Suchergebnisse

AbstractThis article examines the reasons behind Taiwan's effective COVID‐19 response. While some have argued that Taiwan's success with COVID‐19 is based on its experience with SARS, I argue that we should not attribute Taiwan's effective response solely to its SARS experience. The country's success mainly lies in three factors: (1) reliance on the mask policy as the main disease prevention measure and the ability to quickly expand mask production capacity; (2) use of big data and technology to enhance effective implementation of disease prevention and detection measures; and (3) strong state‐society relations favoring transparency, communication, and collaboration. The first two factors can trace their roots to the country's developmental state model. Democracy provides the institutional underpinning for a vibrant civil society and the synergy between state and civil society, strengthening Taiwan's crisis governance legitimacy and increasing citizens' voluntary compliance.

While technology and digital transformation are developing, today's society is rapidly changing. In this context, current management and strategies are becoming outdated, which raises the need to adapt to new challenges and keep pace with innovation. One option that seeks to bring new solutions is the concept of Society 5.0 which combines technological progress and sustainable development, and attempts to achieve a balance between them, ensuring the well-being of all members of society.
Society 5.0 emphasises the creation of socially beneficial solutions, human needs, and improving the quality of life, not just economic growth. Successful implementation of this concept requires quality management that is open to new mindsets, strategies, and approaches to management with a focus on sustainability, innovation, and collaboration. In Industry 5.0, success depends more than ever on management's ability to understand and address the challenges posed by new technologies. Therefore, it is necessary to think about the key skills and capabilities that a manager should have in order to successfully manage an organisation in the context of Society 5.0.
The aim of this paper is to analyse the challenges associated with the management and implementation of the Society 5.0 concept, as well as to identify strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats in this area, and to provide an overview of the key factors for successful management in the context of Society 5.0. In the first part, the theoretical background of this paper will be set, which will be applied for the subsequent analysis. The theoretical part focuses specifically on the definition and description of Society 5.0, and the key elements of this concept. It also focuses on new approaches to management that are key to management in this area, as well as defines the role and importance of SWOT analysis in management and strategic planning.
Based on a comparative analysis of relevant sources, the SWOT analysis will be performed in the practical part as a tool for assessing strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats in relation to the new concept of Society 5.0. The results of the analysis will be evaluated, summarised, and finally recommendations will be made. This text will be useful for managers and executives who want to better adapt themselves to the new era of digital transformation and sustainable development.

Following an overview of the dimensions of the state-society perspective, it is argued that it represents a robust tradition in the study of comparative political development. Three themes are discerned: (1) Future research will benefit from genuinely comparative approaches, particularly across developing regions; further, positioning the examination of authority formation processes in ideological & economic global context is necessary. (2) The study of authority structures will have to transcend the continuing categorization of democratic & authoritarian regime types, with variations within democracies taking center stage. (3) Analysis of the state role in economic analysis will profit from a focus on political & bureaucratic needs while looking to address from where varying state capacities in pursuit of development derive. Research targeting the emergence of authority structures in the context of development, particularly revolutionary & bureaucratic authority regimes & democracies is considered. Attention turns to analyses of the effect of state structures & actions on the developing countries' societies & economies. Criticisms of the state-society perspective are addressed, highlighting the culturalist & rational choice approaches. Some prospective research avenues are offered. J. Zendejas