CC BY
23
UDC: 351: 392
Kozak Viacheslav Ivanovych,
PhD in Public Administration, post-doctoral fellow of Public Administration and Local Self-Government Department of the Dnipropetrovs'k Regional Institute of Public Administration of National Academy for Public Administration under the President of Ukraine, Ukraine, 49044, Dnipro, Hohol-ya Str., 29, 314-316, tel.: (044) 383 83 77, email: [email protected]
ORCID: 0000-0002-0850-4831 Козак В'ячеслав 1ванович, кандидат наук з державного управлтня, докторант кафедри державного управлтня та мюцевого самоврядування Дт-пропетровського регюнального тститу-ту державного управлтня Нацiональноï академй державного управлтня при Пре-Гоголя, 29, кшн. 314-316, тел.: (044) 383 83
ORCID: 0000-0002-0850-4831 Козак Вячеслав Иванович,
кандидат наук по государственному управлению, докторант кафедры государственного управления и местного самоуправления Днепропетровского регионального института государственного управления Национальной академии государственного управления при Президенте Украины, 49044, г. Днепр, ул. Гоголя, 29, комн. 314-316, тел.: (044) 383 83 77, email: [email protected]
ORCID: 0000-0002-0850-4831
3udeHmoei Украти, 49044, м. Днтро, вул. 77, email: [email protected]
FORMATION OF THE ARCHETYPAL PARADiGM OF PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION IN THE CURRENT CONFLICT SITUATION IN UKRAINE
Abstract. The article is dedicated to definition of the archetypal paradigm of the development of public management in Ukraine in its conflict state. The existence of the various archetypes of public administration in the context of implementation of various management concepts is argued. The necessity of new approaches to management influence, for the safety of the development of system of public management and society as a whole from the effects caused by negative factors as well as reducing the impact of the crisis is proved. The author's vision is proposed for solving the crisis state of the public management through
the creation of the arch-typical paradigms of public management through the synergistic integration of the administrative mechanisms of the concept of "new public management", "socio-political networks" theory and the concept of "good governance". The description of each concept is given; the principles of their integration to the national system of public management based on the archetypes of the existing management paradigm are substantiated.
Keywords: paradigm, archetype, archetypal paradigm, public management, new public management, public-policy networks, good governance.
СТАНОВЛЕННЯ АРХЕТИПНО1 ПАРАДИГМИ ПУБЛ1ЧНОГО УПРАВЛ1ННЯ В НИН1ШНЬОМУ КОНФЛ1КТНОМУ СТАН1
УКРА1НИ
Анотащя. Стаття присвячена визначенню архетипно!' парадигми розвит-ку публiчного управлшня в УкраШ в ïï конфлштному стань Аргументовано юнування рiзних архетипiв публiчного управлшня в умовах реалiзацiï рiз-них управлшських концепцiй. Доведено необхiднiсть застосування нових пiдходiв управлiнського впливу, яю б убезпечили розвиток системи публiч-ного управлiння i всього сусшльства вiд дп негативних факторiв та змен-шили вплив кризових явищ. Представлено авторське бачення розв'язання кризового стану публiчного управлiння шляхом створення архетипно!' парадигми публiчного управлшня через синергетичне поеднання управлiнських механiзмiв концепцй' "нового державного менеджменту", теорп "сусшль-но-полiтичних мереж" та концепцй' "належного врядування". Надано опис кожно!' з концепцiй та обгрунтовано засади ix вбудови у нацiональну систему публiчного управлiння з урахуванням архетишв iснуючоï управлiнськоï парадигми.
Ключовi слова: парадигма, архетип, архетипна парадигма, публiчне управлшня, новий державний менеджмент, сусшльно-полггичш мереж^ на-лежне врядування.
