THE STATE LIKE A MANAGER IN THE MECHANISM OF ANTI-CRISIS PUBLIC MANAGEMENT

Abstract

The article examines the role and place of the state in the mechanism of anti-crisis public management (crisis management). The theoretical foundations of anti-crisis public management and its constituent parts are analyzed. Attention is focused on the insufficiency research of the state as a subject of management, which implements the assigned tasks, endowing the functions of state bodies. The issue of anti-crisis public management has become particularly relevant in recent years. The development and improvement of elements of the mechanism, including management methods, contributes to increasing the effectiveness and efficiency of management processes and achieving the goal of anti-crisis public management. It should be noted the interdisciplinarity of this institute, which in turn emphasizes its importance and contributes to the comprehensive disclosure of the problem. The state is a key institution, an element of the mechanism of anti-crisis public management, a subject of management, a manager of this process. Place of state body of legislative competence – the parliament, as well as specially created state bodies intended for management in crisis conditio, is considered. It was determined that a special place is occupied by regulatory support in the process of crisis management. Equally important are the issues of methods of anti-crisis public management, techniques and ways in which it is carried out.The methods used in the process of anti-crisis public management , including Big Data technology, artificial intelligence, as well as automated information and analytical systems are analyzed. The problems of anti-crisis public management, namely its mechanism, have not been sufficiently investigated. When defining the concept of the mechanism of anti-crisis public management, scientists do not include in the definition one of the most important elements of the – state, which carries out management, assigning functions to state bodies of general and special competence. The positive and negative aspects of entrusting the functions of anti-crisis state administration to bodies of general competence have been determined. The development of the legal framework is one of the important directions of the state anti-crisis policy.