| Summary: | The author of this article relies on the premise that strategic management is the highest function of any government, with it being implemented by government bodies through a system of government strategic planning, as well as a specific type of administrative activity – developing and executing strategies, as well as national projects and programs. In essence strategies are normatively burdened formalized priorities, goals and tasks associated with the development of Russia and its regions in the long term. These strategies are meant to be an effective means of implementing relevant government policy, to serve as a source of compromise for society and to ensure purposeful action when it comes to a multitude of social subjects cooperating with each other in order to attain the results in mind. You can tell that there is a problem in organizing government strategic management by the fact that we are dealing with a constant increase in territorial disproportions in the socio-economic, socio-cultural development of Russia’s cities and regions, as well as the population’s indifference towards strategies, federal and regional projects. Among the factors which limit government bodies’ capacity to execute plans for social development is a multitude of various systems of social management in place on a regional and municipal level which do not allow for implementing linear correlations when it comes to administration. Furthermore, internal determination is a factor in developing territorially localized communities, which is when the behavior of any given social group is defined not so much by external factors or administrative pressure, but rather by the actual nature of internal relationships, by recollection of past situations, rules of cooperation for social subjects, life plans and life strategies of individuals and social groups. Solving the problem of organizing government strategic planning systems and ensuring control over the course of Russian society’s development is linked, in the author’s opinion, to revealing those social factors and phenomena which define how appropriate certain innovations are for any given local community, figure out whether the planned results are achievable on a regional level, and to choosing such methods of administrative pressure that the social group in question will be susceptible to. Based on the empirical data, the author of this article argues that there is a connection between the population’s attitude towards the system of government strategic management and a region’s level of development (according to Nikolai Lapin’s classification), while insisting that the differentiation of regions based on their level of modernization is vital information when it comes to differentiating structures and functions of government bodies in regards to strategic planning and choosing regulative mechanisms (from management and handling resources to normative-value and institutional management).
|
|---|
