CC BY
6
UDC: 35:159.955:316.6
DOI: https://doi.org/10.32689/2617-2224-2020-1(21)-57-70
Bobrovskyi Oleksii Illich,
graduate student of the Department of Public Administration and Local Government Dnipropetrovsk Regional Institute of Public Administration of the National Academy of Public Administration, the President of Ukraine; 49000, Dnipro, Str. Titova, 2, e-mail: [email protected]; mob. tel.: +38 (097) 578 74 75.
ORCID: 0000-0001-7395-7477
Бобровський Олексш Iллiч,
асшрант кафедри державного управлтня та мкцевого самоврядування Днтропетровського регюнального т-ституту державного управлтня Нащо-нальног академи державного управлтня при Президентовi Украгни; 49000, м. Дт-про, вул. Титова, 2, e-mail: bobeiur@meta, ua, моб. т.: +38 (097) 578 74 75.
ORCID: 0000-0001-7395-7477
Бобровский Алексей Ильич,
аспирант кафедры государственного управления и местного самоуправления Днепропетровского регионального института государственного управления Национальной академии государственного управления при Президенте Украины; 49000, г. Днепр, ул. Титова, 2, e-mail: [email protected]; моб. т.: +38 (097) 578 74 75.
ORCID: 0000-0001-7395-7477
ARCHETYPES OF MANAGEMENT MODELS AND SYSTEMS THINKING AS FACTORS IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE TRADITIONS OF DEMOCRATIC STATE-BUILDING
Abstract. The necessity of changing approaches to building innovative ways of improving the efficiency of public power is substantiated. The theoretical bases of formation and development of human mental abilities and possibilities of their application as socio-psychological factors of democratization of power and increase of efficiency of public management of territorial communities are investigated.
The expediency of including social and psychological factors of social development into the factors used in the construction of public administration systems has been proved. The idea about the existence of a direct connection of systemic thinking and human intelligence with its archetype has been formed, and a hypothetical opinion has been expressed about their influence on the 'unconscious' personality.
The essence of the concepts 'archetype', 'thinking', 'system thinking', 'intelligence' and 'intellectual models' as the basis of intellectual development and development of cybernetic and system archetypes of management, as a way of intellectualization and improvement of management efficiency, starting from the grassroots levels of society is considered. The expediency of simultaneously considering the archetypical nature of people, their systemic thinking and intellectual models have been proved, which deepens their interconnectedness, mutual influence, and mutual development. The model of connectedness, interaction, and influence of key human factors of development are offered on the development of management systems. The model is intended to get an idea of the possibility of applying an archetypal approach and systemic thinking in mastering theoretical and practical knowledge by future specialists of public administration science. It illustrates the impact of accumulated human properties on the creation and operation of a new type of model for managing territorial community development processes.
It is shown that the introduction of the archetypal approach, systems thinking and systems of archetypes of management require the creation of a basic analytical basis. It should be built on the results of research on personnel composition and management systems of territorial communities through the use of analytical and synthetic models of the Universal Epochal Cycle. It is proposed to supplement the concept of building and development of territorial community management systems by applying an archetypal approach as a new opportunity to identify and engage the intellectual potential of residents in the processes of territorial development and the country as a whole.
Keywords: social and psychological properties of human, an archetype of human, systemic thinking, intellectual models, archetype of the management system, socio-psychological factors of increase of efficiency of management, democratization, and intellectualization of processes, and management of development.
АРХЕТИПИ МОДЕЛЕЙ УПРАВЛ1ННЯ I СИСТЕМНЕ МИСЛЕННЯ
ЯК ЧИННИКИ РОЗВИТКУ ТРАДИЦ1Й ДЕМОКРАТИЧНОГО
ДЕРЖАВОТВОРЕННЯ
Анотащя. Обгрунтовано необхщшсть змши пiдходiв до побудови шно-вацшних шляхiв шдвищення ефективносп публiчноl влади. Дослщжено теоретичш засади формування i розвитку розумових здатностей людини i можливосп 'íx застосування як сощально-психолопчних чинниив демокра-тизаци влади i шдвищення ефективносп публiчного управлшня територ^ альних громад.
