AN AXIOLOGICAL-INSTITUTIONAL APPROACH TO THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION AND CITIZENS

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.32782/tnv-pub.2023.6.6

Keywords:

public administration, citizen, state, society, social systems, civil society

Abstract

The article examines the axiological-institutional approach of the relationship between public administration and citizens. It is substantiated that the effectiveness of public management should reflect both direct and indirect management results that arise objectively. It was found that if the direct results reflect the completeness, expediency and consequences of the goals and objectives of public administration implemented in social relations, then the indirect results allow us to see their validity and conditioning, the level of their influence on other social phenomena. In addition, it is very important to separate the results obtained as a result of public management from those that may arise as a result of the action of objective and possibly spontaneous mechanisms. It was also found that the public administration system is formed under the influence of various factors, for example, the level of development of a specific society, the state of political culture, political traditions, dominant forms of religion, a specific historical situation, and even the territorial and geographical conditions of the country. A universal property of systems is their structuredness. However, the management of social processes has a number of distinctive features: hierarchical statuses of elements; purposefulness, which is formed and functions on the basis of certain norms and values (monarchical, liberal-democratic, socialist, religious, etc.); availability of self-management mechanisms in the system; self-awareness of subjects and objects of management; formal and informal relations; organization (the social system and the subsystem of public administration that provides it is always an organized whole). Therefore, it was established that the public administration system is a complex entity formed from several independent but interconnected subsystems. For example, these are: control system (entity); the system is managed (object); communication system – a system of interactions between the elements of the controlling and controlled systems: direct and feedback, vertical and horizontal, subordinating and supporting, etc.

References

Alasuutari Pertti & Kangas Anita. (2020). The global spread of the concept of cultural policy. Poetics, 82, 101445. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.poetic.2020.101445 [in English].

Castells Manuel. (1989). The informational city: Information technology, economic restructuring, and the urban-regional process. Oxford [in English].

Fukuyama Francis. (1996). Trust: The Social Virtues and The Creation of Prosperity. New York [in English].

Nonaka I., Takeuchi H. (1995). The Knowledge-Creating Company: How Japanese Companies Create the Dynamics of Innovation. Oxford [in English].

Touraine A. (1997). Pourrons-nous vivre ensemble? Egaux et differents. Paris: [in French].

Szaban J. (2007). Zachowania organizacyjne. Aspekt międzykulturowy [Organizational behavior. Intercultural aspect]. Toruń [in Polish].

Sitko-Lutek A. (2005). Kultura organizacyjna okresu transformacji. Ekonomika i Organizacja Przedsiębiorstwa, 12, 67–72. [in Polish].

Szreniawski J. (2003). Wstęp do nauki administracji [Introduction to the study of administration]. Lublin [in Polish].

Published

2023-12-28

How to Cite

Ганущин, С. Н. (2023). AN AXIOLOGICAL-INSTITUTIONAL APPROACH TO THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION AND CITIZENS. Таuridа Scientific Herald. Series: Public Management and Administration, (6), 39-45. https://doi.org/10.32782/tnv-pub.2023.6.6