SOCIAL AND CULTURAL SCIENCES

DOI: https://doi.org/10.62204/2336-498X-2023-2-17

ORGANIZATION IN SOCIO-CULTURAL ACTIVITY:

FEATURES OF CREATION AND PROSPECTS OF DEVELOPMENT

Оleksandr Tadlia,

Head of International Projects,

Science and Research Institute of Social and Economic Development, Ukraine,

tadlya@ukr.net; ORCID: 0000-0002-2576-8599

Annotation. The article provides an overview of publications in which conceptual approaches to the classification of the organization in the socio-cultural sphere have been studied. The essence of the concept of “organization” is considered and supplemented, the stages of the process of forming a model of organizations in the socio-cultural sphere are substantiated. The activity system of socio-cultural organizations is described. A conclusion was made about the expediency of further scientific investigations in the direction of socio-cultural activities, namely the theoretical substantiation of practical recommendations for building an organization system: features of creation and prospects for development.

Keywords: organization, socio-cultural sphere, management of socio-cultural activities, entrepreneurial model of the organization.

Formulation of the problem. The socio-cultural sphere as a special organizational component allows to systematize the competent actions of specialists, support the relationships of various structures and organizations, attract resources, act as an effective modern management model [1] (Tadlia, O., 2020). Management is understood as organizational activity aimed at the development of certain stages that contribute to the effective solution of tasks, being a means of direct interaction, resource potential and, under certain time frames, a specific systemic form of regulation of sociocultural processes [2] (Martynyshyn, Y., Khlystun, O. , Adamonienė, R., & Dibrova, V. (2020). Given that the specific feature of management in a manager’s activity is related to the analysis, design and implementation of various measures, this aspect has the ability to be influenced by technologies that provide answers on the modern needs of the sociocultural organization

Thus, in determining the problematic direction of the research, it is worth focusing attention on the main elements of the socio-cultural organization as an open system and analyzing the peculiarities of its creation and development prospects.

A modern manager of the socio-cultural sphere constantly works in an environment where he himself becomes a subject of activity. The problem of the technology of creating an organization in the activity of a manager of the socio-cultural sphere deserves constructive attention.

The following scientific works are devoted to solving problematic issues related to the functioning and development of management processes in the sphere of culture and art, the development and testing of technologies of organizational aspects of sociocultural management: Astley V.G. and Van de Ven A.H. (1983) formulates perspectives and debates in organization theory, Juli, J. E., Gould, A. M. (2023) distinguishes theory, explanation, and understanding in management research; Rojas-Cordova, C., Williamson, A. J., Pertuse, J. A., & Calvo, G. (2023) Uncovering Why One Strategy Doesn’t Fit All: A Systematic Review of Research and Exploitation Across Organizational Archetypes; Martynyshyn Y., Khlystun O., Adamonene R., Dibrova V. (2020) note systemic analysis in sociocultural management: theory, methodology and technology; Kondra, A. Z., Hurst, D. K. (2009) analyze institutional processes of organizational culture; Drucker P. (2007) focuses on modern management challenges for the 21st century; Strati, A. (2000) distinguishing Theory and Method in Organization Studies: Paradigms and Choice; Kerzner, G. (2017) conceptualizing Project Management: A Systems Approach to Planning, Dispatching, and Controlling. understands the theoretical and practical aspects of designing in the field of academic musical art; Ren D. A. and Bedeyan A. G. (2023) formulates the evolution of management thought; Kay, R. and Alder, J. (2017) planning and Management; Drory, I., Honig, B. and Schaeffer, Z. (2009) The Internet Firm Life Cycle: Scenarios, Legitimacy, and Identity; Nadeem, A. and Singh, P. (2019) leading Change for Success: Embracing Resistance; Kofinas G. P. (2009) Adaptive co-management in social and ecological management. Principles of Ecosystem Management: Resilience-Based Natural Resource Management in a Changing World, Dufour, Y., Steane, P., & Corriveau, A. M. (2018) from Organizational Life Cycle to Ecocycle: A Configurational Approach to Strategic Thinking; Nadim Arne G. (1994) social Organizations: Interaction Within, Outside, and Between Organizations.

