Public Administration Efficiency

Introduction

Chapter 1. General theoretical problems of public administration efficiency

1.1. Management as a social phenomenon

1.2. The specifics of public administration

1.3. Goals, functions and principles of public administration

1.4. Features of public administration in the Russian Federation

Chapter 2. Mechanisms for improving the efficiency of public administration

2.1 Socio-political aspect of efficiency

2.2. Efficiency as a way of anti-crisis existence and development

2.3 Subjective factor in improving the efficiency of public administration

2.4 Information aspect of efficiency improvement

2.5 Regional aspect of efficiency improvement

Conclusion

Bibliography

Introduction

The realities of the existence of our society at the present time, the harsh reality to which everyone is forced to adapt, are directly dependent on the effectiveness of public administration and are inextricably linked with it. In any society, there is interaction between the state and society, the quality and level of which is determined by the effectiveness of management policy. If public administration is to succeed, it must provide citizens with a comfortable existence in accordance with the promises that made this administration legitimate. It is no secret that such actions in a situation of limited resources (both personnel and material) are very difficult. The task of providing for the needs of the whole society, and even more so in the current situation, is almost insoluble. It should be emphasized that in order to solve this problem, state structures in many respects have management systems that are inadequate for solving this problem. The organization of mutually beneficial and effective cooperation with the private sector and the public requires a reorganization, or rather, a restructuring of the public administration system.

Of course, this problem is the most acute and fundamental, and, as a result, almost insoluble in the context of world politics. People have suffered, are suffering and will continue to suffer from the inefficiency of state organizations. It is an indisputable fact that in Russia there is no core thought in organizing the structure of state administration, or, to be more precise, effective public administration. The system of governance, the distribution of power, in the end, our basic law-the Constitution is the quintessence of world experience, but experience not adapted to the specifics of our country, such experience can be described as an ordinary, thoughtless tracing paper.

In this context, a very reasonable conclusion suggests itself, and here it is appropriate to paraphrase the words of the genius M. Bulgakov, put into the mouth of Professor Preobrazhensky - “ destruction starts from the head!” If we consider the state from the point of view of the social mechanism, then this metaphor is optimal for assessing the relevance of the topic "Efficiency of public administration".

In this work, the works related to advanced developments in the field of ensuring the effectiveness of public administration, our scientists and foreign specialists, were used. Among the Russian specialists in the field of public administration, I would like to note the following names: G. V. Atamanchuk, V. Ignatov. Relating to the latest research of Western scientists and practitioners on the issue of improving the efficiency of public administration are the works used in this work by M. Holzer, Mary E. Guy, Daniel V. Martin. I want to make a reservation right away that Western literature, unfortunately, does not reveal the specifics of public administration within Russia; more precisely, Western authors are not interested in this specifics to the right extent. It is very important not to take all the achievements in the field of Western specialists as a role model. A comparative analysis of the role of the state in the social processes of Russia and Western European countries shows, even at first glance, that it is unacceptable to suppress many state functions and withdraw from the performance of one's duties, which leads to a weakening, not strengthening, of our statehood. But, of course, knowledge and application of Western experience, where possible, is necessary. The literature of our authors allows us to identify the specifics of public administration in Russia, to conduct in-depth historical research and to identify the factors that affect public administration. Thus, the combination and analytical approach to these sources provides fertile ground for in-depth scientific research.

The purpose of this scientific study is to search for and designate resources that could be used to improve the efficiency of public administration, and to consider the mechanisms that contribute to this, taking into account the specifics of our state.

To achieve this goal, I have set the following tasks:

Define the very concept of "management". Consider the specifics of public administration. To identify the components of the effectiveness of public administration. To characterize the formation process and the factors that originally influence public administration in the Russian Federation. Outline ways to improve the efficiency of public administration in the Russian Federation.

The subject of the study is the specificity of public administration as a factor determining the crisis-free existence and future development of the Russian Federation.

The object of the research is management as a social phenomenon and public administration in the Russian Federation.

When developing this problem, I used the following methods: historical method, analysis method, synthesis method.

Chapter 1. General theoretical problems of public administration efficiency

1.1 Management as a social phenomenon

Starting to study the content and features of public administration, it is necessary first of all to determine what is governance? .. This term has become a universal means of characterizing a certain type of activity, i.e. a set of actions performed in order to achieve the relevant socially significant goals.

In the broadest sense, management means leading something (or someone). In a similar sense, it is interpreted in our days. However, it is not enough to confine oneself to such a statement. There is a need to disclose the content of this manual, its functional significance. General theoretical positions, including cybernetic ones, provide sufficient grounds for the following conclusions:

Management is a function of organized systems of various nature (biological, technical, social), ensuring their integrity, i.e. achievement of the tasks facing them, preservation of their structure, maintenance of the mode of their activity. Management serves the interests of the interaction of the elements that make up this or that system and represent a single whole with tasks common to all elements. Management is the internal quality of an integral system, the main elements of which are the subject (managing element) and the object (managed element), constantly interacting on the basis of self-organization (self-management). Management involves not only the internal interaction of the elements that make up the system. There are many interacting integral systems of various hierarchical levels, which implies the implementation of management functions, both intra-system and inter-system. In the latter case, a higher-order system acts as a subject of control in relation to a lower-order system, which is an object of control within the framework of interaction between them. Management in its essence is reduced to the control action of the subject on the object, the content of which is the ordering of the system, ensuring its functioning in full accordance with the laws of its existence and development. This is a purposeful ordering influence, implemented in the relations between the subject and the object and carried out directly by the subject of management. Control is real when there is a known subordination of the object to the subject of control, of the controlled element of the system to its control element. Consequently, the control (ordering) impact is the prerogative of the subject of control.

These are the main features that characterize the general concept of management. They are fully acceptable, and for understanding management in the social (public) sphere, where people and their various associations act as subjects and objects of management (for example, the state, society, territorial entity, public associations, production and non-production facilities, family, etc.) etc.) Of course, this takes into account the features of the social sphere, the most important of which is that managerial ties are realized through people's relations. Society is an integral organism with a complex structure, with various kinds of individual manifestations, as well as with functions of a general nature. Hence the need to express the general connection and unity of social processes, which finds its manifestation in the implementation of social management. It is one of the leading conditions for the normal functioning and development of society.

Social management as an attribute of social life is expressed in features predetermined by common features inherent in management as a scientific category, as well as by the features of the organization of social life. (1 p. 41) The most significant are the following:

1. Social management exists only where the joint activity of people is manifested. By itself, this kind of activity (industrial and other) is not yet able to ensure the necessary interaction of its participants, the uninterrupted and effective implementation of the common tasks facing them, the achievement of common goals. Management organizes people specifically for joint activities and certain teams and organizationally draws them up.

2. Social management, with its main purpose, has an ordering effect on the participants in joint activities, giving organization to the interaction of people. At the same time, the coordination of individual actions of the participants in joint activities is ensured, as well as the general functions necessary for regulating such activities and directly arising from its nature (for example, planning, coordination, control, etc.) are performed.

3. Social management has as the main object of influence the behavior (actions) of participants in joint activities, their relationships. These are the criteria of a conscious-volitional nature, in which the guidance of people's behavior is mediated.

4. Social management, acting as a regulator of people's behavior, achieves this goal within the framework of public relations, which are essentially managerial relations. They arise, first of all, between the subject and the object in connection with the practical implementation of the functions of social management.

5. Social management is based on a certain subordination of the wills of people - participants in managerial relations, because their relationship has a conscious-volitional mediation. The will of the rulers takes precedence over the will of the governed. Hence - the imperiousness of social management, which means that the subject of management forms and implements the "dominating will", and the object obeys it. This is how the power-volitional moment of social control is expressed. Therefore, power is a specific means that ensures that the will of the governed is followed by the will of the rulers. This is how the volitional regulation of people's behavior takes place, and in the conditions of the state organization of social life, the necessary "intervention" of state power in social relations is ensured.

Social management needs a special mechanism for its implementation, which embodies the subjects of management. The role of such is played by a certain group of people, organizationally formalized in the form of appropriate governing bodies (public or state), or individual persons authorized to do so. Their activity, which has a specific purpose and special forms of expression, is managerial.

Management, understood in the social sense, is diverse. In the broadest sense, it can be understood as a mechanism for organizing social relations. In a similar sense, we can say that its tasks and functions are practically performed by all state bodies, regardless of their specific purpose, as well as public associations. An element of the social management system is also local government. The object of control here is the whole society as a whole, all the variants of social relations developing in it.

Social management also has a special meaning. In this version, it is usually characterized as public administration, which is understood as a specific type of state activity that distinguishes it from other manifestations (for example, legislative, judicial, prosecutorial activities), as well as from the management activities of public associations and other non-state formations (labor collectives, commercial structures, etc.).

PAGE_BREAK--

1.2 The specifics of public administration

Many authors recognize the nature and substantive specifics of management subjects as the basis for types of management, on the basis of which they distinguish between public administration (the subject of control actions is the state), public administration (the subject of control actions is society and its structures) management (the subject of control actions is an entrepreneur, owner) (8, p. 34). Among all types of government, public administration occupies a special place, as it is characterized only by its inherent properties. Let's consider the most important of them: 1. The state, acting as a subject of management, gives the state management an important property, without which it could not take place. This is a property of the system. How else could the management of huge masses of both human and material resources be carried out. This property is fundamental because only if it is present, consistency, coordination, purposefulness and efficiency can be carried out.

2. The decisive influence on the nature of the impacts carried out by this type of management is exerted by its subject, that is, the state, and the power inherent in it. Thus, referring to the modern Concise Philosophical Encyclopedia, the state is understood as "a structure of domination, which is constantly renewed as a result of the joint actions of people, actions performed through representation, and which, ultimately, streamlines social actions in one area or another." The state differs from public structures in that it implements state power in relation to people, which has legal conditionality (legitimacy) in its source, and in its implementation the power of the state apparatus, which has the means of coercion. This is a forceful pressure, which leads to the fact that the goals set in the management, the organizational moments contained in it, and the norms established by it must be fulfilled. Consequently, all the problems associated with public administration are of a historical nature: what is the state, what and how does it do, what goals does it set for itself.

3. These are, of course, the boundaries of the spread of state administration. Such boundaries can be defined as passing not within the framework of the whole society, but going beyond its framework and manifesting themselves in the foreign policy of a given state. The normal version of the relationship between the state and society is characterized by the fact that the public life of people has a large amount of freedom and self-government, while the boundaries of this autonomy are determined by both public institutions and the state. That is, the state, through legislation, establishes the basic types and norms of people's behavior in all spheres of life and ensures their observance by its power. In this context, the problem is "the prevalence of public administration in society", since here we will not talk about technological changes, but about analyzing the state of society itself, from its ability to self-regulate and adapt to something new. This maxim leads us to the conclusion that public administration will retain its influence on society, but the depth of this influence is a question. It is important to note that this influence will be called upon to reflect and reproduce in itself the state of society. Thus, management should be in a correlative relationship with the process and phenomena to which it directs its goal-setting, organizing and regulatory influences.

So, Public administration - this is the practical, organizing and regulating influence of the state on the social life of people in order to streamline, preserve or transform it, based on its power.

The term "public administration" is widely used in domestic and foreign scientific literature, as well as in the legislation of many countries. For more than 70 years, it has been used in our country, thus giving constitutional grounds for singling out this type of state activity.

1.3 Purpose, functions and principles of public administration

The assessment and analysis of the state of public administration in the Russian Federation and the search for solutions to improve the productivity of public administration in the current situation in the Russian Federation are hampered by the lack of clarification of a number of socio-political and especially aggravated economic problems that act as objective grounds for public administration itself. At the moment, we must answer fundamental questions, without a clear understanding of the answers to which public administration as a technology for their implementation is of little importance. You need to decide on the following points:

1. In what direction are we moving?

In this context, it is necessary to answer the questions that are conceptual, system-forming: Decide what kind of society we want to build and really can. Determine the adequacy of the resources that we have and characterize the political will that we have. Yes, definitely on this stage there is a restructuring of the socio-economic formation, there has been a transition to private property, we are in the plane of market relations and live in a democratic country with all the shortcomings of this model within our specific society. But these values ​​and conquests are a common choice and very vague. Based on the choice in favor of these values, it is impossible to build and formulate a new concept of public administration. It is necessary to determine the specifics of our society and distinguish between the general and the particular within the framework of world experience. Here one should take into account a huge range of factors: from historical specifics to the peculiarities of the mentality.

2. What are the origins of the society we are transforming?

As we can see, this question organically echoes the previous one, since the choice of the path includes the selection and preservation of elements of accumulated knowledge and their intended use. After all, one cannot completely reject the ideas of socialism and consider that they are not in demand. Many of the ideas and principles of socialism have been adopted and put into practice in many countries. As an example, we can take the ideas of F. D. Roosevelt's "new" course. This means that we need a deeper and more critical analysis, it is necessary to isolate what is functional for the development of the future society, and what has revealed its failure. We need to rank public elements, select elements that can be adapted. For more than 10 years we have been living in a transitional society and the system of state administration must be adapted to the interests of the entire social composition of society and in no case should social antagonism be allowed.

3. What actions should be taken during the transition period?

This question is quite logical, since the achievement of any goals is always associated with the use of appropriate means, resources, forms and methods, and to a certain extent they leave their mark on the final result. One can talk about a large number of this kind of experience in modern society and consider the history of actions taken to get out of a crisis, transitional society through the prism of analogies, but this consideration loses its problematics, since the specificity of our country is lost, on the basis of which the consideration takes place.

So, it is expedient to dwell on the fundamental and very difficult stage in the formation of the goals of public administration. As you know, goals perform extensive incentive, stimulating and regulatory functions. The goals of public administration arise on the basis of the goals underlying the life of a given society. They are derived from the goals of society. (6, p. 5)

Goals of public administration in modern Russia.

Ensuring the internal and external security of the country. Development and strengthening of public institutions that ensure sustainable and reliable democratic development of the country. Constitutional protection of the rights and freedoms of citizens of the Russian Federation, general administrative and legal regulation. Formation of state policy aimed at improving the well-being of people. Maintaining a positive environmental environment. Maintenance of market mechanisms. Competent, mutually beneficial cooperation between the regions and the center.

This is only a very general overview of the purposes that public administration is intended to serve. But it is paramount to create a "tree of goals", which would include operational and strategic, final and intermediate, general and particular goals. Goals should be a symbiosis, a synthesis, that is, a kind of integrity. But, this integrity must be combined with adequate means, methods and forms of their implementation, because otherwise even correctly set goals in the process of their implementation will be distorted.

- objectively conditioned types of imperious, goal-setting, organizing and regulating influences of the state on social processes. This is a specific impact of the state, and it is important to note that it is holistic. (7 p. 18) The set of public administration functions is influenced by at least 2 factors: the state, structure, self-governance of social processes, that is, the totality of managed objects, and, of course, the place and role of the state in society. Thus, it can be concluded that the state, and public administration as its derivative, is, on the one hand, the element that carries out violence, that is, the so-called "legitimate violence", and on the other hand, it plays a role subordinate to society and is determined by the needs , desires and interests of social development. Speaking of such a contradiction, I would like to take a step towards limitation and substitution, or rather, at the first moment, in general, about the elimination of this function (I mean "violence"). But, having eliminated this function, it is necessary to fill the vacant place with something, and here only the mechanism of self-government comes to mind, otherwise we will be faced with the fact that the organizing and regulatory mechanisms will be devalued and the so-called vacuum of control will come, that is, chaos , arbitrary

Thus, we should talk about the development, selection and evaluation of those public institutions that are able to take on the functions of public administration and ensure their proper implementation. The best option would be to find some kind of balance, since in modern society we are witnessing a reduction in the public sector (privatization is currently considered one of the main ways to increase efficiency in the public sector), but on the other hand, an increase in the role of state regulation in the organization and policy development in the sphere of organization of market relations.

Functions of public administration

Planning function.(At the same time, you need to answer the question of what, how, where, when the goal is achieved. A strategically important function.) organization function.(Creating conditions for the interaction of people that bring the desired result.) Control function.(A function aimed at ensuring that a person within an organization performs an appropriate amount of activity.) Personnel function.(More and more attention is paid to this function in world practice.) Control function.(The so-called feedback for all listed functions.)

Unfortunately, the postulate of neoconservatives about universal market regulation penetrating all spheres of public life within the framework of our country cannot be confirmed. Here it is important to determine the specific functions of the state so that these functions are not left to the mercy of market mechanisms, but to make sure that the state determines the scope of these functions at the federal level and at the level of market mechanisms. Efficiency in this case should be carried out at the level of taxes, benefits, investments - this is control in the sphere of a market economy. I refer to specific functions: scientific and technological development, control and regulation of the sphere of labor relations and, of course, the financial system. These functions stand apart and require the strictest control by the state, otherwise we can talk about a threat to the country's security. That is, when implementing them, it is necessary to take into account all the features of the country's development, its specifics.

It is no secret that many transformations and transformations in public administration are chaotic and very subjective. There is no methodologically holistic approach to public administration, and this should be recognized. We are placed in a situation where there is no comprehensive mechanism for the creation and transformation of structures both at the federal and local levels. In this context, it is necessary to talk about the principles of public administration. So, principle(from the Latin "principium" - origin, foundation) as a concept of theory reflects the regularities, relationships, relationships between its elements in the system of public administration. (8 p. 186). That is, those laws and relations of socio-political life, content, organizational structure and life of the components of public administration, expressed in the form of certain scientific provisions, fixed in the majority by law and used in the theoretical and practical management activities of people. First of all, in the problem of the principles of public administration, 3 interrelated and interdependent aspects can be distinguished: analysis of the nature of the principles, language, logic and structure of their adequate scientific interpretation) Methodological (indicates the mechanisms of theoretical and practical application principles) It is obvious that at the moment it is impossible to talk about the complete knowledge of all patterns, relationships and interconnections and their description by means of principles. The practical implementation of the principles of state administration does not depend on them themselves, but is determined by the attitude of people towards them. It is not so important to know the principles, but to be able to use them in practical activities, in practical management. Since the principle of public administration is called upon, first in a scientific, and then in a legal form, to express patterns, relationships, relationships that objectively exist in public administration and are of particular importance for its organization and functioning. Speaking about the technology of identifying and substantiating the principles of public administration, we can offer the following indicators, requirements: - Reflect essential patterns, relationships and relationships.

Continuation
--PAGE_BREAK--

Regularities, relationships and interconnections must be stable Regularities, relations and interconnections must be inherent in public administration as an integral social phenomenon.

Reflect the specifics of public administration.

Considering the systematization of the principles of public administration, one can observe some heterogeneity, which indicates great difficulties in this area. This paper uses the systematization borrowed from the work of G. V. Atamanchuk "Theory of Public Administration": Principles of public administration.

Socio-political(formulated as a result of knowledge of the social nature of public administration, general patterns and main features of its development) Functional-structural(revealing the regularities of the structure of state control actions) Organizational and structural(reflecting the nature, patterns and specifics of the organizational structure of public administration and serving as starting points in its formation and improvement, as well as in the organization of state-administrative influences)

4. State-administrative activity ( revealing patterns, relations and interrelations of methods of forms and stages of management activities of state bodies in the formation and implementation of managerial functions.) The issue of the distribution of managerial powers between state authorities is conceptual, central for Russia at all stages of its development, since it accumulates several especially actual problems:

Ensuring democracy and rationality of public administration throughout the country. Federal construction of public administration. Integrity, rationality, efficiency of public administration. The unity of legislative regulation and differentiation of the application of legal norms depending on specific conditions, factors and circumstances. The strength of the state-legal foundations.