Доведено дощльшсть включення соцiально-психологiчних чинникiв роз-витку суспiльства до складу чинниив, якi використовуються при побудовi систем публiчного управлiння. Сформовано уявлення про юнування прямого зв'язку системного мислення й штелекту людини з и архетипом, гшоте-тично висловлюеться думка щодо !х впливу на "несввдоме" особистостi.
Розглянуто сутнiсть понять "архетип", "мислення", "системне мислення", "штелект" й "iнтелектуальнi моделi" як штелектуального пiдrрунтя опанування i розвитку юбернетичних системних архетипiв управлiння як шляху iнтелектуалiзацil i пiдвищення ефективносп управлiння, починаю-чи з низових ланок сусшльства. Доведено доцiльнiсть одночасного розгляду архетишчносп людей, !х системного мислення й штелектуальних моделей, що поглиблюе !х взаемопов'язанiсть, взаемовплив i взаеморозвиток. За-пропоновано модель пов'язаносп, взаемоди i впливу ключових людських чинникiв розвитку на розвиток систем управлшня. Модель призначена для отримання уявлення про можливють застосування архетипного шдхо-ду i системного мислення при опануванш теоретичних i практичних знань майбутшми фахiвцями науки державного управлшня. Вона шюструе вплив акумульованих властивостей людини на створення i функщонування нового типу моделей управлшня процесами розвитку територiальних громад.
Показано, що запровадження архетишчного шдходу, системного мислення i систем архетишв управлiння потребуе створення базового аналпично-го пiдrрунтя, яке мае побудуватися на результатах дослщження кадрового складу й управлшських систем територiальних громад шляхом застосування аналпико-синтетично! моделi "Унiверсального епохального циклу". За-пропоновано доповнити концепцiю побудови i розвитку систем управлiння територiальними громадами заходами iз застосуванням архетипного шдходу як нову можливють виявлення i задiяння iнтелектуального потенцiалу жителiв до процесiв розвитку територiй i кра!ни в цiлому.
Ключовi слова: сощально-психолопчш властивостi людини, архетип людини, системне мислення, штелектуальш моделi, архетип системи управлшня, сощально-психолопчш чинники шдвищення ефективносп управлшня, демократизащя й iнтелектуалiзацiя процесiв, управлiння розвитком.
АРХЕТИПЫ МОДЕЛЕЙ УПРАВЛЕНИЯ И СИСТЕМНОЕ МЫШЛЕНИЕ КАК ФАКТОРЫ РАЗВИТИЯ ТРАДИЦИЙ ДЕМОКРАТИЧЕСКОГО ГОСУДАРСТВА
Аннотация. Обоснована необходимость изменения подходов к построению инновационных путей повышения эффективности публичной власти. Исследованы теоретические основы формирования и развития умственных способностей человека и возможности их применения как социально-психологических факторов демократизации власти и повышения эффективности публичного управления территориальных общин.
Доказана целесообразность включения социально-психологических факторов развития общества в состав факторов, используемых при построении
систем публичного управления. Сформировано представление о существовании прямой связи системного мышления и интеллекта человека с его архетипом, гипотетически высказана мысль об их влиянии на "бессознательное" личности.
Рассмотрена сущность понятий "архетип", "мышление", "системное мышление", "интеллект" и "интеллектуальные модели" в качестве знаниево интеллектуального основания освоения и развития кибернетических системных архетипов управления, как пути интеллектуализации и повышения эффективности управления, начиная с низовых звеньев общества. Доказана целесообразность одновременного рассмотрения архетипичности людей, их системного мышления и интеллектуальных моделей, что углубляет их взаимосвязанность, взаимовлияние и взаиморазвитие. Предложенная модель связанности, взаимодействия и влияния ключевых человеческих факторов развития на развитие систем управления. Модель предназначена для получения представления о возможности применения архетипного подхода и системного мышления при овладении теоретическими и практическими знаниями будущими специалистами науки государственного управления. Она иллюстрирует влияние аккумулированных свойств человека на создание и функционирование нового типа моделей управления процессами развития территориальных общин.