СТАНОВЛЕНИЕ АРХЕТИПИЧЕСКОЙ ПАРАДИГМЫ ПУБЛИЧНОГО УПРАВЛЕНИЯ В НЫНЕШНЕМ КОНФЛИКТНОМ
ПОЛОЖЕНИИ УКРАИНЫ
Аннотация. Статья посвящена определению архетипной парадигмы развития публичного управления в Украине в ее конфликтном состоянии. Аргументировано существование различных архетипов публичного управления в условиях реализации различных управленческих концепций. Доказана необходимость применения новых подходов управленческого воздействия, которые обезопасили бы развитие системы публичного управления и всего общества от воздействия негативных факторов и уменьшили влияние кризисных явлений. Предложено авторское видение решения кризисного состояния публичного управления путем создания архетипной парадигмы публичного управления через синергетическое объединение управленческих механизмов концепции "нового государственного менеджмента",
теории "общественно-политических сетей" и концепции "надлежащего управления". Предоставлено описание каждой из концепций и обосновано принципы их встраивания в национальную систему публичного управления с учетом архетипов существующей управленческой парадигмы.
Ключевые слова: парадигма, архетип, архетипическая парадигма, публичное управление, новый государственный менеджмент, общественно-политические сети, надлежащее управление.
Target setting. It should be noted that the history doesn't know examples of countries that have avoided the crises and conflicts. These crises and conflicts have always been linked with both internal and external factors. The current changes in the modern state and social development, fleeting powerful processes of globalization, the emergence of innovative information technology, external threats and internal conflicts pose challenges for Ukraine to identify and use new approaches of the management influence, which would secure development of the system of public administration and the whole country from the effects of negative factors and reduce the impact of the crises. Modern science of public administration considers reducing crises and conflicts on the state level of the social development in general and public administration system in particular through the use of new management concepts (new public management, good governance, socio-political networks, etc.). That is why Ukraine, in its conflict state, faces the challenge of designing a modernization of the existing instruments of public administration on the basis of new management concepts in the paradigm of relations based on the national archetypes.
Analysis of the recent researches and publications. Research issues of
public administration in Ukraine, state of development and transformation in modern conditions were described in the research papers of: V. B. Averyanov, V. D. Bakumenko, T. O. Bilozerska, R. V. Voytovych, I. I. Hanushchak, Z. S. Hladun, N. T. Goncharuk, V. B. Dziundziuk, V. M. Kniazev, I. B. Koliushko, V. K. Kolpakov, S. O. Kravchenko, V. M. Martynenko, N. R. Nyzhnyk, O. I. Obolensky, I. A. Radzievsky, S. M. Seriogin, V. P. Tymoshchuk, A. F. Tkachuk, Y. P. Sharov and other Ukrainian researchers. The following domestic scientists directed their attention to the study of archetypes of public administration: V. P. Andrushchenko, E. A. Afonin, I. V. Berezhny, T. O. Bu-tyrska, O. I. Vasilieva, O. S. Vlasenko, O. A. Donchenko, O. P. Lukyanov, O. V. Sushy and others. While acknowledging the scientific heritage of these scientists, it should be noted that researches on the subject of becoming the archetypal paradigm of public administration in the current conflict situation in Ukraine is a new area of research in solving the problem of modernization and development of the Ukrainian state.
The purpose of the article. The study is based on the objective determination of the main instruments and
mechanisms of new management concepts in the context of their impact on the development of the archetypal paradigm of public administration in the current conflict situation in Ukraine.
The statement of basic materials. To facilitate understanding of the subject of study let us be define some of the terms. Firstly, a paradigm is a set of philosophical, general theoretical, methodological, worldview, scientific, administrative and other guidelines that have emerged historically and taken in a particular community as a sample, rule, standard for addressing issues; system of the basic scientific achievements (theories, methods), according to which is organized a research practice in a particular field of knowledge in a given period [3, p. 507]. Public administration determines diverse meaningful contexts of the paradigm, such as: institutional; active, legal and regulatory, scientismic, systemic, social, socio-political, instrumental, innovative, paternalistic, liberal [3, p. 508].