Noting the importance of the scientific research of these scientists, it should be emphasized that the mentioned problem requires further research into activities that allow to complement the very nature of practical work, to identify and form competent actions of the manager of the socio-cultural sphere in the management of art projects. In particular, this concerns the prerequisites for identifying technologies and features of creating an artistic project, clarifying individual stages and forms of activity in the socio-cultural sphere. Thus, the identified unsolved problems allow us to formulate the purpose of our work.

The aim of the study. Identify and analyze the main elements of the sociocultural organization as an open system, a kind of strategic tool capable of ensuring the implementation and effective activity of the manager of the sociocultural sphere.

Presenting main material. The organization initiates and plays a special economic role in the life of society and is the main structural and sociocultural element of market realities. The activities of organizations have a multi-functional nature, and sometimes have an ambiguous theoretical and methodological basis, where in the process of constant knowledge there is a conflict situation with certain contradictions between the fundamental level of cultural experience of the past heritage and specific operational practice, which is specified by real events that lead to the generation of certain concepts, which in turn substantiate the stages of its emergence and further functioning.

The theoretical description of the phenomenon “organization” can be found in various theories and purely management concepts, where the organization acts as an object of management [3] (Astley, W. G., & Van de Ven, A. H., 1983); [4] (Joullié, J.E., & Gould, A.M., 2023).

The awareness of the essence of the organization is understood as such a holistic entity that transforms raw resources into a final product, where the parameters of its production function are determined by those technological processes that are used for the production of this product. The main task facing the organization should be focused on finding such a volume of resources and their ratio, which will allow producing a sufficient number of products. Sufficiency and necessity will be determined by the ratio of the marginal costs of the organization and the market price.

Таким чином, функція такої організації обмежується інструментальним характером: вона слугує тільки «передатковою ланкою» між попитом та умовами ресурсних ринків при заданій виробничій технології.

Scientists Rojas-Córdova, C., Williamson, A. J., Pertuze, J. A., & Calvo, G. (2023), emphasize the need to take into account the simultaneous pressure on the organization and its environment of factors of external and internal origin, where a dilemma constantly arises regarding the possibilities of external and internal use of available resources [5]. Each organization chooses an individual direction, combining relations between external and internal factors, motivating motives and limitations.

At the same time, the top-down principles by which the creation and construction of the organization took place, as well as the initiation of management [6] (Wren, D. A., & Bedeian, A. G. (2023) acquire special importance. These basic provisions are a reflection of those laws that will determine the features of the design of organizations and the mode of coordination of all types of its relations with both the external and internal environment. According to this understanding of the essence of internal and external organizational processes, a whole series of problems that are primarily related to the vital activities of the organization may become aggravated, namely: the adoption and implementation of management decisions , organizational structure, establishment of target orientations, including strategic ones, and means of their achievement.

According to P. Drucker (2007), in modern society there are market institutions of all types, sizes, purposes and structures. Institutes are characterized by the following main parameters: purpose of existence (purpose), scope of application, functional content, time period for change, functional costs, degree of rejection or acceptance of innovation, degree of stability of the institution and resistance to transformations into another form. “Challenges of management in the 21st century look at the future of managerial thinking and practice in a new way. The content revolves around two fundamental issues that are happening simultaneously: changes in the global economy and shifts in governance practices. These developments, especially in developed countries, are crucial for studying and understanding the challenges of the future” [7].

Thus, the purpose and target priority of an organization whose philosophy corresponds to the institutional theory is to establish a balance between tasks determined by a specific internal socio-economic policy and the public interests of the system in which this organization operates.

Institutional theory assumes that the external environment has a certain pressure on the organization and forces it to develop legitimate rules that correspond to social norms [8].

The creation of the organization is due to the need to increase efficiency from the use of internal connections between its members. A typical task, which is solved by the organization according to the institutional theory, can be presented as the optimization of the mode of operation in the presence of diverse interests of market subjects and the available information space [9].

Thus, the level of efficiency of the organization and its management system will be the higher the quality of the amount of information at their disposal, and the more quickly and fully it will be used.

Today, the need for careful planning and control of general processes in the organization is increasingly relevant [10], [11]. An organization becomes appropriate for creation only if the operating costs are lower than the corresponding costs in open markets. According to these provisions, the organization works efficiently and is competitive if the costs of economic operations within it are lower than those of other market participants. Such a requirement can be achieved under the conditions of reassignment of unproductive work or part of it to other organizations or specialists, partial or full performance of individual management and production functions outside the organization and regulation of distributed activities in order to achieve maximum satisfaction of consumer needs. Therefore, the main task of the organization is the comprehensive reduction of operating costs, which becomes a fundamental aspect that ensures organizational development.