Показано, что введение архетипического подхода, системного мышления и систем архетипов управления требует создания базового аналитического обоснования, которое должно строиться на результатах исследования кадрового состава и управленческих систем территориальных общин путем применения аналитико-синтетической модели "Универсального эпохального цикла". Предложено дополнить концепцию построения и развития систем управления территориальными общинами мероприятиями с использованием архетипического подхода как новой возможности выявления и задействования интеллектуального потенциала жителей в процессы развития территорий и страны в целом.
Ключевые слова: социально-психологические свойства человека, архетип человека, системное мышление, интеллектуальные модели, архетип системы управления, социально-психологические факторы повышения эффективности управления, демократизация и интеллектуализация процессов, управление развитием.
Problem statement. The organization of an effective system of public management of territorial communities is one of the most important problems of public state formation in Ukraine.
The driving forces of social and democratic development are the knowledge and collective competence of civil servants; their ability to predict tendencies and patterns of development, flex-
ible, rationally structured structures of government bodies; and their internal and external well-established, directed and balanced direct and feedback relations in the implementation of management solutions.
However, at the present stage in the public administration of Ukraine, neither the organization of management nor the level of competencies of managerial staff sufficiently provides a timely and high-quality solution to urgent problems of life of the Ukrainian society. They are particularly acute at the territorial level. In the reform of local self-government, new rights have not been fully realized yet. Territorial communities are not provided with effective organizational models for the development and implementation of management processes, they do not have a sufficient number of experienced, innovative thinking leaders and civil servants who would fully accept the new conditions of management and feel masters of their own lives. Management continues to use traditional approaches to building systems of management organizations and links between higher authorities, businesses, and society. The behaviour of civil servants has not changed. Their powers and vision of their own future are not yet sufficiently independent.
The general psychological state of the society is becoming threatening, as the distrust of the authorities; their capabilities and the ability to create a new climate in society are deepening. It becomes evident that the progressive social movement requires the formation of new management traditions, a new approach to meaningful, functional and organizational design of management
systems and methodological support of power actions.
Considering that the activity of people is the basis of their conscious existence and development, the application of socio-psychological factors in the improvement of the systems of state and municipal government becomes extremely relevant. The existence of complex problems in ensuring the progressive social movement of society motivates the search for new ways of improving the existing state.
Analysis of recent researches and publications. The social purpose of the state and its social responsibility towards its citizens is to create the conditions for their development, meeting the needs and participation in building a democratic platform of their lives. But in the public management of territorial communities to solve this problem, there are no effective programs or plans yet. In the research of the theory and practice of management, a special place is occupied by humans as the main object and subject of state administrative activity and social development. Therefore, radical improvement of the situation in Ukraine is impossible without the development of new scenarios for the development of a democratic society, the formation of new managerial traditions and rules, the broad involvement of thinking and intellectually developed citizens. This is the focus of theoretical and practical research on the formation of conditions for enhancing the creative ability of the deep psychological development of human archetypes and their communities in order to activate and engage them in the systems of life support and development of mankind.
Issues of mental change processes that affect the social status of people in the context of political, cultural and social content, principles of regulation of the ability of emotional activity of subjects, profound factors of activity reproduction in the processes of activity have become the subject of research of many foreign scientists: V. Yadov, A. Shirozii, D. Uznadze, M. Odintso-va and other representatives of the schools of psychology of O. Leontiev and the psychology of D. Uznadze [1].
Ukrainian scientists, representatives of the Ukrainian school of archetype academician E. Afonina (A. Mar-tynov, O. Sushii, O. Donchenko, T. Novachenko, O. Balakirev, S. Bla-hodietelev-Vovk, V. Druk, T. Belska and N. Havkalov, etc.) [1; 2; 3; 4; 5; 6; 7], in addition to the above areas, explore the archetypal components of government, the archetypal development of society's traditions, the development of psychological analytics, the participation of the unconscious in solving social problems; develop methodological foundations for the research of the individual and collective unconscious in the social and other spheres of life. The new methodology and technique of psychosocial analysis of the society of E. Afonina are implemented using the model of the Universal Epochal Cycle.
At the same time, some issues of practical use of human archetypes in the reform processes of democratization of power in society are still pending. One such issue is the application of an archetypal approach, that is, the formation of systemic thinking and intellectual models of people in the construction of systemic archetypes of
public management of territorial communities.