To formulate the concept of archetype, let us use more definitions. Thus, in the classic definition of archetype is — (from the Greek Archetipos — prototype) — a way of connection of images that are transferred from generation to generation. According to Jung, archetypes are the structural elements of the human psyche, which are hidden in the collective unconscious, in general, for all mankind. They are inherited in the same way, as the structure of the body. Archetypes define the overall personality structure and sequence of images, poping-up in mind upon awakening creative activity that is why the spiritual life bears the archetypal imprint [1]. In modern literature arche-
types are called the archaic cultural concepts — characters of man that are historically included on a subconscious level, "filtered" through layers of centuries of cultural transformations. They relate to ideas about man's place in the world and society, normative and value preferences, determine patterns of human activity and retain their value" [7, p. 105]. However, the closest suitable definition to the subject of our study is given in the Encyclopaedia of Public Administration where under the archetype is understood the collective unconscious that is being projected on the basic values of society, forms a system of social norms, standards of behavior and lifestyle in general [3, p. 502].
It follows that the archetypical paradigm of public administration is a description of management models and rationale the principles of their construction at the level of a certain society, which in turn corresponds to the classification criteria of scientific and state paradigm. It should be noted that in this study the archetypical paradigm will affect, first of all, the management models that evolved and became the basis for the emergence of new management concepts, and further, due to the reception, have proliferated in the system of public relations.
In recent years, in the modern scientific literature was placed fundamentally important issue that led to the modern development research — a change of government and management capabilities of the state and its institutions in the conditions of growing uncertainty and unpredictability of the results and consequences of government decisions in various fields.
In worsening conditions, in which the state is forced to operate by implementing basic functions that have been caused by the processes of globalization, accelerated technological development, emergence and exacerbation of environmental problems which exert a direct effect on the quality of life, internal and foreign stability (climate change, spreading of people who have diseases that are difficult to treat and so on). For the Ukrainian state, besides the above-listed factors, the additional burden is caused by the crisis processes of external threat coming from Russian Federation, and internal political conflicts.
According to J. Koppenyan and E. Kliyn the existence of such threats requires the development of a new architecture of public administration, based on the latest knowledge, specific competencies and skills of politicians and officials in order to create new opportunities for cooperation between state and non-state actors both at national and at supranational levels [14].
Thus, changes in the architecture of public administration are influenced by the fundamental civilization changes occurring during the late XX - the beginning of XXI century, affected the development of world scientific opinion on the state, society and man in the context of forming such modern theories and management concepts as "new public management", "social and political networks", "good governance" et al., which provided theoretical and methodological basis of the "global revolution in the public sector" [4].
In addition, the development of the public sector in this or that country is under pressure of the latent system of
self-orientation and self-management of ethnicity, containing principles of formation of moral values, norms of behavior and activity, principles of upbringing, relationship between people, the organization of everyday life. The complex structure of human relations that exist in society is reflected in the public sector and revealed through archetypes — the system of recognition of the collective unconscious, which is influenced by objective and subjective factors. Thus, the objective factors are targeted the socio-historical and historical-cultural incentives of impact on personality, whereas the subjective factors form his cognitive emotional and volitional behavior.
Globalization and transformation of the socio-cultural realities lead to a change of the management paradigms. There have been similar changes to the paradigm of public administration in Ukraine. The transformation processes that are taking place in Ukraine need to form a new management paradigm based on such democratic principles: recognition of democratic principles and norms of governance, trust in the main political institutions and leaders, interpersonal trust, tolerance and consolidation of political and social activities. Today there is a steady need for establishing a new paradigm of public administration, based on authentic archetypes inherent to Ukrainian society, at the same time these archetypes should be influenced by imposed prospects of the global management of existing trends.
For a long time most developed countries for the organization of the public sector used the traditional bureaucratic management model, which
had a great success on the stage of industrial society. This management model was based on: dichotomy principle of politics and administration; hierarchies; centralization; stability of state institutions and public service; formalization of principles and procedures; direct organization for the provision of goods and services to government agencies; bureaucratic form of administration. For some time this management model has its advantages and achievements. However, this model of public administration is not perceived by the civilized world as the "ideal model" of the organization at the private and public sectors because of its inherent inertia, bureaucracy, focus on organizational structures and processes, being characterized by remoteness from civil society, lack of flexibility and innovation [6].
