CC BY
80
UDC: 005.05:159.923
Naplyokov Yuriy Vasilievich,
Master of Strategic Sciences, Master of Military Art and Science, senior lecturer of the department of training of peacekeeping personnel, National Defense University of Ukraine named after Ivan Chernyakhovsky, Colonel, postgraduate student of the Department of Management and Administration of Kharkov National University of Municipal Economy named after O. M. Beketov, 03049, Kyiv, Povitroflotsky Prospect, 28, tel.: +38 (098) 242 13 53, e-mail: designyvn@gmail.com
ORCID: 0000-0002-0343-8337
Напльоков Юрш Васильович,
майстр стратег1чних наук, майстр вш-ськових наук та вшськового мистецтва, старший викладач кафедри тдготовки миротворчого персоналу, Нацональний утверситет оборони Украти iMeHi 1вана Черняховського, полковник, асшрант кафедри менеджменту i адмШстрування Хартвського нащонального утверситету м^ь-кого господарства iменi О. М. Бекетова, 03049, м. Кигв, Повтрофлотський просп., 28, тел.: +38 (098) 242 13 53, е-mail: designyvn@gmail.com
ORCID: 0000-0002-0343-8337
Наплёков Юрий Васильевич,
магистр стратегических наук, магистр военных наук и военного искусства, старший преподаватель кафедры подготовки миротворческого персонала, Национальный университет обороны Украины имени Ивана Черняховского, полковник, аспирант кафедры менеджмента и администрирования Харьковского национального университета городского хозяйства имени А. Н. Бекетова, 03049, г. Киев, Воздухофлотский просп., 28, тел.: +38 (098) 242 13 53, е-mail: designyvn@gmail.com
ORCID: 0000-0002-0343-8337
DOI https://doi.org/10.31618/vadnd.v1i14.109
THE ARCHETYPAL FOUNDATIONS OF VALUE CHOICE IN THE PROCESS OF ADAPTATION TO THE MODERN SOCIETY
Abstract. This article explains an importance of archetypal foundations for the value choice in order to adapt the state (system) to the modern society (environment). To provide effectiveness of the system requires maintaining equilibrium between the system and the environment through decision-making process (DMP) that is based on balance system's ends, ways, and means in the framework of possible permissible risk.
Beliefs and values are critical for the DMP. Obsolete beliefs and values can decrease system effectiveness drastically. The main task is to produce decisions based on topical values to adapt the system to the environment and maintain national interests. An archetype can help to find a right set of values in a certain environment as a combination of the past and the future.
The paradox of the notions of beliefs and values is the need of their saving and the need of their change for successful system development at the same time. They are fundamental and their complete replacement can create chaos and even destroy the system at all. Thus, values choice is a vital and psychological painful process. At first it is difficult to understand the need of their change. Second, it is problematic to find appropriate values that should facilitate successful system development in the given and future environment.
To solve these problems the state authority (SA) and the civil society (CS) together should generate decisions through convergent and divergent processes of thinking. A national archetype, as a relatively stable mental structure, combines these processes together based on the experience. A proper balanced participation of the SA and the CS in the state leadership, based on required values, can make the system effective.
Value choice does not mean accepting or copying values of others, it means reconsidering current values in order to remain effective and functional as a nation in the modern society. Applying of archetypal foundations can help to choice proper beliefs and values that can facilitate making decisions that will provide soft adaptation of the system to a new environment without conflicts and revolutions.
Keywords: archetype, values, beliefs, culture, decision-making process, state authority, civil society, system, environment, equilibrium, thinking, effectiveness.
АРХЕТИПН1 ОСНОВИ ЦШШСНОГО ВИБОРУ В ПРОЦЕС1 АДАПТАЦП ДО СУЧАСНОГО СУСП1ЛЬСТВА
Анотащя. Пояснюеться важливють архетипних основ для щншсного вибору для адаптування держави (системи) до сучасного сустльства (се-редовища). Для забезпечення ефективносп системи потрiбно шдтримува-ти рiвновагу мiж системою та середовищем через процес прийняття ршень (ППР), який Грунтуеться на баланс щлей, способiв та засобiв в рамках мож-ливого допустимого ризику.