It is important to formulate a strategic and operational concept of systemic public administration, since, unfortunately, now we are seeing a picture when power is an element of bargaining and its redistribution on a state scale is opportunistic, political in nature, when the granting of certain powers is a moment some political blackmail. In this context, two actors of this so-called game can be singled out: the federal center and the regional authorities. As we can see, historical analogies are clearly traced in the problem posed, which confirms the thesis about the poor historical memory of those who until recently saw the liquidation of the union center as a panacea for all ills.

Since the problems of building a system that is for the most part workable, capable of self-regulation and adaptation, are not solved at the federal level, this is thus projected onto the regional, and then to the local level.

Thus, the question of the goals, functions and principles of public administration is the most important when trying to create a system of effective public administration.

1.4 Features of public administration in modern Russia

Earlier in the work, the thesis about the historical component of public administration and its undoubted influence on the whole reality was put forward and proved. Thus, we are faced with a new research problem - this is the question of the specifics of public administration in Russia and its expression. The concept of public administration cannot be formed without taking into account the special and unique that is objectively inherent in it due to the uniqueness of historical, geographical, industrial, ethnic and other grounds. But paying such great attention to the specifics, one cannot ignore the typical, universal that should be inherent in the Russian state, as an integral part of the world community and a country developing in line with the universal culture. It is very important that only the merging of these properties in the Russian statehood opens the way to the widespread use of world experience, to the identification of certain state administrative institutions, and at the same time, to the preservation, reproduction and development of a purely national, original, peculiar only to Russia. A reasonable synthesis and its efficient use is the solution to the problem. (22 p. 64). But these intentions are easily declared and far from easily achieved. Based on this, we will try to isolate these features, since without defining them, an analysis of the problems of effective public administration is hardly possible.

So, let's try to identify several planes within which it is possible to analyze the specifics, features of public administration in Russia 1. Of course, this issue should be considered through the prism of centuries-old traditions. This, of course, is the political culture of the population and the ruling elite, to a greater or lesser extent, which determines the features of the problem under consideration. It is not necessary that these traditions determine the process of state administration. There is no doubt, however, that the failure to take them into account, which is possible in a relatively short historical period of time, ultimately creates a situation that does not give the right to scientific analysis. The public administration of Russia has a long history, in which a set of certain constants, constantly operating trends can be seen. Russia almost always (with the exception of short periods of unrest, civil war) had a rigidly centralized government. The correlation of power-administrative functions (making decisions) was shifted in favor of the center, where, in turn, everything or almost everything was concentrated around one person and the apparatus directly working for this person. In this context, the question of a different, more rational redistribution of power between the center and localities (provinces, administrative units) practically did not arise. The latter were given the role of the direct executor of the center's decisions; the implementation of these decisions was the main criterion for evaluating the effectiveness of the actions of local administrative figures (governors, governors, governors, first secretaries).

A reasonable question arises: “Is this tradition irresistible and justified? “The question is also legitimate whether centralization is a necessary and natural state for the country.

The same obvious feature of the Russian tradition of public administration is the tradition of authoritarianism and unity of command embedded in society. The concentration of political power levers around one person in the center, the dominance, the predominance of this person in making political decisions, created, in particular, the absence of a system of checks and balances, compromises and deals as the norms of the political process, a tendency to eliminate independent, autonomous, authoritative, competing on political scene with the first persons of structures, personalities. The need to abandon authoritarianism in Russia's political practice is obvious.

The state administration of Russia operates in an environment that is distinguished by its political culture, which influences the actions of those who determine the political process, behavior, actions of the masses, and the nature of state institutions. In this regard, it should first of all be taken into account that the genetic population of Russia is people who have historically come out of the rural environment, retaining to a certain extent the imprints of rural culture, transformed by the current industrial age and the socialist way of life.

This is the absence of a developed civil society in Russia, that is, self-governing social units that are outside the state, as a special apparatus of government. The formation of such a society causes the authorities to strive to integrate the emerging social structures into state mechanisms, which completely disavows the original meaning of these social formations.

The historical heritage of Russia also gave rise to a certain type of mass attitude towards foreign countries, associated with the constant confrontation between Russia and its environment, the struggle for survival, the spread of Russian possessions across the territory of Eurasia, the desire of the country's leaders to attach the Russian state (to a lesser extent - society) to the forms and norms of advanced civilizations .

The Russian state tradition is multinational in nature, reflecting the centuries-old contacts of ethnic Russians with neighboring Slavic and other peoples, with several world civilizations. Multinational character Russian statehood contains both the habit of interacting and of conflicting. The state practice of governing the country constantly deals with the national factor, requires that it be carefully taken into account, that policies and decisions be developed taking it into account; see constantly an alternative to destabilization in conditions fraught with deterioration of the general socio-economic situation in the country; take into account in decision-making, in managerial practice the factors of differences in cultural heritage, in the religious denominations of the population, in civilizational criteria.

2. What is also beyond doubt is the consideration of the realities of life at the current stage of development. The analysis of this factor is necessary insofar as it allows, on the one hand, to build the development of solutions to the problem posed on a real foundation, on the other hand, it makes it possible to take into account the transient, characteristic only for the present moment, to focus on the real key issues optimization of mechanisms and structures of public administration.

Considering the problem in this plane, from the point of view of today's realities, I would like to note the following features of the current situation. difficulties. Here, as it were, there is a double standard: On the one hand, most people wanted changes in the direction of increasing rights, and on the other hand, no one wanted to put the redistribution of state responsibilities on their shoulders. Here I would like to give a banal example. Standing up for freedom and equality, people did not see that having these, they would have to give up a significant share of social security, which is quite natural. It should be noted that our country has accumulated a significant resource of education and intellectual potential. For a number of indicators, such as literacy, enrollment in the exact sciences, this potential is higher than the world average. However, this factor also became a stimulus for the crisis, being perceived by educated circles, carriers of the achievements of scientific and technological progress, as an anomaly, due to the fact that progress in the field of education, in the intellectual sphere did not lead to an appropriate assessment of the quality of work, was not supported by appropriate organizational and managerial conditions. .

The optimization of the structures and mechanisms of federal and regional government should especially concern the regional level of government in the Russian Federation. The need to move away from the ultimate concentration of power and resources around the center, the mechanisms for the transfer of resources and powers from top to bottom have been mastered only "in the first approximation." It is difficult to establish new managerial ties both vertically and horizontally. Instead of managing decentralization processes, there is a spontaneous struggle to seize power from the center in favor of the regions, the subjects of the Federation.

The Russian Federation is currently experiencing the impact of the legacy of the USSR. In practice, the apparatus of state administration was inherited from the Soviet one, both in terms of personal (symptomatically, the retention of the term “cadres” that appeared in the 30s to describe the personnel of the state apparatus) and, to a large extent, managerial structures and their qualities. The mentality and habits of the former apparatus have been preserved, along with tendencies towards corruption, bureaucratization, the desire to subjugate both citizens and the emerging institutions of civil society. The administrative apparatus operates in an environment of weak regulation, lack of control on the part of society; he is not protected by regulations that provide him with “immunity” against political changes in power structures. The public service as a social and legal institution has not been created.

Now we see especially clearly, after the crisis of August 17, that the main task of state administration is the task of effective management of production. This date, as it were, became the "Rubicon" of understanding.

Mass moods are marked by a significant amount of apathy, detachment from political institutions and elites. The connections of the ruling groups, political parties with the population are poorly developed. Attempts were expressed to impose speculative schemes on society, to manipulate public opinion , which reinforces the nihilism of the public regarding the cynicism of power structures. The trust of the population in politics, in political leaders, after the experience of the last year, will have to be earned for a long time. At the same time, the expectations in the mass are undeniable, built around the possibility of the appearance charismatic leader capable of solving the problems of society at once.

Breaking the social structure = breaking the goal-setting of this society. A primordially Russian question arises: “What to do? » When the socialist-communist landmarks are lost, there is no meaningful consensus in public opinion as to what should be put forward as their replacement. The same applies to the life values ​​of the individual. The widespread fascination with commerce, business, or, to be more precise, with easy money, can hardly claim in the moral aspect for the universality of goals in Russian society. In addition, the slow and difficult transition to the market devalues ​​its values, along with the ideals of democracy. And more and more often one hears talk about a “strong hand”.

This is not the whole list of those ailments that struck our society, or rather, permanently present in our lives for the second decade.

3. Accounting for the solution of problems of public administration in the context of the global aspect. World experience provides not only and not so much knowledge of possible solutions to specific management problems. The global context makes it possible to build the proposed solutions in such a way as to “guess” the trends that are making their way around the world, preserve the Russian identity and use truly optimal options for solving the problems of public administration.

Continuation
--PAGE_BREAK--

Historically and geopolitically, Russia is a decisive factor in the processes on the Eurasian continent. Its influence on the peoples inhabiting this area is great and inevitable. In Russian society, the question of the applicability of world-famous models of development and organization to Russia is rather sharply debated. Accusations of blind copying of a particular model are very common and quite justified. It is methodologically incorrect to consider it possible to apply any specific macro model of a state or socio-economic structure to a country other than the one on the basis of which the model under consideration was formed: each of them bears the unique imprint of the country that gave birth to it. It is obvious that the Russian model of the future device will be specific and original. At the same time, it is methodologically valuable to use foreign experience to find a way out of a crisis situation, to solve the problems facing the country.

In this regard, we again return to the question posed at the beginning of the work - “What are we moving towards? ". The answer to this question makes it possible to concentrate efforts on the path of reformation. In line with this, the concept of public administration in Russia should be based on the decision to strategically key task development of society - on rational use the intellectual, technological, economic potential created in the country for entering the world high-tech market, gaining competitive positions and sales markets there. Such a strategy presupposes bringing under the modern intellectual and technological potential of the country an appropriate information base, new technologies, without which a lag and loss to competitors is inevitable. In turn, it is strategically important to maintain those positions on which the intellectual and technological potential of the changing Russia is built: infrastructure, traditional institutions, the potential of education, science, and technology. Here, anticipatory state thinking, assistance and managerial decisions in the sense of a protectionist policy are needed.

Conclusions to the first chapter

Public administration has its own distinct specifics. Public administration is social administration. The system of effective public administration must have clear goals, functions and principles.

4. The inefficiency of public administration has its own deep historical overtones.

5. Public administration should be in a correlative relationship with the process and phenomena to which it directs its goal-setting, organizing and regulatory influences.

Chapter 2 Mechanisms for Improving the Efficiency of Public Administration

2.1 Socio-political aspect of efficiency

The effectiveness of public administration, as already noted, is not a purely technological problem, but a problem with historical overtones. That is, inefficient public administration is a consequence of the social structure that cannot be included in active social mechanisms Most people.

It is important to understand the essence of the social system, because this means understanding the content, alignment and correlation of social forces in the country, the correlation of their interests, the essence of social contradictions and the tasks arising from this understanding that face society as a whole (for its survival and sustainable, stable development) and before public political forces capable of solving these problems. In our political science literature, the two dominant methods of determining the content of the social order are most common, the sources of which, according to the general opinion, are Marx, on the one hand, and Tocqueville, on the other. The first way: to see the content, the essence, the root system of the social system - in the economy, in property relations. In this case, the main "ideal types" of the modern system are: a private property society - "capitalism" and a public property society - "socialism" (with possible variations between these two main poles). Differences in the forms of political power, features of political regimes in this system of theoretical coordinates are of little significance. This was the point of view of the official social science of the country of "real socialism". And another way of definition: to see the basis, the essence of the social system - in politics, in the political system, in the regime of power. Start from the “priority of politics” - as Raymond Aron calls. And here - their two "ideal types": "democracy" and "totalitarianism". In this system of theoretical coordinates, property relations are secondary and insignificant for understanding the essence of the social system. (9 p. 7) The real content, the real face of the social system is determined by a combination of these two factors (economics and politics, the type of property and the type of power). Moreover, we are talking about factors that are not in a state of unilateral determination in relation to each other. They (and their specific relationship) are determined by other, more deeply underlying circumstances (their interaction is, of course, based on a certain “third common” - what, perhaps, can be designated as “culture”. These factors, interacting with each other (in different eras in different ways) and determine, first of all, the specific face of the social system, the nature of social communities and types of interaction (20 p. 81).In this regard, we need to analyze the stages of the formation of the social system in our country and then we will discover the essence, the specifics of what hinders the improvement of the efficiency of public administration: 1. In the 1920s, the social system was taking shape, being adjusted, or other variants were being tested: war communism, the NEP, state capitalism (in that peculiar interpretation of it - when the state is “proletarian”, and private property, elements of the market and capitalism are “allowed” in the economy) , mixed multilayer economic system etc. By the end of the 1920s, a historic choice had been made. 2.1930-1953 - It was a system, from the point of view of economic, state-nomenklatura property, and from the point of view of political - a system of totalitarianism.

3.1953-1985 - Economic shifts within the nomenclature market, since not only the occupied place is equated to the number of services, but there is an exchange of privileges and benefits. The economic change also entailed a political change: totalitarianism softened, turned into “authoritarianism” (with some isolation of the named “market” relations from ideology and politics).

4. The middle of the 1980s - two “reformist” tendencies developed, which at that time were not yet separated from each other and together supported the Gorbachev leadership. This is the trend of “nomenklatura reformism” and the movement of popular, democratic reformism. Outwardly, in general view, their demands coincided: a change in economic relations, forms of ownership, defined as the denationalization of property, privatization, the market; and changing political attitudes from totalitarianism (and authoritarianism) to democracy.

5. Late 80s - early 90s. Here lies a significant, conceptual miscalculation that stimulated the structure of society, when the majority of the population turned into social outsiders. Reforms were necessary, the declared tasks did not coincide with reality. E. Gaidar in his book "The State and Evolution" described his reforms as follows: "transition from bureaucratic to open market", "from hidden, nomenklatura to open, democratic, privatization", "from state-monopoly capitalism to open capitalism". And as a result, we moved from "nomenklatura" to "semi-democratic capitalism." Privatization, as its authors now confirm, was insufficiently thought out and did not take into account the specifics of our country. The result was a variant when privatization was not only not a form of overcoming “nomenklatura capitalism”, but, on the contrary, a way of consolidating and strengthening it. It secured not only de facto (as it was before), but also de jure huge amounts of property in the hands of the nomenklatura and carried out the alienation of the overwhelming majority of the population from property.

Thus, we can conclude that one of the significant reasons for the inefficiency of public administration is the lack of involvement of a large mass of people in economic, political, social activities, which is projected onto the entire social reality.

2.2 Efficiency as a way of anti-crisis existence and development

In studies conducted by the North Caucasian Academy of Public Administration, the effectiveness of public administration is seen as the result of a complex interaction of various factors, among which the dominant position is occupied by human, social and environmental factors. From this point of view, the effectiveness of power should be assessed by the degree of protection of the balanced interests of society and the state: “The work of the state apparatus can be recognized as really effective only if it successfully solves the problem of optimal protection of the interests of the state and optimal protection of the interests of the population, social groups and each person. In this dual task is the most important side of the concept of the effectiveness of the state apparatus "(27 p. 84) Thus, we can try to identify the following criteria for the effectiveness of social management: and managerial status.

The legitimacy of decisions and actions of the relevant management structures and employees, because compliance with legal and other established norms is an elementary prerequisite for effective management.

The reality of the influence of management activities on the state and development of management objects, since any management decisions and actions lose all meaning if they are not directed at management objects and, ultimately, do not provide real functioning and development; - the depth of consideration and expression in managerial decisions and actions of the fundamental and complex needs, interests and goals of people - the nature and extent of relationships with labor collectives, a wide range of people, the democracy of activity, which at any cost always increases its validity and effectiveness; - credibility of decisions and actions of management structures and employees; - the veracity and expediency of management information issued by management structures and employees.

Thus, one can draw a sad, but very honest and adequate conclusion to the situation - public administration in modern Russia is a model of low efficiency. In this regard, it is appropriate to recall the assessment that was given to the situation in Russia in the conclusion of the Constitutional Judge of the Russian Federation “On the state of constitutional legality in the Russian Federation”, sent on March 5, 1993 to the Supreme Council of the Russian Federation: “Russia is going through one of the most difficult periods in its history. The economy is in decline. The economic and social rights of citizens are not secured, and inter-ethnic conflicts are not weakening. Crime is on the rise. Radical movements pursuing unconstitutional goals are gaining strength. The state apparatus is plagued by corruption. Legal nihilism has become widespread even among the highest officials Russian Federation and its subjects. People's dissatisfaction with the inaction of the authorities, the confrontation between them threatens to turn into a social explosion. The constitutional order of the Russian state is under threat. (28) The search and implementation of the most important ways to improve the efficiency of public administration is a necessary objective prerequisite for preventing and overcoming a crisis of power and administration, which is vital not only for further development, but even for the preservation of Russian statehood.

In this regard, it seems necessary to identify those features that most strongly affect the low efficiency of public administration and that can aggravate the crisis situation that has developed in Russia.

1. In September 1997, speaking at the first meeting of the autumn session of the Federation Council, the President of the Russian Federation B. N. Yeltsin made a very important statement about the need for a “new economic order”, in accordance with which the mechanism of the market and state regulation would work smoothly. Unfortunately, however, it took 6 years to be convinced of the inefficiency of destructive measures and to draw a conclusion that obviously follows from the history of our country and the developed capitalist countries: "... we must increase the role of the state in the economy ... We are resolutely moving from a policy of non-intervention to a policy of proactive regulation of economic processes, control over vital industries and the efficiency of spending budget funds. This is ... the return of the state to a well-thought-out economic strategy. Now it is it that begins to determine the main directions of economic activity." (29) Although the declared intentions in 1997 did not lead to real actions, nevertheless, time showed the correctness of this judgment and the need for action in this direction, but alas, in our reality, understanding usually comes after.

2. Frequent confrontation between representative and executive authorities at all levels. Often, disagreements between the executive and legislative bodies have to be resolved in the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation and in local authorities judicial power. Here we should note the numerous use of the right of veto by the president, which indicates a different understanding of the way effective development public administration, and, consequently, the development of the state as a whole.

3. Increasingly, the question of the relationship between the center and the subjects of the federation, their revision is emerging. The adoption of the Constitution of the Russian Federation in 1993 and the signing of agreements between the Russian Federation and the constituent entities of the Federation largely eased internal political tension in the sphere of federalism. However, they were signed without the consent of other subjects of the Federation, without taking into account their interests, with insufficient development of the principles for delineating powers and subjects of jurisdiction. There is still a lot to be done in Russia to create a federal structure that will ensure the real strength and stability of the unity and territorial integrity of the country, the effectiveness of the activities of federal and regional authorities and administration.

Continuation
--PAGE_BREAK--

4. These are the eternal problems of Russia, which the President of the Russian Federation Boris N. Yeltsin noted so concisely and very clearly in his speech at the Federal Assembly. "Crime today brazenly creeps into politics and dictates its own laws there. Dubious personalities are striving for power. They are helped in this by dishonest officials." (29) The problem of bureaucratic corruption is a global problem that has particularly affected Russia and has acquired exaggerated proportions in Russia.

5. This problem was again identified, or rather, its urgency was reproduced back in 1995 by the highest official of the Russian Federation in his message to the Federal Assembly: "Power in Russia will be effective only when it becomes open, understandable and predictable, when it learns to respond to people's pain, when modern technology, culture and democratic traditions of power leave no gaps for mediocrity and dishonesty, and, finally, when we manage to mobilize the gigantic potential of the Russian people and natural wealth, the potential of the freedom we have won." (30 p. 15) And two years later, the president states the worsening situation: "The main reason for the inefficiency of power is the discrepancy between the new constitutional organization of the state, the new tasks that the government must solve, and the old approaches, structures, methods of management that have largely been preserved" (31 7) Having outlined these problems, I would like to determine the ways out that make it possible to make a breakthrough in solving the problem of increasing the efficiency of public administration. The solution of these problems will make it possible to move a huge ball of problems: (8 p. 21) - to reconsider the principles of financing the state apparatus. Without increasing the current budget expenditures, ensure the growth of the efficiency of the work of managers and, on this basis, limit the growth in the size of the state apparatus.

