Official loyalty as the factor of official activity: administratively-legal and phenomenological approaches

The article discusses the administrative-legal and phenomenological approaches to understanding the official loyalty. Official loyalty is being considered under the administrative-legal approach as adherence to formal official duty, which is a system of obligations, taken together with official status, the source of which are: normative base of service activity, legal requirements of the head and public interests. Lists of the limitations of administrative-legal approach to understanding the of official loyalty: weak underdeveloped concept, the failure to take into account the wide range of situations, operation with a models rather than actual processes. Discusses the advantages of the phenomenological approach in studying the performance of loyalty: its psychological advantages, the existence of a theoretical framework, the work with the real phenomena. Within the phenomenological approach official loyalty is defined as psychological-behavioral integration of the employee in the group operating in the service sector, on the basis of a common cause of activities. Possibilities of sharing of the considered approaches for the decision of problems of optimization of official activity are designated.

1. Burtseva E.V. The problem of subjectivity of employees in the system of internal affairs [Elektronnyi resurs]. Psikhologiia i pravo [Psychology and Law], 2013. no. 1 (In Russ., аbstr. in Engl.)Gornostaev S.V. Problemy diagnostiki sluzhebnoi loyal'nosti. [Problems of diagnostics of official loyalty]. Prikladnaia iuridicheskaia psikhologiia [Applied legal psychology]. 2015. № 2. pp. 110–117.
2. Gornostaev S.V. Sluzhebnaya loyal'nost' sotrudnikov kak nauchnaya problema i faktor obespecheniya bezopasnosti i effektivnosti v funktsionirovanii ugolovno-ispolnitel'noi sistemy [Performance of staff official loyalty as a scientific problem and the factor of safety and efficiency in the functioning of the penitentiary system]. Chelovek: prestuplenie i nakazanie [Person: crime and punishment]. 2016. № 1 (92). pp. 133–138.
3. Gosudarstvennaya sluzhba (kompleksnyi podkhod) [Public service (the complex approach)]: Ucheb. Posobie / Pod. red. A.V. Obolonskogo – 2-e izd. Moscow: Delo Publ., 2000.  440 p.
4. Kuznetsova O.V. Gender characteristics of legal conscience in internal affairs agencies staff [Elektronnyi resurs]. Psikhologiia i pravo [Psychology and Law], 2016. Vol. 6, no. 2, pp. 142–151. doi:10.17759/psylaw.2016060211. (In Russ., аbstr. in Engl.)
5. Muzyakov C.I. Sluzhenie kak sotsial'naya model' realizatsii tsennostnykh osnovanii voinskoi deyatel'nosti [Service as social model of realization of the valuable bases of military activity]. Armiya i obshchestvo [Army and a society]. 2008. № 2. pp.37–41.
6. Parsons T. Sistema sovremennykh obshchestv [The system of modern societies] [In Russian]/ Per. s angl. L.A. Sedova i A.D. Kovaleva. Pod red. M.S. Kovalevoi. M.: Aspekt Press Publ., 1998. 270 p.
7. Pedych M.V. Sotsiokul'turnye aspekty formirovaniya effektivnoi byurokratii [Social and cultural aspects of the formation of an effective bureaucracy]: avtoref. dis. ... kand.sotsiol. nauk : 22.00.06. Maikop, 2012. 25 p.
8. Svinareva O.V., Gornostaev S.V. Sluzhebnyi dolg: znachenie dlya sluzhebnoi deyatel'nosti, sushchnost', formirovanie. [Official duty: value for official activity, entity, formation]. Zakon i pravo [Law and the right].. 2014. № 9. pp. 37–40.
9. Simzyaev A.V. Professional'no-eticheskaya kul'tura sotrudnika OVD [Professional-ethical culture of police officer]. Psikhopedagogika v pravookhranitel'nykh organakh [Psychopedagogy in law enforcement]. 2009. № 3. pp. 12–15.
10. Slivka S.S. Yuridicheskaya deontologiya [Legal deontology]: uchebnoe posobie. Kiev: Atika Publ., 2008. 296 p.
11. Strigunenko Yu.V. Sluzhebnaya distsiplina i zakonnost' v organakh vnutrennikh del: ponyatie, osnovnye komponenty i vidy distsiplinarnykh otnoshenii [Service discipline and legality in the organs of Internal Affairs: concept, key components and types of disciplinary relations] [Elektronnyi resurs]. Obshchestvo: politika, ekonomika, pravo [Society: politics, economics and law]. 2011. №2. Available at: http://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/sluzhebnaya-distsiplina-i-zakonnost-v-organah-vnutrennih-del-ponyatie-osnovnye-komponenty-i-vidy-distsiplinarnyh-otnosheniy (Accessed: 13.07.2014).
