level problems, such as forecasting the effects of specific parliamentary projects or assessing the economic impact of certain tax proposals (psychological approach).
In 1916, A. Faiol [13] formulated the 'Theory of Administration' (laid the foundations for the management of the school of 'scientific management'). He argued that the proposed provisions and arrangements are universal and can be applied in almost all spheres of public life: the economy, the system of public administration and the army, etc. A. Faiol argued that management is to foresee, organize, dispose, coordinate and control (monitor).
Accordingly, it can be concluded that the model of public administration is a set of administrative tools, forms and methods for the purpose of realizing people's needs and solving problems at the expense of state influence on the basis of established norms.
To date, the implementation of the process of public administration takes
place through the development and implementation of appropriate management mechanisms that create conditions for the actual and effective solution of the disagreements present in this area.
As one of its properties, all types of systems have developed management. In order to conduct in-depth reforms to date, a favourable situation has emerged in Ukraine, as there are many unresolved problems and problematic situations in society. It is necessary to involve civil society institutions in making state decisions, to create the necessary conditions for the formation and strengthening of the development of partnership relations between government and society.
In general, public administration is the organization of activities in accordance with the requirements of objective laws, the implementation and organization of targeted influence. Public administration considers management as an impact on society in order to or-
Centralized Model
European Mixed with Divided Hierarchy Model
English and
American
Model
European Mixed Elite Model
Fig. 2. The Main Archetype Models of Governance and their Levels
ganize and coordinate their activities in the process of life. Public administration is a significant element of administration, since it opens up the ability of society to power.
In order to redistribute administrative and political functions in public administration, it is necessary to use effective methods and technologies of management and it is necessary to introduce modern democratic principles of the organization of the activities of public administration bodies: specialized, structural and system-wide. Public organizations, authorities and business structures should ensure the process of development of facilities in the economic system for the proper functioning and development of all spheres of society.
The main archetype models of the following governance system:
1 Centralized Model: It is carried out by state authorities, at all levels of governance; they are formed by the government or head of state;
2 English and American Model: It is carried out by local authorities, management at all levels, except for the state;
3 European Mixed Elite Model: It is a combination of the first two models at the local level, and it is carried out by the authorities of local self-government;
4 European Mixed with Divided Hierarchy Model: It is carried out by the local state administration at the level of the region and district of management only [11].
Each archetype model has the following four levels:
1 National Level: The priorities, as well as goals of the general economic
development of the country and the regional economy are determined, and state and regional socio-economic development programs, financial and tax policies are developed. The functions of interstate relations, environmental protection, and regulation of monetary circulation, defence and taxation by central authorities are fixed. The state form of ownership prevails.
2 Regional Level: Business, regional and sectorial interests are coordinated. The Oblast (region) is the main subject of management.
3 Local Level: Regarding the interests of territorial communities, the State Regional Policy is implemented.
4 Single Level: Harmonization of a separate entity (separate village, urban village (settlement), etc.) with a Development and Activities Program for the realization of their interests.
According to these models, the focus is on organizational and economic instruments; public administrations are characterized by organizational flexibility. The economic mechanism makes it easier to use instruments, because they are understandable and provide a quick response.
As to the nature of the models of effective public administration, the analysis of publications allows us to conclude that all of them must meet the following three main criteria:
• Integrity;
• Complexity;
• Balancing.
Public administration is required to represent and provide, as well as the complex needs and lives of people through the operation of their managerial components. Effective factors of public administration include: mo-
tivation, attitude to work, knowledge, skills, abilities, initiative and responsibility.
Thus, the effectiveness and efficiency of public administration are determined by the effect of qualitative factors of a technical, political, organizational, moral and ideological and socio-psy-chological nature. In highly developed market economies, mechanisms of public administration are the best combination of peculiar principles for commodity production, targeted policy of state regulation of economic processes and public-private partnership.
Conclusions. It can be concluded that the archetypal model is formed under the influence of social and political development of the state. To date, the mechanisms of public administration are being modernized and the Economic Policy is optimized by the State Policy.