Переконання та щнносп мають виршальне значення для ППР. Застарш переконання та щнносп можуть суттево знизити ефектившсть системи. Головне завдання — виробляти ршення на основi актуальних щнностей для адаптування системи до середовища та шдтримування нащональних штере-св. Архетип може допомогти знайти правильний набiр щнностей у певному середовишд як поеднання минулого та майбутнього.
Парадокс понять переконань та щнностей — це одночасна необхщшсть ix збертання та змш для устшного розвитку системи. Вони е фундаменталь-ними, i ix повна змша може створити хаос i взагалi знищити систему. Таким чином, вибiр щнностей е життево важливим та психолопчно болючим
процесом. По-перше, важко зрозумпи необхiднiсть таких змш. По-друге, проблематично знайти вщповщш щнносп, якi повиннi сприяти устшному розвитку системи у теперiшньому та майбутньому середовищь
Щоб вирiшити щ проблеми, державна влада (ДВ) та громадянське сус-пiльство (ГС) разом повинш формувати рiшення через конвергентш та дивергентнi процеси мислення. Нащональний архетип як вiдносно стiйка ментальна структура об'еднуе цi процеси разом на основi досвiду. Належна збалансована участь ДВ та ГС у керiвництвi держави на основi необхщних цiнностей може зробити систему ефективною.
Цiннiсний вибiр не означае прийняття або копшвання цiнностей iнших. Це означае, насамперед, перегляд поточних щнностей, щоб залишатися ефективним i функщонуючим як нащя в сучасному сусшльствь Застосу-вання архетипних основ може допомогти вибрати вщповщш переконання та щнносп, як сприятимуть прийняттю ршень, якi забезпечать м'яку адап-тащю до нового середовища без конфлшпв i революцiй.
Ключовi слова: архетип, щнносп, переконання, культура, процес прийняття ршень, державна влада, громадянське сусшльство, система, середо-вище, рiвновага, мислення, ефективнiсть.
АРХЕТИПНЫЕ ОСНОВЫ ЦЕННОСТНОГО ВИБОРА В ПРОЦЕСЕ АДАПТАЦИИ К СОВРЕМЕННОМУ ОБЩЕСТВУ
Аннотация. Объясняется важность архетипных основ для выбора ценностей с целью адаптации государства (системы) к современному обществу (среде). Для обеспечения эффективности системы требуется поддержание равновесия между системой и средой посредством процесса принятия решений (ППР), основанного на балансе целей, путей и средств системы в рамках возможного допустимого риска.
Убеждения и ценности имеют решающее значение для ППР. Устаревшие убеждения и ценности могут резко снизить эффективность системы. Основная задача заключается в том, чтобы принимать решения, основанные на актуальных ценностях для адаптации системы к среде и поддержания национальных интересов. Архетип может помочь найти правильный набор ценностей в определенной среде как сочетание прошлого и будущего.
Парадокс понятий убеждений и ценностей заключается в одновременной необходимости их сохранения и необходимости их изменения для успешного развития системы. Они фундаментальны, и их полная замена может создать хаос и даже разрушить систему вообще. Таким образом, выбор ценностей — это жизненно важный и психологически болезненный процесс. В первую очередь трудно понять необходимость таких изменения. Во-вторых, проблематично найти соответствующие ценности, которые должны способствовать успешному развитию системы в теперешней и будущей среде.
Чтобы решить эти проблемы, государственная власть (ГВ) и гражданское общество (ГО) вместе должны генерировать решения посредством конвергентных и дивергентных процессов мышления. Национальный архетип, как
относительно стабильная ментальная структура, объединяет эти процессы на основе опыта. Правильное сбалансированное участие ГВ и ГО в руководстве государства, основываясь на требуемых ценностях, может сделать систему эффективной.
