What is Political Management? Political Management and Political Governance What is the Difference between Political Management and Political Activity

Chapter I

PLACE AND ROLE

POLITICAL MANAGEMENT

IN MODERN SOCIETY

Governance is an important and integral part of the political life of a society. Management allows you to solve both large-scale tasks of coordinating political, economic and social processes in society, and smaller ones aimed at achieving specific goals and objectives, such as gaining the confidence of the masses, winning elections, resolving conflict situations, etc. Managerial relations in politics are diverse. In this chapter we are going to get acquainted with the peculiarities of political management and the place that it occupies in the life of modern society.

What is Political Management?

To better understand the place that political management occupies in the system of political governance, let us first single out its most general types. The first type of governance in politics is substantial. It represents objectively acting social mechanisms or processes that induce people to reproduce system elements, social structures, and functional connections in their actions. With the help of substantial control, the integrity of the political system is achieved, its qualitative specificity is preserved, and its reproduction and development are carried out. Within the framework of the political system, such main processes-mechanisms are political socialization, institutionalization, legitimation (1). In practice, substantial management looks like the subordination of people to the norms and rules adopted in a given society, as an orientation towards the values ​​of culture, including political.

The relationalistic type of control (from the French ge1ation - relation) exists in the form of subject-object relations, when it is possible to clearly distinguish those who control and those who are the object of control, i.e. must comply with management decisions. The presence of this type of management distinguishes social systems from all others, because it exists in the form of a conscious, directed activity of people pursuing their goals, capable of making decisions and influencing each other, and therefore, it depends on the individual characteristics of people involved in the management process. ...

In this feature of the relationalist type of government lies both its strength and its weakness. Its strength lies in the fact that a person is able not only to reproduce previously established connections in the system, but also to change them, improve, initiate innovations, and accelerate development. His weakness lies in the inevitable mistakes of a person, and most importantly, in the perseverance that he can show, implementing erroneous management decisions.

In politics, management as subject-object relations exists in three main forms:

a) management relations arising between government officials and government bodies acting as a subject of management, on the one hand, and the population or its individual groups, on the other. This kind of control
usually called public administration, because its subject is the state, its institutions and officials. It distinguishes as a special segment of public administration, which includes all the variety of management activities carried out by executive authorities (government, ministries, departments and other state institutions).

The main feature of public administration is that it is based on the right of "legitimate violence", i.e. the subject of management has power, the necessary status resources for the implementation of management decisions. In modern society, public administration is carried out mainly through normative regulation, i.e. by the development and adoption of laws, decrees, orders and other normative acts by the relevant bodies and institutions. Public administration in modern society is multilevel and unusually complex, primarily due to the unusually expanded number of all kinds of government organizations and institutions;

b) managerial relations that develop within state and political organizations in order to streamline their activities, improve work efficiency. Their peculiarity is that management relations are limited by the framework of individual organizations (state institutions, political parties, etc.), which gives this type of management many similarities with the management of economic organizations. Management in state institutions and political organizations is also based on the ability of the subject of management (the leadership of a state institution, the governing bodies of the party) to rely on status resources, on the right to create norms that are generally binding for members of this organization and apply sanctions against those who violate these norms;

c) managerial relations, where the subject (political organization, pressure group, statesman) cannot rely on the right of “legitimate violence” and on his status resources to achieve political goals, cannot adopt a law or other order that becomes binding, and therefore forced to resort to other forms and methods of influencing the proposed control object. We will call this type of management relationship political management.

In order to better understand the specifics of political management, let us first clarify what political goals are being set and what tasks are being solved within its framework.

1. Strengthening the authority of a statesman or politician. For a politician, authority is significance in the eyes of the population, it is the trust and support of the broad masses, it is success in politics, it is an opportunity to implement various political tasks. Even Niccolo Machiavelli wrote: "If the sovereign relies entirely on fate, he cannot withstand its blows" (2). And the great Florentine is developing a whole program of actions aimed at increasing the authority of the ruler. Modern politicians, especially those whose powers are determined during elections, perhaps even more need the support of the population, so for many of them this task is extremely important.

2. Creation of favorable conditions for the activities of a state institution, political party, public organization by constructing an attractive image in the mass consciousness. Any state institution is interested in the fact that citizens see it as a competent government body. Only in this case his managerial decisions will be perceived in society as important, as requiring execution. Each political organization, in order to win in a sharp competitive political struggle, needs the support of voters, but for this it needs the masses to see in this organization a consistent defender of their interests, to trust it. That is why, without solving this problem, it is practically impossible for political organizations to seriously count on political success.