Public administration must necessarily represent and ensure the needs of people. With regard to public management models, the analysis of publications allows us to conclude that they must meet their main criteria. Building an institutional-archetypal environment and creating mechanisms will ensure the success of a wide range of tasks.
REFERENCES -
1. Amosov O. Yu. & Havkalova N. L. (2015). Kontseptual'ni zasady pub-lichnoho upravlinnia: arkhetypnyj pidkhid [Conceptual principles of public management: an archetypical approach]. Publichne upravlinnia: teo-riia ta praktyka vyp. 1, 8-12 [in Ukrainian].
2. Amosov O. Yu. & Havkalova N. L. (2013). Modeli publichnoho adminis-
truvannia (arkhetypova paradyhma) [Models of public administration (archetype paradigm)]. Publichne upravlinnia: teoriia ta praktyka, 6-13 [in Ukrainian].
3. Bakumenko V. D. &. Popov S. A. (2015). Paradyhma innovatsijnoho ro-zvytku suspil'stva: suchasni kontsept-sii reformuvannia publichnoho uprav-linnia. [Paradigm of innovative society development: modern concepts of reforming public administration]. Efek-tyvnist' derzhavnoho upravlinnia, 43, 21-28 [in Ukrainian].
4. Kozak V. I. (2015). Publichne uprav-linnia v systemi koordynat ukrains'koi derzhavnosti. [Public administration in the coordinate system of Ukrainian statehood]. Efektyvnist' derzhavnoho upravlinnia 44 (1), 64-70 [in Ukrainian].
5. Kolesnykova K. O. (2013). Spivvid-noshennia derzhavnoho upravlinnia ta publichnoho administruvannia u protsesi suspil'noi transformatsii. [Value of public management and public administration in the process of social transformation]. Publichne upravlinnia: teoriia ta praktyka 3, 41-45 [in Ukrainian].
6. Obolens'kyj O. & Lukin S. (2013). Publichne upravlinnia: publichna sfera, publichne pravo i publichna poli-tyka-spivvidnoshennia poniat [Public administration: public sphere, public law and public policy-correlation concepts]. Derzhavne upravlinnia ta mist-seve samovriaduvannia 2, 3-11 [in Ukrainian].
7. Obushna N. I. (2015). Publichne up-ravlinnia iak nova model' orhanizatsii derzhavnoho upravlinnia v Ukraini: teoretychnyj aspect [Public management as a new model of organization of governmental management in Ukraine: theoretical aspect]. Efek-tyvnist' derzhavnoho upravlinnia 44 (1), 53-63 [in Ukrainian].
8. Prykhodchenko L. L. (2010). Sutnist' mekhanizmu zabezpechennia efek-tyvnoho derzhavnoho upravlinnia. [The essence of the mechanism for ensuring effective public management]. Teoriia ta praktyka derzhavnoho up-ravlinnia 3, 3-12 [in Ukrainian].
9. Prykhodchenko L. L. (2009). Struktura mekhanizmu derzhavnoho upravlin-nia: vzaiemozv'iazok komponentiv ta faktory vplyvu na efektyvnist'. [Structure of the mechanism of public administration: the relationship of components and factors of influence on efficiency]. Visnyk Natsional'noi akademii derzhavnoho upravlinnia pry Prezydentovi Ukrainy 2, 105-112 [in Ukrainian].
10. Sharov Yu. P. (2009). Demokratychni zminy v publichnomu upravlinni: prohramno-tsil'ova ideolohiia zdijs-nennia. [Democratic changes in public administration: program-target ideology of implementation]. Visnyk Aka-demii mytnoi sluzhby Ukrainy. Ser.: Derzhavne upravlinnia, 1, 52-57 [in Ukrainian].
11. Sharov Yu. & Chykarenko I. (2010). Yevropejs'ki standarty publichnoho up-ravlinnia: proektsiia na munitsypal'nyj riven'. [European standards for public administration: projection to municipal level]. Derzhavne upravlinnia ta mistseve samovriaduvannia, 295-304 [in Ukrainian].
