Suchergebnisse

In the article the relations among the extent of New Public Management (NPM), coordination, politicization and autonomy in Lithuania are analysed based on COCOPS data (project "Monitoring public sector reforms", financed by Lithuanian Science Council, 2012-2013, agreement no. PRO-10/2012). The analysis is based on the propositions that relate coordination, politicization and autonomy in NPM and post-NPM eras. The operationalization of these variables and construction of scales are demonstrated. The analysis of averages and correlations among extent of NPM, coordination, politicization and autonomy confirms some of the postulated propositions, e.g., high politicization and high level of NPM practices are incompatible; higher managerial autonomy is congruent not only with NPM, but also with post-NPM elements.DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5755/j01.ppaa.15.3.16619 ; Straipsnyje siekiama patikrinti kai kuriuos akademinio Naujosios viešosios vadybos (NVV) diskurso teiginius Lietuvos atveju, pasitelkiant vadovaujančias pareigas užimančių valstybės tarnautojų apklausos duomenis. NVV taikymą analizuojančiose publikacijose pateikiami teiginiai, kurie nusako NVV bei po-NVV iniciatyvų tikslus, priemones ir jų taikymo pasekmes. Mokslininkai teigia, kad NVV pasižymi vadybos instrumentų iš privataus sektoriaus naudojimu viešajame sektoriuje, didesnės autonomijos vadovams suteikimu, mažesniu viešojo administravimo politizacijos lygiu bei neigiamu poveikiu horizontaliam koordinavimui. Duomenų analizė parodo, kad empiriniai ryšiai tarp NVV ir po-NVV "etosų" elementų bei koordinavimo, politizacijos ir vadovų autonomijos patvirtina kai kuriuos NVV doktrinos teiginius ir atskleidžia po-NVV įtaką.DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5755/j01.ppaa.15.3.16619

In the article the relations among the extent of New Public Management (NPM), coordination, politicization and autonomy in Lithuania are analysed based on COCOPS data (project "Monitoring public sector reforms", financed by Lithuanian Science Council, 2012-2013, agreement no. PRO-10/2012). The analysis is based on the propositions that relate coordination, politicization and autonomy in NPM and post-NPM eras. The operationalization of these variables and construction of scales are demonstrated. The analysis of averages and correlations among extent of NPM, coordination, politicization and autonomy confirms some of the postulated propositions, e.g., high politicization and high level of NPM practices are incompatible; higher managerial autonomy is congruent not only with NPM, but also with post-NPM elements.

In the article the relations among the extent of New Public Management (NPM), coordination, politicization and autonomy in Lithuania are analysed based on COCOPS data (project "Monitoring public sector reforms", financed by Lithuanian Science Council, 2012-2013, agreement no. PRO-10/2012). The analysis is based on the propositions that relate coordination, politicization and autonomy in NPM and post-NPM eras. The operationalization of these variables and construction of scales are demonstrated. The analysis of averages and correlations among extent of NPM, coordination, politicization and autonomy confirms some of the postulated propositions, e.g., high politicization and high level of NPM practices are incompatible; higher managerial autonomy is congruent not only with NPM, but also with post-NPM elements.

In the article the relations among the extent of New Public Management (NPM), coordination, politicization and autonomy in Lithuania are analysed based on COCOPS data (project "Monitoring public sector reforms", financed by Lithuanian Science Council, 2012-2013, agreement no. PRO-10/2012). The analysis is based on the propositions that relate coordination, politicization and autonomy in NPM and post-NPM eras. The operationalization of these variables and construction of scales are demonstrated. The analysis of averages and correlations among extent of NPM, coordination, politicization and autonomy confirms some of the postulated propositions, e.g., high politicization and high level of NPM practices are incompatible; higher managerial autonomy is congruent not only with NPM, but also with post-NPM elements.