Выбор ценности не означает принятие или копирование ценностей других. Это означает, прежде всего, пересмотр текущих ценностей, чтобы оставаться эффективным и функциональным как нация в современном обществе. Применение архетипических основ может помочь в выборе правильных убеждений и ценностей, которые поспособствуют принятию решений, которые обеспечат мягкую адаптацию системы к новой среде без конфликтов и революций.
Ключевые слова: архетип, ценности, убеждения, культура, процесс принятия решений, государственная власть, гражданское общество, система, среда, равновесие, мышление, эффективность.
Target setting. The problem of value choice is critical to adapt a nation (system) to the modern society (environment). Archetypal foundations can facilitate selecting a required set of values that have to make the system effective in conditions of the complex and dynamic environment. Therefore, the problem of value choice based on archetypal foundations deserves studying.
Analysis of the recent research and publications. Different authors describe archetypes as repeating events and processes such as patterns of behavior, thoughts, human psychological traits, repeating symbol or motif in literature and art. They apply them to individuals and organizations as types of human psychological images and organizational cultures.
Carl Jung suggested that archetypes are "forms or images of a collective nature which occur practically all over the Earth as constituents of myths and — at the same time — as individual products of unconscious... The [forms and images] are imprinted and hardwired into out psyches" [1]. He believed that
universal, mythical characters — archetypes — reside within the collective unconscious human world. Also he supposed the archetypes as psychological organs, analogous to physical ones in that both are morphological constructs that arose through evolution [2]. At the same time, evolution can itself be considered an archetypal construct [3].
Jung described birth, death, separation from parents, initiation, marriage, the union of opposites as archetypal events. Also he distinguished human archetypal figures with own values: great mother, father, child, devil, god, wise old man, wise old woman, the trickster, the hero; and archetypal motifs: the apocalypse, the deluge, the creation" [4, p. 114].
Corlett and Pearson state that an organization has a conscious organizational level (public face, the center of conscious), unconscious level (complexes, participation mystique, organizational archetypes), and a collective unconscious level (archetypes and instincts) [5]. They emphasize that the underlying assumptions are in the un-
conscious part of the organization, especially in the part of its psyche, called "complexes" by C. Jung, that are formed through organizational experiences patterned by the psychic energy of archetypes as they take form through the minds of individuals and collectives. They suggest that archetypes are "key contributors to organizational culture, many of them representing the forms or outlines of the basic responses to organizational life" [6].
Archetypes are patterns of human behavior and images that originate from the collective unconscious and are the mental analogue of instinct [6]. Sigmund Freud wrote: "there can be no doubt that the source [of the fantasies] lies in the instincts; but it still has to be explained why the same fantasies with the same content are created on every occasion" [7]. He supposed that primal fantasies are a residue of specific memories of prehistoric experiences has been construed as being aligned with the idea of archetypes.
The archetype of the organization presents its culture. According to Schein culture consists of artifacts, values and beliefs, and underlying assumptions [8]. He states that culture is "a pattern of shared basic assumptions that the group learned as it solved its problems of external adaptation and internal integration that has worked well enough to be considered valid and therefore, to be taught to new members as the correct way to perceive, think, and feel in relation to those problems" [9, p. 18].
Thus, the authors above state that individuals and organizations have archetypes. However, they do not discuss applying of archetypal foundations for value choice in order to adapt the sys-
tem to a new environment through proper decision-making.
The purpose of the article is to explain practical significance of archetypal foundations for value choice in the process of adaptation of the society to a new environment. Understanding of social archetypes can facilitate forming a required set of values and beliefs to make proper decisions in time and avoid bifurcation points of the way of social development.
The statement of basic materials. An archetype can foresee values and beliefs that can facilitate effective decision-making to solve problems that can appear between any social group (system) and a modern society (environment). Based on relative stability of the human nature it is possible to suppose that applying of an archetype, as a combination of values, beliefs, and norms, can be useful to lead the system properly.