3. Expanding the number of supporters of a particular state or political program, political project. A common place of discussion about political, economic and social reforms in our society has become the thesis about the difficulties of implementing managerial decisions. One of the main reasons for this is the immunity of the masses, frightened by transformations and more than once deceived, to innovative programs and projects. Consequently, it is necessary not only to work out in detail the nature and sequence of regulatory and legal changes, but also to influence the perception of these changes, to influence people's expectations, their value orientations and moods. Awareness of this need leads to the transformation of this task into one of the important areas of activity of all subjects of politics in modern societies.

4. Formation of electoral preferences of the population. Elections to state bodies are an integral part of democracy. Almost all political forces and parties have already understood the enormous significance of this task. Fierce competition forces them to constantly improve the technology of the fight for votes.

5. Creation of political unions, blocs. Alliance and agreement policies help political actors meet complex challenges. However, the achievement of each political union is the result of a complex and painstaking work to influence its future partners, where practically nothing is solved by the use of force, but skillful maneuvering is required, a jewelery influence on the motivation of potential allies.

6. Influence on political opponents, as well as on opponents in political conflicts. The political conflict is distinguished by the intransigence of the parties, often aggressiveness and a clear unwillingness to play by common rules. Political conflicts destabilize society, sow enmity between its participants, and paralyze the country's economic and social development. That is why it is so important to find ways to resolve political conflicts. The way out of the conflict cannot be ensured by force. This requires the use of special technologies for regulating conflict situations.

7. Influencing government decision-makers. Modern societies are extremely differentiated, they represent various social groups seeking to articulate and defend their interests. One of the ways to uphold group interests is to organize pressure on government bodies and government officials. The forms and methods of such pressure are diverse, they are constantly being improved. And, no matter how we relate to this phenomenon of modern political life, this is a reality that cannot be ignored.

8. Mobilizing the masses for political support. To solve specific political problems, political actors often need a demonstration of mass support, for example, holding pickets, protests, rallies, processions, etc. The organization of mass demonstrations is relevant not only for the opposition, but also * for the ruling forces, if the latter want to show the level of people's confidence in the policy being pursued. In a democratic society, people cannot be forced to take to the streets, but they can be persuaded, encouraged to do so. That is why this task belongs to the sphere of political management.

The importance of these tasks for various actors operating in the field of political relations is obvious. In modern society, it is impossible to achieve significant political results if at least some of these tasks are not solved in everyday practice.

The specificity of all these tasks lies in the fact that for their implementation the subject of management cannot use the powers of power, cannot issue a decree or adopt a law, cannot resort to coercion. The object of administrative influence is outside the zone of status subordination to the subject of management, i.e. he is not obliged (by law, by establishment, by status) to love or hate a political leader, in a secret ballot booth he is free in his choice, he cannot be forced to refrain from spreading rumors about the arbitrariness of the bureaucracy in a particular state institution, he can join to any political organization permitted in the country, etc.

Thus, political management differs from public administration and administration in public institutions and political organizations as follows:

First, in political management, the subject of management is deprived of the right . a) rely on state coercion, apply measures of influence against violators of laws or orders of the executive and judicial authorities, which is available to the subjects of state administration; b) resort to the application of sanctions as the heads of state institutions or political organizations can do in relation to their subordinates. Consequently, the methods of influence of the subject of political management on the controlled object must be very specific, have special forms of influence on the motivational structure of the individual;

Secondly, public administration and administration in state and political organizations (if we are not talking about the arbitrariness of individuals) is based mainly on the principle of rule-making. In other words, state bodies or officials are empowered to pass laws, decrees, and other regulations that are binding on the relevant groups of the population, and the mechanism of sanctions is used by them to direct the activities of people in the mainstream of the accepted norms. As a result, management acquires a largely impersonal character, management decisions are guided not so much by specific people as by a certain understanding of what the general, if possible, most optimal models of social behavior should be reproduced in the actions of many people, since, in principle, almost everyone, or at least the majority can be inserted to obey the adopted law. In political management, the subject of management is deprived of the legitimate right to create norms that are binding on the object of his influence, therefore he is forced to influence, impose his own rules of the game, relying on knowledge of the characteristics of the motivation of specific people, the psychology of personality and the psychology of the masses.