Develop uniform principles for the federal and regional levels of promotion of civil servants, including mechanisms for the effective use of the personnel reserve and rotation of personnel in a single system of public service - to create regulatory framework and a modern infrastructure for the functioning of state power and administration, local government and self-government, training, advanced training and evaluation of the work of state and municipal employees.

Establish clear grounds, as well as procedures for bringing to disciplinary and liability civil servants; introduce the institution of disciplinary proceedings.

2.3 Subjective factor in improving the efficiency of public administration

The designation of these problems leads us to the subjective factor of public administration, that is, to people, to personnel who must ensure the conduction of those decisions that mature in the depths of power structures.

Reforming the civil service of the Russian Federation objectively required providing the authorities with reliable, proactive, professionally competent specialists capable of effectively performing the functions assigned to them.

A necessary condition for solving the problem is the normative legal regulation the activities of the civil service and the functioning of its personnel, determining the procedure for regulating the processes of selection, movement, evaluation of personnel ...

Civil service personnel management is an important core part of public administration. However, the Constitution of the Russian Federation, adopted in 1993, does not contain the term “public administration”, which led to the emergence of a point of view about the illegality of recognizing public administration as a state-legal category.

Such judgments cannot be considered objective. The spirit and letter of such articles of the Constitution presuppose the active influence of the state on economic, political, socio-cultural processes. This is especially true for public authorities and their personnel, which received legal expression in the adoption of the Federal Law “On the Fundamentals of the Civil Service of the Russian Federation”. (4 pp. 14-15) The law allows you to put the work with the personnel of public authorities on a solid legislative basis and scientific foundation.

Among the twelve (12) principles of public service contained in Art. 5 of the Federal Law, the problems of personnel management include seven (7):

equal access of citizens to public service in accordance with their abilities and professional training; the unity of the basic requirements for public service. professionalism and competence of civil servants; publicity in the implementation of public service; responsibility of civil servants for prepared and adopted decisions, failure to perform or improper performance of their official duties; nonpartisan public service. stability of civil servants in state bodies.

On the one hand, the law clearly defined the requirements for an official, on the other hand, it defined the rights and guarantees of an employee in relations with the state. Public service personnel management is a complex and poorly studied phenomenon. Its specificity and priority directions are almost not revealed in the conditions of the democratization of society and the transition to a market economy. Personnel management is an internal quality of the system (public service), the main elements of which are the subject - the control element (the head of the public authority and the personnel service of this authority) and the object - the controlled element (the personnel of the public authority), constantly interacting on the basis of self-organization. The problem is not as simple and obvious as it might seem at first glance.

The effectiveness of personnel management can only be ensured on the basis of a clear definition of the subjects and objects of this impact, the delimitation of the functions of management and the personnel service in solving personnel issues, all the more so the role of the latter is exaggerated.

It is the leadership of the public authority that decides the main personnel values, approves the composition of attestation and competitive commissions, makes management decisions based on their conclusions, and dismisses employees from their positions.

In the preparation and regulatory execution of these decisions, the role of personnel services public authorities, but their functions in personnel management are reduced to the problems of improving the quality of personnel, their professional development, training, retraining, and consulting.

Consequently, the management of civil service personnel acts as a purposeful, orderly impact, implemented in relations between the subject and the object, and carried out directly by the subject of management.

The functions of personnel management need a serious scientific justification. Control functions are an important element of the conceptual apparatus, control theory. However, different sources give different interpretations. But most researchers adhere to the point of view that management functions are associated with activities and are a reflection of the properties of a functioning object (subject of management), a specific form of manifestation in essence.

With regard to the sphere of public service personnel management, it can be considered that functions are the main directions of the content of the management activities of a public authority, its personnel service. It is legitimate to single out universal functions, suitable for any management process, and specific specific functions of the personnel service, expressing the content of its managerial impact.

Universal functions include: planning, organization, coordination, regulation, control. They reflect the essence of the management process.

The specific functions of personnel services and personnel management services include: administrative, forecasting, social, improving the quality of performance, motivation, information and analytical.

Function specifics are a working tool for the implementation of general functions. It is fundamentally important to emphasize that specific functions are mobile.

Outlining the socio-political conditions, place and role of the state in society, they expand or contract depending on the social needs and capabilities of the state.

Public service personnel management is a multifaceted phenomenon. It simultaneously acts as a system of organization, as a process, as a structure.

ProblemsreformsstateservicesRF

An analysis of the current legislation and current trends in the development of the civil service in the Russian Federation allows us to draw the main conclusions regarding the directions of the reform of the civil service.

1. The modern state is characterized by the presence of a variety of tasks and functions on the professional and precise implementation of which the existence of the entire socio-political system depends. Therefore, it must include in its body a professional service corps, whose organizations and activities are regulated by legislative acts. It is obvious that in this case we are talking about such a mandatory state-legal institution, which is called “public service”, in many countries it is called “public service” (Germany, Spain, Belgium), and in some - “civil service”. In Russia, the term “public service” is used.

In tsarist Russia, along with the concept of “public service”, the term “public service” was used (the latter could be considered the equivalent of “public service”). The term "public service" is also common in England and Ireland.

The former Soviet civil service, in its criteria and essential features, contradicted the concept of a rational bureaucracy. In many ways, it was based on abstract, therefore, secondary and not important principles for practice. The change in socialism and the state-legal situation in the country necessitated the reform of the civil service.

From a legal point of view, the modern civil service of Russia is a legal matter that is in constant motion: it changes, is supplemented, new tools are being searched for in resolving existing problems, new regulations are being developed that regulate public service relations. In this area, in the future, there should be major changes. Modern legislation allows us to assert that Russia is on the way to reviving the institution of professional bureaucracy. This institution, based on the professionalism, abilities, political neutrality of employees and the quality performance of their official duties, ensures stable public administration in many countries and is the most important factor in the preservation and positive development of statehood.

2. The reform of the civil service in the Russian Federation began with the adoption of the 1990-94 years. new laws and other regulations. The need for reform of the civil service, scientists have constantly paid attention. However, these measures were carried out until recently without a sufficiently developed plan for reforming the civil service, without clear ideas about the stages and essence of innovations in the civil service. And only at the end of 1993, simultaneously with the approval of the Decree of the President of the Russian Federation of December 22, 1993, “Regulations on the Federal Civil Service” (44), were the theses of the concept of reforming the civil service in Russia published. Critical notes about these theses have already appeared in the scientific literature. In 1992, the theses of the concept of the development of the civil service were also published in a special edition of the Russian Personnel of Russia.

The authors of the program (theses) of the civil service reform identified several stages of the reform. However, it is difficult to see in these theses the specific goal of the legal reform and the model of the future civil service: to reform the old civil service (for what purposes and on what principles?) or to create a new one (meeting what requirements?). What are the goals of legal regulation of relations in the public service? Obviously, from a legal point of view, the goal of the reform and the legal model of the civil service in Russia have not yet been established.

The socio-political goal of the reform, showing the practical desired result, is extremely clear: “The main meaning of the civil service reform is, on the one hand, to form a quantitatively small corps of professional employees, and on the other hand, to maintain order and management without violating the rights and freedoms citizens."

However, the question remains unanswered: what is the legal shell of the future public service?.. After all, it is difficult to agree with such a goal of the reform that dominates in the public consciousness as “creating a small corps of civil servants who are able to perform public functions in a quality manner”.

It seems that the goal of the reform is to create an effective civil service and professional bureaucracy, the organization and activities of which are regulated by legislative acts of the legal content traditional for this sphere.

For example, in Poland, legislators have chosen the path of separating out of all civil servants such a category as officials. It is assumed that other laws will regulate the legal status of "ordinary" employees and technical personnel employed in public authorities. Depending on the choice of the civil service model, it is necessary to form a system of legislation on the civil service, which should establish signs (mandatory features) of the concept of a civil servant, types of employees, classifications of public positions and the criterion for their replacement, issues of service and promotion, privileges of officials and much more. other.

Continuation
--PAGE_BREAK--

The classification of civil servants that existed in the USSR and is currently in force (managers, specialists and technical performers) is fundamentally wrong, since it is inefficient and gives rise to many problems in practice. Indeed, in addition to these types of employees, it was necessary to justify the establishment in the legislation of such categories of employees as “officials”, “authorities”, “responsible employees”. In practice, however, this often created insurmountable difficulties. The imperfection of the current legislation on civil service is also the cause of many problems in lawmaking.

For example, the draft law of the Russian Federation on the fight against corruption (October 1991) is vague and unclear, almost every article suffers, since the basic concepts in the legislation on public service are not properly defined.

The legal regulation of public service processes currently lags behind the level of development of trends and patterns in reforming the public administration system, the state apparatus, municipal authorities. After all, the civil service as a legal institution or branch of law (service law) must ensure stable management. It can play a certain role in stabilizing socio-political life, resolving political conflicts, balancing the actions of various political forces. Obviously, the solution of certain political and economic problems largely depends on the creation and improvement of the legal mechanism for regulating service relations.

3. The civil service is a system of legal relations, which are regulated not only by administrative and legal norms, but also by the norms of other branches of law: state, municipal, labor ...

In this regard, obviously, the tendency to separate similar legal relations into one legal branch will also increase. The legislative process in the field of public service in Russia will lead to the fact that in the near future a new branch of law will appear - service law - with its own subject of legal regulation, that is, as a system of legal norms that regulate relations in the field of public service. The result of the reform of the civil service will obviously be the emergence of the outdated and inefficient civil service of the modern public service.

Service law should become a regulator of state service relations, not only in the sphere of activity of state bodies, within the state administration, but also in the field of functioning of local governments. Of course, there is still a lot of room in the public service system for relations regulated by private law. After all, certain state functions will be carried out by employees who have a legal status different from the legal status of professional officials.

Officials are employees with a special set of rights and duties. In many countries, they are the subjects of the highest political powers of state power, perform especially important state functions, are in special legal relations with the state (loyalty and trust) and are appointed to office by issuing an administrative act.

4. Establishing by law the classical state-legal service relationship, it is necessary to create legislation regulating the legal status of other civil servants who are in labor (private-law) relations with state bodies. (34 p. 35) These persons are also engaged in certain work in the public service, but they do not have to perform specific public tasks and functions that are within the competence only Top category employees. Public-service relations of “ordinary” civil servants will arise on the basis of another way of filling a position in the public administration - by concluding employment contract, the content of which is subject to regulation by private law (for example, labor law). The beginning of the reform of the entire civil service system can be put by the reform of administrative law, which regulates relations of a public law nature. In the future, the development of constitutional and legal norms on public service is also ahead. In 1991, one of the drafts of the Russian Constitution contained a chapter on public service. It should be noted that all drafts of the Constitution of Russia in 1991-93. included in the text an article on equal access of citizens to public positions (for entering the public service). The current level of constitutional and legal regulation of public service issues is very incomplete and suffers from uncertainty.

Based on the political consensus on the need for a unified federal civil service (and, consequently, a unified federal employee of legislation and service law), federal government bodies should do everything possible to exercise the powers established in the Constitution of the Russian Federation in order to create the so-called “framework legislation” on public service. All subjects of the Russian Federation, based on the developed and adopted at the federal level legislative acts, will develop and adopt their own regulations governing public service issues.

The concept of reforming the civil service of the Russian Federation defines the following stages of reform:

The constitution of the institution of the federal civil service.

Establishing the status of a federal civil servant.

Systematization and specification of the process of passing the federal state service.

Formation of a unified system of public service.

A prominent specialist in the field of personnel management, Professor K. S. Belsky defines three stages of reforming the civil service:

The initial stage covering 1993-94. should have been characterized, in his opinion, by a number of important norms of legal acts on public service approved by decrees of the President of the Russian Federation:

regulation on the federal civil service; model regulations on the civil service of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation and local governments (many of which, unfortunately, were not adopted during this period).

2. The main stage covers 1993-97. During this time, the reform of the civil service is carried out not only at the federal level, but also at other management levels: in the administrative apparatus of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation and in local governments July 5, 1995 “Law on the fundamentals of the civil service of the Russian Federation” Rossiyskaya Gazeta 1995 3 August. (41) 3. The final stage covers all subsequent time until the end of the 90s. The main event at this stage is the coordination of all normative-level material on the public service, the consolidation of all legislative acts into one and the creation of a Civil Service Code, norms that could regulate the entire range of public service relations in the Russian Federation.

Reforming the civil service to the planned limits is a continuous process, connected (and in many respects dependent on other circumstances with other reforms with many additions and changes taking place within the state itself and legislation). A serious state approach to the problems of public service requires taking into account many managerial, political, economic, and legal factors. The changes taking place in society, the economy and politics will certainly influence the formation of a new system of public service. Public administration reform and civil service reform are interconnected. It is necessary to take into account the pre-revolutionary Soviet and international experience. The reform of the civil service in other former socialist states confirms that this process is very slow.

We can say that a global pattern has already been formed, which is expressed in the fact that the place of the state and its position on the world stage depends on two mutually determining factors - the quality of training of specialists and the conditions created for the disclosure and use of their potential capabilities and abilities. The strategic task of the state personnel policy is the formation of a highly professional, stable and optimally balanced management apparatus. His vocation is to effectively solve problems and perform the functions of federal bodies.

2.4 Informational aspect of improving the efficiency of public administration

The world social science thought of the second half of the twentieth century considers everything that happens in the world within the framework of the paradigm: agrarian society - industrial society - information society (post-industrial). We can say that we now live in an information society, where the value of information is difficult to overestimate, or rather, it is one of the basic foundations that cement society. “Who owns the information, owns the world” is an axiom. It acquires particular importance in public administration, ensuring its rationality and efficiency. Information support is the basis on which the administrative activity of the state apparatus is built. Information here should be considered as a certain set of various messages, information, data about the relevant objects, phenomena, processes, relationships, etc. This information, being collected, systematized and transformed into a usable form, plays an exceptional role in management. The information circulating in government bodies is heterogeneous and varied. It can refer to the foreign policy, economic, socio-political and environmental situation. Information of these types has an independent value also for the relevant regional administrative structures, when they act as decision-making bodies within their competence. In addition, it serves as the basis for regulatory documents. Information in government bodies can be classified according to various grounds and features. In the literature, attempts have already been made to classify social and managerial information in the study of the problems of informatization and technologization of social space (G. Atamanchuk, M. Rassolov, Yu. Baturin, etc.). Since management information is a certain reflection of social reality (and also natural to the extent that it is involved in the orbit of social human activity), it is recognized that it should be classified primarily depending on the degree of correlation with this reality, the real processes occurring in It Information can be both official and unofficial, general and sectoral, horizontal and vertical. When separating information within the management body, information for the head is put in the first place, and information for officials is in the second place.

Let's try to define the main goal of public administration. This consists in obtaining secondary, processed information on the basis of the collected initial data, which serves as the basis for making managerial decisions. Achieving this goal consists of solving a number of particular tasks, such as collecting primary information, storing it, distributing it between the structural divisions of the management body and their employees, preparing for processing, processing itself, providing the management body in a processed form, providing direct and feedback links in its circulation.

Speaking about the classification of information in government bodies, it is advisable to use the classification given by a highly qualified specialist in the field of management information T. Zakupen, an expert of the Department for CIS Affairs of the Office of the Government of the Russian Federation. "(39) It seems that the information circulating in government bodies should first be classified at the level of structural units. Then, specific types of social information, data, messages and facts that characterize information passing through government bodies should be identified and considered. Further, Based on the so-called specific, private classifications, one can raise the question of the classification of information at the level of all management structures.

Information in the structural subdivisions of the governing body can be classified according to the following main features: the functional purpose and nature of the activities of the structural subdivisions; the relation of the message to the subject managing the structural subdivision; the type of connection between the structural unit and the external environment (direct and feedback communication is carried out on the exchange of information by establishing permanent contacts, holding press conferences, briefings, information meetings.) relation to the target function of the structural unit, logical content. Information of a structural unit can be divided into three independent subsets - about the subjects of the governing body, the objects of its managerial influence (regions, enterprises and organizations, citizens) and their inherent properties and relationships; the physical form of presentation to transformation procedures (probabilistic, sociological, modeling, analytical, computational, etc.); degree of transformation (main, or newly incoming; processed into analytical and forecast notes, TV-radio-photo materials; grouped into information weeklies and bulletins) This classification is by no means indisputable, but it seems to be the most complete. It is necessary to dwell on another important point related to the classification of information - this is its necessity. In general, the classification allows obtaining very valuable information about the information contained in the structural divisions of the state apparatus, contributes to the solution of many fundamental issues of designing a public administration information system and analyzing the appropriate support for structural divisions. (52) Without comprehensive data on the most important properties and characteristics of information, it is impossible to optimize it, to ensure the specified accuracy, reliability and efficiency of use.

The requirement for information as a means of improving the efficiency of public administration:

1. Information is a strategic resource. It should be complete, up-to-date, reliable, cover the whole range of issues of interest to the state structure, be collected regularly, with a certain frequency and in the required volumes.

Continuation
--PAGE_BREAK--

2. Information must meet the combination of goals that the management structure sets, with the means by which it intends to achieve them. Its quality and sufficiency allow the state structure to have an effective plan in front of it, to determine the real and precise goals of managerial influences.

3. Systematization, processing, accumulation and examination. The organization of this work, as well as the analysis of incoming information, its volume, quality and relevance, can be entrusted to the appropriate body, for example, an information and analytical department or an analytical group. Such a unit, along with determining the effectiveness of incoming information, should predict its impact on the activities of the governing body. Speaking about the functional responsibilities of this service, the following wishes can be distinguished:

tracking information summarizing information on a specific issue systematizing assessments of a specific problem drawing conclusions

As a priority direction in the organization of this service, there should be a legal regulation of the issue concerning the responsibility for information support in government bodies. Otherwise, it is likely that the information sent to the management structure will be distorted. Since the quality of decisions made depends on the reliability, timeliness and completeness of information, these acts should also provide for specific strict responsibility for the information provided. The introduction of such measures will significantly improve the quality of information support and control action of public authorities.

4. In addition to the official information system, an informal system should also be used. The informal system, unlike the formal one, is not bound by structural constraints and the sequence of individual operations.

5. It is an axiom that information has only the potential to become useful to the user. The real value of information is revealed after its use, often after several years. Consequently, the principle that Japanese managers adhere to is the only correct one - not to divide primary information into necessary and unnecessary, but to collect all. In public administration, this conclusion acquires a particularly deep meaning.

6. Among the technological innovations that promise to increase the productivity of both ordinary employees and managers, I would like to note the following innovation - the expansion of database management capabilities. A database management system is a software package designed to provide a systematic and flexible approach to organizing and accessing data. There is a technology that allows you to accumulate data in one central database and provide access for specialist employees to information related to their competence.

