Proactivity of the government machinery and the results of selecting priority areas for Russia’s strategic development[Проактивность Государственного Аппарата Управления И Результаты Выбора Приоритетных Направлений Стратегического Развития России]

The research urgency is caused by necessity of evaluating public opinion of public executives, assessment by the society for the selection of priority areas of strategic socio-economic development. The article analyzes public assessments of the country’s strategic development, trust in the chosen direction, and subjectivity of achievements by the government machinery and the government in the chosen directions. The conclusion is made about unsatisfactory pace of implementation of the tasks set, non-fulfillment of the President’s instructions. The analysis shows disappointing results of the failure of a number of provisions of the strategic plan for the development of the country’s economy – “Strategy – 2020”, layering of new strategic initiatives without a proper program, planned development of strategic directions. The aim of the study is the analysis and evaluation of simulating the execution of strategic plans and projects for socio-economic development of the country, demonstration of the positions of the Institute of public opinion against the government machinery and the practice of strategic management decisions. The research methods are structural and functional analysis, content analysis, and secondary analysis of sociological data. The scientific novelty consists in revealing the results of reforming the government machinery, vertical adjustment of the principles of execution of management decisions, negative assessment of efforts to implement strategic priorities as a basis for subsequent strategic socio-economic planning and design. Analysis and evaluation of non-implementation of the “Strategy-2020” should include practically not completed activities of the section “New model of economic growth”, which contained the principal provisions for the implementation of institutional measures of strategic planning, without which it is impossible to achieve the indicators of other sections of the strategy. Institutionally, “Strategy 2020” was the most detailed document that revealed a set of interrelated priorities, goals, tasks, projects and processes for implementing national socio-economic policy reforms, containing elements of road maps, alternatives, and scenarios for implementing measures. The strategy itself was not officially adopted; it was an element of a new economic ideology, a change in the format of organizing the work of the government machinery.