Architectonics And Strategic Architecture Of Regional Public Administration Systems: Assessment Of Compliance

Abstract

The article presents the results of assessing the level of compliance of the existing architectonics of the regional systems of public administration of socioeconomic development of territories with the strategic architecture which means a qualitatively new state of mentioned systems as a response to environmental changes. The research hypothesis implies that in the conditions of increased change rate the sustainable development of any territory can be maintained due to the transformation of public administration system architectonics into strategic architecture. The success of this transformation is determined by how much the regional systems of public administration are oriented to the maintenance of the proper development of both economic and social processes. The purpose of the research is to develop the methods assessing the compliance of the existing architectonics of regional public administration systems with the strategic architecture. The research is based on the differentiated integral evaluation of the development level of social and economic processes, using the method of gap analysis. 85 subjects of the Russian Federation were evaluated within the framework of the justified system of criteria and indicators of strategic architecture effectiveness. The results of the research are presented by assessing the level of compliance of the existing architectonics of regional public administration systems with the strategic architecture for 2016. The limitations of application of the results obtained are associated with the necessity to alter the current legislature in the field of evaluation of effectiveness of executive bodies at the sub-federal level.

Keywords: Architectonicscompliance assessmenteconomic processeseffectiveness criteriasocial processesstrategic architecture

Introduction

Integration of Russia into the world social and economic space predetermined the need to ensure the transparency of activities of state and local authorities, as evidenced by the reforming of their structure and functions, the introduction of strategic management methods into management practice.

Success of implementation of strategies for the socioeconomic territorial development (hereinafter referred to as the SETD) is largely determined by the compliance of the strategic capabilities of the current structure of the public administration system (hereinafter – PAS) with the goals and objectives of socioeconomic development in a strategic perspective. However, the complexity and high inertia of the object of management, which is a combination of social and economic processes of territorial development, added by low dynamic capabilities of the current architectonics (structure) of PAS, poor development of professional competences in the human capital structure of public administration subjects, and, consequently, skills of strategic management do not allow for the rapid response of the management system to changes in the external environment.

Problem Statement

High risks of socioeconomic development of Russia and its regions caused by prolonged conservatism of economic structure and high level of dependence on the conjuncture in markets of raw materials, combined with the above-mentioned systemic contradictions, gave the impulse for institutional transformations which formed the basis of PAS architectonics transformation into the strategic architecture in order to increase its flexibility and adaptability to changes, provide the sustainable SETD, and improve the life quality of citizens. However, the given process is not over yet. That is why the assessment of the compliance of the existing architectonics of PAS with the strategic architecture is the important aspect of SETD public administration at macro- and meso-levels.

Research Questions

Theoretical and methodological approaches to the transformation of the PAS architectonics into the strategic architecture were discussed in details by the authors in a monographic research (Glushakova & Vaysberg, 2014). Theoretical foundations for the mentioned transformation are the statements of strategic management concept at the level of organization, significant contribution to it having been made by well-known scientists (Ansoff, 1965; Drucker, 1992; Kotler, 1999; Mintzberg, 1973; Porter, 1991; Thompson & Strickland, 1993; Chandler, 1962; Andrews, 1971).

Today, there are prepared models describing namely the activities of government agencies and departments, e.g. Federal Enterprise Architecture (FEA). Methods, principles, and approaches used in it were applied in developing the USA Federal Architecture. In Russia, methodology of the FEA was used, while implementing the model of electronic government.

In our opinion, the notion of “architecture” contains deeper essential sense reflecting the strategic context of PAS functioning in the changing conditions.

As we understand, the strategic PAS architecture means the qualitatively new state of the mentioned system as a response to changes manifesting itself in the action of exclusively formal institutions, selecting of priority development processes, using of key strategic resources, information-telecommunication systems and standards of sustainable SETD, increasing of professional competencies of public administration subjects as one of the most important components of the human capital.

During the research, the approaches to assessing the level of compliance of existing SETD PAS architectonics with the strategic architecture (Glushakova & Vaysberg, 2014) were improved. First of all, the rating scales were changed, this having been caused by the extended public law bodies studied (hereinafter – PLB). Also, the system of indicators was changed due to the formation of new institutional conditions of SETD public administration.