Values and beliefs are different, but both are critical for the decision-making process (DMP). Beliefs can be seen as true assumptions based on the experience. In the changeable and dynamic environment, beliefs should be revised because of their relativeness in truth. Values are based on the constant human nature and focus on providing of security and feeling that you are a human. They are universal and not contextual and directly connected with human needs. Together, values and beliefs present a deep level of culture as a set of organizational shared learning and experiences. Adaptation of the system to the changeable environment may require revising values and beliefs through understanding of the need of their change.
An archetype may foresee required values for the nation to make the state
effective in a new environment. Technological development and increased communication globalize the world and make it open and vulnerable. It transforms a society from a collective form to an individual one by providing an opportunity for everyone to take part in discussion and decision-making through social networks. It may erase boundaries of a national identity and create new rules of behavior.
It is possible to assume that people create their culture as a certain type of social behavior based on selected values in order to adapt the system to the environment and/or shape the environment. Combination of values may be repeated on the new level of system development. Huntington states "the world is divided into eight major civilizations or "cultural zones" based on cultural differences that have persisted for centuries. These zones were shaped by religions, traditions that are still powerful today, despite of the forces of modernization" [10]. It can prove the fact that culture is a national archetype. Also, in spite of globalization "the nation remains a key unit of shared experience and its educational and cultural institutions shape the values of almost everyone in the society" [11, p. 37]. Moreover, "empirical evidence from 65 societies indicates that values can and do change, but also they continue to reflect a society's cultural heritage" [12, p. 49].
On one hand, values should be constant in order to secure the system from destruction. On the other hand, maintaining of system functionality requires revising beliefs and values in conditions of changeable environment. The need to change and save values at the same
time creates a paradox. Applying of a combination of values, as a certain social archetype, may solve this problem.
There are two schools of thoughts about interactions between values and development of the system. They outline convergent and divergent processes in the process of development of the system. The purpose of a convergent process is to save the system and a divergent process should adapt it to the environment through changes. The first school "emphasizes the convergence of values as a result of "modernization" — the overwhelming economic and political forces that drive cultural change. This school predicts the decline of traditional values and their replacement with "modern" values. The other school of thought emphasizes the persistence of traditional values despite of economic and political changes. This school assumes values are relatively independent of economic conditions" [12, p. 19].
Cancellation of serfdom in the Russian imperia in 1864 and slavery in the USA in 1865 are examples of the industrial revolution and economic growth that promoted development of democratic values. The American civil war was grounded on a competition between the agricultural South and the growing industrial North for free, motivated and profitable labors instead of slavery work.
Besides, in spite of influence of economic development on democracy growth, promotion of democratic values can also facilitate economic development. DiMaggio highlights the impact of culture on the economy: "culture can either affect economic behavior by influencing how actors define
their interests (constitutive effects...), by constraining their efforts on their own behalf (regulatory effects), or by shaping a group's capacity to mobilize or its goal in mobilizing" [12, p. 28].
Moreover, "the survival/self-expression dimension reflects materialist values (such as maintaining order and fighting inflation) versus postmaterialist values (such as freedom and self-expression), subjective well-being, interpersonal trust, political activism, and tolerance of out-groups" [13, p. 29]. Thus, "position in this two-dimensional space reflect a multidimensional reality — and this remarkable socioeconomic-cultural; coherence reflects the fact that a society's culture is shaped by its entire economic and historical heritage" [13, p. 32]. Hence, an archetype of the system may support two primary tendencies — the need to change and secure the system at the same time. Thus, system development is based on convergent and divergent processes. The task is to develop the society and get mutually profitable result for rich people and people with an average income. Therefore, a certain set of values should correspond to an archetype that will provide this condition.
