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 the most various directions. Unfortunately, at present, the work of the Russian state authorities requires profound changes, it needs various kinds of recommendations, which should be developed in all areas of the life of society. Performance evaluation system government controlled should also be substantially improved. And only after these and many other transformations, we will be able to see the results of the work government agencies, 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 every person. This is the most important aspect of the concept of efficiency. 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 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 its history. The economy is in decline. Economic and social rights citizens, interethnic conflicts do not weaken. 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.

Search and implementation the most important ways improving 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 the preservation of the 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 outputs that make it possible to make a breakthrough in solving the problem of improving the efficiency of public administration. The solution of these problems will allow 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;

Develop uniform for the federal and regional levels principles of promotion of civil servants, including mechanisms effective use personnel reserve and staff rotation in unified system public 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 to disciplinary and liability civil servants; 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 large number of problems in the field of public administration and that these problems can be criticized ad infinitum. 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 with 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; slowdown and at the same time deepening the geographical unevenness of the development of production with the 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 the 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; orientation public policy to use the most progressive, recommended by world practice and applicable in the modern historical situation, methods, forms, mechanisms and resources for solving urgent problems of people's life; close interaction of scientific thought and management practice, developed by 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 democratic governance social processes, consciousness, behavior and activities 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 for a normal community development we need 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 manifestations has been completely lost. 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 information support 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 governance, 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, improving management efficiency should be one of the priority areas when reforming the public administration system.

As a result of studying this chapter, the student should:

know

• main trends in the development of public administration;
• principles and approaches to assessing the effectiveness of public administration;
• methods for assessing the effectiveness of public administration;
• a system of measures of state influence aimed at improving the efficiency of public administration;
• the main content of the state strategy aimed at improving the efficiency of public administration;

be able to

• set goals and formulate tasks aimed at improving the efficiency of public administration;
• use regulatory legal documents to assess the effectiveness of public administration;

own

• methods for evaluating the effectiveness of public administration;
• modern technologies public administration assessments;
• skills to assess the effectiveness of the implementation of government programs.

Theoretical and methodological approaches to determining efficiency

Modernization of the public administration system is inextricably linked with the determination of the optimal parameters that contribute to the formation of public administration as an open, dynamic social system. To form an effective model of public administration, a comprehensive analysis of the relationship between the political system, state power, civil society institutions, socio-economic standards and socio-cultural norms is required.

In the face of changing political and social environment the problem of establishing an adequate public administration system capable of effectively responding to the challenges of the external environment is being updated, the need to develop a balanced system of indicators and criteria for the effectiveness of the activities of public authorities becomes obvious.

There are several theoretical and methodological approaches to the definition of efficiency. In different fields of activity, the understanding of efficiency has its own characteristics. Thus, in politics, "efficiency" is seen as something positive and a desirable value characteristic of activity. In relation to the activities of government bodies, this term has become an effective political symbol, capable of organizing public opinion in support of certain proposals. In the very general view efficiency is understood as the possibility of achieving a result; the significance of obtaining the result for those to whom it is intended; the ratio of the significance of this result to the amount of effort spent on achieving it.

In organizational theory and administrative management, efficiency is defined as the ratio of net positive results (the excess of desirable consequences over undesirable ones) and acceptable costs. In economics and management studies, there are two approaches to performance evaluation. The first is related to the assessment technical efficiency, the second - economic efficiency.

Technical performance measures reflect the nature of the activity being assessed: it indicates that “the right things are being done”.

Economic efficiency indicators characterize how the assessed activity is implemented, how productively the expended resources are used, i.e. "how well these things are done". The effectiveness of managerial or administrative work is evaluated by determining the ratio between the result obtained and the resources expended.

In studies of the effectiveness of public administration, state bureaucracy and state institutions, several theoretical and methodological approaches can be distinguished that link efficiency with certain factors.

• 1) An approach, based on the concept of leadership. Representatives of this direction link the effectiveness of the organization with leadership skills, management style, individual characteristics and qualities of the heads of government bodies, systems for selecting, assessing the performance of tasks, motivation and professional development of civil servants.
• 2) An approach, developing the theory of Weber's rational bureaucracy. This approach focuses on hierarchical structure, functional specialization, the presence of clear principles of regulation professional activity civil servants, which are considered as necessary prerequisites for the effective operation of power structures.
• 3) Performance Approach, associated with the theory of life cycles, is to consider the effectiveness of public administration in conjunction with the assessment of the influence of constantly and cyclically formed coalitions, or groups of influence, in government. The nature of decision-making in bureaucratic structures and their effectiveness are considered in the context of the life cycles of an organization's development.
• A) Within the concept of professionalism effective activity is directly dependent on the professionalization of public authorities, the availability of career (professional) officials, their level of professionalism and competence.
• 5) economic approach linking the increase in the efficiency of public authorities with the presence of a competition mechanism among departments, a system for introducing innovations, as well as political and social accountability of public authorities, primarily to taxpayers.
• 6) Ecological approach which emphasizes that the results of the activities of the bureaucracy depend on the nature of the external environment (the ecology of the organization) and the ability of public authorities to manage changes and innovations in order to adapt to these changes.
• 7) An approach, based on the concept of quality management. Within the framework of this approach, the main focus is on creating a system of continuous improvement of processes and public services in public authorities; involvement of civil servants in this activity with the maximum use of their creativity and organization of their group work. Quality management is based on the relationship between the potential of public authorities and performance results with constant correlation with strategic goals and the involvement of employees in quality processes, their training, increasing their competence and motivation.