Thirdly, very specific tasks are being solved within the framework of political management. Solving these tasks helps political actors to strengthen their positions in the political arena, to win the competition, and to increase their influence on the masses. Obviously, these tasks are very important for political actors striving to expand their sphere of influence on society, to implement their plans, political programs and projects. However, the attitude of the population to these tasks will always be ambiguous, because personal ambitions, group interests, and selfish goals appear behind them. This is why these tasks are usually not advertised. It is hardly possible to imagine a political campaign where the publicly declared goal would be to increase the prestige of the president or the prestige of a ministry, lobby for tax breaks for a financial and industrial corporation, or influence political allies.

Fourthly, within the framework of political management, special techniques and methods of solving managerial problems are formed. The set of such techniques is usually called political technologies.

In the literature, there are two approaches to defining the concept of "political technology". Proponents of the first view political technologies as a universal component of any administrative process in politics. So, in the "Political Encyclopedia" it is indicated that political technologies "are a way to streamline expedient practical activities, a set of techniques aimed at transforming (changing the state) of an object in the field of politics, achieving a given result (goal)" (3). A definition similar in content is given by A.I. Soloviev: “Political technologies are a set of consistently applied procedures, techniques and methods of activity aimed at the most optimal and effective implementation of the goals and objectives of a particular subject at a certain time and in a certain place” (4).

Proponents of a different approach, and the author is one of them, tend to believe that political technologies are one of the types of management technologies in politics, inherent exclusively to political management. The technologies emerging in the system of public administration and in the system of administration in state and political organizations have a number of distinctive features, and mixing them with purely political technologies will not allow us to see the specifics of the latter.

We have already said that within the framework of political management, the subject of management cannot resort to violence, is deprived of the right to create generally binding norms and apply sanctions to those who do not comply with them, he must use such methods of influencing
people in order to change their behavior, which exclude the use of direct coercion, physical violence. This is the specificity of political technologies.

Political technologies are a means of skillfully influencing people's motivation, their consciousness and subconsciousness, these are ways that encourage people to act in accordance with the interests of a political subject, but at the same time maintain their feeling of freedom of their choice, the naturalness of their actions. These techniques ensure the introduction of new ideas, values ​​into the mass consciousness, the formation of new attitudes, beliefs, and among them there are many that can be called manipulative.

Looking ahead, let's say that political management poses many complex ethical problems to society, which are based on the mismatch of group and public interests, intense competition in the political space, differences in ideological views and value orientations of political subjects and the constant temptation to solve their political problems by any means. ... We will talk about this in more detail in the final chapter.

So, political management is a special type of management in politics, when the subject of management, striving to achieve a certain political goal, is deprived of the opportunity to create generally binding norms and rely on the right of "legitimate violence" political technologies.

Political management is one of the most important tools for purposeful, conscious, planned regulation of the system of social relations, as well as the search for new ways to include people and their interests in the process of transforming life. Today's political manager must not only organize and coordinate the activities of various state, political or public organizational structures for the implementation of their mission, but also make socially significant decisions and implement them so that it does not destroy, but helps the life of the whole society or its individual communities.

The urgency of the problem of political governance is determined, however, not only by the actual situation, but in many respects by it the crisis of the science of society, which has not bypassed political science as well.

Purpose of the work: to consider the main directions of development of political management in modern conditions.

Research objectives:

Reveal the general characteristics of political management and public administration in modern conditions;

Analyze the essence and features of political management; identify the role of management in modern conditions.

The degree of scientific elaboration of the problem. The problem of political governance in the broadest sense of the word has always been in the center of attention of scientists since the inception of political philosophy. The study of trends in modern political governance was based on the works of G. Almond, D. Bell, M. Weber, A. Giddens, R. Dahrendorf and others.

A fundamentally important event for the development of the theory and practice of political governance was the use of the achievements of classical management, formed in the works of F. Taylor, A. Fayol, G. Emerson, L. Urvik, E. Mayo, P. Drucker, G. Simon, A. Etzioni , L. Bertalanffy and others. In modern literature, such directions as "social management", "innovative management", "strategic management" and "political management" have emerged. The problems of political management can be traced especially vividly in the literature on political and administrative management, which reflects the research of network and various managerial approaches associated with the development of the concept of “new public management”. Western political science has made a significant contribution to the development of issues of reforming political governance in accordance with the requirements of a post-industrial society.