12. Lerner D., Coleman J. & Dore R. (1968). Modernization [w:] International Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences. NY, Vol. 10 [in English].
13. Fajol' A., Yemeron H., Tejlor I. & Ford H. (1992). Upravlenye — eto iskusstvo [Management - is an art]. Moscow [in Russian].
СПИСОК ВИКОРИСТАНИХ ДЖЕРЕЛ -
1. Амосов О. Ю, Гавкалова Н. Л. Кон-цептуальш засади публiчного
управлшня: архетипний пщхщ / О. Ю. Амосов, Н. Л. Гавкалова // Публiчне управлшня: теорiя та практика. — Вип. 1. — К., 2015. -С. 8-12.
2. Амосов О. Ю., Гавкалова Н. Л. Моде-лi публiчного адмшктрування (ар-хетипова парадигма) / О. Ю. Амосов, Н. Л. Гавкалова // Публiчне управлшня: теорiя та практика. -К., 2013. — С. 6-13.
3. Бакуменко В. Д., Попов С. А. Парадигма шновацшного розвитку су-сшльства: сучасш концепцп рефор-мування публiчного управлшня /
B. Д. Бакуменко, С. А. Попов // Ефектившсть державного управлшня. — О., 2015. — С. 21-28.
4. Козак В. I. Публiчне управлшня в системi координат украшсько! державност / В. I. Козак // Ефектившсть державного управлшня.— Вип. 1. — Л., 2015. — С. 64-70.
5. Колесникова К. О. Сшввщношення державного управлшня та публiч-ного адмшктрування у процес сус-шльно! трансформацп / К. О. Колесникова //Публiчне управлшня: теорiя та практика. — Вип. 3. — Пе-реяслав-Хмельницький, 2013.
C. 41-45.
6. Оболенський О., Лукт С. Публiч-не управлшня: публiчна сфера, публiчне право i публiчна поль тика-сшввщношення понять / О. Оболенський, С. Лукш // Дер-жавне управлшня та мкцеве само-врядування. — Вип. 2. — Х., 2013. — С. 3-11.
7. Обушна Н. I. Публiчне управлшня як нова модель оргашзацп державного управлшня в Украшк теоре-тичний аспект / Н. I. Обушна // Ефектившсть держ. управлшня. — Вип. 1. — Херсон, 2015. — С. 53-63.
8. Приходченко Л. Л. Сутшсть меха-шзму забезпечення ефективного державного управлшня / Л. Л. При-
ходченко // Теорiя та практика державного управлшня. — Вип. 3. — Х., 2010. — С. 3-12.
9. Приходченко Л. Л. Структура ме-хашзму державного управлшня: взаемозв'язок компонента та фак-тори впливу на ефектившсть / Л. Л. Приходченко // Вшн. Нац. академп держ. управлiння при Пре-зидентовi Украши. — Вип. 2. — О., 2009. — С. 105-112.
10. Шаров Ю. П. Демократичш змши в публiчному управлшнк програм-но-цiльова iдеологiя здiйснення / Ю. П. Шаров // Вкн. Академii мит-но! служби Украши. Серiя: Дер-
жавне управлiння. — Вип. 1. — К., 2000. — С. 52-57.
11. Шаров Ю. П., Чикаренко I. бвропей-ськ стандарти публiчного управлшня: проекщя на мунщипальний piBeHb / Ю. П. Шаров, I. Чикаренко // Держ. упр. та мюцеве самовря-дування: зб. наук. пр. — Д.: ДР1ДУ НАДУ, 2010. — С. 295-304.
12. Lerner D., Coleman J., Dore R. Modernization [w:] International Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences. NY, 1968, Vol. 10. — 386 p.
13. Файоль А., Емерон Г., Тейлор I., Форд Г. Управление — это искусство. — М., 1992. — 349 с.