Unfortunately, along with the recipe for increasing the efficiency of information flows, there are problematic issues (18 p. 120) related to information: - Some types of information with with great difficulty quantifiable (for example, motivation) - The information system is able to take into account only formal information connections (at the same time, informal contacts are of great importance) - Despite the increase in the flexibility of information systems through decentralization, their scope is still limited to certain internal and external conditions There is no doubt that information systems, information technologies can lead to an increase in the productivity of public administration. However, technology is not success itself; competent, energetic, responsible leadership is needed. It is important to evaluate the intended uses of information technology from the point of view of the organizational system as a whole. (2 p. 810) In turn, the responsibility and efficiency of management are in close connection and interdependence. Responsibility is a subjective component of the effectiveness of management activities. Fixing this interdependence, we can give the following definition of it: responsibility is the focus and ability of the subject to the effective (effective) performance of duties and the achievement of the goals of his activity in accordance with the social values ​​he shares.

2.5 Regional aspect of improving the efficiency of public administration

P. A. Stolypin, speaking on June 8, 1906 in the State Duma, said: “Power cannot be considered a goal. Power is a means to preserve life, peace and order. Therefore, while condemning arbitrariness and autocracy in every possible way, it is impossible not to consider the anarchy of the government dangerous. We must not forget that the inaction of the authorities leads to anarchy, that the government is not an apparatus of impotence and seeking” (56) Before determining the mechanisms for increasing the efficiency of public administration, one should once again define the criteria for efficiency - this is the ability of state structures at various levels to successfully solve economic, social, financial, organizational and other tasks, achieve the set goals, coordinate and coordinate the economic and political interests of various groups of the population, while acting in a strictly defined legal space.

For Russia, as for a federal state, there is a completely justified development model, which is as follows: in a transitional period, in a reformed society, a strong central government with reliable levers of control is especially needed. Nevertheless, it is impossible not to be aware that the vital activity of this stage should be limited and that it should be replaced by balanced mechanisms in the model: A powerful federal “center” with its power and financial resources should interact with strong regions capable of effectively solve independently or jointly with the "center" the main issues related to the life of people. Adhering to this point of view, the question arises about the distribution of powers within this model. Here we can distinguish 3 levels of relations between the “center” and the regions (8 p. 131):

Economic and social problems are the responsibility of the regions. A range of problems is identified for a joint solution. Actually issues of national importance (defense, foreign policy And. etc. e) are under the jurisdiction of the federal "center".

In the context of world management theory, there is an increasing trend towards delegation of authority with general control, which is a very healthy grain and is a way to unload the “center” from regional problems, thereby concentrating on problems of strategic importance.

You can delegate authority according to the following scheme, that is, everything related to working with the region should be planned as follows:

Priority, that is, all projects should be divided into three categories: a... The most important. b. Urgent. in. Minor. Structure of the decision of questions. Intermediate "letochki" (correction of positions). The exact date of the decision of the issues. Personal responsibility in the project.

"The slave is negligent. Do not force the master to do his work with a strict command - he himself will not take it willingly" - this ancient quote clearly reflects human nature and the nature of managerial influence. Acting in accordance with this scheme, it can be assumed that the relationship between the "center" and the regions will move to a qualitatively new level, when the responsibility, the scope of the tasks and the terms of reference for the tasks on each side are determined. Then mutual accusations should move into the legal field, which will regulate these relationships and disputes that arise in their course.

By correctly delegating authority, you can create an impeccable mechanism that will amaze with its effectiveness.

Nevertheless, one cannot speak about the universality of this scheme, because there are differences between the regions and it is necessary to develop such schemes with certain nuances in proportion to the number of regions. But the main idea in this context is that one of the ways to improve the efficiency of state power as a whole can be the strengthening of its regional component.

In such a difficult situation, there seems to be only one way out of this situation - strengthening the economic and financial foundation of the regions. This is an effective way to improve the efficiency of regional authorities, which gets the opportunity to form a normal budget and off-budget funds and thereby resolve the issues facing it without begging for money from the Federal "center". Such approaches can be implemented in practice in relation to depressed regions. It is important for them to get help at the start, to provide capital on a targeted basis to launch the economy and revive production. But this requires well-designed programs with clearly defined goals and objectives. To this end, it may even be necessary to structurally regroup financial resources from the federal financial fund regional support. It is expedient to divide them into two components: the current support fund (subsidies through the system of transfers) and the development fund. Today, subsidies that go to meet the immediate needs of the regions dominate. But they do not fundamentally solve the problem. In addition, there are cases when these funds are used for other purposes. In any case, our press constantly reports that the money “did not reach” the regions, was “lost” somewhere, and numerous regulatory authorities are beginning to look for them.

It is necessary to provide the regions not with irrevocable subsidies, but to provide loans for specific projects... There are conditions for this. The regions have natural resources, many have a developed mining and processing industry, own property, and have shares. This means that loans have something to provide materially. Such a procedure will increase the responsibility of the regions for a more rational and efficient use of financial resources, and will interest them in earning money on their own, rather than waiting for subsidies from the federal budget.

Another resource, perhaps the most effective, if implemented. Turn part of the income of the population into investments. After all, the population today every month buys currencies in the amount of several billion dollars. Approximately a quarter of all income is spent on these purposes. That is, money either does not work or is in the speculative sector of the economy.

Successful economic and social development regions - is a central aspect of improving the efficiency of public administration. It is on this basis that regional power structures will gain confidence, stability and the necessary dynamics. And these are the main components of the effectiveness of public administration.

Conclusions for the second chapter:

The mechanisms for improving the efficiency of public administration are:

moderate decentralization. Improving the use of the information component of public administration Improving the quality of public services and the mechanism for their distribution. The need to include the masses in active life. Reforming the civil service and developing human resources.

Conclusion

The restructuring of public administration requires, first of all, the restoration of relations of trust, mutual understanding, sincerity and honesty between the state and citizens, between state bodies and all public structures. It is necessary to achieve a reasonable correspondence between state-legal regulation and the naturalness of life, its experience and traditions, sustainability and adaptability, multi-layeredness and self-governance. We are talking about the broad socialization of public administration, in the process and as a result of which it will converge, merge with society, become a socially relevant component of its free, democratic and effective organization and functioning. It seems that public administration cannot be simply outlived, discarded by the people, but must be transformed into it, become its integral part and take the place that is objectively determined by the modern level of social development and its own organizing and regulatory capabilities.

Based on the analysis of scientific literature, historical practice and trends in social progress (within the framework of socialism, capitalism, and mixed forms), several directions of movement towards this goal are visible.

1. A special role belongs, of course, to wide, open, full-blooded and active direct and feedback links between all components of the subject of public administration, their decisions and actions on the one hand, and various individual and mass manifestations of people's lives on the other.

2. The state can only be considered an adequate form of expressing the interests of civil society if, through the system of its bodies, employees of the apparatus and participants in management processes, firstly, it perceives the entire set of national, collective and personal, general and specific, long-term and short-term , historical and specific interests of the population of the country; secondly, it objectively, fairly and promptly assesses the relevance and priority of interests and represents them in its legal decrees and organizational actions, treats all subjects of interests equally; thirdly, it contributes with its resources, capabilities, the power of the practical realization of interests, and really ensures the satisfaction of people's needs.

3. When analyzing the relationship between the state and society, it should also be taken into account that the social-class and national structure of society is in dynamics, active migration processes are taking place in the country, the age and sex composition of the population and the demographic situation are changing, which means that the needs and interests of people are constantly being transformed, attitudes and motives of their actions and actions. Thus, the balance of relations between the state and society cannot be stable, once given: it will be constantly violated and must be just as constantly restored. The proper level of sociality of public administration is unthinkable without the mechanisms of knowledge of the social environment, adaptation and self-improvement that are highly developed in its system.

Continuation
--PAGE_BREAK--

4. High demands are put forward by the society to the state administration in terms of its level of democracy. Moreover, in the very understanding of democracy, two aspects emerge. The first defines democracy as the mass nature and effectiveness of the participation of the population in the development, adoption and implementation of state-administrative decisions. The second connects management with state power, which ensures and guarantees the practical implementation of state management decisions. Management without relying on power, without its introduction into management processes, is imaginary, illusory, and often creates the appearance of activity. Both aspects are interdependent and in a social movement are valuable when they act in unity.

The end of the 20th century actualizes the scientific validity of public administration. Indeed, today, with all the significance of the accumulated experience, only science has the ability and the necessary data to objectively determine the trends of social development. Experience usually refers to the past, art - intuitively, while scientific knowledge can predict with a sufficient degree of certainty and even program ways and means of movement into the future. Of course, only genuine science is suitable for this, and not its surrogate, science freed from the obligation to explain current policy or justify failed practice. Therefore, the scientific validity of public administration in the future will be determined by the interaction of two factors: the level of development of scientific knowledge (social, natural and technical) and the readiness, ability and ability of public administration to absorb and use it. True, in this interaction much depends on the state administration itself, which can stimulate and support it.

Another important public demand for public administration is becoming increasingly loud. Two centuries of the industrial type of production have shown the limitations and dangers of the production, or, as it is often called, technocratic approach to the organization of social life and, of course, to public administration. It was under the influence of this approach that the ideas of the Renaissance and the Enlightenment, which nurtured our civilization, the ideas of a deeply humanistic nature were pushed aside. Man was usually seen in only two guises: as a producer and as a consumer, with the application to him of one - economic - criterion for evaluating development. In fact, since the time of Taylor, the science of production management has been developing in the system of such coordinates, many of the postulates of which were later taken and accepted by the theory of public administration. The situation that is taking shape on the verge of millennia requires a concrete change in the entire philosophy and methodology of public administration. The person should be put at the forefront, public administration is called upon to acquire a truly humanistic coloring. It is necessary to look for non-traditional forms of interconnections between people, people with nature, with their past and future. And this is possible with a broad humanization of public administration, with careful consideration of philosophical, sociological, psychological, legal, and pedagogical knowledge.

From the standpoint of precisely the interests of man, his self-preservation, the extension of the human race, the state administration will probably have to analyze and evaluate the existing and newly introduced technologies, tools and objects of labor, the raw materials and materials used, product quality, lifestyle, living conditions and much more.

And, of course, society wants to see public administration socially effective. Not “hurrying after” social processes and always lagging behind, not only focused on the economy, but owning an integrated approach and predictive vision. Management, in which a leading, heuristic principle based on knowledge of objective patterns, capable of retaining subjective factors, effective, active, effectively solving social problems and ensuring the progressive development of society will become widespread.

I would like to note that everything is important in society: production, distribution, exchange and consumption, the social sphere, science, literature and art, law and morality, architecture and communications, history and spiritual culture, health and physical development of people and much more. But all this can then create a favorable and rational way of life, when it is brought together into an integral, dynamic, harmonious system and “works” for a person. Despite the fact that there are natural interconnections between all phenomena and processes, management gives due systemicity, development, productivity and economy of social life. For only and exclusively it has the unity of such abilities as goal-setting, organization and regulation.

Bibliography.

Atamanchuk GV Management - social value and efficiency. M., 1995

Public Administration Effectiveness ed. S. A Batchikov and S. Yu Glazyev M., 1998 (translated from English)

State and municipal administration ed. A. Ya Ponamareva S-P., 1997

Chikanova L. A Civil servants M., 1998

Public administration and public service abroad. Ed. V. V Chubinsky S-P., 1998

Atamanchuk G. V General Theory of Management M., 1994

The effectiveness of state power and management in modern Russia, ed. Ignatov V. Rostov-on-Don 1998

Problems of Improving the Efficiency of State Power and Management in Modern Russia, ed. Ignatov V. Rostov-on-Don 1998.

Atamanchuk GV Theory of public administration. M. 1997.

Batanina I. A. Political management in the Tula region 1997

Atamanchuk G.V. Functioning of the state administration apparatus M., 1998

Osipov V. And Power problems of public administration Saratov 1997

Brief philosophical encyclopedia. M., 1994 Reforming the state apparatus: world practice and Russian problems // Problems of theory and practice of management 1999 number 1

Optimization of public administration in a transitional society // Problems of the theory and practice of management 1997 number 4

Administrative reforms: challenge and solutions // Problems of the theory and practice of management 1998 number 1

What determines the effectiveness of public administration // Problems of the theory and practice of management 1996 number 1

Akov. R, Emery. F. On Purposeful Systems. M., 1974

Management information systems // Problems of theory and practice of management 1996 number 2

Strategic efficiency of managerial decisions // Problems of theory and practice of management. 1996 number 5

Bachilo I. L. Organization of the Soviet state administration. M. 1984.

Goncharov VV In Search of Management Excellence: Leadership of Senior Management Personnel. M., 1993

Ignatov V. Formation of the system of state and local government and self-government in modern Russia. Rostov-on-Don. 1997.

Korzhukhina T., Senin A. History of Russian statehood. M. 1995

Kochetkov A. Efficiency of the system of state power // Power. 1997 number 5

Skidmore M. J., Trapp M. K. The American system of public administration. M., 1993 (translated from English)

Stolypin P. A. We need a great Russia. Complete collection of speeches in the State Duma. M., 1991.

Ignatov V., Sulemov V., Radchenko A., Ivlev A., Beklemishev E., Ogarev A., Ponedelkov A. Staffing of the public service. Rostov-on-Don. 1994.

Russian newspaper 1993. March 11. Russian newspaper 1997.25 September. Address of the President of the Russian Federation to the Federal Assembly

"On the effectiveness of state power in Russia" M., 1995

Message of the President of the Russian Federation to the Federal Assembly "On the situation in the country and the main directions of the policy of the Russian Federation" M., 1997 Izvestiya. 29th of October. 1996

Kurashvili B.P. Essay on the theory of public administration. M., 1987.

Legal Notes 1995 Number 2

Problems of increasing the efficiency of state power in Russia // Russia and the modern world. 1997 number 3

Milner B. Z., Evenenko L. I., Rapoport V. C. System approach to management organization. M., 1983.

Peters T., Waterman R. In search of effective management. M., 1986 (translated from English)

Administrative and public administration: French experience // Problems of theory and practice of management 1997 number 1

Japan: administrative reform and the state apparatus // Problems of the theory and practice of management 1996 number 5

Qualitative aspects of information in public administration // Problems of the theory and practice of management 1999 number 1

Rational Choice in Politics and Management ed. Smorgunov L. V S-P., 1998

M. Weber Selected Works M., 1990

Aganbegyan A. G Management and efficiency M., 1981

Taylor F. U Principles of Scientific Management M., 1991 (translated from English)

Iacocca L. Manager's Career M., 1991 (translated from English)

Management consulting ed. Milana Kubra M., 1992 (translated from English)

Theoretical problems of public administration and public service. Ed. Bessonov B. N M., 1997

Tikhomirov M. M. The system of information and intellectual support for management activities in the structures of the public service. M., 1996

Toktybekov A. A. Theoretical foundations of the mechanism of public administration. M., 1996

Tikhonov R. E Optimization of structures and mechanisms of federal and regional government M., 1994 Issue 6

Kleptsov M. Ya Principles of construction and implementation of a mobile information system for governing bodies of state power M., 1996

Kleptsov M. Ya Information systems of government bodies M., 1996

Omarov A.M. Social management. Some questions of theory and practice M., 1980

Oblonsky A. V Man and public administration M., 1987

Send your good work in the knowledge base is simple. Use the form below

Students, graduate students, young scientists who use the knowledge base in their studies and work will be very grateful to you.

Hosted at http://www.allbest.ru/

COURSE WORK

by discipline: The system of state and municipal government

on the topic: The effectiveness of state and municipal government

Introduction

1.1 The concept of management effectiveness

1.3 Criteria and indicators of public administration efficiency

2. Efficiency of state and municipal government in Russia

2.1 Evaluation of the effectiveness of municipal management

2.2 Evaluation of the effectiveness of public administration

Conclusion

List of used literature

Introduction

The description of the effectiveness of public administration, as well as the administration itself, is devoted to many scientific works. In the field of public administration, the key factor that denies or justifies specific methods and forms of activity is traditionally considered to be efficiency. Therefore, most of the private problems of the implementation of public administration can be combined into one, the most general and relevant both at the regional, central (federal) and interstate levels - the problem of effective organization of the system of administrative and public administration.

The relevance of the topic of the course work is due to the fact that the current stage of development of Russia is characterized by increased attention to the problem of the effectiveness of state power and management. Scientific research is devoted to this problem, it is discussed on television, among officials and politicians. The materials of the Messages of the President of the Russian Federation to the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation also contain a statement of tasks in this area. Meanwhile, the complexity of building a stable and effective system public administration in modern Russia. . Nevertheless, the desire to achieve this efficiency in practice continues to face various problems: personnel, economic, political, etc. This is especially true when the effectiveness is determined for the top management in the management system.

The purpose of the course work is to determine the effectiveness of state and municipal government in Russia. To do this, it is necessary to solve the following tasks:

Expand the concept of "efficiency" of management

Consider indicators and criteria for management effectiveness

Consider assessing the effectiveness of municipal government

Consider assessing the effectiveness of public administration

1. Content and withThe essence of management effectiveness

1.1 The concept of management efficiency

In the field of public administration, the key factor that denies or justifies specific methods and forms of activity is traditionally considered to be efficiency. Therefore, most of the private problems of the implementation of public administration can be combined into one, the most general and relevant both at the regional, central (federal) and interstate levels - the problem of effective organization of the system of administrative and public administration. Due to their practical and theoretical significance, the problems associated with the conceptualization of the concept of public administration efficiency, the development of methods for improving efficiency and its measurement, are considered in detail in almost all social sciences. Moreover, these problems have become a key subject of research in certain scientific disciplines (for example, public sector economics or municipal management). However, any science (more precisely, any researcher working within the framework of a particular scientific paradigm) considers these problems from a specific angle. The very concept of efficiency, due to its inherent multidimensionality, has many interpretations and interpretations. Of course, the choice of one of them or the creation of a new one will depend on the goals of a particular analysis, the level of this analysis and, finally, the chosen methodology. So, in microeconomics, efficiency is often understood as production function, which describes the dependence of costs and output, or the achievement of the largest volume of production of goods and services using resources of a certain cost. In administrative theory, along with the economic component of the concept of efficiency (“the ratio of the volume of services provided to the cost (volume) of resources required to provide a given volume of services”, there is often also a technical (or organizational) component, determined from the standpoint of achieving goals. Technical efficiency means the degree of compliance with state services to the needs, knowledge and resources of their clients, i.e. reflects the compliance of the management organization with external conditions.Historically, in the process of changing one dominant scientific paradigm to another, the concept of efficiency has changed and gradually acquired an ever wider range of interpretations.The process of expanding and complicating the meanings of this concept was especially noticeable in the course of methodological changes within organizational theory and the theory of public administration Adherents of the "classical school" often interpreted "efficiency" as the achievement of formal goals, by pre-established methods in specific rocks. However, this mechanistic approach to the conceptualization of the concept of effectiveness assumed that the goals of the organization are clearly established and measurable, and standard methods are used to achieve these goals. This approach turned out to be appropriate only for analyzing the effectiveness of simple organizations, whose personnel are subject to clear rules and perform simple routine operations. A simple organization with a rigid hierarchical structure and usually strong paternalistic traditions presented the employee with elementary requirements: to be loyal and perform work in deadlines in the manner indicated above. This was well understood by mechanistic, value-neutral attitudes to the analysis of the effectiveness of organizations, starting with Frederick Taylor and Max Weber, when they sought to avoid consideration of ethical, political or psychological factors in their studies. In the traditional, or "classical" paradigm of administrative policy, based on the principles set forth in the works of F. Taylor, W. Wilson and M. Weber, the emphasis on the efficiency of the public administration apparatus is decisive. Efficiency in this case is objective, non-personal in nature and is based on three methodological principles: the separation of administration from politics, the recognition that "in each element of any work there is always one method and one way of execution, which is faster and better than all the others" , and, finally, the recognition of the bureaucratic organization as the most effective for the implementation of scientific principles of management. The classic of American administrative science, Dwight Waldo, directly pointed to the determination of the growth of general interest in the phenomenon of efficiency by the process of transition from the conditions of the activities of organizations in the 19th century. to the conditions of activity of organizations of the XX century. “At the turn of the century, however, it became obvious that morality, despite all the desirability, is insufficient. Democracy must be wealthy, capable. Citizens must be active and vigilant. The state machine should not waste time, money and energy. The wasteful use of our resources must be corrected. If our good intentions are thwarted by inefficiency, then inefficiency is therefore the chief vice." At the same time, efficiency gradually became a kind of fetish, a kind of god for administrators and politicians. G. Simon wrote that efficiency is essentially the "modus operendi of the organization" and is often used as a virtual synonym, the task of administrative theory is to determine "how the organization should be designed to do the job efficiently." This approach defined the main instruments of change in organizations (and, accordingly, the instruments for increasing the efficiency of their work) as an administrative order, an order capable of rationalizing the actions of personnel (for example, establishing an “effective” structure or abolishing an “inefficient” one). By narrowing the base for the unpredictable, random actions of individuals, the directive mode of management, according to the adherents of the technocratic, or mechanistic, approach, allowed the best possible "quantitative rationalization", thereby facilitating the process of measuring efficiency, which was carried out using simple indicators in the input / output system. . Thus, with a mechanistic approach to the theory and practice of organizing the effective work of personnel, the psychological, social and political aspects of efficiency were not actually affected (the latter was deliberately omitted, since the traditional administrative models were based on the principle of a clear separation of the competences of politicians and administrators). All the attention of researchers and practitioners was focused on the technical side of the management process within the organization, while the role of environmental factors was omitted. Gradually, the contradictions between ideal bureaucratic models and real management practices, and hence the contradictions between the prescribed and real results of public administration, became so obvious that it was necessary to adjust the management paradigm, including a wider range of aspects of management activity. The "Human Relations School" rejected the mechanistic understanding of efficiency, defined through the formal achievement of goals, as too simplistic and inconsistent with practice. Efficiency began to be interpreted as a complex, complex phenomenon, determined by a number of criteria: the degree of satisfaction of the organization's personnel with their work and its results, the level of staff turnover in the organization, staff motivation, etc. In this case, the conditions for efficiency, in addition to loyalty, subordination and clear knowledge of the implementation procedure operations also includes conscious satisfaction with work and working conditions, interpersonal relationships that have developed in the team. In other words, socio-psychological factors and informal connections within the organization were included in the study of the phenomenon of effectiveness. However, there was a different kind of danger here. Excessive actualization of psychological factors, the construction of the concept of efficiency based on the hierarchy of needs limited its applicability to the sphere of interindividual relations within the organization and, as a result, overly simplified the assessment of real management processes. Neglect of the formal aspects of the activities of organizations, the problems of the hierarchy of power (a kind of rejection reaction to the previous technocratic, or mechanistic, approach to management) led to the inadequacy of this approach in relation to the analysis of the activities of complexly organized systems. And here we have to fully agree with M. Crozier, who advocated a constructive synthesis of these two scientific approaches, the illegitimacy of updating only one of the aspects of the activities of organizations: either formal or informal. Representatives of cybernetic and then synergetic approaches to efficiency analysis made this concept more complex, while trying to avoid both individualistic and structural determinism. The starting point of their methodologies was the openness and complexity of organizations, their active interaction with the environment, the feedback system. In other words, the simplicity, closeness, linearity of organizations inherent in mechanistic models, as well as individualism, atomism and excessive psychologism, characteristic of the theoretical developments of representatives of the school of human relations, were rejected.

Determining the effectiveness and revealing the results of managing socio-economic systems remains one of the least studied areas of management science. This issue causes even more difficulties in the practical activities of authorities and administration. At the same time, it is quite obvious that performance evaluation is of extreme practical value, since it allows you to calculate how correctly the areas of activity are chosen and what result it brings. Orientation to the final results (foresight in the activities of its results, the calculation of each action and the formation of centers of responsibility for the final results, which are endowed with appropriate authority and independence, but subject to the achievement of predetermined results) is becoming a true trend of the times and is found not only in financial management, but and is included as a fundamental component in many modern management concepts.

1.2 The content of the concept of "efficiency of publicmanagement"

Rational and effective public administration requires the connection of goals, means and results of their implementation, since only it creates a cycle in the public administration system, gives rise to the trust of society and people in it and stimulates management processes. The place and role of public administration in the mechanism of "division of labor" was determined by the following characteristics: public administration - a specific type of activity for the implementation of a single state power, which has a functional and competence specificity that distinguishes it from other types (forms) of the implementation of state power; public administration is an activity of an executive-administrative nature. Its main focus is execution, i.e. enforcement of laws and by-laws. This goal is achieved by using the necessary legal powers (management); public administration - the prerogative of special subjects, generally referred to as executive and administrative bodies of state power or bodies of state administration; public administration - executive activity carried out in the process of daily and direct management of economic, socio-cultural and administrative-political construction. The immediacy of such leadership is due to the fact that it was in the jurisdiction (organizational subordination) of state administration bodies that the bulk of property objects was located, thereby expressing the quality of the state as the owner of the main means of production; public administration - by-law activities carried out "on the basis of and in pursuance of the law"; it is secondary to legislative activity. This is a generalized characteristic of public administration, to which some other specific features can be added, including: verticality (subordination, hierarchy) of the system of executive and administrative bodies; the implementation of the legal and imperious powers belonging to these subjects in the administrative, i.e. out of court; the possibility of administrative law-making provided by the current legislation (combination of law enforcement with law establishment); inclusion in the mechanism (system) of public administration not only of executive and administrative bodies, but also of all other links administrative apparatus(for example, administration state enterprises) etc. In this understanding, government bodies were considered as the executive apparatus of state power or state administration, which is the main link in the practical implementation of legislation, as well as other legal acts of state authorities, i.e. Councils of various levels. In their main organizational manifestations, these bodies were "tied" directly or indirectly to the system of Soviets of People's Deputies. The content of the concept of “activity efficiency” is generally known - it is the designation of any activity, including management, as productive, productive, effective. In economics, the category economic efficiency and the corresponding criteria for its evaluation. In modern management, the same is done in relation to the management of an organization (firm) in a competitive market. They can be used in defining the concept of public administration efficiency that we are considering. However, there can be no complete extrapolation (transfer) of the features of the concepts of economic or managerial efficiency. The problem is in particular public administration as an activity that differs from other types of administration primarily in that it is carried out with the help of state power and state bodies. The fact that, as noted, the priority role here is played by political leadership, politics, which is a concentrated expression of the public interests of social groups and citizens. Therefore, a meaningful definition of the concept of “efficiency of public administration” and its criteria is not a technological operation, say, according to the model: “costs - output”, but is an element of the management activity of a political subject, which carries a certain political aspect. “ public purposes” - in the end, these are politically significant goals; “results” - objects, services, processes related to the satisfaction of public needs and interests (expressed in politics); "state resources" - economic, social, political, ideological and informational capital, regulated by the state both in terms of social expediency and possibility, and legal validity. The specific content of the concept of “public administration efficiency” can also be defined through the model - the “input-output” ratio, which characterizes the activity of the political system as a whole and the management subsystem of which part of it. At the "input" of the system: the requirements of the society (managed object), which determine the adoption of appropriate decisions, and the support of the managing subject - legitimacy (society's trust) and the resources that the state has to implement possible solutions. At the “output”: a real change in the object as a result of the decisions made and the achievement of the goals of the managing subject (system). Within the “input-output” system model, subsystems are formed and operate that duplicate the system one in application to the analysis of the effectiveness of both the internal management activities of individual state bodies in relation to other bodies, and external - in relation to society or its part. In this context, the concepts are used: “partial efficiency” and “full efficiency”. The first is characterized by indicators of the effective solution of a part of the problems, individual components of the overall goal; the second - indicators of the successful solution of the whole complex of problems that form the general, ultimate goal of the managing subject. For the public administration system as a whole, the concept under consideration is interpreted mainly as “full efficiency”.

1.3 Criteria and indicators of public administration efficiency

The concept of "efficiency criterion" of public administration refers to a sign or a set of signs, on the basis of which the effectiveness of the management system as a whole, as well as individual management decisions, is evaluated. The core element of this concept is the term “assessment”. Its specific meaning predetermines the ambiguity of the procedure for evaluating the results and consequences of the same actions and decisions of the managing subject by people.

Evaluation of the effectiveness of public administration is necessary for both state authorities and society. It allows society to control the quality of the activities of state institutions. And managers and civil servants need it for self-control, to improve the management process. The problem of evaluating efficiency is the problem of analyzing management activities and decisions.

Evaluation as the core of the concept of “efficiency criterion” is a term derived from the concept of “value”. The latter indicates the social significance of certain phenomena (social and natural). The objects of evaluation are various results of management activities: means of subsistence, types of social relations, processes, specific acts of activity, etc. They are called “objective values”. Objects are evaluated, i.e. their social significance is determined in accordance with ideals, principles, goals, concepts, norms, etc. These phenomena are referred to as “subjective values”. They should be distinguished from “objective values” (objects of evaluation).

Each political system has its own system and hierarchy of values, objectively determined by the foundations of the existence of the state and the interests of society. The system of values ​​is the fruit of the collective historical creativity of a given community of people, reflecting the result of the interaction of the political community with the environment, as well as social relationships between its members. The value system of a particular political union (state) does not cover all their diversity that exists in the social world (for example, moral, aesthetic, scientific, and even political). It is composed of those values ​​that are most significant for the existence and functioning of the political union, which are fixed in the constitutional foundations of the state system, in the ideology, political principles and goals of the state, are embodied in the political strategy, as well as in the principles, concepts and goals of the activity of the managing entity.

The basic values ​​of the modern Russian state are political democracy (democracy), the sovereignty of the state, its integrity and security, legal law, political and social rights and human freedoms, free labor based on the diversity of ownership of the means of production, pluralism, etc. It is known that that millions of Russians recognize many other, traditional values. For example, social justice, catholicity (collectivism), Orthodox values.

All of them are incorporated in the criteria for determining the effectiveness of the main activities of the state, decisions made by the ruling subject. Formulated by the ruling elites and political leaders, proven by historical experience and enshrined in law, the basic values ​​acquire a generally significant, objective character in relation to members of society and to governing entities. The smaller the gap between the officially proclaimed values ​​and the current rules of the "game" of managers, the more real the effectiveness of management.

The performance criteria are based on the principles of public administration, since they are objectively determined by the regulatory requirements developed by the practice of social and public administration, and the means of regulating the relationship between the goals and results of management activities. The principles express the requirements of the objective laws of control; their action is associated with the implementation of the functions of the control system and stimulates the initiative and self-activity of the controlled masses.

The criteria for the effectiveness of public administration are formed on the basis of a system of subjective values ​​expressed in the ideology of the socio-state system, in the strategic goals of the ruling subject - the political course, in the concepts, political attitudes and norms of the management system, behind which are common national-state interests. Often, the interests of the ruling classes or the dominant national-ethnic groups are presented as such. The foregoing explains the relativity of performance evaluation criteria, their dependence primarily on the type of political system, as well as the specific historical conditions in which it functions. Values, goals, concepts, principles of public administration, the regulatory framework of the management system, and finally, public needs and interests - all these elements of the criteria for the effectiveness of public administration are variables determined by the social and state system, political regime and specific environment (historical and natural) in which the given political community lives. Taken together, they constitute a mechanism for the reaction of the behavior of the state as a community of people to changes in the external environment and its internal state, a system of control over external and internal processes of change. The wider the scope of control, i.e. rational influence, the higher the management efficiency. But control, rational management of society and the environment cannot expand indefinitely. The limit to it is the natural self-organization of society. We have already discussed this in previous chapters. The ability of a state subject to combine a purposeful impact on society with the realization of its ability to self-organize is one of the universal indicators of management efficiency.

Evaluation of the effectiveness of public administration in theoretical aspect there is a procedure for comparing the results of certain decisions with criterial features that embody officially recognized values, interests, goals and norms. The evaluation procedure is at the same time the process of identifying the contradiction between the subjective and objective factors of management. Such contradictions are quite natural: it is impossible (and not necessary) to fully take into account the entire variety of objective trends and needs, interests and demands of society in goals and strategies, projects and plans, as well as to foresee the impact of constantly changing situations. Solutions fix a certain distance. Between the existent and the proper, the actual and the desired, the realized and potential possibilities of the state and society. Contradictions between achieved results and unrealized opportunities, between used and unclaimed resources, between indicators at the input and output of the control system are determined by the inadequacy of goals and means to the scale of real opportunities and objective needs, as well as to the volume of resource reserves.

Compliance of the results of decisions with the values ​​and goals of the system, social needs, interests and potential opportunities for their satisfaction does not occur spontaneously. It is achieved by increasing the level of functioning of the entire management system, the adequacy of the principles, forms, methods and style of making and implementing decisions. objective factor and normative-value base of management.

The described procedure for evaluating the effectiveness of management allows us to understand its difference from the implementation of the control function. Including the element of control (establishing the conformity of the result of the implementation of the decision with the intended goals), the evaluation process is not limited to it, because the main thing here is an indicator of how much the decision corresponded to the mission, functions and goals of this state body, as well as the interests of the state and society, their capabilities and objective needs; to what extent the expended efforts are realized in the implemented changes of the managed object.

Depending on what is recognized as the main sign of effectiveness, three groups of criteria are distinguished: value-rational, goal-oriented and pragmatic (these criteria are discussed in Table No. 1). Determining the effectiveness of management on the basis of the conformity of the results of decisions and their consequences to the values ​​recognized by the state, expressed in the political strategy, we call the value-rational criterion. If the compliance of the results of the implementation of the decision with the set goals, practical tasks expressed in state programs and plans is taken as an indicator of management efficiency, then such a criterion is called goal-oriented. Measuring the effectiveness of management by type - "cost-output" or "cost-result" characterizes the pragmatic criterion.

The considered criteria for the effectiveness of public administration are general, in the sense that they can be used in assessing decisions related to the activities of the managing entity in any area of ​​public life. At the same time, each of the types of criteria is applicable to the analysis of decisions of various levels, scales and significance for the state and society. The value-rational criterion will help the politician and the theorist to evaluate the effectiveness of global, system-wide decisions of the authorities and management of the highest level, the results and consequences of which are manifested in profound changes in the whole society or in many of its areas. It is incorrect to judge the effectiveness of such decisions by individual positive results, as well as by the identified losses. Both are felt and comprehended by the ruling subject and the ruled gradually, often over a long period. It is all the more impossible to express these results and the expected consequences in any exact numerical terms. Only by considering what happened, ongoing and possible results through the prism of a value system, the analyst will be able to determine the positive or negative effectiveness of these large-scale management actions of a state entity.

The goal-oriented criterion is also general, complex, but it is focused on assessing the effectiveness of management according to fairly specific indicators that characterize the immediate results of the goals achieved, tasks solved, strategies and programs implemented, taking into account the state resources used. The integral indicator - the correspondence of the results to the interests of the state and society is also more specific than “correspondence to values”. Although the understanding of state interests is also a problem. Marked evaluation indicators can be fixed by quantitative methods and qualitative characteristics. For example, indicators of the level and quality of life, political activity of citizens - voters, health status. The effectiveness of many government decisions at the highest and regional levels cannot be measured quantitatively, however, even in such situations, the latter can play a supporting role. For example, the effectiveness of the reform Russian system Education, of course, is not measured by the number of converted secondary schools and technical schools into a certain number of gymnasiums, colleges and lyceums. The main thing is in assessing the quality of a new, variable, system educational institutions, in whether this quality has become higher than the Soviet level or not. Nevertheless, quantitative data should be taken into account when carrying out the results of the reform.

Concerning the pragmatic criterion of efficiency. Evaluation of the effectiveness of individual specific decisions of management bodies at different levels is quite appropriate. Only primitive pragmatism, motivated by so-called common sense and the ever-present scarcity of resources, is dangerous. Such an approach of the authorities to the system of higher education and to science put the latter before the danger of degradation, led to the loss of previously won priorities. According to some press reports, at present 80% of Russian mathematicians and 50% of physicists work abroad. As is well known, government spending on education and science pays off over a long period of time; this is the basis for progress in the present and future, a contribution to the potential of the state. Vulgar pragmatism in educational and scientific policy is opposed to the fundamental interests of the people.

The effectiveness of public administration is made up of the interaction of many factors, from the totality of the results of management activities in all spheres of state and public life. Therefore, the problem under consideration is not exhausted by the analysis of general efficiency criteria. Along with general efficiency criteria, science and practice use specific ones for each area of ​​management: political, social, economic, etc. The content of each of them also includes a general requirement: compliance of the results of management activities with certain state values, goals and norms, management principles and public interests. The specificity is determined by the essential features of efficiency, which are manifested only in this type of management. For example, for political management, this is the level of development of the political activity of the masses and the protection of human rights and freedoms; for the social - ensuring the improvement of the quality of life, etc. The general criterion is concretized and supplemented by a special one, used to determine the effectiveness of the management of individual spheres of public life. Thus, the theoretically well-known definition of the effectiveness of managerial activity as the ratio of “net positive results (the excess of desirable consequences over undesirable) and acceptable costs” can successfully “work” in assessing decisions on specific socio-economic issues related to individual organizations. Such decisions “may be called effective if the best result is achieved for a given time cost of choice.”

Global economic decisions (and not only) in one way or another affect the social sphere and politics, where it is not possible to calculate “net positive results”, as well as “acceptable” or “given time”, “lowest costs”. In addition, it should be borne in mind that the effectiveness of socio-political decisions in many situations is directly related neither to the lowest costs, nor to high ones, and even more so to the given ones. The costs of such decisions are mostly not programmed, which does not mean that they are out of control.

efficiency public administration municipal

2. Efficiency of state and municipal government in Russia

2.1 Efficiency markmunicipal government

The effectiveness of power in the country is determined by how effective power is at the primary, grassroots level - in the municipality. The population judges the work of the entire state machine by the way municipal government works. Local self-government, due to its social nature and objective laws of decentralization of management, is called upon to solve the most complex problems. The list of these problems - issues of local importance - is disclosed in the articles of the Federal Law of October 6, 2003 No. 131-FZ "On general principles organizations of local self-government in the Russian Federation”.

In order for the municipal authorities to be able to really solve issues of local importance, the Tax and Budget code The Russian Federation will make fundamental changes, after the entry into force of which the municipal government will receive greater resources and powers. As President of the Russian Federation D. A. Medvedev noted in his Address to the Federal Assembly, “the issue of increasing the responsibility of municipal authorities for the quality and results of their work is long overdue. The empowerment of representative bodies of local self-government with such serious powers implies, in turn, an increase in the requirements for the quality of their own work". For a long time, there was a myth at the local level that as soon as the governing body is chosen by the population itself, life will immediately improve. This point of view is reflected in the former legislation on local self-government, in which it was obligatory to have only a representative body in municipalities. However, this was not enough. The second, more persistent and convenient myth is to give the local self-government a lot of money in the form of a permanent tax base, and then all problems will be solved. This is not the case for many reasons:

Even huge financial reserves can simply be stolen, as evidenced by the practice of recent decades. No wonder the President of the Russian Federation D. A. Medvedev called corruption the main problem of state and municipal administration. According to the degree of corruption in 2008, Russia ranked 147th in the world;

You need to think about why in municipalities with similar conditions, with the same filling of the municipal budget and the amount of resources, people live differently: somewhere everything is relatively safe and the population is satisfied with the work of local authorities, but somewhere the habitat is neglected and people sharply criticize power.