Evolutionary organizational theory has gained considerable popularity as the ideological basis of the concepts of the “organizational life cycle” [12], [13].

Thus, the priority for the functioning of the organization, whose internal ideology of creation corresponds to the principles of ecological theory, should be the development of its own characteristics that correspond to the parameters of the external environment. The main task of management from the point of view of the ecological model of the creation of the organization consists in the formation of one’s own potential with a clear orientation to the external environment. The problem of current efficiency comes first, that is, the transformation of existing resources and competencies into competitive advantages, rather than the development of resources and competencies that would allow generating only certain opportunities, for example, market ones.

It is extremely useful from the point of view of management that the evolutionary model is based on the principles of situationism and assumes the absence of a single criterion for optimizing management decisions. The most important thing in the evolutionary theory, in our opinion, is the assumption about the possibility of changing the criterion of the effectiveness of the organization’s functioning and the duality of its status, namely: belonging to a certain “population of organizational formations and the possibility of having “its own traditions in a certain direction of activity, volumes and offers of involved factors” . That is, he will take into account the advantages that will be provided when making a management decision and the real mode and experience of success – failure of the organization’s functioning.

The entrepreneurial model of the organization is based on the existing variety of forms of ownership and organizational and legal forms of organizations and the inevitable overcoming of contradictions, which are caused by the need to subordinate the results of the organization to the multiplicity of goals and interests of parties or stakeholders interested in its activities, that is, those who influence the activities of the organization, and those who falls under its influence. Social groups of stakeholders include: competitors; consumers of goods and services; territorial communities; ecological condition of the territory; resource providers and partners; other interested groups that significantly influence the organization’s activities.

This theory is based on the obligation to coordinate the interests of the organization’s participants. The main idea of this concept is that the results of the organization’s activities have multiple subordination and are a source of problems and contradictions between the state, owners, management system and the collective. The process of determining priorities and aligning the interests of the parties involved in the distribution of results or the final product is complex, because it is a mandatory procedure to maintain the integrity of the organization and ensure its development.

To reflect all the diversity of aspects of the organization’s functioning, a concept is proposed that integrates the positives of the above theories and can be recognized as active-adaptive [14]. The active-adaptive theory of the organization is based on the fact that organizations do not simply play the role of a passive observer of the changeability of the external environment, but must manage the external conditions of their functioning [15]. According to the theory, the achievement of the set goals takes place under the conditions of the existing potential and strategically oriented active influence on the external environment.

The components of success are synergistic relationships and interdependencies between the limited available resources of the organization and the principles of their use, which correspond to the well-founded utility function of the organization’s behavior. One of the key reasons failure to ensure effective management of a sociocultural organization – the impact of the uncertainty of the external environment on direct activity – is eliminated or leveled, which allows managers to focus on making management decisions with the maximum usefulness of the final results. In our opinion, the active-adaptive model of organization creation and behavior is the most promising and effective. It forms the basis for full and indisputable use of the existing potential of the organization, aggressive search for new opportunities, prevention of conflicts and problems, provides the possibility of using intensive technologies.

The extraordinary importance for maintaining the essential significance of the concept “organization”, from our point of view, is that it belongs to a group of economic categories according to the following criteria: universality, fundamentality, interconnectedness.

The category “organization” is characterized by universality, which is manifested in the similarity of the system of subject-object and object-subject relations in the general structure of relations, including managerial ones. From this point of view, the properties of internal organizational interaction should be “predictable, orderly, expedient, sustainable.” This ensures compliance of the organization category with the “versatility” criterion. The system paradigm assumes, on the one hand, a clear identification of the organization in one of the structured meaningful spaces (economic organization, state or market institution, labor collective, focus group, etc.), and on the other hand, the organization cannot be such that it exists only in one identification space and should be considered comprehensively.

The category “organization” serves as a fundamental basis for the formation of general explanatory principles, with the help of which the relationships between the subject and the object of management or between other phenomena and processes are analyzed. It should be emphasized that for completely independent systems, not only the types of intersystem interaction can be extremely diverse, but the interaction itself will acquire both an irrational and a rational character.