In domestic science, the tradition of the Soviet period, when the political was identified with the state and was reduced to the issue of exercising power, exerts a great influence on the consideration of the problems of political management. In the context of the formation of a modern political system in the country and regions, the problem of political management remains new, relevant and increasingly attracts the attention of Russian scientists. Many Russian scientists, including G.V. Atamanchuk, A.N. Galkin, Gelman V.Ya., N.I. Glazunov, A.M. Omarov, etc.

Chapter 1. Characteristics of political management and public administration

1. Political management: concept, essence, features

Management is inherent in all organized systems: physical, biological, social. With its help, the integrity of these systems is achieved, their qualitative specificity is preserved, reproduction and development are carried out. The main feature of social, including political systems is the presence in them of two types of government. The first type of management is systemic, it represents objectively acting social mechanisms or processes that induce people to reproduce systemic elements, structures, and functional connections in their actions. Within the framework of the political system, such main processes-mechanisms are political socialization, institutionalization, legitimation, within the framework of a separate political organization - mutual role expectations, group norms and value orientations. 1

In practice, systemic management looks like the subordination of people to society, culture, external and internalized, i.e. deeply assimilated personality, norms, rules, values. This type of management is also called the self-organization of the system, thereby emphasizing the presence in each system, including the political one, of internal mechanisms that ensure its reproduction.

The specificity of social systems - society, institutions, organizations, groups - is the presence in them of the second type of management, which exists in the form of a conscious directed activity of people pursuing their goals, capable of creating structures, making decisions and influencing each other. The presence of this type of governance distinguishes social systems from all others. It brings subjectivity to management relations, makes them more complex, depending not only on system requirements, but also on the individual characteristics of the people involved in the management process.

This subjectivity contains both the strength and the weakness of social management. Its strength lies in the fact that a person is able not only to reproduce previously established connections in the system, but also to change them, improve, initiate innovations, and accelerate development. His weakness lies in the inevitable mistakes of a person, and most importantly in the perseverance that he can show, implementing erroneous management decisions.

In the future, we will talk about management not as a systemic property of self-organizing complexes, but as a conscious impact carried out by a person or a group of people (a subject of control) on a control object (another person or a group of people) in order to achieve certain goals. In other words, we will consider management as subject-object relations, as real interactions of people, as a series of events during which decisions and decisions are made, efforts are made to implement them, there is resistance to these decisions, or unquestioning obedience is carried out. 2

Management related to the sphere of politics includes the whole set of management processes that arise in the field of political power relations. The following main types of management in politics can be distinguished:

a) management relations arising between government officials and government agencies acting as a subject of management, on the one hand, and the population or its individual groups, on the other. This type of government is usually called public administration, because its subject is the state, its institutions and officials. It is distinguished as a special segment - public administration, which includes all the variety of management activities carried out by executive authorities (government, ministries, departments and other state institutions).

The main feature of public administration is that it rests on the right of “legitimate violence,” that is, the subject of management has power, the necessary status resources for the implementation of management decisions. In modern society, public administration is carried out mainly in the form of the creation by the relevant bodies and institutions of norms that are depersonalized in nature and exist in the form of laws and other general regulations. Public administration in modern society is multilevel and unusually complex, primarily due to the unusually expanded number of all kinds of government organizations and institutions.

b) managerial relations that develop within state and political organizations in order to streamline their activities, improve work efficiency. Its peculiarity is that management relations are limited by the framework of individual organizations (state institutions, political parties, etc.), which gives this type of management many similarities with the management of economic organizations. Management in state institutions and political organizations is also based on the ability of the subject of management (the leadership of a state institution, the governing bodies of the party) to rely on status resources, on the right to create norms that are generally binding for the members of this organization.

c) managerial relations, where the subject (political organization, pressure group, statesman) cannot rely on the right of “legitimate violence” and on his status resources to achieve the goals set, cannot adopt a law or other order that becomes binding, and therefore is forced to resort to other forms and methods of influencing the proposed control object. We will call this type of management relations political management or political and technological management. 3

Political and technological governance allows political actors to tackle very specific tasks. Let's name some of them:

Creation of an attractive image of a government institution, political party, public organization or pressure group.

Expansion of the number of supporters of a particular political program, management project.