We must learn to manage:

Finance, that is, rationally plan and manage even small budget revenues, analyze and develop new financial sources, look for investors, etc.;

Innovation, that is, mastering new management technologies with the help of consultants and experts;

Human potential, primarily the potential of municipal employees, personnel of municipal organizations and the entire local community;

Information technologies, putting them at the service of local authorities.

The quality of local government is determined by the quality of professional training of employees and the system of local governments. And in this regard, the decisive word belongs to the state power. In the legislation, local self-government is guaranteed state support: legal, financial, organizational, methodological. The main attention is paid to the legal and financial support of local self-government - this is a necessary minimum. But without professional organization local government, neither legal nor financial support is working. It is no coincidence that in developed countries the role of organizational support for local self-government is increasing.

Organizational support by the state of local self-government is currently systematically implemented in Russia by government bodies:

1. Clear goal-orientations for local governments have been developed - these are criteria for the effectiveness of the activities of local governments (see Decree of the President of the Russian Federation of April 28, 2008 No. 607 “On assessing the effectiveness of the activities of local governments of urban districts and municipal districts”). Of particular importance is the fact that the criteria for the effectiveness of the activities of local governments are logically interconnected with the assessment of federal authorities and the authorities of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation and are their direct continuation at the local level.

2. A new system of local self-government bodies has been formed, which is mandatory for the implementation of the real right of the population to local self-government, which includes the head of the municipality, a representative body and local administration.

3. New mechanisms for direct and feedback communication between the subject and object of municipal government have been developed - a complex of various forms and methods for preparing and discussing the most important management decisions with the population.

4. Innovative mechanisms are being introduced to ensure transparency of power and social control over the activities of local governments: mandatory publication of reports on the results of work on the official websites of the municipality and the subject of the Russian Federation, mandatory sociological surveys of the population.

5. A mechanism has been formed to identify and encourage the best managers, thanks to which it is possible to create a positive competitive environment. As the long practice of interaction between municipal and regional bodies has shown, the competitive environment can also be negative - if municipal leaders compete not in terms of indicators characterizing the quality of life of the population and the degree of implementation of new methods and principles of management, but in their other qualities. And in such a negative environment, municipalities received incentive financial resources due to subjective reasons.

6. A mechanism is being developed for management control over monitoring the efficiency of the municipality. The principal innovation of this mechanism is the compilation of a list of indicators necessary to determine the inefficient expenditures of local budgets.

7. Sanctions are established for inefficient management, up to the introduction of temporary financial management. Particularly promising in terms of the formation of effective local self-government is the creation of an institution of professional managers of local administration, designed to improve the professionalism of municipal employees.

8. We have listed only the first steps towards an effective professional organization of local self-government. These steps can be criticized for a certain incompleteness and scientific underdevelopment, but they have been made, and such government initiatives, of course, should be supported and developed by the scientific community. In order to fulfill the Russian development program until 2020 and rise to a decent standard of living, even more complex innovations in the organization of local self-government will have to be introduced.

9. The most difficult job of analysts at the state level is the definition of quality standards for municipal social services and procedures for their provision, that is, municipal regulations.

The next step should be the transition from the formulation of performance indicators to the definition of performance indicators - both the minimum necessary and the best. Efficiency should be measured by specific indicators that are the same for all municipalities - urban districts or municipal districts with similar operating conditions. This will be followed by the development of federal and regional standards for financial and other resource support for specific standards and procedures for the quality of municipal services.

If we talk about the methodological support by the state of local self-government and the development of municipal personnel, then the main thing here is the need to train municipal employees in the principles of management after the conceptual and methodological development of the content of high-quality municipal social services. It is necessary to explain how to achieve efficiency, to teach new management technologies. To date, municipal vocational education is the weakest link in local self-government.

If we consider municipal managers as the first stage of a unified system of governance in Russia, then it is necessary to systematically approach their professional training. The Address of the President of the Russian Federation D. A. Medvedev to the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation says: “Today's Russia and its future innovative economy, public service, management system and social services also need a new system for the formation of a personnel reserve, which will business of the most talented, creative and professional people. The managerial reserve should include three levels: municipal, regional and federal”.

In Russia, a unified system of personnel reserve of the state and municipal service is being formed. A weighty argument in favor of such a step is the introduction of class ranks for municipal employees, the creation of conditions for rotation in the state and municipal service. But after all, this can only be done if there is systematic professional training, continuous professional education of state and municipal employees.

Civil servants are taught systematically, strictly in accordance with the law, every three years employees attend refresher courses. Education is built on the basis of federal and regional educational standards in the specialty "State and municipal management". Municipal employees are taught as far as possible, due to the understanding by the head of the subject of the Russian Federation of the importance of training. However, one-time training events, which are sometimes organized on an emergency basis to train some municipal managers, cannot improve the quality of management.

The beginning of high-quality professional training of municipal managers should be the development of a state educational standard for municipal management of the modern level. If we analyze the existing state standard for this specialty, we can see that:

municipal management is devoted to the minimum amount of material studied; there are textbooks called “State and Municipal Administration”, in which 1/8 of the material concerns municipal administration (to be fair, it must be said that just as little attention is paid to the specifics of state administration in regions); the concepts of the standard are largely outdated and do not correspond to the modern system of local self-government.

A systematic approach to the professional training of municipal managers means improving the state standard and professional training procedures:

Definition and strict observance of clear periods of advanced training of municipal managers;

The relationship of learning not only with the momentary, but also with the long-term tasks of the reform of local self-government;

A clear identification of the specifics of municipal government in the structure of the state standard and the formation of a comprehensive body of knowledge and competencies in this area. According to the Federal Law of October 6, 2003 No. 131-FZ “On the General Principles of the Organization of Local Self-Government in the Russian Federation”, the institute of professional managers of the local administration was legally created.

The logic of the formation of the institution of professional managers of the local administration requires, following the legislative consolidation of the status of real actions to form a cadre of managers. A corps of highly qualified specialists should be created who can move mobilely around the municipalities of Russia and participate in competitions. The launch of such processes of horizontal mobility would create opportunities for professional growth and the exchange of successful experience among professional managers. As a result, they could more reliably, on an innovative basis, unite the country through management technologies at the grassroots, municipal level.

Not a single educational structure training of professional managers of local administration. Only at the Russian State Social University for students of day and evening departments in the specialty "State and Municipal Administration" the optional course "Professional Manager of Local Administration" is being conducted for the second year.

The implementation of a high-quality educational standard should be ensured by the system of higher and secondary specialized educational institutions. For the professional training system, it is necessary to select talented and patriotic teachers, train them in Russia and train in the developed countries of the world in this regard.

In order to increase the level of professionalism of local managers and improve the organization of local governments, it is necessary to create a powerful infrastructure vocational education municipal government, which should include the following links: the All-Russian Municipal Academy;

structures of vocational education in the regions: institutes, training and evaluation centers; research institutes and laboratories of management technologies to improve the efficiency of local self-government bodies; counseling centers; professional associations of municipal managers, professional managers of local administrations; structures of assistance for the professional development of municipal personnel in the Association of Small and Medium Cities of Russia and other associations of municipalities.

Establishing effective work of municipalities is vital for the citizens of Russia. Optimal managerial decisions made at the state level, as well as the orders of the population, will ultimately be executed (or not executed) by the local authorities. Qualitatively, the municipal government will be able to work only if it is professionally trained and rationally organized.

2.2 Evaluation of the effectiveness of public administration

The current stage of Russia's development is characterized by increased attention to the problem of the effectiveness of state power and management. Scientific research is devoted to this problem, it is discussed on television, among officials and politicians. The materials of the Messages of the President of the Russian Federation to the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation also contain a statement of tasks in this area. Meanwhile, the complexity of building a stable and efficient public administration system in modern Russia is also obvious. First, the problem of efficiency has not been sufficiently developed in the theory of public administration, since it is mainly affected when it comes to commercial enterprises. This creates problems in building a theoretical basis for making changes. Secondly, the difficulties of directly implementing public administration reforms are very likely, since each system seeks to preserve itself and uses its full potential for this. The purpose of this article is to identify the conditions for improving the efficiency of public administration in Russia based on the analysis of key elements state system using the developments of modern management theory.

Similar Documents

Organization of the apparatus of state and municipal administration. The concept and characteristics, the main types of government bodies and ways of their formation. The political mechanism of the system of state and municipal government.

test, added 01/23/2017


The concept of public administration efficiency, its types and main characteristics. The main factors influencing this indicator. Criteria for the effectiveness of public administration, methods and measures to improve it, achieved criteria.

term paper, added 12/24/2011


Methodological bases for the formation of a system of criteria for the effectiveness of public administration. Indicators for assessing the effectiveness of the activities of bodies executive power subjects of the Russian Federation. Model for improving the quality of public administration in Russia.

term paper, added 04/13/2016


The complexity of assessing the effectiveness of public administration. Theoretical and methodological approaches in the study of the effectiveness of public administration. Characteristics and methods for assessing the economic and social efficiency of public administration.

test, added 01/23/2017


The concept of public administration, a systematic approach to its study, the level of legality. Methods for assessing the effectiveness of the public administration system. Features of socio-economic forecasting. Efficiency of indicative planning.

term paper, added 10/11/2009


Tasks, methods and functions of municipal government. Methodological approaches to determining its effectiveness. The place of municipal government in the system of economic management. Indicators of the efficiency and effectiveness of the activities of authorities.

term paper, added 03/10/2015


The essence of public administration. Methods of state and municipal management. Features of organic and catch-up modernization, their advantages and disadvantages. The specifics of the modernization of state and municipal government in Russia.

term paper, added 01/02/2017


Organizational environment of state and municipal government. Direct and feedback. Factors internal environment state administration. Functional-structural subsystem of public administration. Criteria for the distribution of departmental functions.

test, added 01/23/2017


Theoretical issues of personnel policy: essence and concept, stages, efficiency criteria. Main characteristics, efficiency in the field of state and municipal government in the Russian Federation. Professional development, training of employees.

term paper, added 03/06/2016


Public administration: efficiency criteria and its understanding in the history of political science. Evaluation of management effectiveness in the Republic of Belarus: analysis of the main criteria. Ways and ways to improve the efficiency of rational public administration.

1. The concept of public administration efficiency

In the field of public administration, the key factor that denies or justifies specific methods and forms of activity is traditionally considered to be efficiency. That's why most of the private problems of the implementation of public administration can be combined into one, the most general and relevant both at the regional, central (federal), and at the interstate levels — the problem of effective organization of the work of the system of administrative and public administration.

The urgency of this problem increases in the conditions of post-industrial society, characteristic features who are :

• - accelerating the pace of scientific and technological development;
• - high social risks, instability of social ties, high social mobility;
• - intense competition both in the foreign and domestic markets;
• - globalization of economic relations;
• - the ever-growing need for innovation.

All this predetermined the rejection of the traditional mechanistic approach to management and stimulated the search for new theoretical models and practical methods for implementing effective public administration.

Due to their practical and theoretical significance, the problems associated with the conceptualization of the concept of public administration efficiency, the development of methods for improving efficiency and its measurement are considered in detail in almost all social sciences. Moreover, these problems have become a key subject of research in certain scientific disciplines (for example, the economy of the public sector or municipal management). But any science considers these problems from a specific angle .

The very concept of efficiency, due to its inherent multidimensionality, has many interpretations and interpretations. Of course, the choice of one of them or the creation of a new one will depend on the goals of a particular analysis, the level of this analysis, and, finally, the chosen methodology.

In microeconomics under efficiency often understand the production function that describes the dependence of costs and output, or the achievement of the largest volume of production of goods and services using resources of a certain cost (McConnell, Brew, Stiglsch).

In administrative theory along with the economic component of the concept of efficiency (“the ratio of the volume of services provided to the cost (volume) of resources required to provide a given volume of services” (Epstein) often they also distinguish the technical (or organizational) component, determined from the standpoint of goal achievement . Technical efficiency refers to the degree to which public services meet the needs, desires and resources of their clients, i.e. reflects the compliance of the management organization with external conditions .

Historically, in the process of changing from one dominant scientific paradigm to another, the concept of efficiency has changed and gradually acquired an ever wider range of interpretations. The process of expansion and complication of the meanings of this concept was especially noticeable in the course of methodological changes within the organizational theory and the theory of public administration.

Adherents of the "classical school" often interpreted « efficiency» as the achievement of formal goals, by predetermined methods within a specific timeframe (Taylor). However, such a mechanistic approach to the conceptualization of the concept of efficiency assumed that the goals of the organization are clearly established and measurable, and standard methods are used to achieve these goals. This approach turned out to be appropriate only for analyzing the effectiveness of simple organizations, whose personnel are subject to clear rules and perform simple routine operations. . A simple organization with a rigid hierarchical structure and, usually, strong paternalistic traditions presented the employee with elementary requirements: to be loyal and perform work on time in the manner indicated above. This was well understood by adherents of a mechanistic, value-neutral attitude to the analysis of the effectiveness of organizations, starting with Frederic Taylor And Max Weber when they tried to avoid consideration of ethical, political or psychological factors in their research. In the traditional, or "classical", paradigm of administrative policy, based on the principles set forth in the works F.Taylor, W.Wilson and M.Weber, the emphasis on the efficiency of the work of the public administration apparatus is decisive. Efficiency in this case is objective, non-personal in nature and is based on three methodological guidelines :

• - separation of administration from politics;
• - recognition that "in every element of any work there is always one method and one way of execution, which is faster and better than all the others" (Taylor);
• - recognition of the bureaucratic organization as the most effective for the implementation of scientific principles of management.

The classic of American administrative science, Dwight Waldo, directly pointed to determination of the growth of general interest in the phenomenon of efficiency as a process of transition from the conditions of the activities of organizations in the 19th century. to the conditions of activity of organizations of the XX century. “At the turn of the century, however, it became obvious that morality, despite all the desirability, is not sufficient. Democracy must be wealthy, capable. Citizens must be active and vigilant. The state machine should not waste time, money and energy. The wasteful use of our resources must be corrected. If our good intentions are ruined by inefficiency, then inefficiency is therefore the chief vice.” (Waldo)

In the middle of the twentieth century task of administrative theory was to determine how an organization should be designed to do the job effectively (Simon). This approach determined main instruments of change in organizations (and, accordingly, tools to improve the efficiency of their work) administrative order, an order capable of rationalizing the actions of personnel (for example, establish an "effective" structure or abolish the "inefficient"). Narrowing the base for unpredictable, random actions of individuals, directive control, according to adherents of the technocratic, or mechanistic, approach, allowed the best possible "quantitative rationalization", thereby facilitating the process of measuring performance, which was carried out using simple indicators in the input / output system . However, it is precisely in the positivist pursuit of quantitative analysis and manipulation of numbers that the social quality of organizational change is almost always left out of research.

Thus, with a mechanistic approach to the theory and practice of organizing the effective work of personnel, the psychological, social and political aspects of efficiency were not actually affected (the latter was deliberately omitted, since the traditional administrative models were based on the principle of a clear separation of the competences of politicians and administrators) . All the attention of researchers and practitioners was focused on the technical side of the management process within the organization, while the role of environmental factors was omitted. .

Gradually contradictions between ideal bureaucratic models and real management practices , which means contradictions between the prescribed and real results of the activities of public administration became so obvious that it was necessary to adjust the management paradigm , the inclusion in it of a wider range of aspects of management activities.
The need for human relations rejected the mechanistic understanding of efficiency, defined through the formal achievement of goals, as too simplistic and inconsistent with practice. Efficiency began to be interpreted as a complex, complex phenomenon, determined by a number of criteria :

• - the degree of satisfaction of the personnel of the organization with their work and its results;
• - the level of staff turnover in the organization;
• - staff motivation, etc.

In this case to the conditions of efficiency, in addition to loyalty, subordination and clear knowledge of the procedure for performing operations, also applies and conscious satisfaction with work and working conditions, interpersonal relationships that have developed in the team.

In other words, socio-psychological factors and informal connections within the organization were included in the study of the phenomenon of efficiency. However, there was a different kind of danger here. Excessive actualization of psychological factors, building the concept of efficiency based on the hierarchy of needs limited its applicability to the sphere of interindividual relations within the organization and, as a result, overly simplified the assessment of real management processes .

Neglect of the formal aspects of the activities of organizations, problems of the hierarchy of power (a kind of rejection reaction to the previous technocratic, or mechanistic, approach to management) led to the inadequacy of this approach regarding the analysis of the activities of complex systems . And here we have to fully agree with M. Crozier, which the advocated a constructive synthesis of these two scientific approaches , the illegality of updating only one of the aspects of the activities of organizations: either formal or non-formal.

Representatives of cybernetic and then synergetic approaches to performance analysis made the concept more complex while trying to avoid both individualistic and structural determinism. The starting point of their methodologies was the openness and complexity of organizations, their active interaction with the environment, the feedback system. In other words, the simplicity, closeness, linearity of organizations inherent in mechanistic models, as well as individualism, atomism and excessive psychologism, characteristic of the theoretical developments of representatives of the school of human relations, were rejected .

If we consider changes in approaches to the analysis of the conditions for effective management through the prism of the development of models of organizational systems, then three types of such system models can be distinguished, each of which is based on organizational principles developed, respectively: by the “classical school”, the cybernetic approach and the synergistic approach .

1. Mechanical type of organizational system characterized by an extremely weak structural response to environmental changes. Accordingly, organizational systems of this kind are characterized by a small innovative potential and insignificant opportunities for its implementation. The conflict between bureaucracy and change (innovation) is very palpable here;
2. Adaptive type of organizational system characterized by adaptation to changes in the external environment. Organizational systems of this type react post factum, trying to adapt their organizational structure to new conditions. The type of feedback in this case is negative;
3. Creative type of organizational system characterized by an active role in the transformation of the environment and a flexible organizational structure. Organizations of this type are focused on internal development and development of the external environment. They are able to quickly change both the goals of the activity and the structure. The type of feedback in this case is positive.

Cybernetics and, later, the synergetic approach also determined new conditions for efficiency.:

The need to abandon the artificial imposition of directions for the development of complex systems;

Actualization of "sensitivity" to the initial conditions, which consists in highlighting the special in the conditions of the genesis of the organization and the process of its development (the greatest attention is paid to the "personal" history of the organization);

Determining the effectiveness of management activities not through an analysis of the amount of resources expended, but through a study of the qualitative distribution of management impact (administrative impact configuration);

Recognition of the multiplicity of potential scenarios for the development of complex systems (it is fundamentally important for effective management to take into account the maximum number of such scenarios or models);

The accelerated qualitative growth of the system is determined by the inclusion of positive feedback mechanisms, leading to “blow-up regimes”.

In this way, new system performance indicator became even more complex as it includes both historical, economic, psychological (motivational) and structural-communicative components.

1. Social efficiency of public administration

The problem of conceptualizing the concept of public administration efficiency, choosing the principles of its analysis and evaluation criteria turned out to be much more difficult than the problem of analyzing efficiency in the sphere of private production and market exchange. This is explained primarily the absence of a universal and objective evaluation mechanism for the work of the public administration system . IN private sector such are prices established in the course of free market exchange, and the main criterion for the effectiveness of the company is, respectively, its profit .

In the public administration system, usually, applied the only way performance evaluation - self-development of performance measurement standards . In other words, the activity of the state is evaluated on the basis of the evaluation scale and measurement methods developed by it. This opens up wide opportunities for perverting or replacing public goals and interests with the goals and interests of the bureaucratic system itself.

