在开拓创新中求发展

发展是硬道理。没有发展就没有进步,就没有生气,就要没落和死亡。发展、进步的催生婆往往是新情况、新矛盾、新问题。中国革命的历史很能说明问题,５０年前,全国胜利前夕,毛泽东同志有一句名言：“我们熟悉的东西,有些快要闹起来了,我们不熟悉的东西正在强迫我们去做。”毛泽东号召全党要重新学习。二十年前,党的十一届三中全会前夕,邓小平同志在迎接一个新的伟大时代即将开创的时刻,预见到在实现四个现代化的进程中,必然会出现许许多多我们不熟悉、预想不到的新动向和新问题,小平同志指出：“要向前看,要及时地研究新情况和解…     

狠抓落实 开拓创新

党的十六届二中全会明确提出,全面贯彻落实十六大精神是全党全国当前和今后一个时期的首要政治任务。要求各级党委,继续围绕主题、把握灵魂、狠抓落实,在深入人心上下功夫,在开拓创新上下功夫,在力求实效上下功夫,把学习贯彻“三个代表”重要思想和十六大精神不断引向深入。     

分析病人满意度强化医疗服务意识

目前医疗机构正面临着日益激烈的市场竞争,医疗服务的竞争已不再局限于医疗质量和价格。优质的医疗服务是医院在现代医疗市场营销的最好载体,以现代服务理念为指导,为病人提供优质的服务,     

和平促发展，合作求共赢——中国和东南亚人民的共同心声、共同梦想

碧海云天,绿环邕城。2013年6月3日,中国-东南亚民间高端对话会在美丽的广西南宁举行,会议由中国民间组织国际交流促进会（简称“中促会”）主办。中共中央政治局委员、中央书记处书记、中宣部部长刘奇葆出席开幕式并发表题为《汇聚人民智慧,推动共赢发展》的主旨讲话,开幕式由全国妇联副主席、中促会副会长孟晓驷主持。     

找准定位促发展

正京能集团自2004年12月成立以来,承担着首都北京电力、热力生产供应,改善大气环境,民生工程建设和经济社会发展的重要使命。近几年来,京能集团工会在集团党委和市总工会的正确领导下,在理念创新与探索中,对工会工作有了一个更深刻的认识:一是把工会工作放在企业整体发展中找准定位;二是把工会工作作为党的群众工作的重要组成部分,工会     

跨越断裂带

十年树木,百年树人。荒凉的山坡需要绿色的生命,贫穷的山乡等待着他们——广州市佛冈县那条美丽的港江边上.有一片小小的黄土坡。日月变迁,风吹雨淋。形成了一条小小的.'断裂带"~坡斜路陡,泥沙滚动.等待着开     

求发展 求突破 求深入 创一流——北京市朝阳区加强新时期工会工作

加强新时期工会工作,实现工会重点工作的突破,必须以邓小平理论和党的十五届四中全会精神为指导,牢记“三个代表”,进一步解放思想,振奋精神,观念更新才能带来工会工作的突破;必须立足全局,突出工会的维护职能,调动和发挥广大职工的积极性、创造性,才能在重点工作的落实上有较大突破;必须主动争取党的领导,加强与各部门的通力协作,才能确保重点工作有较大突破;必须转变工作作风,不断深入探索,才能在提高工会     

强化维权服务职能 动员职工围绕发展大局建功立业

<正>中央、北京市党的群团工作会议,深刻阐明了新形势下党的群团工作的重大意义、方向目标和基本要求。结合对群团工作提出了新的要求,房山区总工会坚决贯彻落实中央和北京市决策部署和工作要求,努力做好党的职工群众工作,展现工会作为,服务区域发展。一是统一思想,坚持正确政治方向,增强工会组织三性。在思想上、政     

跨界联盟 打破壁垒促发展

正前不久,北京市出台的《关于进一步深化北京市职工创新工作室工作的意见》和《北京市级职工创新工作室管理办法》提出,到2025年,全市各级职工创新工作室总数将超过8000家,市级职工创新工作室将超过900家,同时探索建立跨区域、跨行业、跨企业的职工创新工作室联盟。跨界职工创新工作室联盟,无疑很亮眼。作为职工创新工作室的升级版,它将如何发挥聚能作用?     