Today, the performance assessment of executive authorities of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation and local governments is carried out according to Decrees of the President of the Russian Federation No. 548 of November 14, 2017 and No. 607 of April 28, 2008, the special attention is paid to the achievement of both economic and social aims of territorial development which can give all opportunities of developing the human capital. Despite the fact that scientific community determined the human capital as a SETD factor-determinant in the second half of the twentieth century (Shultz, 1971; Becker, 1962, 1964, 1967), the significance of social processes in its extended reproduction was also recognized (Edvinsson & Malone, 1997; Psacharopoulos & Patrinos, 2004; Ozturk, 2008; Fukuyama, 1995; Roik, 2010; Mikhaylov, 2012; Kuklin & Gurban, 2012; Tatarkin & Andreyeva, 2014; Auzan, 2013; Mau & Stupin, 1995), the alteration of Russian public administration paradigm in the given context occurred only following the crisis of 2009.

Purpose of the Study

The foregoing implies the need to develop fundamentally new approaches to assessing effectiveness of the functioning of the SETD PAS.

In our opinion, to assess the level of compliance of PAS architectonics with the strategic architecture it is necessary to consider the specific administration object, namely SETD. At the same time, the significance of social processes in the extended reproduction of the human capital and sustainable territorial development implies the necessity to study social and economic processes separately.

The given conceptual approach allows formulating the criteria of effectiveness of SETD PAS strategic architecture in the conditions of high rate of environmental changes, the latter include:

  • level of development of social processes and economic ones;

  • rate of response of social processes and economic ones to a management action;

  • gaps in the rate of response of social and economic processes to a management action.

Thus, the assessment of correspondence of SETD PAS to the criteria of effectiveness allows judging how close is the existing architectonics of PAS to the strategic architecture, and, as a result, how strategically flexible is it in the changing environment. This is the main purpose of our research.

Research Methods

To assess the level of compliance of the existing SETD PAS architectonics with the strategic architecture, we developed methods which we represent below.

Justification of the system of indicators

At the basis of their methodology the authors laid the calculation of component indexes and integral index which allow to estimate the level and rate of the development of social and economic processes, as well as the gaps in the rate of their response to a management action, and, as a result, determine the level of PAS architectonics compliance with the strategic architecture. We believe that for the assessment it is necessary to use the official indicators of government statistic observation, this does not require the significant involvement of human and other types of resources in the current systemic constraints.

Justification of the system of indicators of the development of social and economic processes with the aim of assessing is presented in table 01 .

Table 1 -
See Full Size >

Model

The indicators justified in table 01 allow calculating:

SP (Social Processes) component index characterizing the level of social process development (1):

<inline-graphic xlink:href="d1"/> (1)

EP (Economic Processes) component index characterizing the level of economic process development (2):

<inline-graphic xlink:href="d2"/>(2)

Weights of the indicators included into the evaluation system were obtained with the data of a questionnaire in which 10 experts of higher qualification took part. The high level of conformity of expert opinions was confirmed by the Kendall concordance coefficient values of 0,648 and 0,613 for economic and social processes correspondingly.

At the basis of SP and EP component and private index calculation lies a linear scaling method that allows to transform the indicators having different measurement units into a comparable form (3). Scaled indicators take values from 0 to 1 inclusively.

Reference points are i -variant indicator maximum and minimum values being fixed for the whole research period. If the measured indicator is negatively related to socioeconomic development, for example, crime rate and the like, then the inverse linear scaling is used (4):

<inline-graphic xlink:href="d3"/>(3)<inline-graphic xlink:href="d4"/>(4)

Based on SP and EP component indexes, it is possible to calculate the integral index of SEP (Social and Economic Processes) (5):

<inline-graphic xlink:href="d5"/>(5)

The assessment of the public administration system architectonics compliance with the strategic architecture is made as follows.

  • The assessment of the development level of social/economic processes. The value of the integral indicator of SEP allows to evaluate the development level of socioeconomic processes on the whole, but, in order to reveal the contribution of social and economic processes to the formation of the given indicator, they need to be studied separately. It is evident that the public administration system architectonics corresponds to the strategic architecture, if the development level of both social and economic processes is high. We suggest differentiating the development levels of social and economic processes into low, below the average, average, above the average, and high, wherein their development level is to be assessed on a five-point scale.

  • The assessment of the rate of social and economic process response to a management action. The rate of social and economic process response to a PAS management action is shown by the rate of growth of component indexes (6) and (7):

<inline-graphic xlink:href="d6"/>(6)and<inline-graphic xlink:href="d7"/>(7)

Their matching allows observing how fast (slow) the social and economic processes react to the management action within the research period. The obtained value of the growth rate of SP index and EP index receives the definite number of points on a five-point scale .

