Public Administration as an Object of Scientific Research and a Direction of Civil Servants’ Education

The article is devoted to systematizing and updating the research and educational characteristics of public administration. The research method is a problem analysis of the public administration research discipline and the design of the problem of training personnel for the contemporary public service. The result of the study is the justification of the need to match the key competen- cies of civil servants to the priority areas of public administration as a scientific discipline. The article concludes that contemporary public administration should be understood as a practical activity to achieve national and regional goals and objectives through state organizations and public participation. This definition allows to accumulate both domestic and foreign experience, as well as combine practice-oriented and research characteristics of the concept under study. The theoretical basis of public administration is determined by two key methodological approaches: socio-engineering that is focused on the search for optimal management models for solving prob- lems that arise in society in a way; and humanitarian, that is based on the need to overcome bureaucracy and inertia of the management system. The subject of contemporary public admin- istration consists of some problem areas, including: international, national, regional and local public administration systems; organization and implementation of sectoral and sectoral policies, strategies, projects and programs; administrative processes and procedures; research of the state and municipal service; civil society; information support and digital transformation of administration. The article substantiates that the Russian education system has now created conditions for more flexible consideration of the requests of the state and municipal service system in terms of the composition and quality of officials’ competencies. The author comes to the conclusion that the dynamics of the competence approach to the civil servants education is quite optimistic: on the one hand, educational standards and training plans flexibly take into account the needs of the state and municipal service, and on the other hand, they correspond to modern trends in the transformation of the public administration system towards a more efficient organization of interac- tion between the state and citizens.

1. Balashov A. I., Barkova T. N., Vasilyeva E. A. and others. Preparation, writing and protection of the final qualification work in the field of training “State and Municipal Administration”: textbook. St. Petersburg: A. M. Konovalov Publishing House, 2020. (In Rus).

2. Vasilenko I. A. State and municipal administration. M.: Gardarika, 2005. (In Rus).

3. State Strategic Management: monograph /edited by Yu. V. Kuznetsov. St. Petersburg: Peter, 2014. (In Rus).

4. Menshikova G. A., Mironova A. A., Pruel N. A. Assessment of regulatory impact as a public examination of management decisions // Bulletin of St. Petersburg University. Series 12. Sociology [Vestnik Sankt-Peterburgskogo universiteta. Seriya 12. Sotsiologiya]. 2016. N 3. P. 101–117. (In Rus).

5. Petrov M. V., Burov V. V., Shklyaruk M. S. at al. State as a platform. (Cyber)state for the digital economy. Digital transformation. M.: Center for Strategic Research, 2018. 53 p. (In Rus).

6. Potapova E. P., Zhukov P. V., Filippov D. A. On the formation of new competencies of state and municipal employees in the process of training undergraduates in the specialty 38.04.04 “State and Municipal Administration” // Bulletin of the Novgorod branch of the RANEPA [Vestnik Novgorodskogo filiala RANKhiGS]. 2018. Vol. 8. N 2–1 (10). P. 120–127. (In Rus).

7. Radchenko A. I. Fundamentals of state and municipal administration. Rostov-on-Don: MarT, 2007. (In Rus).

8. Usvatov I. S. On the structure of civil society: the definition of the concept of the institution of civil society // Lacunas in Russian legislation [Probely v rossiiskom zakonodatel’stve]. 2009. N 4. P. 82–84. (In Rus).

9. Belanche G. D., Casaló Arino L. V. Rebuilding public trust in government administrations through e-government actions. Revista Española de Investigación de Marketing ESIC. 2015. N 19. P. 1–11.

10. Brans M., Coenen L. The Europeanization of Public Administration teaching // Policy and Society. 2016. Vol. 35, Iss. 4. P. 333–349.

11. Bratianu C., Hadad S., Bejinaru R. Paradigm Shift in Business Education: A Competence-Based Approach // Sustainability. 2020. N 12 (4). P. 1348.

12. Glass L.-M., Newig J. Governance for achieving the Sustainable Development Goals: How important are participation, policy coherence, reflexivity, adaptation and democratic institutions? // Earth System Governance. 2019. Vol. 2. P. 100031.

13. Istratea L., Maria L. Research on the Use of Project Management in Organizational Culture Change in Public Administration Institutions // Procedia Economics and Finance. 2012. N 3. P. 617–622.

14. Jovanovic M., Sjödin D., Parida V. Co-evolution of platform architecture, platform services, and platform governance: Expanding the platform value of industrial digital platforms. Technovation. 2021. Available online 10 January, 102218. DOI: 10.1016/j.technovation.2020.102218.

15. Manoharan A. P., Mirbel W., Carrizales T. J. Global comparative public administration: Are graduate programs responding to the call? // Teaching Public Administration. 2018. N 36 (1). P. 34–49.

16. Moncayo-Martínez L. A., Ramírez–Nafarrate A., Hernández-Balderrama M. Evaluation of public HEI on teaching, research, and knowledge dissemination by Data Envelopment Analysis // Socio-Economic Planning Sciences. 2020. Vol. 69. P. 100718.

17. Newcomer K., Scheirer M. A. Opportunities for program evaluators to facilitate performance-based management // Evaluation and Program Planning 2001. N 24. P. 63–71.

18. Pal L. A., Clark I. D. Teaching public policy: Global convergence or difference? // Policy and Society. 2016. Vol. 35, Is. 4. P. 283–297.

19. Peters B. G. Policy Instruments and Public Management: Bridging the Gaps // Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory. 2000. N 10 (1). P. 35–48.

20. Peters B. G. Policy capacity in public administration // Policy and Society. 2015. Vol. 34, Is. 3–4, September–December. P. 219–228.

21. Pryadilnikov M. Public policy training and development of MPA/MPP programs in the Russian Federation // Policy and Society. 2016. N 35 (4). P. 371–383.

22. Spicer M. W. Public Administration, the History of Ideas, and the Reinventing Government Movement // Public Administration Review. 2004. N 64 (3). P. 353–362.

23. Szczepaniuk E. K., Szczepaniuk H., Rokicki T., Klepacki B. Information Security Assessment in Public Administration // Computers & Security. 2020. Vol. 90. P. 101709.

24. Tassabehji R., Hackney R., Popovič A. Emergent digital era governance: Enacting the role of the ‘institutional entrepreneur’ in transformational change // Government Information Quarterly. 2016. Vol. 33, Is. 2. P. 223–236.

25. Tonn B., Stiefel D. The future of governance and the use of advanced information technologies // Futures. Vol. 44, Is. 9, November 2012. P. 812–822.