Purpose of the article: To find out unused possibilities of archetypal approach and systemic thinking as factors of levelling outdated traditions of management for increase of efficiency of activity of management personnel; to find new ways of interaction between authorities and active members of society through their grouping and understanding through the development of their archetypal meta-settings, systemic thinking and the use of systematic archetypes of governance in the formation of governing bodies, training and recruitment for public service.
Presentation of the main research material. Since the beginning of the third millennium, the life of the Ukrainian people has been accompanied by serious disturbances: new political forces are emerging, economic and social problems are increasing, the role of historical roots is diminished, traditions, preferences, human values change, inter-ethnic respect disappears, which disperse basic values and negatively affect the consciousness of the population. The perception of new realities creates profound shifts in the formation of the personal and collective consciousness of people and does not inspire them to be active in new conditions. Although sprouts of positive sentiment have already taken root, which has been proved by Ukrainian scientists [8; 9; 10]. It promotes the self-realization and restoration of the energy of social actions, increases, and development of traditions of the Ukrainian people.
However, the moods, hopes, and aspirations of the population have not
been realized to date. This is also understood by the Ukrainian authorities, who, as Ukrainian scientists point out, 'no longer claim a monopoly of violence and prohibition, but try to function as a technique for managing life in the form of advice and recommendations of specialists' [10, P. 11].
It is obvious that without the active participation of the people of the country in the realization of the development goals chosen by the state, such a state in the society cannot be changed by either the chosen policy or scientifically substantiated and approved long-term development plans. Reproduction of social harmony, interaction and harmonious activity of power with society requires a serious change in the thinking of the society and the restructuring of the organization of power activity [11].
The change in consciousness of 'metanoia' (transcendence) in the Christian tradition was emphasized as insight and penetration into the essence of the high God [12]. Subsequently, it became the object of the research of many scientists. From the concept of 'consciousness' of humans was distinguished and its part, which man cannot recognize and distinguish. This feature of humans and the community has been called the archetype. For the first time, the philosophical interpretation of the term 'archetype' was made by K. Jung and his followers, and later by Avicenna and many other researchers who analysed the individual and collective unconscious generated by humans in some strange way [13]. For a long time, the archetype is regarded as one of the characteristics of humans and the community, which
is difficult to distinguish and formally describe. Although it is believed that there are boundaries of communication and human activity, in which its archetype can manifest itself quite clearly, namely: during the manifestation of professional and social qualities of a human, when evaluating during a certain position, when communicating, in professional activity, etc. It is believed that the archetype of a person influences his or her ability and desire to learn, master new competencies and form processes of thinking in humans. In doing so, the archetype itself develops. The 'unconscious' is nourished at the expense of new knowledge, skills, and new connections and increases the power of influence on the human mentality. During a group activity or study, a nourished individual archetype changes the group's 'unconscious' and mentality. However, 'the mentality is not given to a person from birth, but cultivated as a way of thinking, world-view, and character of emotional life' [10, P. 9]. The mentality is considered as a historically conditioned specificity of thinking, totality, and forms of organization of features of the social and political psychology of people, and their socio-cultural conscious. This suggests that exploring the 'archetype' of humans, at the same time should consider its properties such as the way of thinking, systemic thinking, intelligence, and intellectual model.
In order to gain a better understanding of the formation of human archetypal abilities, it is hypothetically assumed that the emphasized qualities of the human mind and activity are directly related to the archetype, although it is not quite clear as such.
Let's consider these qualities in more detail.