  • The assessment of gaps in the rate of social (SP) and economic (EP) process response to the management action. According to the above formulated effectiveness criteria of the PAS strategic architecture, social processes must develop faster than economic ones. It allows obtaining significant economic and social effects of the territorial development in the future. The gaps in SP and EP response rate will be evaluated according to the formula (8):

<inline-graphic xlink:href="d8"/>(8)

where n – a reporting year; n-1 – the previous year, and the obtained value will receive points on a five-point scale.

  • Isolation of typological groups and assessment of the level of SETD PAS compliance with the strategic architecture. Suggested scales of assessment of the level of the current SETD PAS architectonics compliance with the strategic architecture allow concluding that a maximally possible formalized value is 25 points, this makes possible to isolate the SETD PAS typological groups:

  • complete discrepancy between the current SETD PAS architectonics and the strategic architecture (from 1 to 5 points);

  • compliance level of of the current SETD PAS architectonics with the strategic architecture is below the average (from 6 to 10 points);

  • average compliance level of the current SETD PAS architectonics with the strategic architecture (from 11 to 15 points);

  • compliance level of the current SETD PAS architectonics with the strategic architecture is above the average (from 16 to 20 points);

  • high compliance level of the current SETD PAS architectonics with the strategic architecture (from 21 to 25 points).

Monitoring of transition of the SETD PAS of an individual PLB from one typological group into the other is made due to the division of the range of indicator values: the development level of social (SP)/economic (EP) processes; the rate of the response of social (SP) and economic (EP) processes to the management action; the gaps in the response rate of social (SP) and economic (EP) processes at five equal intervals , this allows to identify the correspondence of the current SETD PAS architectonics to the strategic architecture in the context of reasonable effectiveness criteria.

Findings

Approbation of the methods developed by the authors was carried out on the example of the regions of the Russian Federation for 2016.

We studied the relation closeness (strength) between the above justified indicators. As a result, only 13.3% of indicator combinations demonstrated the strong relation (the value of the correlation coefficient was more than 0.7), this being estimated as an acceptable proportion of combinations demonstrating the strong relation between the indicators included into the assessment system. The reference points were determined as minimal and maximal values within the justified system of indicators for the period from 2003 to 2016 (table 02 ) accompanied by two falls of socioeconomic development in 2008-2009 and 2013-2016 caused by the conjuncture change in the markets of energetic resources (oil, coal).

Table 2 -
See Full Size >

The results of the assessment for 2016 are presented in figure 01 , for the example sixteen regions were taken with the SETD PAS which received the highest (19 points) and lowest (from 13 to 16 points) values of the level of compliance of architectonics with the strategic architecture.

Figure 1: Assessment results of level of compliance of SETD PAS architectonics with strategic architecture
Assessment results of level of compliance of SETD PAS architectonics with strategic architecture
See Full Size >

Conclusion

The methods developed allow evaluating the level of compliance of the current SETD PAS architectonics with the strategic architecture not only at the sub-federal (municipal) level, but also at the national one. The methods can be used in a similar research in any country of any government type. No doubt, this evaluation will require considering national characteristics of social and economic development, and, as a result, specifying the system of indicators formed by the organs of state statistics observation.

Generally, the research undertaken showed that no subject of the RF had the high level of compliance of the existing SETD PAS architectonics with the strategic architecture. This fact does not allow providing the rapid response of processes of territorial development to environmental changes.

Acknowledgments

The research was carried out with the financial support of the Russian Foundation for Basic Research in the framework of the scientific project No. 18-010-00244.