Different combinations of individual archetypes may form group archetypes that generate a national archetype. The archetype of the group presents the organizational culture that has to make this group effective in a certain environment. Combination of group archetypes forms a national archetype (a national culture). This national archetype can respond to which values should be taken to make the system effective in a new environment. Technological development changes the environment and
initiates revising of values. Therefore, a proper set of values can facilitate maintaining of system effectiveness.
The value choice is a step by step process of selection of a required set of values that has to facilitate an effective DMP to satisfy human needs [14] and solve problems through establishing equilibrium between the system and the environment. The author suggests that types of human values can be divided in four sets of values in general: individual, group (organizational), national, and international (corporate). These sets of values can be combined in a specific order and adapted or selected by the system under internal and/ or external influence in order to make decisions that will provide the required system effectiveness. A set of values (archetype) can be repeated on the new level of development of the system.
An example of revising and repeating values on the new level of development can a collapse of the Soviet Union, as a geopolitical change, that forced citizens of former Soviet republics changing values. However, it is not a new set of values — this social archetype was used for instance, by the Ukrainian nation, in the past. Change in a system structure does not mean refusing previous values. It can be a certain set of values that corresponds to the situation and help to solve a problem (to balance the system) through establishing equilibrium between the system and environment. A set of values can be based on unconscious archetypes or their dominance. The past set of values may be practical to apply on the new level of development of the system.
Even for developed democratic countries, similar values can have dif-
ferent priority [19]. Therefore, the most important things are not values itself, but their combination or a national set of values that presents a national social archetype. An archetype includes the best proportion of different values and balanced according to national features and the environment. This archetype as a set of values should solve the problem in the given environment. Individual, organizational, and national values should support each other and, therefore, present a certain value set on each level of development of the system. For example, growth of individual value (freedom) should fit with a democratic society. The socialist society decreases the role of an individual and focuses on collective interests and values.
It is possible to suppose that a certain set of values already existed on the lower level of development of the system. Hence, it is possible to apply this set of values again to solve the problem, but on the new level. It can help to understand which values should be developed in the society in advance in order to be ready for the future challenges.
A repeating character of historical events proves importance of archetypal foundations for value choice. Societies have had diverse sets of values in order to build effective state governance. For example, city-states of the ancient Greece, Sparta and Athens were based on different human values, beliefs, norms, delegation of authority and freedom of actions. Athens was a democratic state with high level of participation of the civil society (CS) in the state decision-making. Sparta had centralized and authoritative governance with strong military discipline. Another example is a system
of Soviet leadership with centralized power of the Communist party and a collective idea and the business oriented American governance system with focus on individual values. Leaders of other countries such as Mustafa Kemal Ataturk in Turkey and Augusto Pinochet in Chile applied an archetype of centralized military governance in period of stagnation and chaos in their countries. Thus, based on the system and environmental conditions use of proper archetypes can help to govern the society effectively.
Values should support the DMP that is directed to secure the system itself. On the new level of development, the value set can be improved/changed partly in order to adapt the system to a new environment. The system should be adaptable enough. Understanding of the environment and system itself through system openness can decrease delay in system reaction. It provides also synchronization of activities between the system and the environment.
Divergent and convergent processes should balance the system in its development through the DMP as combination of critical and creative thinking [16]. A national archetype can define a type of relationships between the state authority (SA) and the CS in order to solve problems in the new environment. The SA and the CS can reflect a reaction of the system to an environmental change according to the speed and frequency of this change. It happens based on a current set of values that originates from a national archetype. The task is to save system functionality through system resistance or/and its possible adaptation. To protect the system from undesired change and minimize risk is
a primary task of the SA that naturally presents a convergent process in thinking. On the other hand, the system should be adapted to the environment. The CS looks for ways to improve human life and presents a divergent process in thinking that opens the system for changes and innovations. Cooperation between the SA and the CS is vital and should be realized through effective governance grounded on mutual understanding and feedback mechanism. A proper set of values based on an archetypal foundation may define the proportion of interactions between the SA and the CS. This proportion should improve the DMP in order to make the system effective and survivable in the new environment.