Formation of electoral preferences of the population.

Organization of political unions, blocs.

Influence on political opponents, as well as on opponents in political conflicts.

Influencing government decision-makers.

Mobilizing the masses for political support.

The importance of these tasks for various actors operating in the field of political relations is obvious. In modern society, it is impossible to achieve significant political results if at least some of these tasks are not solved in everyday practice. But the specificity of all these tasks lies in the fact that for their implementation, the subject of management cannot use power, cannot issue a decree or adopt a law, cannot resort to coercion, he must induce action. The object of administrative influence in this case is outside the zone of status subordination: he is not obliged (by law, by establishment, by status) to love or hate a political leader; in the secret ballot box, he is free to choose; he can join any political organization permitted in the country; he cannot be forced to refrain from spreading rumors about the arbitrariness of the bureaucracy in this or that state institution, etc.

So, political management is a special kind of management in politics, when the subject of management, striving to achieve a certain goal, is deprived of the opportunity to create generally binding norms and rely on the right of "legitimate violence", i.e. either to the right of state coercion, or to a status right in a political organization.

Georgy TANOV

POLITICS AND POLITICAL MANAGEMENT: TOWARDS DEFINITIONS

The article examines the history of the emergence of the term "politics", its constituent parts, and also reveals such a concept as "management" and "political management".

The history of occurrence of the term "politics" and its components are considered in the article. In addition such notions as management and political management are also revealed in the article.

Keywords:

politics, management, political management; politics, management, political management.

The concept of polity1 is associated with various institutional dimensions of politics associated with the main political institutions - legislative, executive, judicial authorities, the institution of parliamentarism, the constitution, traditions of self-government, etc. This concept comes from the ancient Greek concept of "polis" - city-state. Most often, the concept of polity is associated with a form of government, a system (public or state), and a state structure. It is currently used as a synonym for the modern state and everything that relates specifically to the state - the political system, political institutions, politics, power, etc.

The concept of policy2 has a slightly different meaning, the meaning of which is best conveyed by such words as policy, line of behavior, attitude, course, strategy. It is clearly seen that it more reflects the process and technological aspects of politics, while the concept of polity is more consistent with its structural and functional content sides. The concept of policy is also the best fit and interfaced with concepts such as methodology, rules, principles, norms, standards, etc.

And finally, the concept of politics3 is associated with the methods of conducting politics, the art of governance, political life itself, in particular the party activities of the leadership, the style and principles of behavior, relations in a particular sphere that are connected with politics.

The content of the essence of politics is also expressed in its goals and values, in the motives and mechanisms for making various political decisions, and finally, in the very problems that it is designed to solve. The political process reflects the complex, fundamentally subjective and conflicting nature of political activity, its existence as relations between different states, political institutions, social groups, organizations, etc.

It should be especially emphasized that the role and place of politics in society as a special sphere of social life is determined by three of its most important properties4:

Gerkulesovich - Chief Specialist-Expert of the Department of Legislative Support for the Activities of the Pension Fund of the Russian Federation [email protected]

Versatility, i.e. the all-encompassing nature of politics, the ability to influence any aspect of life, be present and exert its definite influence on all elements of society, relations, events, processes;

1 http://lingvo.yandex.ru/polity/

2 http://lingvo.yandex.ru/policy/

3 http://lingvo.yandex.ru/politics

4 http://www.gumer.info/bibliotek_Buks/Polit/Dict/15.php

The penetrating ability of politics, which means its possibility of unlimited penetration into all sides and directions of people's social life;

The attributiveness of politics in relation to non-political social phenomena, relations and spheres, the ability of politics to combine with any other types of activity of a person and society.

In modern political science there are many different directions and approaches, methods of political research. Along with the traditional paradigms - behaviorism, structural functionalism, culturological approach, etc. - comparatively new approaches, such as the geopolitical paradigm, the "ecological" approach (focusing attention on the historical and genetic factors of political development), political feminism (focused on research gender factors in politics, the position of women in society, etc.), postmodernism, etc.

Describing the methodological foundations of political science in the first period of the development of political science, American political scientist D. Easton1 noted: "Political scientists proceeded from the assumption of almost complete correspondence between constitutional and legal codes concerning the rights and privileges of holders of public office, and their real political actions." In general, this period can be designated as institutional. Political science at this time was of a fundamentally normative nature.