References

  1. Andrews, K. (1971). The Concept of Corporate Strategy. Irwin: Homewood.
  2. Ansoff, I. (1965). Corporate Strategy: An Analytic Approach to Business Policy for Growth and Expansion. New York: McGraw-Hill.
  3. Auzan, A. A. (2013). Missiya universiteta: vzglyad ekonomista [The mission of the university: the view of the economist] Voprosy obrazovaniya [Education], 3, 266-287. (In Russ.).
  4. Becker, G. S. (1962). Investment in Human Capital: A Theoretical Analysis. Journal of Political Economy, 70, 5, 2, 9-49. DOI:
  5. Becker, G. S. (1964). Human Capital. New York: Columbia University Press.
  6. Becker, G. S. (1967). Human Capital and the Personal Distribution of Income: An Analytical Approach (2th Ed.). Michigan: University of Michigan.
  7. Chandler, A.D. (1962). Strategy and Structure: Chapters in the History of the Industrial Enterprise. Cambridge: MIT Press.
  8. Drucker, P.F. (1992). Managing for the future. New York: Truman Talley Books/Dutton.
  9. Edvinsson, L., & Malone, M. (1997). Intellectual Capital. Realizing Your Company's True Value by Finding Its Hidden Brainpower. New York, N.Y: Harper Collins Publishers.
  10. Fukuyama, F. (1995). Trust: The Social Virtues and the Creation of Prosperity. New York: Free Press.
  11. International Maritime Organization (2010). International Convention on Standards of Training, Certification and Watchkeeping for Seafarers, 1978/1995/2010.
  12. Glushakova, O. V., & Vaysberg, Ya. A. (2014). Otsenka effektivnosti strategicheskoy arkhitektury sistemy publichnogo upravleniya sotsial'no-ekonomicheskim razvitiyem territorii [Evaluation of the effectiveness of the strategic architecture of the public management system of socio-economic development of the territory]. Novosibirsk: Sibirskaya akademiya finansov i bankovskogo dela [Novosibirsk: Siberian Academy of Finance and Banking] (In Russ.). Retrieved June 5, 2018 from: https://elibrary.ru/item.asp?id=24133920.
  13. Kotler, P. (1999). Kotler on Marketing. New York: Free Press.
  14. Kuklin, A. A., & Gurban, I. A. (2012). Sostoyaniye trudovogo kapitala regionov Rossii v kontekste issledovaniya natsional'nogo chelovecheskogo kapitala [The state of labor capital in the regions of Russia in the context of the study of national human capital]. Izvestiya Ural'skogo gosudarstvennogo ekonomicheskogo universiteta [Scientific Journal of the Ural State University of Economics], 4(42), 42-49. (In Russ.)
  15. Mau, V., & Stupin, V. (1995). Ocherki politicheskoy ekonomii rossiyskikh regionov [Essays on the Political Economy of Russian Regions]. Voprosy ekonomiki [Issues of Economics], 10, 29-46. (In Russ.).
  16. Mikhaylov, V. V. (2012). Finansovoye regulirovaniye protsessov v kontekste ustoychivogo razvitiya sotsial'no-ekonomicheskikh system [Financial regulation of processes in the context of sustainable development of socio-economic systems]. Sibirskaya finansovaya shkola [Siberian Financial School], 6 (95), 85–89. (In Russ.).
  17. Mintzberg, H. (1973). The Nature of Managerial Work. New York: Harper and Row.
  18. Ozturk, I. (2008). The Role of Education in Economic Development: A Theoretical Perspective. Retrieved May 15, 2018 from: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1137541
  19. Porter, M.E. (1991). Towards a dynamic theory of strategy. Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 12, 95-117.
  20. Psacharopoulos, G., & Patrinos, H.A. (2004). Returns to Investment in Education: A Further Update. Educational Economics, 12(2), 111– 134. DOI: 10.1080/0964529042000239140
  21. Roik, V. (2010). Sotsial'nyy byudzhet – vazhneyshiy instrument realizatsii prav cheloveka v sotsial'noy sfere [Social budget – the most important tool for the realization of human rights in the social sphere] Chelovek i trud [Man and Labor], 7, 9-13.
  22. Shultz, T. (1971). Investment in Human Capital. London: Collier-Macmillan Limited
  23. Tatarkin, A., & Andreyeva, Ye. (2014). Formirovaniye postindustrial'nogo sotsial'nogo gosudarstva: vektor razvitiya chelovecheskogo potentsiala [Formation of postindustrial social state: vector of human potential development]. Problemy teorii i praktiki upravleniya [Problems of management theory and practice], 7, 24-31. (In Russ.).
  24. Thompson, A., & Strickland, A. (1993). Strategic Management: concepts and cases (7th Ed.). Chicago: Irwin.

Copyright information

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

About this article

Publication Date

02 April 2019

eBook ISBN

978-1-80296-058-7

Publisher

Future Academy

Volume

59

Print ISBN (optional)

-

Edition Number

1st Edition

Pages

1-1083

Subjects

Business, innovation, science, technology, society, organizational theory,organizational behaviour

Cite this article as:

Trifonov, V., Mikhailov, V., Fadeykina, N., Vaysberg, Y. A., & Glushakova*, O. (2019). Architectonics And Strategic Architecture Of Regional Public Administration Systems: Assessment Of Compliance. In & V. A. Trifonov (Ed.), Contemporary Issues of Economic Development of Russia: Challenges and Opportunities, vol 59. European Proceedings of Social and Behavioural Sciences (pp. 331-341). Future Academy. https://doi.org/10.15405/epsbs.2019.04.37