An analysis of theoretical and methodological approaches to determining efficiency allows us to conclude that, as a rule, economic efficiency and social. The independence of these types of efficiency, of course, is relative, since they are in close unity and interrelation. When analyzing the effectiveness of public administration, the social effect is of particular importance, the essence of which lies in the fact that it must be stable, reproducible, progressive, contain a source for subsequent social development. The Russian sociologist G. V. Atamanchuk divides the social efficiency of public administration in general and the activities of public authorities, in particular, into three types:

• 1) overall social performance. It reveals the results of the functioning of the public administration system (i.e., the totality of state bodies and objects managed by them);
• 2) special social efficiency. It characterizes the state of organization and functioning of the state itself as a subject of management of social processes. This type of criteria includes:
  • - expediency and purposefulness of the organization and functioning of the state control system, its large subsystems and other organizational structures, which is determined through the degree of compliance of their control actions with goals objectively based on their position and role in society. It is necessary to establish by law what goals each state body should implement, and upon their achievement, evaluate the relevant managers and officials,
  • - time standards for solving management issues, developing and passing any management information,
  • - style of functioning of the state apparatus,
  • - regulations, technologies, standards that every manager and civil servant must follow,
  • - the complexity of the organization of the state apparatus, arising from its “fractionality”, multi-stage and abundance of managerial interdependencies,

the costs of maintaining and ensuring the functioning of the state apparatus;

3) concrete social efficiency. It reflects the activities of each management body and official, each individual management decision, action, relationship. Among the criteria, one can distinguish the degree of compliance of the directions, content and results of the management activities of bodies and officials with those of its parameters that are indicated in legal status(and competencies) of the body and public office; legality of decisions and actions of state authorities and local self-government, as well as their officials; reality of control actions.

The effectiveness of the activities of public authorities is determined not only by the magnitude economic effect, but above all by the socio-political results of the activities of the authorities. To assess the effectiveness of public administration and the activities of public authorities, evaluation technologies and procedures are needed that would be sustainable, objective and allow timely adjustment of the activities of public authorities.

• See: Economic theory / ed. V. D. Kamaeva. M. : VLADOS, 2000; Dictionary of Economics: Per. from English. K. Pass, B. Lowes, L. Davis. Moscow: School of Economics, 2004.
• See: Stolyarova VL Functions and evaluation of the results of work of employees of the management apparatus. M. : Economics, 1995; She is. Problems of normative and methodological support and evaluation of the results of the work of civil servants / public service in the Russian Federation: concept, experience, problems. M.: RAU, 1993.
• Tocqueville A. Democracy in America. M., 1992; Management is a science and an art / A. Fayol, G. Emerson, F. Taylor, G. Ford. M. : Respublika, 1992. Weber's theory of bureaucracy is studied in sufficient detail in the monograph by M. V. Maslovsky. See: Maslovsky M.V. Max Weber's theory of bureaucracy and modern political sociology.N. Novgorod: Publishing house of UNN, 1997; He is. Political sociology of bureaucracy. M., 1997; Gaidenko P. P., Davydov Yu. N. The problem of bureaucracy in Max Weber // Questions of Philosophy. 1991. No. 3; Makarenko V.P. Faith, power and bureaucracy (criticism of the sociology of M. Weber). Rostov i/D., 1988; Zverev A.F. The theory of bureaucracy: from M. Weber to L. von Mises // Soviet state and law. 1992. No. 1; Okhotsky E. V., Smolkov V. G. Bureaucracy and bureaucracy. M., 199 Alekseeva T.A. Modern political theories. M., 2000; Pushkareva GV State bureaucracy as an object of research // ONS. 1997. No. 5.
• Filonovich S. R., Kushelevich E. I. The theory of life cycles of the organization I. Adizesai and Russian reality // Sotsis. 1996. No. 10.
• Becker G. The nature of the profession // Ethics of success: Bulletin of researchers, consultants and decision makers. Issue. 3/94. Tyumen - Moscow, 1994; McIntyre A. After Virtue: Studies in Moral Theory. M.: Academic project; Yekaterinburg: Business book, 2000; Durkheim E. About division social labor. M. : Kanon, 1996; Weber M. Science as a vocation and profession / Weber M. Selected works; per. with him. M. : Progress, 1990; Weber M. Politics as a vocation and profession / Weber M. Selected works; transl. with it. Moscow: Progress, 1990.
• See: MillJ. S. Principles of Political Economy / ed. by W Ashley. New York: A.M. KellerPublishers (1848); NorthD. (1993): Institutions and Credible Commitment // Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics. Vol. 149.
• Western economic sociology: a reader of modern classics / comp. and scientific. ed. V. V. Radaev; measures. M. S. Dobryakova and others. Moscow: Russian Political Encyclopedia (ROSSPEN), 2004.
• See: Lobanov VV Public administration and public policy. SPb., 2004; Sadler J., Lobanov VV Increasing the efficiency of local authorities: the experience of Great Britain // Problems of theory and practice of management. 2001. No. 2; Efficiency of public administration: Per. from English. / under total ed. S. L. Batchikov and S. Yu. Glazyev.M. : Foundation "For Economic Literacy", Russian Economic Journal, Publishing House "Consultbanker", 1998; Fundamentals of product quality management. M.: Publishing house of standards, 1996; Sakato Shiro. Practical guide on product quality management; from Japanese M. : Mashinostroenie, 1994; Product quality management: issues of theory and practice. M. : Thought, 1996; Tomilin V. N. Quality management in conditions of transition market economy// Standards and quality. 1990. JSIb 10.
• Atamanchuk GV Ensuring the rationality of public administration. M., 1990; General theory of management: a course of lectures. M., 1994; Theory of public administration. M., 1997.