In the late 1980s in Western countries repeated attempts were made to introduce market mechanisms for evaluating and measuring efficiency in the sphere of state and municipal government . However, the introduction of organizational models built on the basis of the “neoclassical research program” and methods for evaluating the effectiveness of their work led to failures in the social sphere , which ultimately had a negative impact on the functioning of the economy and the political system of most Western states. The expansion of the state with its directive way of distributing resources and benefits was replaced by the expansion of the market with the dominance of the "right of the strongest" and obvious gaps in social policy . Hence, the most urgent problem in the field of assessing the effectiveness of public administration is the problem of harmonious combination of market and public approaches to assessing efficiency. This proves the growing interest of Western and domestic sociologists, political scientists, economists, lawyers in this issue.

In recent years, there has been a tendency in Western and Russian literature to talk about " social economy" And " social efficiency”, contrasting these expressions with earlier and narrower meanings of efficiency and productivity. Obviously, this is due to the limited use of market assessment methods in the field of public administration, the change in the management paradigm, the actualization of the analysis of social interactions in the course of the management process, as well as the requirement to assess the social effects of management decisions.

In Western and, in particular, in the English-language literature on the issues of public administration, the concept of "social efficiency" in most cases is used as a kind of alternative to economic efficiency and productivity. For instance, Marshal Dimok in his work Criteria and Objectives of Administrative Policy, he clearly seeks to move away from the mechanical meaning of efficiency. Any rigid or mechanistic interpretation of the term, he believes, is not appropriate: good administration is not "coldly mechanical" - it is highly humanized, "alive and bright." Moreover, Dimok argues that " there is no real efficiency that is not also social ". Efficiency, and this is quite obvious, is a key object of administrative policy, but it must be socially, humanistically interpreted. Efficiency is a matter of quality, And therefore, quantitative and mechanistic methods of measurement do not exhaust the fullness of the problem .

F French explorer Anise le Port, criticizing the bureaucracy and the traditional approach to the analysis of public administration, also writes: “Experience shows that it is not enough to change the mode of production, the social system or the system of government, so that the risk of the revival of bureaucracy disappears; concerns about its reappearance require a conscientious determination of the causes that give rise to it, as well as strong political will to get rid of the old logic of development and determine the conditions for creating greater social efficiency.

The authors whose works are cited above interpret social efficiency as an alternative to purely economic (or, rather, mechanistic) interpretation of the effectiveness of public administration. Already by myself the term "social efficiency", in their opinion, is intended to emphasize the social essence of the management process, to humanize the image of a management organization . However, this approach does not provide us with the essential characteristics of the phenomenon of social efficiency and, perhaps, only makes it difficult to understand what specific meaning is given to the concept of "social efficiency".

Another approach to the interpretation of social efficiency, also quite common in the literature, connects this phenomenon with the effective social policy of the state, the creation and distribution of public goods . Such an interpretation is usually included in the analysis of the formation and development of the so-called welfare state, or the welfare state. Critical approach to market mechanism distribution, caused primarily by the need to eliminate market flaws through the political mechanism of its correction, actualized the importance of social efficiency as a more equitable distribution of benefits . However, this approach also seems to be not entirely legitimate, since implicitly contains a contradiction between maximizing the public good (in the form of, say, social support, free education, medical care) and economic (market) efficiency , requiring the achievement of an optimal allocation of resources . Thus, a certain tension appears between the social component of the term (in this particular interpretation) and efficiency.

You can also bring another, narrower, approach to the interpretation of the term "social efficiency". He is the following contrast : efficiency of the "bureau" versus social efficiency and is based on the methodology of rational choice theory and neoclassical premises . Let us briefly outline its essence. The state bureaucracy, as a rational maximizer of its own benefit, seeks to increase its own budget and the scale of a specific management organization. These goals at a certain stage of the expansion of the bureaucracy become extremely ineffective for society, since, as O. Comte wrote almost two hundred years ago, the official “exists only through the production of working classes; and that everything he consumes is taken from the producers.” Social efficiency in this case is defined as the difference between the social product produced by this organization and the costs of society for its maintenance . Of course, such an interpretation of the term is related to the previous one, but it should be considered as completely independent, since it provides for a more specific level of analysis. J.-E. Lane wrote on this subject: "Speaking of efficiency, we must separate the question of which of these two mechanisms is the most effective, from the question of the extent to which bureaus or political programs should organize their activities most effectively."

Social efficiency is a function of minimizing transaction costs. She is directly related to the effective operation of the mechanism for coordinating social interactions . Therefore, the approach to the conceptualization of the concept of "social efficiency" is based on the following basic premises:

The social effectiveness of the administration is in reducing political uncertainty at the macro level , the formulation of clear "rules of the game" and control over their implementation;

Social efficiency the higher, the more society invests in building the capacity of the state , defined as “the ability to effectively conduct and promote collective activities” (The State in a Changing World. Report of the World Bank, 1997); at the same time, it is important to emphasize that we are not talking about a quantitative extensive increase in the power of the state (bureaucratic apparatus, army, police, etc.), but about the search for qualitatively different ways of organizing administrative and public administration;

The key way to increase the potential of the state and, accordingly, social efficiency as a result of using this potential is creation of an effective system of norms and rules that clarify social interactions and limit risks of various kinds . (In this case, we are interested in the impact of non-economic factors on the efficiency of state policy and the economy, determined through the value of transaction costs. Accordingly, the higher the social efficiency, the lower the cost of society for transaction costs (exchange costs). For modern post-industrial societies, the issue of increasing transaction costs is quite acute, since their growth is determined by the growing complexity of contractual relations, the deepening division of labor, and the increase in the number of innovations. It is no less (and perhaps even more) relevant for the so-called transitional societies, especially Russia and the countries of the former USSR. Here increase in transaction costs rather, it is determined by other reasons: the loss of guidelines for social interaction, an exceptionally low level of trust in the government, politicians, business partners, an underdeveloped information system, etc.)

This definition has at least three benefits.

Firstly , it allows you to evaluate social efficiency regardless of the level of analysis: at the level of communities of states, individual national states, organizations, their divisions, etc.

Secondly , it largely allows you to avoid ideological overtones, while remaining neutral with respect to various forms of coordinating interactions with the market, hierarchy, and others.

Thirdly , it is equally applicable to the evaluation of governance in both the private and public sectors.

The change in emphasis in public administration from process and rules to quality customer satisfaction has led to introduction of new indicators of the effectiveness of public administration:

The level of satisfaction of citizens with the services provided;

The level of trust in the central government and local administration;

Degrees of involvement in the decision-making process, etc.

This, in turn, required changes in the management culture and the formation of a new style of work.

In this way, public administration efficiency study both in Russia and abroad formed at the end of the 20th century. as an independent scientific direction, in which, with different approaches, there are a number of general provisions and research trends :

recognition of innovations in the field of public administration as key factor increase its efficiency;

the need to shift the attention of researchers from the technical and economic spheres of reform to the socio-political ones;

recognition of the latter's higher development potential;

the need to conceptualize the concept of "social efficiency" and the search for methods for measuring it and, finally, the search for models of socially effective public administration.

3. Types of public administration efficiency

Public administration is complex in its elemental composition and relationships and multifaceted by function system. The volume and nature of the social processes and phenomena covered by it reflects specifics public administration, and consistency And organized integrity are its essential feature. Taken together, consistency and organized integrity provide the necessary coherence, coordination, subordination, purposefulness, rationality and efficiency of public administration.

The need for the effective impact of the state on the dynamically developing modern super-complex processes and phenomena determines the significance and interest on the part of society and its structures in the effectiveness and efficiency of public administration. Increasingly relevant in relation to public administration are such characteristics as " productivity", "efficiency", "quality", "efficiency". Increasingly rising the question of the capacity of the state as a determining subject of management, meet the most urgent needs of individual citizens and society as a whole in conditions of severely limited resources . At the same time, the long-term nature and stability of positive changes in the state is determined by a real increase in the productivity and efficiency of public administration.

Public administration , aimed at solving any problem, should be effective and efficient. However, it does not always give the desired result, which the managing subject aspired to, often leads to undesirable consequences, which makes the issue of the effectiveness and efficiency of public administration always relevant.

Between effectiveness and efficiency you can't put an equal sign. If about performance government controlled can be judged by the achievement of goals, as the main result of management actions, then efficiency requires an answer to the question: “At what cost was this result obtained? ". However, when evaluating public administration, they are often treated as equivalent concepts.

When evaluating the effectiveness of public administration, the main criterion for evaluating which is the achievement of goals , important point is an the nature of the goals. There should always be a question here: “Is the goal achievable and what is the timeframe for achieving it?”.

At the same time, no matter how complex the system of public administration is, it is equally and no less difficult to determine the effectiveness of public administration, to identify criteria, indicators, as well as methodological approaches and methods for evaluating efficiency.

The concept of " efficiency" comes from the Latin word "effects", which means real, creative . As science developed, its content became more and more enriched and, in relation to the current stage of development, efficiency is seen as effectiveness, most often presented as the ratio of the result obtained and the costs associated with obtaining it.

It is necessary to calculate in advance the effectiveness of management, based on the possibility achievements best results whenever possible in as soon as possible at the lowest cost of all types of resources. It is important to emphasize that we are talking not only about the resources used (material, labor, financial, informational, etc.), but also about the timing of the implementation of the management task. The delay in the timing of its implementation leads, sometimes, in general to the inexpediency of its solution.

In relation to the public administration system efficiency (in a broad sense) should be considered as a complex characteristic of the potential and actual results of the functioning of the system, taking into account the degree of compliance of the results obtained with the goals and objectives of its development. At the same time, the compliance of the results obtained with the goals and objectives of the country's development should be viewed not only in the short term, but also in the medium and long term. Besides, public administration efficiency should reflect both the direct results of management and secondary objectively arising results . And if direct results reflect completeness, expediency and consequences of the goals and objectives of public administration embodied in the life of society , then side effects allow you to see their validity and conditionality, the degree of their influence on other social phenomena . And here it is very important to separate the results and consequences, as a result of public administration, from those that may arise as a result of the action of objective and, possibly, spontaneous mechanisms.

Public Administration Efficiency cannot reflect results in only one direction or aspect (political, economic, social, etc.). It should reveal all its multi-element content, all the variety of ongoing processes and phenomena. She should reflect the results of interdependent processes of development of man and society, their interaction with nature . This testifies to need integrated approach to assessing the effectiveness of public administration.

However, one understanding of what should reflect the effectiveness of public administration is not enough to address this issue in practice. And, despite the fact that the problem of the effectiveness of public administration dates back many decades, it remains unresolved to this day. With regard to each object of public administration, the concept of efficiency is specified, criteria and performance indicators are selected, and only on their basis a comprehensive assessment of the results of public administration is given. Most often, the effectiveness of public administration is considered in relation to social and economic development states .

Based on the variety of tasks facing the state related to the management within the country, and also depending on the object and control level, stand out different kinds public administration efficiency:

- economic , reflecting the effectiveness of the economic policy pursued by the state, the effectiveness of ongoing processes and phenomena (economic growth, the use of resources, privatization, investment, the public sector of the economy, etc.);

- social , allowing to determine the effectiveness of the social policy of the state, solving social problems of the life of society, its various groups and classes. The main criterion for the social efficiency of public administration is improving the quality and standard of human life.

- ecological , associated with the use of the environment, the implementation of environmental protection measures;

- foreign economic , reflecting mutually beneficial economic cooperation with states in the international arena, in the international division of labor, in the field of monetary relations, in the exchange of the latest technologies, etc.

Also stands out efficiency of sectoral, regional and local government and self-government.

You can select and other types of efficiency , but all of them, in fact, associated with the functions of the state , i.e. with the main directions of its activity, expressing the essence and purpose of public administration . Degree implementation of these functions And determines the effectiveness of state management of objects and processes.

In a modern society with a democratic political system and a market economy, the state, of course, performs many functions and responsibilities that very difficult to evaluate from a formalized standpoint of efficiency. It is clear that, for example, the function of ensuring the spiritual and physical health of the population, developing education, protecting the family, motherhood and childhood, educating the younger generation, stimulating the development of science and national culture are difficult to meet the indicators of economic and even social efficiency . But this should in no way serve as an excuse for inaction or self-elimination of the state from responsibility for their qualitative implementation.

IN Lately the effectiveness of public administration is often considered in terms of two measurable components: technical efficiency and economic efficiency.

Technical efficiency of public administration determined by the degree of achievement of the goals of the activity, taking into account public interests . Technical efficiency

Economic efficiency of public administration is defined as the ratio of the cost of the volumes of services provided to the cost of the volumes of resources attracted for this .

Economic efficiency reflects the internal state of affairs in the public administration system , her own activities. Technical efficiency reflects the compliance of public administration with the requirements of the external environment, taking into account the impact it has on the state of society . It is associated with both quantitative and qualitative indicators, the important characteristics of which are their efficiency and regularity.

As an economic category, economic efficiency reflects the relationship regarding the achievement of the desired result and the costs incurred in doing so. . It is efficiency that characterizes the level of economic development of the country to the greatest extent, directly or indirectly reflecting the quality, condition and level of use of all types of resources involved in the production process.

The main requirement for state management of the economy - promotion production efficiency, which speaks the most important quality characteristic of production , reflecting the level of development of production forces and the degree to which the needs of society are met .

Economic efficiency can be calculated at various levels : at the level national economy, individual regions, industries, enterprises, organizations, firms, households, as well as at the level of individual entrepreneurial projects.

When evaluating the economic efficiency at the level of the national economy, two important components should be taken into account : economic efficiency and social acceptability. This suggests that the choice of an effective strategy for sustainable economic development should be based on a real resource base and bring economic benefits to the whole society. Ultimately, the evaluation of the effectiveness of the functioning of the economy should be linked to the dynamics of the well-being of the people, based on the consistent rise of the productive forces.

At the same time, the productive forces should be considered in their broadest sense - not only as labor force, means of labor and objects of labor, but as the entire productive potential of the country, including scientific and creative potential, technological innovation, entrepreneurial resource, organizational and structural factors, etc.

The definition of any type of efficiency of public administration is based on criteria and indicators that reflect the state of the object of management, obtained as a result of managerial influence from the state.

4. Criteria and indicators of public administration efficiency

For a reliable and reasonable judgment about the effectiveness of public administration, it is used criteria and indicators, reflecting the result of management and the effect obtained . Based on the fact that the effectiveness of public administration is a multidimensional set, including many separate and, at the same time, closely interconnected and interdependent processes and phenomena, in determining the effectiveness of public administration is used multi-criteria approach.

Criteria , acting as the main measure, and indicators describing objects that allow assessing the level and quality of management, differentiated by spheres of public life . They are quantitative and qualitative.

To characterize the processes taking place in the economies of dynamically developing countries, the main criterion is building up social production on the basis of the latest scientific and technological achievements, leading to an increase in labor productivity, an increase in the quality, diversity and manufacturability of products. In the social sphere, the desire to implement the principle is obvious. social justice, taking into account, of course, the laws and forms of modern social relations, which are unique in each country. In the spiritual sphere, the understanding is ripening that every person must develop physically, morally and aesthetically and take place as a person in a free, democratic society.

In a general assessment of the efficiency of the functioning of the economy, the following system of indicators is used : GDP, GNP and ND - their total volume and calculations per capita, the structure of the national economy, the production of main types of products per capita, the level and quality of life of the population, indicators of economic efficiency. However, this system may change as the national economy develops.

The most important groups of indicators are the following groups:

1) Total volume and calculations per capita GDP, GNP and ND. When comparing them, the following conditions must be met: Firstly , compared indicators should be given to the same year or to the same period; Secondly , they must be brought to a single currency, taking into account the purchasing power of national currencies, i.e. at their purchasing power parities (PPP) and taking into account the commodity structure of GDP, i.e. taking into account household consumer spending, capital investment (market, paid goods and services), state social services and other current government spending (military and civil, i.e. non-market goods and services). If these conditions are not observed during comparison, then the real picture of the country's development is not reflected.

2) Industry structure national economy. Its analysis is based on GDP calculated by industry . When comparing the level of development by sectoral structure, the relationship between material and non-material production, industries and large economic complexes is studied. Here, the share of mechanical engineering, the chemical industry, i.e. industries that ensure scientific and technological progress, as well as the share of fuel and energy, agro-industrial, construction, defense and other complexes.

3) Production of main products per capita. These indicators make it possible to judge the country's ability to satisfy the need for the main types of products that are most significant for the development of the national economy (for example, electricity production, steelmaking and the production of rolled products, machine tools, cars, mineral fertilizers, etc.), as well as meeting the needs of the population in food products, durable goods (washing machines, televisions, refrigerators, etc.).

4) Standards of living. It is estimated by indicators such as GDP per capita, the structure of GDP use, especially the structure of final consumption expenditures (personal consumption expenditures). The following indicators are used to analyze the standard of living:

Consumer basket,

Living wage,

Average life expectancy,

The level of education of the population,

Per capita consumption of staple foods in calories and protein content,

Skill level labor resources,

The number of pupils and students per 10 thousand population,

Share of spending on education in GDP;

Indicators characterizing the development of the service sector (number of doctors per 10,000 population, number of hospital beds per 1,000 population, provision of housing, etc.).

In recent years, to determine the quality of life, it has been used human development index(HDI), used as an alternative to GDP to change the socio-economic development of the country. It allows you to assess the nature and priorities in the development of the country, to give a visual comparison of its achievements. The HDI is an integral indicator of human development, consisting of three components: longevity, education and standard of living . Longevity is measured by life expectancy, education by a combination of adult literacy and average years of schooling, standard of living by real GDP per capita adjusted for local cost of living (PPP). The HDI value ranges from 0 to 1, where 0 is min and 1 is max. If the HDI is 0.5 or less, it is rated as low; from 0.5 to 0.8 - medium and from 0.8 to 1 - high.

Indicators economic efficiency to the greatest extent characterize the level of economic development of the country , directly or indirectly reflecting the quality, condition and level of use of fixed and working capital, labor resources . These include: labor productivity, capital intensity of a unit of GDP and a specific type of product, capital productivity of a unit of fixed assets, material intensity of a unit of GDP or a unit of production etc.

The most important in assessing the efficiency of social production are the following: indicators:

- labor productivity (for the national economy as a whole, for individual sectors, for types of production);

- capital productivity ;

- material consumption GDP produced goods and services.

Productivity of social labor is the most important indicator of the efficiency of social production and reflects both the efficiency of human labor and the economy of social labor embodied in the means of production. She is calculated as the ratio of the industrial gross domestic product to the number of employees employed in the sectors of the national economy.

return on assets characterizes the effectiveness of the use of fixed production assets in the national economy as a whole and in its individual sectors, at enterprises.

Material consumption, calculated at the national economic level, characterizes the level of material costs (raw materials, materials, fuel, energy), respectively, per unit of GDP, and at the level of individual industries or enterprises - the efficiency of using objects of labor.

To assess the level of use of fuel and energy resources and metal costs, indicators of energy intensity and metal intensity of GDP are used.

Energy intensity represents an indicator characterizing the level of consumption of fuel and energy resources within the country per unit of GDP, respectively.

Metal consumption- this indicator characterizing the level of metal costs per unit of GDP, respectively .

Importance for public administration acquire criteria of general social efficiency arising from political sphere . But these are most likely not criteria reflecting the results of management, but criteria showing how, by what forms, methods used in management, proper indicators of the development of the economic, social and spiritual spheres of society are provided . These criteria, including political ones, are also very important for management results. There is no politics for the sake of politics, there is politics for the sake of society.

Since the state of development of society cannot always be reflected through the existing system of criteria and indicators, it is necessary to form criteria that can reflect the results obtained. Wherein performance criteria should not only reflect the degree of achievement of the set results, but also respond to the emergence of new problems in management, as well as to the negative consequences of public administration .