Globalized and unified world set the target to scientists of creating new multilevel approaches and multi-faceted concepts of developing society and the state, basis of which was the settlement of relations and interests of local, sub-national, national and global levels. This determinant was designed to ensure social well-being and efficiency of the state as the institution as a whole.
The end of the 90s of the XX century was marked by the fact that Western scientific environment understood the need to change the archetypal paradigm on the level of the public sector. This was caused by the fact that the world's global processes stimulated the development of administrative and bureaucratic dysfunction of public administration. In addition, structural political and legal reforms (administra-
tive, territorial, and decentralized) that occurred in Europe and the developed world in recent decades, changed attitude towards fundamental and decisive role of the state as an institution and transformed the archetype paradigm of public administration from the state bureaucracy to public administration.
Search for an efficient state administrative model has led to the emergence in the science and practice of public administration the new theoretical and methodological approaches, including: the concept and practice of "new public management", the theory of "social-political networks" and the concept of "good governance" [9-13; 17; 18]. Each of these conceptual directions claims to universality and the status of the new paradigm of public administration.
For the purpose of the study, we will try to imagine a brief description of each of the concepts and justify the principles for their embedding in the national system of public management taking into account the authentic archetypal paradigm.
Analyzing various definitions of the new public management and the divergence of specific forms of its practical application in the system of public administration it may be noted that the developers put aim to achieve efficiency of governance of the state and efficient use of public funds by creating a "small size and competitive public sector, improve the quality of management of public services and the rapid reaction of the state to meet the needs of citizens" [16, p. 9]. Defined principles of the new public management were characterized by apparent shift attention from the structure and management process (in the coordinate
system of rational bureaucracy) on the outcome of management. The tool to achieve optimal results of the new public management was the adaptation of successful business management techniques for the purpose of managing social development [8].
However, with time, it became clear that privatization, outsourcing and other practices of the new public management require excessive force to control, monitor and regulate, that therefore requires additional financial and human resources. After some time appeared scientific justifications that the concept is "intellectually dead" and attempts to implement its ideas in practice led to excessive complications in the political and administrative process [12]. Since then, the growing interest in the theory of "social and political networks" has begun, whose development was marked by the urgent need to address the priority socioeconomic political issues in the context of globalization and informatization and the need to adapt to the uncertainty and unpredictability of the external environment and the fragmentation of the political system.
As the concept of the new of state management, the paradigm of sociopolitical networks is coming out of the formation of the provision of social needs. It is a special type of archetypes based on the culture of consensus in public and private entities that interact with each other in certain areas of policy on the basis of resource dependency to reach agreement on the issue in the solution of which all are interested. But, unlike the new public management, socio-political networks at fundamentally different level reveal
the essence of the relationship between the public and community institutions. According to this concept they are not based on hierarchical, subordinate relationships, and the system of cooperation and co-government built on horizontal relations, equal statuses, network structures, precluding the use of enforcement mechanisms and direct pressure.
In the context of the developing paradigm of public management based on the concept of socio-political networks is the dominant mechanism of public involvement in the decision-making and policy management. Equally important is the use of the specific type of resource as social capital in solving social problems, which significantly affects the dynamics of public administration [5]. Building a system of public administration according to the network architecture allows activating informal relationship channels, providing motivation, and creating a favorable environment for interaction and accumulating resources to address national and supranational issues.
However, there are certain limitations to the widespread use of the concept of the social and political networks. The network management objectively weakens not only the responsibility, but the coordination that is important for any government institution and the state as a whole. According to G. Peters, only "strong vertical connections between social groups and NGOs provide effective coordination" [15].
Identified over time deficiencies of the theory and practice of the new public management and also awareness of inability of the amorphous network
structures to form a long-term strategy of the social development, implementing focused management and settling conflicts between political actors encouraged to develop a new conception of "good governance".
Management archetype of this concept is based on common democratic rules and relationships, just for the good governance of the state, society and the world at large. The good governance is a mechanism to ensure the functioning of society as a whole self-regulating system, a way to implement public authority, which is achieved through: compliance with public policy needs of the social development; real participation of citizens in the formulation and implementation of public policy; combining the capacity of all three sectors (government, business, and public); continuous monitoring of various segments of society for public authorities, etc. [2].