Executing priority national development in indonesia: Program innovation of the junior minister

In the process of Indonesia's administrative reform and conduct of its planned development efforts, several innovative measures evolved in its executive structure. One of these was the use of temporary organizational entities to expedite the achievement of development goals where sectors/programs of the national development plan encompass two or more executive agencies and/or levels of governments. In organizational design, the executive problem is the reconciliation between responsibility and authority with the purpose of achieving maximum technical efficiency in the execution of priority development programs. As an organizational device to deal with this problem, the offices of six junior ministers were established. By employing the technique of executive authority in rank, these ministers, heading temporary agencies organized in terms of program responsibility as specified in the development plan and as approved by the cabinet, have become the organizational means by which to integrate all of the disparate project activities vested in the executive line agencies in productive organizational cores. Should this organizational innovation prove successful, it will be one of the more important organizational contributions in recent years to the execution of centrally planned development programs in a developing society.     

The ethics of international service learning as a pedagogical development practice: a Canadian study

International service learning, a form of service learning where students travel to developing countries to provide community services of varying types, has come to be common practice at universities throughout the Global North. This paper reports and discusses a case study focused on the ethical questions arising from current practice at one Canadian university. The study follows the path students take from their home university to their final placement. In the context of the political economy of North–South relations in a period of neoliberalism, the analysis considers the ethics of power differentials, reciprocity, accountability, student preparedness and qualifications in relation to host communities. The article concludes with a critique of post-secondary institutional involvement with and promotion of international service learning.     

Resources and Rent Seeking in the Democratic Republic of the Congo

By examining the Congolese political economy through the lens of the ‘resource curse’ theory, this article aims to advance our understanding of the chronic underdevelopment of the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC). Proceeding in three distinct phases the article examines the effect of resource rents, foreignn aid and the likely effect of Chinese investment. It finds that a political tradition of patrimonialism and corruption based on large inflows of easily corruptible resource rents was established in the Mobutu period. In the post-conflict period the source of revenue shifted from resource rents to foreign aid, while the political tradition remained essentially unchanged. The model of the Congolese political economy established in these first two sections will then be used to make an informed assessment of the Sicomines deal. The article finds that the structured nature of the deals means that it is unlikely to perpetuate the ‘resource curse’ condition.     

Leadership and innovation in the administrative state

The field of public administration, as well as the social science upon which it is based, has given little serious attention to the importance of vigorous leadership by career as well as non-career public administrators. The field tends to focus on the rigidities of political behavior and the obstacles to change. To reclaim an understanding of the importance of individual leadership the author suggests the use of biography and life history. The behavior and personality of the entrepreneur is an especially helpful perspective on the connection between leadership and organizational or institutional innovation. The case of Julius Henry Cohen, who played a pivotal role in the development of the New York Port Authority, is used to illustrate the connection between the entrepreneurial personality or perspective and innovation.

In the social sciences—and especially in the study of American political institutions—primary attention is given to the role of interest groups and to bureaucratic routines and other institutional processes that shape the behavior of executive agencies and legislative bodies. In view of the powerful and sustained pressures from these forces, the opportunities for leadership—to create new programs, to redirect individual agencies and broad policies, and to make a measurable impact in meeting social problems—are very limited. At least this is the message, implicit and often explicit, in the literature that shapes the common understanding of the professional scholar and the educated layperson in public affairs.⁽¹⁾ For administrative officials, captured (or cocooned) in the middle—or even at the top—of large bureaucratic agencies, the prospects for “making a difference” seem particularly unpromising. In his recent study of federal bureau chiefs, Herbert Kaufman expresses this view with clarity:… The chiefs did not pour out important decisions in a steady stream. Days sometimes went by without any choice of this kind emerging from their offices … If you need assurance that you labors will work enduring changes on policy of administrative behavior, you would do well to look elsewhere. ⁽²⁾

There are, of course, exceptions to these dominant patterns in the literature. In particular, political scientists and other scholars who study the American presidency or the behavior of other national leaders often treat these executives and their aides as highly significant actors in creating and reshaping public programs and social priorities. ⁽³⁾ However, based on a review of the literature and discussions with more than a dozen colleagues who teach in political science and related fields, the themes sketched out above represent with reasonable accuracy the dominant view in the social sciences.