Decision implementation always creates a delay in system reaction to the environmental change because it is based on analysis of data, information, knowledge and a feedback loop. Coefficient of dynamic equilibrium (K ) bei 11 eq
tween the system and the environment defines this delay and shows how the system and the environment fit with each other [17, p. 9]. There is a certain critical coefficient of dynamic equilibrium (Keq crt) [18, p. 146] when the system starts losing stability without a possibility to be restored and eventually creates a new structure. To avoid
destruction of the system there is a certain minimal coefficient of dynamic equilibrium K . [19, p. 201] when a
^ eq min L 71 J
decision must be made. Achievement of K . should generate change of a value
eq min ° °
set based on archetypal foundations. If we do not change the value set, system effectiveness can decrease critically (K . ^ K t).
^ eq min eq cr '
Maximum system openness can create resonance that may also change (destroy) system structure. This moment can correspond to a certain maximum possible coefficient of dynamic equilibrium (K ), when the system is maxi-
^ eq max' ' J
mally open and vulnerable. K may
eq max
be close to 1. Achievement of K
eq max
may be equally negative to achievement of K when a system can be
eq crt J
destroyed also. Hence, achievement of K . and K may negatively affect
eq crt eq max
the system in the context of saving its functionality.
Frequency of system fluctuation (Fs) and frequency of environmental fluctuation (Fe) describe the process of their interaction. If system reaction does not coincide with the environmental change or the phase of delay in the DMP is big, the system can be destroyed. A wrong set of values can make the DMP not effective and increase delay (AT) in system reaction to the environmental change (fig. 1).
Amplitude^ of fluctuation
Time
Fig. 1. Fluctuations of the system and the environment
Source: created by the author.
A certain optimal coefficient of dynamic equilibrium (K opt) [20, p. 194] provides maximum achievable effectiveness of the system in conditions of a changeable environment. Achievement of K . can be defined by the most fa-
eq opt J
vorable combination of interactions between the system and the environment based on effective leading of relations between the SA and the CS.
Thus, there are four main points that have to be taken in account to lead the system effectively: K , - K . -
J J eq crt eq mm
K , - K . They characterize
eq opt eq max J
divergent and convergent processes in the DMP that based on archetypal foundations of value choice in order to adapt the system to the environment. There is a function between K and a
eq
value choice based on archetypal foundations: Keq = f (types of values, a value set). An algorithm of change a value set defines conditions when the system has to start changing of its value set (fig. 2). K may be defined by the measure
eq
of effectiveness (answer the question — are we doing right things?) and the measure of performance (answer the question — are we doing right things
well?) [21, p. 15-2]. These measures are human created because people determine indicators of these measures as a level of satisfaction of their needs. Therefore, these measures are based on the set of values. Furthermore, effectiveness of public management may be also defined by the level of human satisfaction through leading the process of value choice.
Conclusions. To summarize, applying of archetypal foundations for value choice can adapt a nation successfully to a modern society. Convergent and divergent processes, as interaction between the SA and the CS, facilitate a proper DMP based on a social archetype and monitoring of four main points of interactions between the system and the environment to revise values. Also, on the new level of development of the system a selected set of values can be enriched by new values that may appear because of technological development and innovations. Thus, archetypal foundations of value choice can help to generate a set of values that will make the system effective in the current and future environment.
Fig. 2. An algorithm of change a Value Set
Source: created by the author.
references -
1. Jung C. G. Edited by Gerhard Adler & R. F. C. Hull. (1970). "Psychology and Religion: West and East. Collected Works of C. G. Jung". Vol. 11. Princeton, N. J.: Princeton University Press.
