Abstract
This research analyses the change and politicisation of educational management in Lithuania in 2001–2013, as well as the impact of reforming the educational managers’ recruitment procedures on the scope of politicisation. According to the data analysis, 39% of managers in Vilnius city and Vilnius district are politicised. The politicisation level is even higher (50%) among the managers who were selected through the new recruitment procedures. This is a concern because the level of politicisation in public educational organisations is higher than in other public sector organisations (government agencies or state-owned companies). Furthermore, contrary to the initial expectations, reforming the recruitment system has not decreased the politicisation level. The aim of this research is to identify factors that stimulate different behavioural strategies (‘top-down’ and the ‘bottom-up’ politicisation) and affect the actual level of politicisation. In order to achieve this aim, data were collected on the political engagement of 168 managers currently employed in public educational organisations in Vilnius city and Vilnius district as well as 64 managers who were appointed under the new recruitment procedures. Moreover, a survey of 58 public educational institutions was conducted in order to gather data on the career patterns (appointment and dismissal dates) and professional background of the former managers.
Highlights
The politicisation level is even higher (50%) among the managers who were selected through the new recruitment procedures
This is a concern because the level of politicisation in public educational organisations is higher than in other public sector organisations
In order to achieve this aim, data were collected on the political engagement of 168 managers currently employed in public educational organisations in Vilnius city and Vilnius district as well as 64 managers who were appointed under the new recruitment procedures
Summary
Meyer-Sahling savo darbuose išskiria keturis idealiuosius politizacijos tipus. Vertėtų pasakyti, kad pirmųjų trijų tipų politizacijos (nepolitizacija, ribota politizacija ir atvira politizacija) dažniausiai yra naudojamos kaip politikos koordinavimo strategijos. Dėl to straipsnyje yra išskiriamos dvi politizacijos kryptys: „iš viršaus žemyn“ ir „iš apačios aukštyn“42. Politizacijos „iš viršaus žemyn“ varomoji jėga yra partinis elitas, kuris naudojasi patronažu siekdamas šių pagrindinių tikslų: kontrolės (sprendimų priėmimo proceso, priėjimo prie partijai svarbių institucijos išteklių) arba paramos (partijai lojalių asmenų tinklo plėtros)[43]. Politizacijos „iš viršaus žemyn“ rezultatai yra politinio (asmeninio) pasitikėjimo pareigybių skaičiaus didėjimas ir politiškai (asmeniškai) lojalių asmenų paskyrimas į karjeros valstybės tarnybos pareigybes, santykinai dažna vadovų kaita, dažnas viešojo sektoriaus organizacijų sukūrimas ir pertvarkymas. Vykdant politizaciją „iš viršaus žemyn“ pirmenybė politizuojant skiriama toms viešojo sektoriaus įstaigoms, kurių kontrolė yra svarbi įgyvendinant partijos prioritetus. Jog partinė konkurencija politizacijos mastui svarią įtaką turi tik tuo atveju, kai kalbama apie politizaciją „iš viršaus žemyn“, t. Kad Vilniaus mieste partinė sistema yra daug labiau fragmentuota nei Vilniaus rajone, keliama hipotezė, jog, vyraujant politizacijai „iš viršaus žemyn“:.
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