For such a category as “organization”, the changeability of its individual components determines the provision of a new meaning to the whole concept. This criterion has an extremely important theoretical and methodological significance, because it actualizes the obligation to conduct continuous research of significant parameters of the organization and its environment.

There are different approaches to the interpretation of the term “organization”. It should be noted that even today the understanding of the essence of the category “organization” is a debatable issue and even one that introduces a certain dissonance into the practice of research. The search for the most accurate definition of the essence of the concept of “organization” within the classical and neoclassical paradigms remains the object of the greatest attention for scientific thought. The version that the organization is a group of people whose activities are deliberately coordinated to achieve a common goal has become the most widespread [16]. Such an approach among the key elements of the “organization” category involves the selection of the following elements: man- society, structure, goal, technology, functions, which are the object and means of organizational transformations.

Thus, every social entity interpreted as an “organization” must meet the following characteristics: have at least two persons in its composition, united by a common goal, activity and conscious coordination of actions.

Summarizing the scientific-theoretical and empirical results published in the scientific literature, we will come to the conclusion that the term “organization” also exists in another context: to define activity as “ordering of all elements of a certain object in time and space” or as “an aggregate processes or actions that lead to the unification of elements, parts into a whole” and “formation of a viable sustainable system”, and “improvement of relationships between parts of the whole”. In addition, it is identified with the simple creation of a formal organizational structure as “the process of creating an enterprise structure, transferring tasks and powers to a person who takes responsibility for their implementation” and “correct selection of personnel.”

In our opinion, this interpretation is more in line with the concept of “organizing”. Because the term “organize” is appropriate to use when it refers to a process involving “people, their work, their efforts”, on the one hand, and on the other – when it is necessary to “group people for some purpose, coordinate and regulate their actions in the spirit of expediency”. It is likely that this fact explains the inconsistency in the understanding of the etymology of this word, and also causes the destruction of the single semantic load of the term.

In explanatory dictionaries, you can find the cognate words organization and organize (English), organization and organizer (French), which correspond to the static “organization” and the dynamic “organize” contextual content, respectively. They have the same etymological roots and come from the Greek word orγavov “organon”, which means a device, a tool. In our opinion, considering the organization in the context of “action” rubs off belongs to systemic ideology, because “such a set of objects that does not acquire integrity, or does not have single subjects of management, or has antagonistic and conflicting relationships” cannot be considered as a system. In view of this, we also consider the opinion of some scientists who claim that activities in organizations are coordinated “spontaneously” to be erroneous.

Using all the possibilities of human resources management becomes a priority direction in the activities of prosperous art firms and cultural institutions. As a result, organizational-technical and social-psychological conditions are created for the formation of labor potential and the maximum realization of professional, physical and spiritual qualities of professionals. And modern managers strive for the organization under their management to work in an open system mode, interacting with the environment, to use the full intellectual and spiritual potential of the staff and modern situational technologies in solving the most difficult tasks of survival and development.

The comparison of open and closed management systems, which is given in table 1, becomes interesting.

The new management paradigm requires that management hierarchies, rigid schemes and rules be replaced by teamwork, direct interactions, permanent innovation, continuous learning and improvement. In this case, managers turn into assistants and partners for subordinates, they must be able to take conscious risks, promote fuller development of abilities and effectively use their energy.

Such requirements led to the emergence of a new type of organization – a learning organization. The key to the success of such organizations is the creation of work teams and the mutual exchange of information, which contributes to the formation of an atmosphere of trust and a sense of belonging to the company. The traditional model of an organizational structure built with a single top-down chain is giving way to new, flatter models that support the self-management of competing teams that include representatives from different departments and different levels of management. Team management is especially widely and fruitfully used in the field of art and culture.