To characterize the thinking patterns, K. Jung divided people into extroverts and introverts. Among the components of general thinking are 'speed, depth of thinking, breadth of thinking, the flexibility of thinking, strategic, reflection (self-awareness) and organization' [13]. A characteristic feature of the way of thinking is determined by its ability to acquire a new quality in its highest cumulative expression: a state of systemic thinking, which allows identifying the connections of the analysed phenomenon not as a set of objects or social events, but as regularities and systemic changes made in them. Although these changes may not always be described by qualitative or quantitative indicators, they do help to give an idea of the trends or cyclical nature of changes in the society, individual systems, and links that make it work. Systemic thinking is linked to and identified with the model of human consciousness and subconscious-ness (human archetype), which can be influenced by a subconscious direction for a deeper understanding of the mystery of the creation of the human conscious and the unconscious and to predict their manifestation in the processes of social evolution and human activity in society. In the presence of such properties, a person can assume that they are able to embody in its archetype, develop and manifest themselves in communication with other people. It is obvious that properties should be considered as inalienable and interconnected features of a person, which can be formed and developed when it acquires new knowledge, competency
skills, and experience. The development of human thinking at a certain stage begins to form so-called systemic thinking. It is 'a conceptual framework of a set of different knowledge and intuitions over the last 50 years, designed to facilitate the perception of the integrity of phenomena that helps to bring about change' [12, P. 23] (Translated by the author O. B.). To such thinking in practical activity leads to the observation of direct and feedback relationships, the vision of integrity not as its static state, but as a series of regular changes that enhance the ability of the phenomenon to counteract undesirable influences, to create its equilibrium and balance. General and vocational training, culture, and experience, systemic thinking develop human intellectual abilities. But the archetype and intelligence of man are not the same things. Unlike archetypes, human intelligence is created and subjected to development. According to Albert Einstein, the creations of the intellect have been through the noisy bustle of generations and have warmed the world with warmth and light for centuries. Today, the science that studies intelligence gives more than 70 definitions of it. Common to them, integrity and consistency of mental experience can be identified its ability to activity and the psychological characteristics of the human. The development of intelligence is directed to the formation of an intellectual model of a human, which reflects in his mind certain provisions, generalizations, pictures or even images that influence his understanding of the world and the choice of ways of action. One of the important and potentially valuable possibilities of system
thinking is that its application allows getting an idea that some manifestations of the behaviour of the processes of the structure of a phenomenon occur again and again. This manifestation of the idea was called the type of structure, and the formation of phenomena archetype of the system, including 'limits of growth', 'change of problem', 'pattern of behaviour' and others. [12, P. 109]. This type of archetype is compared with stories and situations, or the state of systems that repeat themselves under different conditions more than once. This phenomenon is reflected in different fields of knowledge (Biology, Economics, Management, and Psychology, etc.), which allows combining a large number of repetitive situations into a much smaller number of manageable archetypes.
Recognizing the existence of human archetypes and taking into account the possibilities of mastering systemic thinking and the formation of intellectual models, allows the recognition of the behaviour of complex systems and the existence of relationships in them, their constant periodicity or constant repetition, called 'system archetypes' and primarily 'archetypes of control systems'. Their definition should be due to the science of Cybernetics, which proposed six types of system archetypes of management.
The term 'archetype' in Cybernetics is interpreted as a high degree of abstraction of the system, which gives each system a certain status, which characterizes the level of development of knowledge and management skills [14]. The archetype of management systems reflects the principles and contours of control using information
flows, which becomes its calling card. The archetypes of control systems offered by Cybernetics are a general archetype that implements the following principles: interaction of control systems with the environment, blackbox principle, and feedback principle. Considering the general archetype, a number of system archetypes were proposed: open-loop control archetype, closed-loop control archetype, adaptive control system archetype, system archetype in which optimal control algorithms and reflective control archetype are implemented [15; 16].
In order to identify, describe and analyse the archetypes of control systems, efforts should be directed to the use of a higher form of concentration of knowledge and skills capable of implementing control algorithms. Thus, the management of the systemic archetype of reflective control implies the need to possess a set of management science knowledge about managed objects, the interpretation of knowledge of public control functions to rebuild this knowledge in the processes of functioning and self-organization of systems, models and management algorithms. This will solve the problem of recognition of the environment and technologies for preparing the appropriate response to the effects of management objects, the allocation of causal chains, trends, and patterns, the identification of factors, the construction of analytical and static models and their analysis.