2. Boeree C. George. (2006) "Carl Jung". Archived from the original on 6 February 2006. Retrieved from: https://web. archive.org/web/20060206030011/ http://www.ship.edu/~cgboeree/jung. html
3. Brown R S. (2013). "Beyond the Evolutionary Paradigm in Consciousness Studies". The Journal of Transpersonal Psychology, Vol. 45, № 2, p. 159-171.
4. Retrieved from: http://atpweb.org/jt-parchive/trps-45-13-02-159.pdf
5. Jacobi Jolande. (1959). Complex, Archetype, Symbol in the Psychology of C. G. Jung. London: Routledge & Ke-gan Paul.
6. Corlett John G. and Pearson Carol S. (2003). Mapping the Organizational Psyche — A Jungian Theory of Organizational Dynamics and Change. Gainesville, Florida: Center for Applications of Psychological Type.
7. Feist J. and Feist G. J. (2009) Theories of Personality, New York New York; McGraw-Hill.
8. Freud S. (1917). "Introductory Lectures on Psycho-Analysis". The Standard Edition of the Complete Psychological Works of Sigmund Freud, Volume XVI (1916-1917).
9. Schein E. H. (2010). Organizational culture and leadership. The Jossey-Bass business & management series, (4th ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
10. Huntington Samuel P. (1993). "The Clash of Civilizations?" Foreign Affairs 72 (3), p. 22-49. 1996. The Clash of Civilizations and the Remarking of World Order. New York: Simons and Schuster.
11. Inglehart Ronald and Wayne E. Baker. (2000). "Modernization, Cultural
Change, and the Persistence of Traditional Values". American Sociological Review, Vol. 65, № 1 (February, p. 1951). Retrieved from: http://www.jstor. org/stable/2657288
12. DiMaggio Paul. (1994). "Culture and Economy". p. 27-57 in the Handbook of Economic Sociology, edited by N. J. Smelser and R. Swedberg. Princeton, Princeton University Press.
13. Inglehart Ronald and Wayne E. Baker. (2000). "Modernization, Cultural Change, and the Persistence of Traditional Values". American Sociological Review, Vol. 65, № 1 (February, p. 19-51). Retrieved from: http:// www.jstor.org/stable/2657288
14. Maslow A. H. (1943). "A theory of human motivation". Psychological Review. 50 (4), p. 370-396. Retrieved from: http://psychclassics.yorku.ca/ Maslow/motivation.htm
15. World Values Surveys. Retrieved from: http://www.worldvaluessurvey.org/ WVSDocumentationWV6.jsp
16. Allen C. D. (2012). "Creative Thinking for Individuals and Teams". An essay on creative thinking for military professionals. U.S. Army War College. Retrieved from: http://www.au.af.mil/ au/awc/awcgate/army-usawc/allen_ creative_thkg_sr_ldrs.pdf
17. Naplyokov Y. V. (2014). "An Algorithm for Maintaining Dynamic Equilibrium to Achieve Strategic Goals". Master's Thesis, U. S. Army War College, Carlisle Barracks, Pennsylvania 17013, USA.
18. Naplyokov Y. V. (2017). "Adaptation of the system through management of its center of gravity" // Public Management. — № 4 (9). — p. 139-151.
19. Retrieved from: http://vadnd.org.ua/ ua/collection/
20. Naplyokov Y. V. (2017). "Archetypical principles as a basis for non-conflicting decision-making" // Public Management. — № 3 (8). — p. 194-203. Re-
trieved from: http://vadnd.org.ua/ua/ collection/
21. Naplyokov Y. V. (2018). "Changing of mental models for effective decisionmaking" // Public Management. — № 1 (1l). — p. 189-206. Retrieved from: http://vadnd.org.ua/ua/collec-tion/
22. Headquarters, Department of the Army (2015). FM 6-0, Commander and Staff Organization and Operations. Washington, DC, USA.
список використаних джерел -
1. Jung C. G. Edited by Gerhard Adler & R. F. C. Hull. (1970). "Psychology and Religion: West and East. Collected Works of C. G. Jung". Vol. 11. Princeton, N. J.: Princeton University Press.