Ignoring the principles of the good governance has resulted in the formation of weak (improper) management, the main elements of which are ineffective, secrecy and corruption. In countries where for a long period functioned both centralized system and improper corrupt administration, which might be included the Central European countries, including Ukraine, there is no effective scenario of rapid and radical transition to the principles of the good governance. This is due to the impossibility and undesirability of firing all the employees who have operated with prior management system, and this is objectively conditioned to the length of time, necessary to establish the new management principles. However, the important reality to bear
in mind is that there is some mental, professional lack of training of citizens to use the principles of transparency, accountability, involvement to control the actions of government and other administrative structures. Moreover, the good governance implies the application of the principles of "quality control" and therefore collaboration of power, civil and expert communities in developing high standards in providing administrative services.
We believe that for Ukraine, which is in the crisis-conflict state, and which is still in the policy-making of the model of public administration would be appropriate to use a synergistic combination of best management mechanism concepts of the rational bureaucracy, new public management, socio-political networks and good governance.
Analyzing the management mechanisms that are used in Ukraine, it may be noted that the system of public administration inherent in periodic and/ or permanent use of various instruments without exception management concepts and theories. This is due to a typical state of current Ukraine, its political and state system. Being a part of the Soviet Union, Ukraine for a long time was eliminated from civilized democratic governance that affected the course of its archetypal management paradigm. Change in concept in the management paradigm from centralized management to decentralized governance occurs slowly. This is due to the different archetype of the socio-cultural groups representing various regions of Ukraine and their vision of development of the state. The mentality of these groups affects on the formation of the archetype in the center
of the public administration system, especially regional and local self-management elites.
Conclusions. It was determined that the archetype as the collective unconscious phenomenon, that has certain characteristic features for Ukrainian society inherent in archetypes of public administration.
It was determined that the strategy of becoming the archetypal paradigm of the development of public administration should be based on the preservation of national identity under conditions of globalization management trends and should be based on the modernization of authentic management values.
It is noted that without forming own national authentic archetypical paradigm of the development of public administration Ukraine will remain a permanent crisis-state conflict and cannot be properly integrated into the civilized community. Its ability to meet the challenges of the modern world and the ability to implement effective economic, social, and modernization policy will be characterized by the emergence of authentic archetypes of public administration and their implementation in the areas of livelihood of the state and society.
REFERENCES -
1. Archetyp // Slovar literaturovedches-kich terminov [Archetype // Dictionary of literary terms] [Electronic resource] / Eksperymentalnaia hruppa Lib-Ra; red. Rudnev Yu. B. — Elektron. dan. — Kyev, 2001-2005. — Available at: http://slovar.lib.ru/dictionary/ar-hetip.htm (accessed April 24, 2017).
2. Bezverkhniuk T. Yevropeiski standarty vriaduvannia na rehionalnomu rivni: monohrafiia [European standards of governance at the regional level: Monograph] / T. M. Bezverkhniuk, S. E. Sakhanenko, E. K. Topalova; za zah. red. T. M. Bezverkhniuk. — Odesa : ORIDU NADU, 2008. — P. 328.
3. Entsyklopedychnyi slovnyk z der-zhavnoho upravlinnia [Collegiate Dictionary from the public administration] [Electronic resource] / uk-lad.: Yu. P. Surmin, V. D. Bakumen-ko, A. M. Mykhnenko ta in. ; za red. Yu. V. Kovbasiuka, V. P. Troshchyn-skoho, Yu. P. Surmina. — K.: NADU, 2010. — 820 s. — Available at: http:// www.academy.gov.ua/NMKD/ library_nadu/ Encycloped_vydanniy/ 14ff57eb-06bd-4b2b-8bfb-ead7f286d5dd.pdf (accessed April 24, 2017).
4. Kettl Donald. Hlobalnaia revoliutsyia v hosudarstvennom upravlenyy [The Global Revolution in Public Administration] [Electronic resource] / Donald F. Kettl. — Available at: http://maga-zines.russ.ru/oz/2004/2/2004_2_20. html (accessed April 24, 2017).