The emergence of the behavioralist trend was a real revolution in political science, since behaviorism puts political facts at the center of scientific research. Mid 1960s - early 1970s marked by the crisis of the behavioral approach. In 1969, D. Easton2 proclaimed a new - postbi-hevioral revolution in political science. The essence of this revolution was to overcome the ideology of empirical

1 Easton D. Systems analysis of political life. - M., 1965.

2 Easton D. New revolution in political science // Socio-political journal, 1993, no. 8.

rism, which was characteristic of behavioralism, as well as to pay more attention to value orientations in political processes, without which it is fundamentally impossible to understand their meaning and direction. The post-behavioral approach, in essence, advocated that the behavior and professional activities of politicians and political scientists should always be based on fundamentally scientific knowledge, universal values, high morality and humanism. In fact, this revolution in political science is directed against the political principles of N. Machiavelli, who asserted in political actions the primacy of success, the effectiveness of political activity, regardless of the methods and means of achieving them - success at any cost and by any, incl. immoral and criminal methods.

Note that in modern political science, this post-behavioral approach best meets both the realities of the modern world and the requirements of a truly scientific study of political processes and phenomena.

The next concept that needs to be defined in its basic meanings and contents in our work is the concept of political management. But first, a few words about management, which literally translates as management, administration, organization. According to the authors of the American Encyclopedia of Professional Management3, the starting point for the development of modern management should be considered 1886, when businessman G. Towne spoke at a meeting of the American Society of Mechanical Engineers with a report “The Engineer as an Economist”. This report was the first to raise the problem of the need for management as a professional specialization and scientific discipline. It should be noted that the emergence and development of management functions are associated with the division, specialization and cooperation of labor, with technical progress, with the socialization of production. It is no coincidence that A. Marshall, an outstanding economist of the previous century, singled out management (about this

3 http://www.akademout.ru/referates/18/2.php

4 Marshall A. Principles of Economics. - M., 1993, vol. 1-3.

process will be discussed in more detail below) into a separate factor of production along with the three traditional ones - capital, labor and land.

Management as a whole is understood as a process of managing a firm, meaning a special professional organizational activity, which is aimed at achieving, in the course of any economic activity of a firm operating in market conditions, certain intended goals by rational transformation of the resources of a given firm (capital, materials, technology, information, labor resources) and the external environment in the processes of interaction with it. It should be emphasized here that the term "management" is used in relation to the management of only economic activities, while to describe management for the sake of achieving other, fundamentally non-economic goals, as a rule, other terms are used - organization, management and administration.

A special type of management is political management1, which includes the development of strategic goals and tactical attitudes, mechanisms of influence of administrative state structures, legislative and executive power on the development of society. It should be especially noted that the fundamentally important content of political management is that “this is a special type of political governance, in which the subject of governance, striving to achieve a certain political goal, is deprived of the opportunity to create generally binding norms and rely on the right of“ legitimate violence ”and therefore is forced to apply special techniques and methods of solving their problems, use a variety of political technologies for this ”2. By virtue of the foregoing, political management includes political image-making and branding, OC, electoral management, regulation of political conflicts, lobbying, the practice of concluding political alliances, etc.

1 http: //www.gumer.info / bibliotek_Buks / Polit / Dict / 12.php

2 Pushkareva G.V. Political management. - M.: Delo, 2002.

Other works emphasize4 that in a broad sense, political management encompasses all management of the processes of direct and representative democracy, international political relations, as well as managerial approaches to the sphere of public administration (new public management). In a narrow sense, political management

This is the theory and practice of managing mass political campaigns and political processes of the influence of civil society on the state. Since this concept is central to our entire study, we will dwell on the analysis of its content in more detail.

We have already said that in one form or another, political management as a special type of managerial interaction, characterized by the desire of one side to influence the other, without resorting to violence, coercion, and acting by more sophisticated methods and means, is represented in any society, it constitutes a stable component of political life. Recognition of this very nature of understanding the essence of political management makes it each time unique and inimitable in its own way, since these are its specific manifestations, which are found in the peculiarities of lobbying the interests of a group or political party, shaping the image of a statesman or reconciling conflicting parties.

The study of political management is currently carried out by political scientists, sociologists, psychologists. Each of the listed groups of scientists has its own field of scientific activity. Political scientists regard political management as an applied political science, as its basic direction, where the theory and practice of political life are directly connected.