In the article the relations among the extent of New Public Management (NPM), coordination, politicization and autonomy in Lithuania are analysed based on COCOPS data (project "Monitoring public sector reforms", financed by Lithuanian Science Council, 2012-2013, agreement no. PRO-10/2012). The analysis is based on the propositions that relate coordination, politicization and autonomy in NPM and post-NPM eras. The operationalization of these variables and construction of scales are demonstrated. The analysis of averages and correlations among extent of NPM, coordination, politicization and autonomy confirms some of the postulated propositions, e.g., high politicization and high level of NPM practices are incompatible; higher managerial autonomy is congruent not only with NPM, but also with post-NPM elements.

The meaning and usage of the universal term 'democracy' differs from one nation to another. They also differ in various institutional contexts. Legislation, political speeches, public opinion and the media interpret democracy in different ways. Different usages of democracy manifest political differences, which, as the term itself indicates, are of political origin and follow universal values, which can be interpreted in many ways. On the one hand, the historical troubles of Lithuania (specific features of the national identity such as a long common history with Poland, life under the Russian tsars, national rebirth, short but very painful Soviet experience) are reflected in the contemporary usage of the term 'democracy' in Lithuania. They are rather invisible. On the other hand, the actual meaning of democracy is related to its assumed meaning in the Soviet times. Our thesis is rather positive one. On the basis of our empirical data, collected from a survey, and content analysis, we show that the most pertinent explanation of how democracy is understood and interpreted in contemporary Lithuania is to be captured by the "stratification" approach, i.e. the study on how various social groups, differing in their political, economic and cultural resources, perceive democracy. In this research we also show how the notion of democracy gradually expands and incorporates fresh and new meanings differentiated by individual social-political experiences and expectations.

The meaning and usage of the universal term 'democracy' differs from one nation to another. They also differ in various institutional contexts. Legislation, political speeches, public opinion and the media interpret democracy in different ways. Different usages of democracy manifest political differences, which, as the term itself indicates, are of political origin and follow universal values, which can be interpreted in many ways. On the one hand, the historical troubles of Lithuania (specific features of the national identity such as a long common history with Poland, life under the Russian tsars, national rebirth, short but very painful Soviet experience) are reflected in the contemporary usage of the term 'democracy' in Lithuania. They are rather invisible. On the other hand, the actual meaning of democracy is related to its assumed meaning in the Soviet times. Our thesis is rather positive one. On the basis of our empirical data, collected from a survey, and content analysis, we show that the most pertinent explanation of how democracy is understood and interpreted in contemporary Lithuania is to be captured by the "stratification" approach, i.e. the study on how various social groups, differing in their political, economic and cultural resources, perceive democracy. In this research we also show how the notion of democracy gradually expands and incorporates fresh and new meanings differentiated by individual social-political experiences and expectations.

The meaning and usage of the universal term 'democracy' differs from one nation to another. They also differ in various institutional contexts. Legislation, political speeches, public opinion and the media interpret democracy in different ways. Different usages of democracy manifest political differences, which, as the term itself indicates, are of political origin and follow universal values, which can be interpreted in many ways. On the one hand, the historical troubles of Lithuania (specific features of the national identity such as a long common history with Poland, life under the Russian tsars, national rebirth, short but very painful Soviet experience) are reflected in the contemporary usage of the term 'democracy' in Lithuania. They are rather invisible. On the other hand, the actual meaning of democracy is related to its assumed meaning in the Soviet times. Our thesis is rather positive one. On the basis of our empirical data, collected from a survey, and content analysis, we show that the most pertinent explanation of how democracy is understood and interpreted in contemporary Lithuania is to be captured by the "stratification" approach, i.e. the study on how various social groups, differing in their political, economic and cultural resources, perceive democracy. In this research we also show how the notion of democracy gradually expands and incorporates fresh and new meanings differentiated by individual social-political experiences and expectations.