5. Molodtsov O. V. Sutnist politychnoi merezhi yak modeli predstavnytstva ta realizatsii interesiv subiektiv terytori-alnoho rozvytku [The essence of political network as a model representation and realization of interests of the territorial development] [Electronic resource] / O. V. Molodtsov // Der-zhavne upravlinnia: teoriia ta prakty-ka : elektron. nauk. fakh. vyd. — 2006. — № 1. — Available at: http://www.nbuv. gov.ua/e-journals/ DUTP/2006-1/ txts/P0LITICHNI/06movstr.pdf (accessed April 24, 2017).
6. Radziievskyi I. A. Fenomen hlobal-izatsii i derzhavne upravlinnia [The phenomenon of globalization and governance] [Electronic resource] / I. A. Radziievskyi // Derzhavne
upravlinnia: teoriia ta praktyka. — 2006. — № 1. — Available at: http:// www.academy.gov.ua/ej/ej3/txts/ FILOSOFIYA/03-RADZIEVSKIY. pdf (accessed April 24, 2017).
7. Sybyriakova M. Merezheve spivtova-rystvo derzhavnykh sluzhbovtsiv yak sotsiokulturnyi chynnyk zapobihan-niu koruptsii [Online community of civil servants as a sociocultural factor for preventing corruption] [Tekst] / M. Cybyriakova // Publichne uprav-linnia: teoriia ta praktyka: zbirnyk naukovykh prats Asotsiatsii doktoriv nauk z derzhavnoho upravlinnia. — Kh.: Vyd-vo "DokNaukDerzhUpr", 2010. — № 3-4. — P. 103-111.
8. Smorhunov L. V. Hosudarstvennoe up-ravlenye y polytyka: Ucheb. Posobye [Local Government and Politics: Textbook] / Pod red. L. V. Smorhu-nova. — SPb : Yzd-vo S.-Peterb. un-ta, 2002. — P. 564.
9. Blatter J. Beyond Hierarchies and Networks: Institutional Logics and Change in Transboundary Spaces / J. Blatter // Governance: An International Journal of Policy, Administration and Institutions. — 2003. — Vol. 16. — № 4. — P. 503-526.
10. Borzel T. A. Organizing Babylon — On the Different Conceptions of Policy Networks / T. A. Borzel // Public Administration. — 1998. — Vol. 76. — № 2. — P. 253-273.
11. Drechsler W. The ReEmergence of "Weberian" Public Administration after the Fall of The new public Management: The Central and Eastern
European Perspective / Wolfgang Drechsler // Halduskultuur Administrative Culture. — 2005. — № 6. — P. 94-108.
12. Duonleavy P., Mangetts H. H., Bas-tow S, TinklerJ. The new public Management is Dead — Long Live Digital Era Governance // Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory. — 2006. — Р. 467-494.
13. Good Governance — and Sustainable Human Development [Електронний ресурс] / UNDP // Governance for Sustainable Human Development. A UNDP Policy Document. — Available at: http://www.mirror.undp.org/ magnet/ policy/chapterl.htm. (accessed April 24, 2017).
14. Koppenjan J., Klijn E.-H. Managing Uncertainties in Networks. — Rout-ledge, 2004.
15. Peters B. The Future of Governing: Four Emerging Models. — Lawrence : University of Kansas Press, 1996.
16. Pollitt C. Public management reform: [A comparative analysis] / C. Pollitt, G. Bouckaert — 2nd ed. — Oxford, UK : Oxford University Press, 2004. — P. 151-155.
17. Vienazindiene M. The new public Management: Theoretical and Practical Aspects / M. Vienazindiene, R. Ciarniene // Engineering Economics. — 2007. — № 5 (55). — P. 44-50.
18. Wachhaus A. Networks in Contemporary Public Administration: A Discourse Analysis / A. Wachhaus // Administrative Theory & Praxis. — 2009. — Vol. 31. — № 1. — P. 59-77.