In order to recognize and use the archetypes of control systems, distinguished by the science of cybernetics, it is necessary to create conditions for their harmonization with the collective archetypes of management (their
collective unconscious), since this phenomenon is implicit and almost unmanageable. It can be about other abilities of people who will implement the positive archetypal properties of managers in management activities and implement them in management. The archetypal approach to the application of systemic management archetypes proposes to consider ways of thinking, systems thinking, intelligence, and intellectual models that can, with some conventionality, be considered the key to intuition and the subconscious. The logical structure of the connection and interaction of key human factors, their inclusion in the development of management systems is shown in the figure.
of increasing the efficiency of management at the content-functional, design, technological and experimental stages of modernization of public authorities to provide the authorities with intellectually developed employees.
The functioning of a set of models of the type of systemic archetypes of management and the connections between them can create the basic basis for the formation of a new psychological climate in the management of society through innovative technologies of social harmonization, common vision, and interaction to achieve the goals of developing a common life. It is also advisable to use our model when developing strategic and on-going devel-
Fig.: The Model of Connectedness, Interaction & Influence of Key Human Factors on the Development of Management Systems
The model is intended to get an idea of the possibility of applying an archetypal approach and systemic thinking in mastering theoretical and practical knowledge by future specialists of public administration science. It illustrates the impact of accumulated human properties on the creation and operation of a new type of model for managing territorial community development processes. This model is proposed to be used in the research of problems
opment measures for a country and its regions.
It should be noted that in the existing models of management systems, the composition of methods of their construction (linear, functional, linear-functional, matrix, divisional, staff) and in the recruitment of managerial positions do not take into account the socio-psychological factors that would impede the consideration of ways of thinking, systemic influence
and opportunities of individuals and collectives for active participation in management, which does not allow to involve psychological factors in positive changes in society.
At the same time, the proposed means of systemic thinking and people's intellectual ability to apply the archetypal methodology in improving the effectiveness of public management of territorial communities do not cover all the necessary archetypes of governance systems in building a democratic society. It is necessary to have a basic analytical basis to know the real possibilities of applying the archetypal approach in the system of public power in the conditions of transformation processes. It can be created using the analytic-synthetic model of the Universal Epochal Cycle by E. Afonina, which allows conducting a socio-his-torical analysis of the development of society and civilization, deepening into the very foundations of human social existence [2].
Conclusions and prospects for further researches. Systemic thinking, systemic vision, systemic improvement, and systemic development are the key concepts of the human world perception, which leads to in-depth studies of their transformation and application in various spheres of human activity.
The application of already known systemic archetypes of governance provides an opportunity to recognize the existing systems of public administration of the territories, their archetypal and intellectual models. It will help to solve today's multifaceted problems of democratic governance and the ability of leaders to make the necessary timely
changes in the managed processes and influence their social abilities. Therefore, the process of mastering system thinking and the formation of intelligent models must be focused and managed.
The development of social thinking becomes a powerful source of formation of intelligence, both individual and collective. It also enriches the human archetypes, which creates the conditions for the development of systemic archetypes, in particular in the state and municipal government.
It is necessary to create conditions for expanding the concept of improvement of organizational-content and functional forms of management systems. It will take into account behavioural theories, structural images of the collective unconscious, tendencies, and dynamics of archetypal layers of reality, the achievements of cybernetics, systematic thinking, and management of processes.
Further directions of research of this problem should become as follows: creation of analytical models of the analysis of quality of management systems at the initial level of societyterritorial communities; identification of existing problems and an assessment of ability of the power to their decision; development of methodology of development by cybernetic system archetypes of management and development of methods of their practical construction and functioning; conceptualization of archetypal and system approaches in increase of efficiency of public management for their application in practice; development of the content of additions to educational programs of training of future special-
ists from public administration in institutions of higher education (universities), centres of training and advanced training of administrative personnel for acquisition of knowledge and skills of development of system thinking and intelligence with use of computer technologies.
REFERENCES -
1. Proceedings of the 3Conference Title (2013): mezhdunarodnaia nauchno-praktycheskaia konferentsyia "Sym-volycheskoe y arkhetypycheskoe v kulture y sotsyalntikh otnoshenyiakh" — International scientific-practical conference "Symbolic and archetypal in culture and social relations". (175 p.). Praha: Vedecko vydavatelské centrum "Sociosféra — CZ" [in Czech Republic].