The meaning and usage of the universal term 'democracy' differs from one nation to another. They also differ in various institutional contexts. Legislation, political speeches, public opinion and the media interpret democracy in different ways. Different usages of democracy manifest political differences, which, as the term itself indicates, are of political origin and follow universal values, which can be interpreted in many ways. On the one hand, the historical troubles of Lithuania (specific features of the national identity such as a long common history with Poland, life under the Russian tsars, national rebirth, short but very painful Soviet experience) are reflected in the contemporary usage of the term 'democracy' in Lithuania. They are rather invisible. On the other hand, the actual meaning of democracy is related to its assumed meaning in the Soviet times. Our thesis is rather positive one. On the basis of our empirical data, collected from a survey, and content analysis, we show that the most pertinent explanation of how democracy is understood and interpreted in contemporary Lithuania is to be captured by the "stratification" approach, i.e. the study on how various social groups, differing in their political, economic and cultural resources, perceive democracy. In this research we also show how the notion of democracy gradually expands and incorporates fresh and new meanings differentiated by individual social-political experiences and expectations.

The meaning and usage of the universal term 'democracy' differs from one nation to another. They also differ in various institutional contexts. Legislation, political speeches, public opinion and the media interpret democracy in different ways. Different usages of democracy manifest political differences, which, as the term itself indicates, are of political origin and follow universal values, which can be interpreted in many ways. On the one hand, the historical troubles of Lithuania (specific features of the national identity such as a long common history with Poland, life under the Russian tsars, national rebirth, short but very painful Soviet experience) are reflected in the contemporary usage of the term 'democracy' in Lithuania. They are rather invisible. On the other hand, the actual meaning of democracy is related to its assumed meaning in the Soviet times. Our thesis is rather positive one. On the basis of our empirical data, collected from a survey, and content analysis, we show that the most pertinent explanation of how democracy is understood and interpreted in contemporary Lithuania is to be captured by the "stratification" approach, i.e. the study on how various social groups, differing in their political, economic and cultural resources, perceive democracy. In this research we also show how the notion of democracy gradually expands and incorporates fresh and new meanings differentiated by individual social-political experiences and expectations.

The meaning and usage of the universal term 'democracy' differs from one nation to another. They also differ in various institutional contexts. Legislation, political speeches, public opinion and the media interpret democracy in different ways. Different usages of democracy manifest political differences, which, as the term itself indicates, are of political origin and follow universal values, which can be interpreted in many ways. On the one hand, the historical troubles of Lithuania (specific features of the national identity such as a long common history with Poland, life under the Russian tsars, national rebirth, short but very painful Soviet experience) are reflected in the contemporary usage of the term 'democracy' in Lithuania. They are rather invisible. On the other hand, the actual meaning of democracy is related to its assumed meaning in the Soviet times. Our thesis is rather positive one. On the basis of our empirical data, collected from a survey, and content analysis, we show that the most pertinent explanation of how democracy is understood and interpreted in contemporary Lithuania is to be captured by the "stratification" approach, i.e. the study on how various social groups, differing in their political, economic and cultural resources, perceive democracy. In this research we also show how the notion of democracy gradually expands and incorporates fresh and new meanings differentiated by individual social-political experiences and expectations.

The meaning and usage of the universal term 'democracy' differs from one nation to another. They also differ in various institutional contexts. Legislation, political speeches, public opinion and the media interpret democracy in different ways. Different usages of democracy manifest political differences, which, as the term itself indicates, are of political origin and follow universal values, which can be interpreted in many ways. On the one hand, the historical troubles of Lithuania (specific features of the national identity such as a long common history with Poland, life under the Russian tsars, national rebirth, short but very painful Soviet experience) are reflected in the contemporary usage of the term 'democracy' in Lithuania. They are rather invisible. On the other hand, the actual meaning of democracy is related to its assumed meaning in the Soviet times. Our thesis is rather positive one. On the basis of our empirical data, collected from a survey, and content analysis, we show that the most pertinent explanation of how democracy is understood and interpreted in contemporary Lithuania is to be captured by the "stratification" approach, i.e. the study on how various social groups, differing in their political, economic and cultural resources, perceive democracy. In this research we also show how the notion of democracy gradually expands and incorporates fresh and new meanings differentiated by individual social-political experiences and expectations.

