Whether there is an alternative of a power vertical?
Strengthening of a power vertical, seemingly, the only problem which is solved still by our governors with invariable success. Apart from, of course, not declared problem of personal enrichment. Doukreplyalis to the fact that in order that to arrange the child in kindergarten or to lay on water to the rural house it is necessary to address directly the President! Intermediate links of a vertical had no independence, just transfer links any more: down there are orders, up reports...
And how it is possible differently, you ask? What can be put instead of vertical structure of the power? It from time immemorial remains the only scheme for the structure of any human community. From kindergarten where the nurse orders children, and nurses - the manager, to the countries and interstate structures of type of NATO or the UN. Of course, not everywhere so slippery vertical, as at us or in Democratic People`s Republic of Korea. Somewhere at all levels there are real elections, and each link of a chain has essential freedom of decision-making and responsibility.
However a vertical - it is also a vertical, with all its shortcomings and advantages. The main lack of a vertical consists in an imbalance of competence and responsibility. The good manager seldom is a good expert in the area. It selects competent experts under the tasks. Here - that the dog is also buried: and whether always competent? And maybe, first of all - loyal? Friends - relatives?
* As whether will begin to represent to a krestishka, to the town, well how not to take care to the native little man? (Griboyedov, “Woe from Wit“)
on the other hand, subordinated always with pleasure will get rid of responsibility on the chief. In vertical structure their main objective - not to make the work perfectly well, and to make so that there was enough administration. And it not always same. Beautiful reports, the magnificent presentations, vigorous schedules can hide very sad results. In case of large failures of the chief will replace. Subordinated will remain to fail business further.
And the main lack of system - as they define that it is necessary for the people? Yes in any way. They are solve, to themselves the purposes and tasks think out. As a result - the power separately, and the people separately.
* The government on other planet lives, native. (Daneliya, “Kean - a dza - a dza“)
In systems with fair elections everything is a little better. And all the same election pledges are one, and real tasks and real affairs - absolutely another. Elections - it is rather a competition of eloquence and creativity, but not business qualities of candidates.
That in exchange?
Natural conclusion: alternative of a vertical is the horizontal! Instead of a power vertical - a responsibility horizontal.
What does it look like? And here is how: at first it is necessary to set the tasks, and for this purpose to understand that, actually, the people - need that? In our century of the Internet it is simple to find out it: create the corresponding websites yes interrogate citizens. When basic needs of the people become clear, it is possible to formulate tasks. And under tasks to make teams.
At the head of team - the situational leader. I.e. the person who is most competent of the resolved issue! What team will receive the allocated resources and powers in the order, decides at a competition - the tender. It is possible to start in parallel and several teams. Here to you and competition. It is necessary to watch only that selection of the command, distribution of resources and the competition between them were honest.
For this purpose there has to be a system of coordinators. Notice, not chiefs, but only coordinators. The people coordinating actions of various teams that those did not interfere with each other did not duplicate work, did not clash among themselves. The task is carried out? The team is dismissed. The new task appeared? A team is gathered again. As in old times gathered a team under a concrete military campaign. By the way, the regiment initially meant a campaign, and the colonel called the chief of a campaign.
Responsibility for the actions is born not by the coordinator, and team with the leader. It gathers reputation which will affect results of further tenders. Badly coped with a task? Next time under a similar task will choose other command. Well coped? Let`s give you more responsible and monetary task.
And in this system who is the President? Not the tsar and not God, but only Supreme coordinator. Its role is reduced to ensuring the honest competition between the largest teams replacing with themselves the ministries. And to rational distribution of resources and powers between them. Positions of coordinators of all levels, certainly, have to be elective. A certain risk of corruption at the same time remains, but significantly decreases: the coordinator - not the chief. He is only a traffic controller at the intersection: waves a staff, but to order to drivers, where it to go, cannot. Only watches that rules were followed.
For an additional insurance from corruption each public servant will have the account in mortgage fund of social responsibility. He receives essential part of a salary in this respect which he can withdraw money with (with good percent) only upon termination of the contract. If the employee is convicted of corruption, he loses both work, and money from the account that will make extremely unprofitable and dangerous business to accept bribes. Besides means of mortgage fund - good help for the state budget.
Here such is in brief my concept of a horizontal control system. Of course, it is thought and issued not out and questions - the sea. But it is alternative, isn`t it? Let`s discuss?