The scholarly field of public administration is part of the social sciences, and the generalizations set forth above apply to writings in that field as well.⁽⁴⁾ (Indeed, Kaufman's book on federal bureau chiefs won the Brownlow Award, as the most significant volume in public administration in the year it was published.) Similarly, the argument regarding scholarly writing in the social sciences can be extended to the texts and books of reading used in courses in political science and public administration; what is in the scholarly works and the textbooks influences how we design our courses and what messages we convey in class. The provisional conclusion here, then, is that in courses as well as in writings the public administration field gives little attention to the importance of vigorous leadership—by career as well as noncareer administrators. Neither does it give much attention to the strategies of leadership that are available to overcome intellectual and political obstacles which impede the development and maintenance of coalitions which support innovative policies and programs.⁽⁵⁾

The further implication is that students learn from what we teach, directly and indirectly. Students who might otherwise respond enthusiastically to the opportunities and challenges of working on important social programs learn mainly from educators that there are many obstacles to change and that innovations tend to go awry.⁽⁶⁾ And there the education often stops, and the students go elsewhere, to the challenges of business or of law. Those students who remain to listen seem to be those more attracted to the stability of a career in budgeting or personnel management. Public administration needs these people, but not them alone. If career officials should have an active role in governance and if the general quality of the public service is to be raised, does it not require a wider range of young people entering the service—including those who are risk-takers, those who seek in working with others the exercise of “large powers”?

Taken as a class, or at least in small and middle-sized groups, scholars in the fields of public administration and political science tend to be optimistic in their outlook on the world. Informally, in talking with their colleagues, they tend to convey a sense that public agencies can do things better than the private sector, and they sometimes serve (even without pay) on task forces and advisory bodies that attempt to improve the “output” of specific programs and agencies and that at times make some modest steps in that direction. Why, then, do public administration writings and courses tend to dwell so heavily on the rigidities of political behavior and the obstacles to change?

One reason may be our interest, as social scientists, in being “scientific.” We look for recurring patterns in the complex data of political and administrative life, and these regularities are more readily found in the behavior of interest groups and in the structures of bureaucratic cultures and routines. The role of specific leaders, and perhaps the role of leadership generally, do not as easily lend themselves to generalization and prediction.

Perhaps at some deeper level we are attracted to pathology, inclined to dwell on the negative messages of political life and to emphasize weakness and failures when the messages are mixed. Here, perhaps more than elsewhere, the evidence is impressionistic. ⁽⁷⁾

Some of the concerns noted above—about the messages conveyed to students and to others—have been expressed by James March in a recent essay on the role of leadership. He doubts that the talents of specific individual managers are the controlling influences in the way organizations behave. He, however, questions whether we should embrace an alternative view—a perspective that describes administrative action in terms of “loose coupling, organized anarchy, and garbage-can decision processes.” That theory, March argues, “appears to be uncomfortably pessimistic about the significance of administrators. Indeed, it seems potentially pernicious even if correct.” Pernicious, because the administrator who accepts that theory would be less inclined to try to “make a difference” and would thereby lose some actual opportunities to take constructive action.⁽⁸⁾

March does not, however, conclude that the “organized anarchy” theory is correct. He is now inclined to believe that a third theory is closer to the truth. Administrators do affect the ways in which organizations function. The key variable in an organization that functions well is having a “density of administrative competence” rather than “having an unusually gifted individual at the top.” How does an organization come to have a cluster of very able administrators—a density of competence—so that the team can reach out vigorously and break free from the web of loose coupling and organized anarchy? Here March provides only hints at the answer. It happens, he suggests, by selection procedures that bring in able people and by a structure of motivation “that leads all managers to push themselves to the limit. “⁽⁹⁾     

柬埔寨积极推进重建与发展事业

柬埔寨是一个美丽富饶的国家,但是近代以来,由于法国殖民者长达90年的殖民统治和掠夺,加之红色高棉极左政策的破坏以及近30年内战的摧残,使柬埔寨这个昔日"和平的绿洲"繁华不再,经济发展缓慢,成为世界上最不发达国家之一.     

外国执政党促进社会活力与和谐的做法

和谐社会建设是一项复杂的系统工程,而社会创造力和活力是和谐社会的一个重要组成部分.外国政党形态不同、功能各异、作用不一,其组织形式、运作模式、发展程度、执政能力差别很大,并深受本国的历史传统文化、经济发展水平、民族风俗习惯等多种因素的影响和制约.但是,外国执政党从执政理念、制度建设和具体做法等方面,均十分重视建设一个充满活力的和谐社会.