The meaning and usage of the universal term 'democracy' differs from one nation to another. They also differ in various institutional contexts. Legislation, political speeches, public opinion and the media interpret democracy in different ways. Different usages of democracy manifest political differences, which, as the term itself indicates, are of political origin and follow universal values, which can be interpreted in many ways. On the one hand, the historical troubles of Lithuania (specific features of the national identity such as a long common history with Poland, life under the Russian tsars, national rebirth, short but very painful Soviet experience) are reflected in the contemporary usage of the term 'democracy' in Lithuania. They are rather invisible. On the other hand, the actual meaning of democracy is related to its assumed meaning in the Soviet times. Our thesis is rather positive one. On the basis of our empirical data, collected from a survey, and content analysis, we show that the most pertinent explanation of how democracy is understood and interpreted in contemporary Lithuania is to be captured by the "stratification" approach, i.e. the study on how various social groups, differing in their political, economic and cultural resources, perceive democracy. In this research we also show how the notion of democracy gradually expands and incorporates fresh and new meanings differentiated by individual social-political experiences and expectations.

Face à l'évolution rapide des pressions économiques et sociétales et aux problèmes complexes des politiques publiques, les gouvernements doivent réagir de manière proactive aux nouveaux défis. Ce n'est qu'une des caractéristiques de l'intelligence. Dans le présent article, nous analysons le concept récemment introduit de gouvernance publique intelligente, un concept qui nécessite une meilleure conceptualisation. Dans cet article, nous définissons les caractéristiques et les critères d'une gouvernance publique intelligente et proposons un instrument pour son évaluation. L'expérimentation de la méthodologie au niveau du gouvernement central en Lituanie indique que le système lituanien de gouvernance publique ne peut pas encore être considéré comme un système social intelligent. Certaines caractéristiques de l'intelligence sont déjà bien exprimées et il existe bel et bien des exemples positifs. Cependant, la gouvernance publique intelligente ne fait pas encore partie de la culture du gouvernement lituanien. Remarques à l'intention des praticiens Notre article fait progresser le concept de gouvernance publique intelligente en examinant et en affinant les dimensions clés de ce concept et tente d'opérationnaliser ces dimensions et diverses sous-dimensions à l'aide d'indicateurs vérifiables de façon empirique. Afin de démontrer le potentiel du cadre proposé, nous présentons les résultats empiriques basés sur une enquête d'experts menée auprès de cadres supérieurs du secteur public en Lituanie. Premièrement, ces résultats produisent une évaluation théoriquement fondée de la gouvernance publique intelligente au sein du système lituanien de gouvernement central et, deuxièmement, ils indiquent les domaines de la gouvernance publique qui doivent être renforcés.

Faced with rapidly changing economic and societal pressures and complex public policy problems, governments must respond proactively to new challenges. It is just one of the characteristics of being smart. This article analyses the recently introduced concept of smart public governance, a concept that requires better conceptualization. This article defines the characteristics and criteria of smart public governance and suggests an instrument for its assessment. Piloting of the methodology at the central government level in Lithuania suggests that the Lithuanian system of public governance cannot yet be considered a smart social system. Some characteristics of smartness are already well expressed, and some positive examples do exist. However, smart public governance is not yet a part of Lithuania's government culture. Points for practitioners The article advances the concept of smart public governance by discussing and refining key dimensions of this construct and attempts to operationalize these dimensions and various sub-dimensions using empirically testable indicators. To demonstrate the potential of the proposed framework, we present empirical results based on an expert survey of top public executives in Lithuania. These results, first, provide a theoretically grounded assessment of smart public governance within the Lithuanian system of central government and, second, point to those areas of public governance that need to be strengthened.