2. Sushyi, O. V. (2018). Ukrainske dyvo [The Ukrainian miracle]. Ukrainskyi sotsium. — Ukrainian society, 4(67), 162-165 [in Ukrainian].
3. Bielska, T. V. (2014). Arkhetypni kontseptualni zasady stanovlennia i rozvytku hlobalnoho hromadianskoho suspilstva [Archetypal conceptual foundations for the emergence and development of global civil society]. Publichne upravlinnia: teoriia ta prak-tyka. — Public administration: theory and practice, 2(18), 14-22 [in Ukrainian].
4. Sushyi, O. V. (2012). Psykhosotsi-alna kultura derzhavnoho upravlinnia [Psychosocial culture of public administration]. — Kyiv: Svitohliad [in Ukrainian].
5. Afonin, E. A. & Balakirieva, O. M. (2015). Funktsionalna i kompetent-nisna hotovnist derzhavnykh sluzh-bovtsiv Ukrainy do zdiisnennia publi-chnoho administruvannia v umovakh demokratii [Functional and Compe-
tent Willingness of Ukrainian Civil Servants to Perform Public Administration in Democracy]. nauk.-analit. dopovidna zapyska. Kyiv: DU "In-stytut ekonomiky ta prohnozuvannia Natsionalnoi akademii nauk Ukrainy" [in Ukrainian].
6. Afonin, E. V. & Balakirieva, O. M. (2015). Funktsionalna i kompetent-nisna hotovnist derzhavnykh sluzh-bovtsiv Ukrainy do zdiisnennia publi-chnoho administruvannia v umovakh demokratii [Functional and Competent Willingness of Ukrainian Civil Servants to Perform Public Administration in Democracy]. Ukrainskyi sotsium — Ukrainian society, 1, 7-22 [in Ukrainian].
7. Afonin, E. A. (2010). Liudska iden-tychnist ta osoblyvosti yii vplyvu na polityku y derzhavne upravlinnia [Human Identity and its Impacts on Politics and Public Administration] Kont-septualni zasady vzaiemodii polityky i upravlinnia — Conceptual framework for policy-management synergies, (pp. 265-289). Kyiv : NADU [in Ukrainian].
8. Afonin, E. A., Sushyi, O. V. & Usa-chenko, L. M. (2011). Zakonomirnosti ta osoblyvosti suspilno-transformatsi-inykh protsesiv v Ukraini [Patterns and features of social and transformation processes in Ukraine]. Ukrain-skyi sotsium. — Ukrainian society, 4(67), 7-30 [in Ukrainian].
9. Sushyi, E. V. & Afonin, E. A. (2011). Arkhetypyka kak novoe nauchnoe napravlenye mezhdystsyplynarntikh yssledovanyi problem hosudarstven-noho upravlenyia [Archetypal as a new scientific field of interdisciplinary research of public administration problems]: Proceedings of the 9rd International: International Conference "Hosudarstvennoe upravlenye v KhKhI veke: tradytsyy y ynnovatsyy" — materials of the 9th international
conference "Public Administration in the 21st Century: Traditions and Innovations". (Vols. 2). (pp. 111-122). Moscow: Yzd-vo Mosk. un-ta [in Russian].
10. Afonin, E. & Martynov, A. (2019). Ukrainske dyvo: vid depresii do sot-sialnoho optymizmu [The Ukrainian miracle: from depression to social optimism]. Kyiv: Kyievo-Mohylianska akademiia [in Ukrainian].
11. Hebert, Saimon A. (2001). Adminis-tratyvna povedinka: Doslidzhennia protsesiv pryiniattia rishen v orhani-zatsiiakh, shcho vykonuiut adminis-tratyvni funktsii [Administrative Behavior: Investigating Decision Making Processes in Organizations Performing Administrative Functions]. (Trans). Kyiv : ArtEk [in Ukrainian].
12. Senhe P. (1999). Piataia dystsyplyna: Ysskustvo y praktyka samoobuchai-ushcheisia orhanyzatsyy [Fifth discipline: The art and practice of self-study organization]. (Trans). Moscow: Olymp — Byznes [in Russian].