2. Boeree C. George. (2006) "Carl Jung." Archived from the original on 6 February 2006. Retrieved from: https://web. archive.org/web/20060206030011/ http://www.ship.edu/~cgboeree/jung. html
3. Brown R. S. (2013). "Beyond the Evolutionary Paradigm in Consciousness Studies". The Journal of Transpersonal Psychology, Vol. 45, № 2, p. 159-171.
4. Retrieved from: http://atpweb.org/jt-parchive/trps-45-13-02-159.pdf
5. Jacobi Jolande. (1959). Complex, Archetype, Symbol in the Psychology of C. G. Jung. London: Routledge & Ke-gan Paul.
6. Corlett John G. and Pearson Carol S. (2003). Mapping the Organizational Psyche — A Jungian Theory of Organizational Dynamics and Change. Gainesville, Florida: Center for Applications of Psychological Type.
7. Feist J. and Feist G J. (2009) Theories of Personality, New York New York; McGraw-Hill.
8. Freud S. (1917). "Introductory Lectures on Psycho-Analysis". The Stan-
dard Edition of the Complete Psychological Works of Sigmund Freud, Volume XVI (1916-1917).
9. Schein E. H. (2010). Organizational culture and leadership. The Jossey-Bass business & management series, (4th ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
10. Huntington Samuel P. (1993). "The Clash of Civilizations?" Foreign Affairs 72 (3), p. 22-49. 1996. The Clash of Civilizations and the Remarking of World Order. New York: Simons and Schuster.
11. Inglehart Ronald and Wayne E. Baker. (2000). "Modernization, Cultural Change, and the Persistence of Traditional Values". American Sociological Review, Vol. 65, № 1 (February, p. 1951). Retrieved from: http://www.jstor. org/stable/2657288
12. DiMaggio Paul. (1994). "Culture and Economy". p. 27-57 in the Handbook of Economic Sociology, edited by N. J. Smelser and R. Swedberg. Princeton, Princeton University Press.
13. Inglehart Ronald and Wayne E. Baker. (2000). "Modernization, Cultural Change, and the Persistence of Traditional Values". American Sociological Review, Vol. 65, № 1 (February, p. 1951). Retrieved from: http://www.jstor. org/stable/2657288
14. Maslow A. H. (1943). 'A theory of human motivation". Psychological Review. 50 (4), p. 370-396. Retrieved from: http://psychclassics.yorku.ca/ Maslow/motivation.htm
15. World Values Surveys. Retrieved from: http://www.worldvaluessur-vey.org/WVSDocumentationWV6. jsp
16. Allen C. D. (2012). "Creative Thinking for Individuals and Teams". An essay on creative thinking for military professionals. U. S. Army War College. Retrieved from: http://www.au.af.mil/ au/awc/awcgate/army-usawc/allen_ creative_thkg_sr_ldrs.pdf
17. Naplyokov Y. V. (2014). 'An Algorithm for Maintaining Dynamic Equilibrium to Achieve Strategic Goals". Master's Thesis, U.S. Army War College, Carlisle Barracks, Pennsylvania 17013, USA.
18. Naplyokov Y. V. (2017). "Adaptation of the system through management of its center of gravity" // Public Management. — № 4 (9). — P. 139-151.
19. Retrieved from: http://vadnd.org.ua/ ua/collection/
20. Naplyokov Y. V. (2017). 'Archetypical principles as a basis for non-conflicting
decision-making" // Public Management. — № 3 (8). — P. 194-203. Retrieved from: http://vadnd.org.ua/ua/ collection/
21. Naplyokov Y. V. (2018). "Changing of mental models for effective decision-making" // Public Management. — № 1 (11). — P. 189-206. Retrieved from: http://vadnd.org.ua/ua/collec-tion/
22. Headquarters, Department of the Army (2015). FM 6-0, Commander and Staff Organization and Operations. Washington, DC, USA.
