Abstract
|
THINKING STRATEGICALLY: CHALLENGE FOR COMPETENCY DEVELOPMENT AMONG PUBLIC SECTOR LEADERS AND MANAGERS
Submitted in support of the main theme: “Leadership and Management in the Public Sector, Values, Standards and Competencies in Central and Eastern Europe,” 15th NISPAcee Conference, May 17-19, 2007, Kyiv, Ukraine
Proponent: Donald E. Fuller, Ph.D.
Senior Lecturer
Anglo-American College
Prague, Czech Republic
donaldfuller_99@yahoo.com
ABSTRACT.
Yehezhel Dror urged strategic governance in 2001 and earlier. Is it possible? Was he thinking prescriptively? Does it make sense?
The paper examines Dror’s hypothesis with respect to the Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland and Slovakia. The paper examines two questions: (1) whether, a priori, one might postulate possible strategic governance in four countries emerging from similar Soviet bloc pasts; and, (2) whether outcomes can be explained by the intersection of a passive population and a self-interested state.
The paper uses secondary sources: Freedom House, “Nations in Transit;” Pew Research Center; Transparency International, United Nations Development Report, New Democracies Barometer, and others, to examine commonality or divergence among the four states. On the basis of these observations, conclusions will be presented addressing the two questions raised. The paper will test the goodness of fit of ex ante postulates drawn from Dror, Polanyi, Przeworski, Rose-Ackerman, De Soto, Potucek, and others, with indicators, ex- post, from the secondary sources. Similar as well as divergent patterns will be particularly valuable in assessing outcomes emerging from the four states. While path dependent inputs may not have been entirely similar among the four states prior to 1989, such as “goulash communism” having been identified with Hungary, such differences will be held constant in this research. Of particular interest will be the unusual behavior of Slovakia in the rapid period following Meciar’s essential demise. Emphasis, therefore, will be focused on outcomes. Prior counterfactuals do not seem evident considering similar Soviet experiences including military interventions in the four countries prior to 1989: Budapest, 1956; Poznan, 1956; Czech Republic and Slovakia (Czechoslovakia), in 1968.
In summary, Dror argued in favor of an increased governmental capacity to “influence, or weave, the future for humanity’s benefit.” The central question focuses upon the likelihood of changing from a ‘Raison d’ etat’ (state interest) to a ‘Raison d’ humanite.’ (individual interest). For purposes of this research, the units of analysis will be the Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland and Slovakia, the Visegrad Four.
|