12. Chirkin V.E. Konstitutsionnoe pravo : kurs dlya prepodavatelei, aspirantov i magistrantov [Constitutional law: a course for teachers, graduate students and undergraduates]. Moscow. : Norma : INFRA M Publ., 2013. 688 p.
13. Anderson B. Imagined communities: reflections on the origin and spread of nationalism. – 2nd, revised edition. London, New York: Verso, 1991. 224 p.
14. Boszormenyi-Nagy I., Spark G. Invisible loyalties: reciprocity in intergenerational family therapy.  Hagerstown: Harper & Row, 1973.  xxi, 409 p.
15. Bowal P., Brierton T.D. & Campbell C. The Whistleblower Defence to Employment Dismissal [Электронный ресурс]. Law Now. 2007. № 32(2). Available at: http://hdl.handle.net/1880/47956 15/07/2014 (Accessed: 15.07.2014).
16. Connor J. The Sociology of Loyalty / J. Connor. – New York: Springer Science Business Media, LLC, 2007. – 161 р.
17. De Graaf G. The Loyalties of Top Public Administrators [Elektronnyi resurs]. Jnl. of Public Admin. Research and Theory. 2001. №21(2). P. 285-306 [Review]. Available at: http://jpart.oxfordjournals.org/ content/21/2/285 (Accessed: 22.07.2014).
18. Emerson D.M., Helfeld T.I. Loyalty among government employees. The Yale law journal. 1948.  № 58(1). pp.1–143.
19. Fletcher G.P. Loyalty: an essay on the morality of relationships. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1993. 224 p.
20. Grodzins M. The loyal and the disloyal: social boundaries of patriotism and treason. – Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1956.  319 p.
21. Kasiński M. Lojalność urzędnika w świetle prawa i etyki. [Elektronnyi resurs]. Annales. Etyka w życiu gospodarczym. 2010. № 13(1). Available at: http://dspace.uni.lodz.pl: 8080/xmlui/handle/11089/1575 (Accessed: 8.07.2014).
22. Keller S. The limits of loyalty. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2007. 232 p.
23. Kleinig J. On loyalty and loyalties: The contours of a problematic virtue. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2014. 315 p.
24. Maurer H.H. The political attitudes of the Lutheran parish in America: a study in religious sectionalism. American journal of sociology. 1928. №  33(4). pp. 568–585.
25. Maynard-Moody S., Musheno M. Cops, Teachers, Counselors. Stories from the Front Lines of Public Service. Michigan: University of Michigan, 2003. 221 p.
26. Mentzelopoulos A.M. Federal government public service ethics: managing public expectations / A.M. Mentzelopoulos. Carleton University, 1990.  159 p. [Elektronnyi resurs]. Available at: https://dspace.library.uvic.ca//handle/1828/2361 (Accessed: 15.07.2014).
27. Meyers M.K., Vorsanger S. Street-Level Bureaucrats and the Implementation of Public Policy. Handbook of Public Administration / B.G. Peters and J. Pierre (eds.). New York: Sage Publications, 2003. pp. 245-256.
28. Royce J. The Philosophy of Loyalty. New York, Norwood: Macmillan Co, Norwood Press, J.S.Cushing Co, Berwick&Smith Co., 1914. 409 p.
29. Singer E.A. Love and loyalty. The philosophical review. 1916. № 25(3). pp. 456–465.
30. Tanner A.E. The Philosophy of Loyalty by Jostah Royce. The Macmillan Co.,  New York, 19o8. pp. xiii+409 review. The American Journal of Psychology.  1908. № 19(3).  pp. 409–412.
31. Waterford J. Loyalty versus the public interest. 2007. [Elektronnyi resurs]. Available at: http://apo.org.au/commentary/leaking-public-interest (Accessed: 14.07.2014).
32. Weatherly U.G. Multiple groupings and loyalty patterns. American journal of sociology. 1934. № 40(2). pp. 204-213.
33. Wellisz S.H. Bureaucracy: Department of Economics Discussion Papers. Department of Economics, Columbia University. New York, 2002. [Elektronnyi resurs].  Available at: http://academiccommons.columbia.edu/item/ac:112594 (Accessed: 24.07.2014).
34. Wynne L.C., Ryckoff I.M., Day J., Hirsch S.I. Pseudomutuality in the family relations of schizophrenics. Psychiatry. 1958. № 21. pp. 205–220.