5. Evaluation of the effectiveness of public administration

Evaluation of the effectiveness of public administration is objectively necessary. She due to a number of circumstances :

Non-renewability of losses incurred by society as a result of thoughtless management;

The generation of new problems that can affect the decline in the level of management for a long time;

Decreased confidence in management , his public prestige.

The results of public administration are evaluated by the whole society, its separate groups and each person individually. because they are visible through a change in the level and quality of life of the population, through the development of the social and spiritual sphere, through the results obtained in the field of economy, national security, international cooperation etc.

However, this assessment does not replace the need for special, official assessment of the effectiveness of public administration . Moreover, the assessment of management effectiveness should be carried out at the stage of preparing a management decision, which to a certain extent can guarantee its sufficient level.

Management assessment should be carried out in relation to the nature, level, effectiveness of the organization and functioning of the public administration system and its results . Assessments must be strictly defined in terms of time, forms, procedures, and consequences. They are designed to become a natural and necessary part of management, to be systematic and authoritative.

In the public administration system, evaluation should be carried out, at a minimum, relative to :

Goals that are practically implemented in public administration, in conjunction with goals that are objectively determined by public demands;

Goals implemented in management processes and results obtained in the implementation of public administration (decisions and actions);

Objective management results and their compliance with public needs and interests;

Social costs spent on public administration in comparison with the objective results obtained as a result of management;

Opportunities inherent in the management potential, and the degree of their actual use.

In practice, the assessment of the effectiveness of public administration is carried out in the following areas :

Evaluation of the implementation process;

Evaluation of results;

Impact assessment;

Estimation of economic efficiency.

When evaluating the effectiveness, various methods are used: the method of comparisons, expert methods, modeling, etc.

The choice of the type of assessment and assessment methods depends on the goals of management, the interests of the organization or an interested group of people, socio-political conditions, the availability necessary resources and much more.

The whole set of studies aimed at evaluating the effectiveness of public administration can be represented through two groups :

Scientific research;

Traditional forms of evaluation.

Scientific research are carried out using various scientific methodologies and techniques for studying social, economic, political processes. Their application brings good theoretical and practical results, but requires a lot of time and high financial costs.

When conducting scientific research, the following are used:

Sociological surveys (questionnaires and interviews);

Observations (open and hidden);

Expert assessments;

Modeling;

Formation of control groups;

Conducting experiments, etc.

In view of the multidimensionality of public administration objects in assessing the effectiveness of management decisions, methods of multidimensional statistical analysis, allowing not only to group objects of observation into classes, to consider them in dynamics, but also to form qualitative aggregated indicators both for describing the objects themselves and for monitoring progress as a result of managerial influence. At the same time, special attention is paid to the analysis of the impact of the consequences of managerial decisions (for example, responses to reforms), meaning not only the immediate results of the decision made and implemented, but the whole complex of management consequences (consequences of change), their impact on all spheres of public life.

The most common method , which is used in assessing the effectiveness of management, is comparison method. In this case, various types of comparisons are used: comparison with planned targets, with the past, with the best or average for a certain period . For example, when assessing the effectiveness of management in relation to the socio-economic development of the country in the context of an annual or five-year period, a comparison of actual indicators with indicators laid down in the annual forecast or five-year program of socio-economic development is used.

Traditional forms of assessing the effectiveness of public management decision presented by political or administrative control and are the results of parliamentary hearings, reports of leaders and control commissions, state audit etc.

It should be noted that assessment of the effectiveness of public administration is done by various public institutions: citizen, family, labor collectives, public associations, state structures . Of all the evaluation methods, the following should be distinguished:

- reports public authorities, management structures, as well as officials on the results of their activities;

- public opinion is also a kind of evaluation of the effectiveness of public administration, which is set of judgments, views, positions, points of view of many people . It sort of correlates the results of management with the needs, interests and expectations of people. And although public opinion by nature subjectively, because of its mass nature, it has the ability to objectively "see" the effectiveness of public administration;

The assessment of the effectiveness of public administration reflects media which, in their essence, are called upon to objectively assess the events taking place in the life of society and, consequently, the results of management;

- appeals of citizens, the content of which forms ideas about people's lives, their needs, specific interests, violations of their rights, etc., which to a certain extent also make it possible to judge the effectiveness of public administration, to detect shortcomings, omissions, weaknesses in the public administration system.

The neoclassical research program (neoclassical theory) is a term widely used in economics and political economy for scientific direction, based on the following methodological assumptions: individuals are rational and have full information at the moment of making a choice, the market is perfectly competitive. Thus, neoclassical theory focuses primarily on the study of how individuals maximize their utility and organizations maximize their profits.

As noted above, today it would be fair to call public administration in Russia insufficiently effective in order to provide timely and high-quality public services to the population, as well as to develop the country as a whole in a variety of directions. Unfortunately, work is currently Russian authorities state power requires profound changes, needs various kinds of recommendations that should be developed in all areas of society. The system for evaluating the effectiveness of public administration should also be substantially improved. And only after these and many other transformations, we will be able to see the results of the work of state bodies, the effectiveness of which will be expressed in the optimal and timely protection of the interests of the state and the population, various social groups and each person. This is the most important side of the concept of the effectiveness of the state apparatus.

In this regard, it is appropriate to recall the assessment that was given to the situation in Russia in the conclusion of the Constitutional Judge of the Russian Federation “On the state of constitutional legality in the Russian Federation”, sent on March 5, 1993 to the Supreme Council of the Russian Federation: “Russia is going through one of the most difficult periods in its history. The economy is in decline. The economic and social rights of citizens are not secured, and inter-ethnic conflicts are not weakening. Crime is on the rise. Radical movements pursuing unconstitutional goals are gaining strength. The state apparatus is plagued by corruption. Legal nihilism has become widespread even among the highest officials of the Russian Federation and its subjects. People's dissatisfaction with the inaction of the authorities, the confrontation between them threatens to turn into a social explosion. The constitutional order of the Russian state is under threat.

The search and implementation of the most important ways to improve the efficiency of public administration is a necessary objective prerequisite for preventing and overcoming the crisis of power and administration, which is vital not only for further development, but even for the preservation of Russian statehood.

The main problems of inefficient public administration were discussed in paragraph 2.1. Having outlined these problems, I would like to determine the ways out that make it possible to make a breakthrough in solving the problem of increasing the efficiency of public administration. Solving these problems will make it possible to shift a huge layer of problems:

· Reconsider the principles of financing the state apparatus. Without increasing the current budget expenditures, ensure the growth of the efficiency of the work of managers and, on this basis, limit the growth in the size of the state apparatus;

· to develop uniform principles for the federal and regional levels of promotion of civil servants, including mechanisms for the effective use of the personnel reserve and rotation of personnel in a single system of civil service;

· create a regulatory framework and a modern infrastructure for the functioning of state power and administration, local government and self-government, training, advanced training and evaluation of the work of state and municipal employees;

· establish clear grounds, as well as procedures for bringing civil servants to disciplinary and financial liability; introduce the institution of disciplinary proceedings.

The mechanisms for improving the efficiency of public administration are:

1. Moderate decentralization;

2. Improving the use of the information component of public administration;

3. Improving the quality of public services and the mechanism for their distribution;

4. The need to include the masses in active life;

5. Reforming the civil service and developing human resources.

To have the most complete picture of public administration in Russia on present stage it is necessary to consider not only the problems in this area, but also the prospects for its development. It is impossible not to agree that there are a lot of problems in the field of public administration and one can criticize these problems endlessly. This is an easy, simple, but useless thing, if you do not learn from these problems, if you do not learn from the mistakes and delusions of our ancestors and ourselves. The value of history lies only in the teaching of intelligent life and is completely determined by the ability of people to draw conclusions from it and create the future, based on its cumulative, both positive and negative heritage. History gives us the main thing: knowledge and experience, we must do the rest ourselves.

This means that if in the past public administration did not justify the hopes placed on it, then something must be done so that in the future it will change its condition for the better.

In this context, it is quite possible to believe that the coming 21st century will present increased and stringent requirements for public administration, for which it is already necessary to start preparing. There are already grounds to assert that society will meet conditions that will be characterized, on the one hand, by the limitation of the resources of the planet Earth necessary for human existence, and, on the other hand, by an increase in demand for them due to the expansion of people's civilizational needs. Evidence of this are the following trends: narrowing, and for some types and depletion of the possibilities of extracting mineral raw materials of the desired quality and volume; exacerbation, and in some places even a crisis state of the natural habitat of mankind; complication, and in some places even going beyond the equilibrium limits of demographic processes that increase anthropogenic pressure on the planet; a slowdown and, at the same time, a deepening of the geographical unevenness of the development of production, with corresponding social consequences; impoverishment of human culture due to excessive unification and imitation of the disseminated and massively used social information.

Of course, the above does not exhaust the "challenges" of the future, dictating new paradigms of thinking and behavior. There are many more of them, both global and local scales. But even those named convincingly speak of the great complexity of the problems that confront humanity and each individual people. They have a different property than even those problems that worried people throughout the 20th century. And, accordingly, require a different approach to public administration.

First of all, the very nature of the problems, their structure, scale and resources involved in their solution are such that only free enterprise, the play of market elements, competition, the dynamics of supply and demand, purely social forces and regulators cannot implement them. There will be a need for strong interstate cooperation within the framework of the world community with thoughtful, coordinated and rational state administration in each country. This is not about replacing or substituting other types of governance, such as management, local self-government, public administration and public self-government, free human behavior, but about the performance by the state administration of the functions of coordinating and integrating management processes on the territory of the country, within regions and continents, throughout planets.

Speaking about public administration, it should be noted that today it needs a force that understands the role of the corresponding objective contradictions in the subjective factor, which is prepared for their analysis and resolution, is able to authoritatively influence the consciousness, behavior and activities of people. Historically, such a force has developed in the form of state power and state administration carried out through it. The whole problem lies in the state of this force, in the level and nature of its development. After all, it can be just rude, soulless, based on sanctions, as well as intellectual, creative, humane, based on knowledge.

Based on the foregoing, it is possible to deduce such a perspective of public administration as a “leading state”, which, with the right approach to the implementation of public administration, can easily be made the main criterion that determines its effectiveness.

The "leading state" of public administration means that in its system, mainly in its subject, modern scientific thought will be widely used, a free creative search for optimal management decisions will be adopted, the most trained specialists in various areas of management will be concentrated, and there will be an open comparison of management results. with social needs, management will begin to serve the interests of society and promote its development.

Public administration in a "leading state" has the following characteristics: deep consideration in management decisions and actions of the real possibilities of specific objective conditions and the subjective factor, the dynamics and trends of their changes; the orientation of state policy towards the use of the most progressive methods, forms, mechanisms and resources recommended by world practice and applicable in the modern historical situation for solving urgent problems of people's life; close interaction of scientific thought and management practice, developed public expertise of fundamental government decisions, maintaining the preparedness of management personnel at the level of modern public knowledge; openness and receptivity to new sources and resources of management, the ability to timely master the most progressive mechanisms and methods for solving management problems; flexibility and adaptability of its elements and their systemic relationships, the potential for continuous self-improvement, development and improvement of the control actions emanating from it.

The main thing in the “outstripping state” of public administration is seen in the fact that among people professionally employed in it, there should always be an intellectual, creative intensity, strong analytical and predictive thinking, a social orientation of professed values, high and sincere personal morality, skills of democratic management of social processes. consciousness, behavior and activity of people. In many countries, both society (citizens), and political organizations (in power or aimed at mastering it), and professional managers (officials and managers), and owners (in their various forms) have realized that normal social development requires a well-organized and functioning state apparatus, and in it - the best, most trained and talented representatives of the people. Over time, this awareness will come and take root in Russia, if we begin to seriously reform the sphere of public administration today.

As a result of the analysis of the processes that took place in our society and especially in the public administration system, seven types of resources were identified, the use of which in the future will have a positive impact on ensuring the rationality of public administration.

We are talking about strengthening relationships with society and overcoming the alienation of the state apparatus (power) from citizens. The authoritarian-bureaucratic system of socialism collapsed, but alienation persisted and, in a number of aspects, intensified. Under the ringing of bells about the rights and freedoms of a person, a citizen, many people found themselves outside the normal social life. Much is also said about the strengthening of the systemic nature of public administration, which at present not only has not become higher, but in many ways has been lost altogether. The question is raised about deepening the democracy of public administration, which is necessary in any modern society, because the latter, due to objective reasons, cannot develop outside the framework of democracy. The formation of a new statehood gives rise to hopes, but their implementation in the proclaimed model is very far away. Attention is drawn to improving the information support of public administration, without which, in the conditions of a huge array of processed management information, it is simply impossible to rationally manage on a society-wide scale. The development of the human potential of public administration is considered as a complex problem, since the personnel of both the subject of public administration and managed objects must be properly trained for the effective management of management processes. Attention is focused on improving the style of public administration, which, as it were, accumulates and practically implements science, art and management experience. In conclusion, it is said about measuring the effectiveness of public administration, through the mechanisms of which society not only evaluates the results of management, but also forms feedback to identify errors and weaknesses.

For the development of public administration in the future, it is important that the decision-makers on all aspects of development are interested in studying and understanding scientific information. There is a need for a streamlined process of improving public administration.

Summing up, it should be noted that the realities of the existence of our society at the present time, the harsh reality to which everyone is forced to adapt, are directly dependent on the effectiveness of public administration and are inextricably linked with it. In any society, there is interaction between the state and society, the quality and level of which is determined by the effectiveness of management policy.

The integrity of the state and the unity of society are the result of effective state administration, the basis for ensuring their security and the condition for achieving the well-being of the people. Therefore, increasing the efficiency of management should be one of the priorities in reforming the public administration system.

In the scientific literature, several approaches have been developed to the problem of improving the efficiency of public administration. The main of these approaches can be classified as follows.

• 1. The concept of leadership. Representatives of this approach link the effectiveness of public administration with leadership skills, management style, individual characteristics and qualities of the heads of ministries and departments, systems for their selection, evaluation, performance of tasks, motivation and professional development.
• 2. Weber's theory of rational bureaucracy. This theory requires that the administrative bureaucracy be separated from politics, have a hierarchical structure, functional specialization, clear work rules and job descriptions, separation from property, which will create the necessary prerequisites for effective work.
• 3. Theory of life cycles. The main idea of ​​this school is to show the dependence of the effective work of government departments on the influence of constantly and cyclically formed coalitions or groups within the organization.
• 4. The concept of professionalism. This concept makes the effective operation of state and municipal bodies directly dependent on the availability of career (professional) officials, well trained, with great experience works that are guided by their main mission - serving the state and society, and the departments themselves have a certain level of autonomy and are focused on solving the main, national tasks and problems.
• 5. The concept of economic responsibility. The concept is based on an economic approach, which proves that the increase in work efficiency is associated with the presence of a competition mechanism among departments, a system for introducing innovations, as well as political accountability of state bodies, primarily to taxpayers.
• 6. Theory of social ecology. A relatively new theory that proves that the performance of the bureaucracy depends on the nature of the external environment (the ecology of the organization) and the ability of the public administration to manage change and innovation in order to adapt to these changes.

Obviously, all these theories and concepts focus on one of the aspects of the effectiveness of public administration. Apparently, it is more correct to talk about creating a model of effective public administration. And for this it will be necessary to implement a set of political, legal, organizational, and economic measures.

The first thing that needs to be done by Russian citizens, political organizations (in power or aspiring to it), professional managers (officials and managers), owners, is to realize that a well-organized and functioning state apparatus is needed for normal social development, and it contains the best, most trained and talented representatives of the people.

Historical experience shows that to put forward reasonable goals (what to strive for, what to want), to form the management functions necessary for this (how, how to achieve goals), to create working organizational structures (mechanisms for people's interaction), the subjects of management can only if they better developed and higher than managed objects. It is impossible to lead managed objects (to influence them) if you do not know why, where and how to lead.

It is impossible to achieve this goal without creating a rational system for the selection and promotion of civil servants. The existing system of selection and promotion of state officials is not able to attract on a mass scale the most trained and talented Russians to the public service.

It should also be taken into account that the most trained and talented representatives of the people must be adequately paid for their work. Here is what Guy Brabant, President of the International Institute of Administrative Sciences, said on this issue: “Too low pay for a bunch of civil servants is fraught with two dangers. One of them (and this is typical for Moscow, and for Paris, and for Mexico City) is the outflow of the best personnel to the private sector. The second danger is corruption, which is clearly present where the employees who control citizens or businesses receive much less than the persons they control. As experts emphasize: “Cheap administration is the most expensive administration in the world. It is possible to save money on managerial personnel, on the technical equipment of administrative bodies, but for such savings

the state has to pay exorbitant prices.

But the cost of raising the salaries of officials should be proportional to the results of their activities. Managers should be paid not for the process, but specifically for the result of labor, setting a salary in a certain proportion of the minimum or average salary in the country or jurisdictional territory.

In addition, Russia needs to adopt the experience of developed countries, where programs are constantly being developed and implemented to improve the state apparatus, various structures are created for these purposes in the form of ministries, departments, agencies, etc. In developed countries, almost every political party in its program documents has a section devoted to the improvement of public service.

Effective public administration is impossible without a long-term strategy for the socio-economic, political, legal, spiritual and moral development of the country, its priorities, and rational mechanisms for solving the tasks ahead.

An effective model of public administration can only be built by a society capable of self-organization and not subject to manipulation, realizing the essence of the existing problems in public administration and seeing rational ways to solve them.

Improving the efficiency of public administration requires changes in the philosophy of public administration. The subjects of public administration need to clearly understand what is happening inside the managed system itself, between the managed system and its external environment what government agencies do.

IN modern conditions the subjects of public administration are required to have a clear vision of promising ways for the development of the state and society. Outstanding results are achieved by seizing opportunities, not by solving problems. When solving problems, one can only hope for the restoration of the previous state or for the elimination of restrictions in achieving results. To achieve outstanding results, resources must be directed to exploiting opportunities rather than solving problems. The main thing is not how to exercise control, but how to determine long-term goals and concentrate resources and forces on them. Concentration is the key to real social and economic results. Today, no principle of efficiency is violated with such constancy as the principle of concentration. This is typical for the activities of public authorities. They tend to try to do a little of everything.

For the sustainable development of the state, the competence of civil servants alone is not enough, the leading position is what leads to the sustainable development of the state.

The effectiveness of the activities of state bodies and civil servants consists in ensuring that they achieve socially significant goals related to the needs and interests of the people in the shortest possible time at the lowest possible cost of economic, financial, labor, natural and other resources. Or, more precisely, the effectiveness of the activities of state bodies and civil servants is determined not by how much has been done, but by whether everything has been done that is necessary for the normal life of the majority of the people.

Statistical and sociological data testify to the low efficiency of the activities of state bodies and civil servants in modern Russia. In this regard, in order to increase the efficiency of the activities of state bodies and civil servants, it is necessary to implement a set of political, legal, organizational and economic measures.

The effectiveness of the activities of state bodies and civil servants to a decisive extent depends on the quality of the political leadership of the country, its political consciousness and responsibility, and the ability to lead.

SELF-CHECK QUESTIONS

• 1. Compare the concepts of "public administration efficiency" available in the scientific and educational literature.
• 2. What indicators are used to evaluate the performance of public authorities and local governments?
• 3. What factors influence the effectiveness of public administration?
• 4. Formulate the main directions for improving the efficiency of public administration.
• 5. Analyze philosophical approaches to effective public administration.

• Lobanov VV Public administration and public policy: a tutorial. SPb., 2004. S. 288-289.
• Public service. The search for efficiency. Foreign experience. Issue. 13. M., 1996. S. 26.sh Ibid. S. 21.