When we talk about political management as an object of research, we mean all the diversity of these management relations, manifested in incl. in those specific actions

4 Smorgunov L.V. Comparative Political Science in Search of New Methodological Orientations: Do Ideas Mean Anything to Explain Politics? // Polis, 2009, No. 1.

steps taken by their real participants in a particular country, in a particular time period. However, it is simply impossible to describe political management in all its concrete historical manifestations. The activities of people reproducing these political management relations are too diverse, mobile, unique. It is important to identify in these relations that stable, repetitive, which will allow a deeper understanding of the logic of these relations. In other words, we now have to define the subject of political management research.

The subject of scientific research generally indicates what is to be studied in this object. Since any social object, incl. and our - political management - is unusually complex, multifaceted and can be considered from different angles, then it is quite possible that there are discrepancies in the subject field of the theory of political management. The choice of the subject of research is influenced by two main factors:

The purpose of knowledge, its practical significance (for what purpose do we want to get knowledge about this object);

The theoretical and methodological position of the researcher (what knowledge and how we will receive).

It is these two factors that make it possible to single out the most important, significant one in an amorphous moving object, which affects both the depth of its description and the use of the knowledge gained for practical purposes, in solving managerial problems. The first factor sets the direction of the research, the second - allows you to formulate a conceptual apparatus, highlight interrelationships, and describe internal processes. Let us consider how, under the influence of these two factors, the subject field of scientific knowledge about political management is singled out.

There is a strong opinion that knowledge about management processes has a purely applied, practical value, that it is intended for solving specific management problems. From such

kind of statements it follows that the study of management processes should be aimed at studying specific situations and developing appropriate recommendations. This is certainly true. But, in our opinion, it is impossible to limit oneself to solving only this scientific problem. Scientific knowledge about political management should include both general theoretical knowledge about the nature, specifics, forms of development of this management process, and applied knowledge about the conditions and ways of solving a specific management problem. Only by relying on general theoretical ideas, it is possible to increase the angle of view of the events taking place, to better understand their internal tendencies, which is extremely important for the development of technological techniques and methods, for the design of technological activities, for the transition from the practice of direct response to a changed situation and adaptation to activities, aimed at transforming the very objective reality.

So, political management requires both theoretical knowledge about this management process, and applied knowledge, allowing to develop practical recommendations for solving a specific management problem. Together they make up a kind of iceberg, where the massive underwater part is a set of theoretical concepts that explain the nature, the specifics of this special type of relationship that is developing in the field of politics, and the visible, surface is the skills and abilities of cognition, explanations, and research of specific situations that are realized in management practice. ...

Comparison with an iceberg reveals well the perception of the work of specialists - political managers that has developed in society, when they are credited only with the professional ability to find a solution in a specific managerial situation and do not take into account that the search for this solution can be effective only if the political manager is able to rely on a solid baggage of theoretical knowledge.

From the point of view of the definition of the concept, political management is one of the ways to carry out management functions in politics. And the difference between such institutions as political management and political governance is as follows: the methods of political management, in contrast to the state, do not imply the use of the means of state coercion. Thus, the subject of management cannot rely on the right of legitimate coercion and does not have the ability to create norms that are generally binding. The political goal of the subject of management is to change the political situation in the country.

Functions of political management:

• work to strengthen the authority of a politician or statesman;
• an increase in the number of supporters of a certain political program;
• influence on the electoral views of the population;
• work on the attractiveness of the image of a political party or public organization;
• the creation of political blocs and alliances;
• impact on opponents with whom the subject of political management is in conflict, as well as on those who have the right to make government decisions.

At the same time, the object to which the impact is directed is completely free in its expression of will, it is not obliged to sympathize or, on the contrary, to treat negatively the subject of control.

1. Image making, that is, creating a certain image of a political subject, working on a positive image. Imagemaking can be both individual and collective. In the first case, it is about creating a positive image of a particular person. As an example of image-making in the post-Soviet countries, one can cite the desire of the leaders of the right-wing parties to dress in national costumes, make appropriate hairstyles, etc. Although this is only the tip of the iceberg, since the creation of an image also includes the dissemination of opinions about the family and personal values ​​of the leader and about much, much more.

Collective or corporate image-making presupposes the formation of a positive image of the party in the minds of the masses. The use of this technique can be traced from the pre-election videos of political parties: the general plot, the use of messages common to all, even the color scheme of the decoration of each scene.