13. Iunh, K. (2009). Soznanye y bessoznatelnoe [Consciousness and the unconscious]. — Moscow: Aka-demycheskyi Proekt [in Russian].
14. Hlushkov, V.M. (Ed.). (1973). Ent-syklopediia kibernetyky [Encyclopedia of Cybernetics]. (Vols. 1-2). Kyiv: Holovna redaktsiia Ukrainskoi radi-anskoi entsyklopedii [in Ukrainian].
15. Freidyna, E.V. (2007). Yssledovanye system upravlenyia [Management systems research]. Novosybyrsk: NHUЭU [in Russian].
16. Byr, S. (1965). Kybernetyka y uprav-lenye proyzvodstvom [Cybernetics and production management]. Moscow: Nauka [in Russian].
СПИСОК ВИКОРИСТАНИХ ДЖЕРЕЛ -
1. Символическое и архетипическое в культуре и социальных отноше-
ниях: материалы III междунар. на-уч.-практ. конф., 5 - 6 марта 2013 г., Прага : Vedecko vydavatelske centrum "Sociosfera - CZ", 2013. 175 с.
2. Суший О. В. Украшське диво. Украшський сощум. 2018. № 4(67). С. 162-165.
3. Бельська Т. В. Архетипш концеп-туальш засади становлення i роз-витку глобального громадянського сусшльства. Публiчне управлшня: теорiя та практика. 2014. № 2(18). С. 14-22.
4. Суший О. В. Психосощальна культура державного управлшня: моно-графiя. Кшв : Свiтогляд, 2012. 344 с.
5. Афонш Е. А. Балаюрева О. М. Функцiональна i компетентнiсна готовнiсть державних службовцiв Украши до здiйснення публiчного адмiнiстрування в умовах демократа наук.-аналiт. доповщна записка. Кшв : 2015. 24 с.
6. Афонш Е. В., Балаюрева О. М. Функщональна i компетентнiсна готовнiсть державних службовцiв Украши до здшснення публiчного адмiнiстрування в умовах демократа Украшський сощум. 2015. № 1. С. 7-22.
7. Афонш Е. А. Людська щентичшсть та особливост 'i'i впливу на политику й державне управлiння. Концеп-туальнi засади взаемодп полiтики i управлiння : навч. пос16. Кшв : НАДУ, 2010. С. 265-289.
8. Афонш Е. А. Суший О. В. Законо-м!рносп та особливост сусшль-но-трансформацiйних процеав в Украшг Украшський соц1ум. 2011. № 4. С. 7-30.
9. Суший Е. В., Афонин Э. А. Архе-типика как новое научное направление междисциплинарных исследований проблем государственного управления Государственное управление в XXI веке: традиции и инно-
вации : материалы 9-й междунар. конф., г. Москва, 25-27 мая 2011 г. Москва: Изд-во Моск. ун-та, 2011. Ч. 3. С. 111-122.
10. Афонш Е., Мартинов А. Украшське диво: вщ депресп до сощального оптимiзму: монографiя. Кшв : Ки-ево-Могилянська академiя, 2019. 296 с.
11. Саймон Геберт А. Адмшстративна поведшка: Дослiдження процесiв прийняття ршень в органiзацiях, що виконують адмiнiстративнi функ-ци; пер. с англ. за заг. ред. Р. Ткачук. Кшв: АртЕк, 2001. 392 с.
12. Сенге П. Пятая дисциплина: Искусство и практика самообучающейся
организации : пер. с англ. Москва : Олимп - Бизнес, 1999. 408 с.
13. Юнг К. Сознание и бессознательное. Москва : Академический Проект, 2009. 188 с.
14. Енциклопедiя юбернетики : у 2 т. / редкол. : В. М. Глушков (вщп. ред.), М. М. Амосов, I. П. Артеменко [та ш.]; АН Украшсько1 РСР. - Кшв : Голов. ред. Укр. рад. енцикл., 1973. Т. 2. 570 с.
15. Фрейдина Е. В. Исследование систем управления : учебно-методический комплекс. Новосибирск : НГУЭУ, 2007. 184 с.
16. Бир Стаффорд. Кибернетика и управление производством. — Москва : Наука, 1965. 391 с.