The effectiveness of public administration is a concept that denotes the ratio of results and achieved public goals, results and used public resources. Effective management is an activity with the best possible results in meeting public needs and interests in the context of the regulation of resources by the state.

Efficiency is an indicator of how fully the efforts (resources) expended by the managing subject and society to solve the problems posed are implemented in socially significant final results.

Thus, the category of "public administration efficiency" is defined through the concepts: "public goals", "results", "public needs and interests". Each of them reflects the specific features of public administration with a political aspect.

"Public goals" are, after all, politically significant goals; "results" - objects, services, processes related to the satisfaction of public needs and interests (expressed in the policy); "state resources" - economic, social, political, ideological and information capital, regulated by the state both in terms of social expediency and possibility, and legal validity.

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. To assess the effectiveness of public administration, certain criteria are needed, on the basis of which it is possible to draw conclusions about the effectiveness of a particular management decision.

The concept of "efficiency criterion" of public administration denotes 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 objects of evaluation are various results of management activities: means of subsistence, types of social relations, processes, specific acts of activity and other “objective values”. In addition, there are "subjective values" - these objects are evaluated, i.e. their social significance is determined in accordance with ideals, principles, goals, concepts, norms, etc. 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. For example, the basic values ​​of the modern Russian state are political democracy (power of the people), the sovereignty of the state, its integrity and security, legal law, political and social rights and freedoms of a person, free labor based on the diversity of ownership of the means of production , pluralism, etc. Millions of Russians recognize many other, traditional values. For example, social justice, catholicity (collectivism), Orthodox values.

Evaluation of the effectiveness of public administration in a theoretical aspect 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 contradictions between the subjective and objective factors of management.

Such contradictions are quite natural: it is impossible (and not necessary) to fully take into account in goals and strategies, projects and plans all the variety of objective trends and needs, interests and demands of society, as well as to foresee the impact of constantly changing situations. Decisions fix a certain distance.

The contradictions between the real and the proper, the actual and the desired, the realized and potential capabilities of the state and society, between the achieved results and the unrealized opportunities, between the used and unclaimed resources, between the indicators at the input and output of the control system are determined by the inadequacy of goals and means to the scale of re- real opportunities and objective needs, as well as 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 to the objective factor and the normative-value base of management.

Depending on what is recognized as the main sign of efficiency, three groups of criteria are distinguished: value-rational, goal-oriented and pragmatic. The value-rational criterion is the determination of the effectiveness of management on the basis of the compliance of the results of decisions and their consequences with the values ​​recognized by the state, expressed in the political strategy.

A goal-oriented criterion is an indicator of management effectiveness as the correspondence of the results of the implementation of the decision to the set goals, practical tasks, expressed in terms of government programs and plans. A pragmatic criterion is a measurement of the effectiveness of management by the type of "cost-output" or "cost-result".