2. Electoral technologies - systemic methods of organizing an election campaign. They imply the provision of a comprehensive impact on voters.

3. Technology of political union - unification of supporters and opponents of a political force or leader. The result of the use of this technology is the emergence of blocks in the legislative bodies and outside these bodies. Very often this type of political management manifests itself on the eve of the next elections.

4. The technology for resolving a political conflict consists in finding a way out of political confrontation or reducing tension in it. May be to provide preferences this or that side of the conflict, in search of a compromise.

5. Lobbying - work that is aimed at influencing persons who have the right to make managerial decisions.

Thus, we can conclude that the methodology for implementing the functions of political management is very specific. After all, the subject cannot rely on state coercion, apply one or another generally binding sanction. The success of a party or a public association in the political arena depends on how effective political governance is.

Management related to the field of politics includes the entire set of management processes that arise in the field of political relations. The following main types of management in politics can be distinguished:

- management relations arising between government officials and bodies acting as a subject of management, on the one hand, and the population or its individual groups- with another. This type of government is usually called public administration, because its subject is the state, its institutions and officials.

The main feature of public administration is that it relies on the right of legitimate violence, that is, the subject of government has the powers of authority, the necessary status resources to implement administrative decisions.

In modern society, public administration is carried out mainly in the form of the creation by the relevant bodies and institutions of norms that are depersonalized in nature and exist in the form of laws and other general regulations. Public administration in modern society is multilevel and unusually complex, primarily due to the unusually expanded number of all kinds of government organizations and institutions;

• - managerial relations that develop within state and political organizations in order to streamline their activities, improve work efficiency. A feature of managerial relations in this case is that they are limited by the framework of individual organizations (government agencies, political parties, etc.). Management in state institutions and political organizations is based on the ability of the subject of management to rely on status resources, on the right to create norms that are generally binding for the members of this organization;
• - management relations, where the subject (political organization, pressure group, statesman) cannot rely on the right of legitimate violence and on their status resources to achieve their goals, cannot adopt a law or other order that becomes binding, and therefore is forced to resort to other forms and methods impact on the proposed control object. This type of management relationship is called political management, or political and technological management.

So, political management- this is a special type of management in politics, when the subject of management, striving to achieve a certain goal, is deprived of the opportunity to create generally binding norms and rely on the right of legitimate violence, that is, either on the right of state coercion, or on the status right in a political organization.

Political and technological governance allows political actors to solve very specific problems: strengthening the authority of a statesman or politician; creating an attractive image of a state institution, political party, public organization or pressure group; expanding the number of supporters of a particular political program, management project; formation of electoral preferences of the population; organization of political unions, blocs; influence on political opponents, as well as on opponents in political conflicts; influencing government decision-makers; mobilizing the masses for political support.

Currently, it is customary to talk about the following main types of political management:

• - image making - creation of an image, an image of a statesman, a politician, attractive to the broad masses;
• - corporate political image making - the formation in the mass consciousness of a recognizable positive image of a state institution, political organization, party;
• - electoral technologies - systematic organization of the election campaign;
• - political branding - the introduction into the mass consciousness of recognizable symbols, meanings, images that, in accordance with the goals of the subject of political and technological management, are capable of rallying, uniting people or, on the contrary, separating them into rival groups;
• - technology of political alliances - activities aimed at involving their political allies and opponents in solving the assigned tasks;
• - technologies for regulation and resolution of political conflicts - search for ways and means to reduce political confrontation and political tension in society;
• - lobbying technologies - activities aimed at influencing government officials who make management decisions.

The listed types of political management differ in the goals that the subject of political management can set for himself.

The isolation in society of special types of professions associated with political technologies, gave rise to the classification of political management on a professional basis.

It is customary to distinguish the following types: analytical support for political campaigns; political advertising; political PR as information support for political campaigns; image making in the narrow sense of the word, including the work of consultants with a politician in order to correct his behavior; speechwriting, or writing speeches for a politician; organizing and conducting mass political actions.

The above list of types of political management is not exhaustive. Today new professions are being born - newsmaker(creator of events, news or news stories), spin doctor(organizer of a propaganda campaign aimed at reducing the role of negative information for a politician), which will inevitably lead to the emergence of new types of political management.

Thus, political and technological management is not only differentiated according to the types of tasks to be solved, but also becomes more complicated according to a professional basis.