Table 1

Comparison of open and closed social objects (organizations)

№	Comparative characteristics	Traditional organizations	Modern organizations
1.	Managerial thinking	staff Thinking of a closed system	Thinking of an open system
2.	The main goal	Economic efficiency	Стійкий розвиток
3.	Assumptions about environment	The environment is predictable	The environment is completely uncertain
4.	General characteristic behavior	Monotony. Emphasis on planning and management	The search for a new type of behavior,
5.	Sources of development	Internal: increase in labor productivity of personnel; cost reduction; saving resources; own innovations; own funds from profits	Internal: the same. Mainly external: information about innovations; investments; new resources; new markets
6.	Technology management	power and responsibility, that is. bureaucratic regulation; division and cooperation of labor at the enterprise, in the industry; economic coercion	integration of interests, values and goals of personnel; Involvement of personnel in decision-making; transfer of information to personnel, training in the use of information

The educational organization can be represented by the following elements: vision and corporate culture of managers; authority; new structures and their “flattening”; sources of internal information; socio-cultural technologies: education, trainings, team actions.

The new management paradigm is based on the modern integrative perception of the world, which is not stable and involves the search for an acceptable state of the object (organization) in continuous change.

Conclusions. Thus, the advantages of the organizational approach, which is a continuation and development of the processional, system and situational approach in management, are:

1. a fundamental basis that provides a wide range of research, where approaches are considered that are the boundaries of the whole and determine its stages within these boundaries;
2. a combination of new modern theoretical developments and their practical application to increase the effectiveness of the activities of organizations in the sociocultural sphere;
3. the possibility to choose the optimal path of effective development on the basis of system forecasting, which takes into account the unity of the mission, goals, tasks of the organization in its relations with the external environment.

Thus, managers of the socio-cultural sphere must confidently navigate the modern social space of urgent needs, evaluate and draw up business plans, a strategy for the promotion of goods or services, or orient the socio-cultural market according to their individual values; analyze information materials, be able to turn information into a business or social component, while applying the principles of formation, functioning of the management system, professional experience, technologies, finances and legal components for the development of the organization and the realization of one’s artistic project.

References:

1. Tadlіa, О. (2020). Innovative Approach in Art Project Management. SocioCultural Management Journal, 3(2), 138-156.
2. Martynyshyn, Y., Khlystun, O., Adamonienė, R., & Dibrova, V. (2020). System analysis in socio-cultural management: theory, methodology and technology. SocioCultural Management Journal. Kyiv: Kyiv National University of Culture and Arts, 2020, vol. 3, no. 2.
3. Astley, W. G., & Van de Ven, A. H. (1983). Central Perspectives and Debates in Organization Theory. Administrative Science Quarterly, 28(2), 245–273. https://doi. org/10.2307/2392620
4. Joullié, J. E., & Gould, A. M. (2023). Theory, explanation, and understanding in management research. BRQ Business Research Quarterly, 26(4), 347-360.
5. Rojas-Córdova, C., Williamson, A. J., Pertuze, J. A., & Calvo, G. (2023). Why one strategy does not fit all: a systematic review on exploration–exploitation in different organizational archetypes. Review of Managerial Science, 17(7), 2251-2295.
6. Wren, D. A., & Bedeian, A. G. (2023). The evolution of management thought. John Wiley & Sons.
7. Drucker, P. (2007). Management Challenges for the 21st Century (1st ed.). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780080942384
8. Kondra, A. Z., & Hurst, D. C. (2009). Institutional processes of organizational culture. Culture and organization, 15(1), 39-58.
9. Strati, A. (2000). Theory and method in organization studies: Paradigms and choices. Theory and Method in Organization Studies, 1-256.
10. Kay, R., & Alder, J. (2017). Coastal planning and management. CRC Press.
11. Kerzner, H. (2017). Project management: a systems approach to planning, scheduling, and controlling. John Wiley & Sons.
12. Drori, I., Honig, B., & Sheaffer, Z. (2009). The life cycle of an internet firm: Scripts, legitimacy, and identity. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 33(3), 715-738.
13. Dufour, Y., Steane, P., & Corriveau, A. M. (2018). From the organizational life-cycle to “ecocycle”: a configurational approach to strategic thinking. Asia-Pacific Journal of Business Administration, 10(2/3), 171-183.
14. Nadim, A., & Singh, P. (2019). Leading change for success: embracing resistance. European Business Review, 31(4), 512-523.
15. Kofinas, G. P. (2009). Adaptive co-management in social-ecological governance. Principles of ecosystem stewardship: Resilience-based natural resource management in a changing world, 77-101.

Ahrne, G. (1994). Social organizations: interaction inside, outside and between organizations. Social Organizations, 1-192.