Along with general efficiency criteria in science and practice, specific ones for each sphere of management are used: political, social, economic, etc. The content of each of them also includes 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 signs 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 an increase in the quality of life, etc. Thus, 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 well-known in theory 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” when evaluating decisions on specific socio-economic issues related to to individual organizations. Such decisions "can be called effective if the best result is achieved for a given time cost of choice"

For example, evaluating the effectiveness of certain government programs (economic, social or cultural development) is possible using the following indicators: the volume of work performed and activities carried out, correlated with the costs; implementation of officially established standards for the consumption of goods and services; the level of satisfaction of the needs and requests of the population in certain services and items of vital necessity, which is recorded, in particular, by surveys of the population and analysis of complaints and suggestions from citizens; growth dynamics of budget allocations, etc.

Effective concrete decisions of state organizations are, therefore, optimal. Those that ensure the implementation of generally significant goals, but are not associated with high costs; those that bring significant success to one side, but do not require large losses for the other side.

An optimal solution is a solution that brings significant positive results for all parties (“super-optimal solution”); a solution that ensures the achievement of a combination of conflicting actions, interest groups, the practical elimination of specific sources of conflicts or the settlement of the latter.

In conclusion, let us pay attention to the desire of foreign theorists and practitioners of management to constantly emphasize the “critical component” in the “successful change” of the organization of management - ensuring a higher degree of participation of people in this process at all levels (subjective world).

EFFICIENCY OF PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION

The problems of public administration efficiency are in the first row of those that are in the focus of attention of modern science and practice. This is confirmed, in particular, by the encyclopedic work of American scientists and specialists - “The Effectiveness of Public Administration” (Marcel Dekkerins. 1992. M. 1998). The analysis of this problem is devoted to the work of scientists of the North Caucasian Academy of Public Administration “Problems of the efficiency of state power and management in modern Russia”. Rostov n/a. 1998. Issue. 12; “Effective Technologies in the System of State and Municipal Administration”. Maykop - Rostov n/a. 1999; Ignatov V.G., Ponedelkov A.V., Starostin A.M. Efficiency of public service //Public service: theory and organization. Rostov n / a.: Phoenix. 1998, and others. Issues of "measurement" of efficiency are considered in the course of lectures by G. Atamanchuk "Theory of Public Administration". M. 1997. Authors, including foreign ones, emphasize the significant relevance of the problem for modern Russia. It is impossible not to agree, for example, with the statement of Prof. M. Holzer in the preface to the publication in Russian of the named work: “The future of democratic power structures in Russia at all levels largely depends on their ability to ensure, in conditions of severely limited resources, the satisfaction of the most urgent needs of individual citizens and society as a whole” ... Long-term the nature and stability of positive changes is determined by a real increase in productivity ... by the fact that government structures that provide various services to the population work more efficiently, by ... how much any organizations that declare their goal “serving the interests of the people” actually manage to get real final results, on the basis of which it is possible to judge the achievement of the set goal” /1/.

In this chapter, it is necessary to clarify the range of issues that make up the content of the problem of the effectiveness of public administration; to summarize some of the developments available in the literature and try to understand issues that have not yet been adequately covered.

1. The concept of public administration efficiency, its criteria

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 economic science, the category of economic efficiency and the corresponding criteria for its evaluation have been thoroughly developed. 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.

of which reflects the specific features of public administration with a political aspect. “Public goals” are ultimately 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 part of it. 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”.

Having defined the concept of “public administration efficiency”, it is necessary to move on to clarifying the main issue - the criteria for efficiency. It is the crux of the problem.

The concept of "efficiency criterion" of public administration denotes 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 assessment).

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 value system 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 social world(for example, moral, aesthetic, scientific, and 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 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. Whichever of the principles of management considered earlier, whether it be the principle of economy of entropy or limited rationality, unity of centralization and decentralization of power and control, democracy and legitimacy of decisions, each can act as a criterion criterion for evaluating efficiency.

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 social and state system, in strategic goals the ruling subject - the political course, in the concepts, political attitudes and norms of the management system, behind which there 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, normative base management systems, 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 the specific environment (historical and natural) in which this 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 targeted 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 a theoretical aspect is a procedure for comparing the results of certain decisions with criteria criteria 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 to the objective factor and the normative-value base of management.

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 inefficiency government 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 management system, the distribution of powers, in the end, our main 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 self-withdrawal from the performance of their 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, conduct deep historical research and identify those factors that affect public administration. Thus, the combination and analytical approach to these sources provides fertile ground for deep 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), which ensures 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 involves the implementation managerial 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 general concept management. They are fully acceptable, and for understanding management in the social (public) sphere, where people and their various associations(e.g. state, society, territorial entity, public associations, production and non-production facilities, family, etc.) Of course, this takes into account the features social sphere, the most important of which is that managerial communications are realized through the relations of people. Society is a holistic organism with a complex structure, with various kinds of individual manifestations, as well as with functions general. Hence the need to express a common connection and unity 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 public life, it is expressed in features predetermined by the general features inherent in management as a scientific category, as well as by the features of the organization of public 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.