Article Critique 3:

138 Review of Contemporary Philosophy Vol. 14, 2015, pp. 138 –143 , ISSN 1841 -5261 CITIZEN PARTICIPATIO N IN ORGANIZATIONAL DECIS ION MAKING DOINA POPESCU LJUNGHOLM [email protected] University of Pite ști ABSTRACT. The purpose of this study is to ex amine the function of individuals and stakeholders in governance, the effectiveness of the citizen involvement process, processes of direct citizen participation, and challenges to thickening democracy via raised citizen involvement . The analysis presented in this paper contributes to re - search on direct separate citizen participation in governance, the relevance of citizen involvement and participatory democracy in constructing a feasible society, citizen participation in decision -making processes, and go vernance operations in which individuals enhance governmental responsibility via their involvement . Keywords: citizen participation; decision -making process; governmental accountability 1. Introduction Citizenship involvement is the bedrock of democracy . D irect citizen partici - pa tion frequently lies on the shoulders of public administrators for effective performance . Associating the enlarged perspective of citizen and the notions of collective power and decision making (Nica and Potcovaru, 2015) , citizen participation is the operation by which constituents of a society share power with bureaucrats in making concrete decisions (Lăzăroiu, 2015) and in tak - ing actions associated with the public . Direct citizen involvement establishes the terms and requirements for citizenship and for how we regard the decision maker ’s function in backing of it, and is noticeable at all layers of govern - ment, despite the fact that it has a tend ency to be more obvious locally and regionally because of questions of scale. The more significant the discontent among individuals within a policy sphere , the more vociferous the demands for direct citizen participation. (Rober ts, 2004) Indi viduals can have a sign if- icant function in public policy and decision making, and hav e the right to determine what is relevant to them (Popescu -Ljungholm, 2015a) and how they can most fully attain their goals . Public managers should further greater citizen participation in the activity of government. Leaders in public affairs 139 recognize tools for the new governance (de Beaufort and Summers, 2014) via arrangements of public, private, and nonprofit entities : it entails citizens and the mechanisms via which they engage in the activity of government. (Blomgren Bingham et al., 2005) 2. Citizen Participation in Decision -making P rocesses Engageme nts in local entities improve particular experience s as performances of citizenship and supply associationa l exper ience which stimulates the acknowledgement of and the pre -eminence of shared and public goods. T he performance of citizen engagement , by its a ssociational feature , tends to bring about an increased sense of strength (Nica and Potcovaru, 2014 ), which, in turn, supports additional participation. Local entities are critical to the criterion of local self government and furnish the chief process for expanding citizen involvement in the political system. Individuals performing in groups collec - tively can establish political capital (Lăzăroiu, 2013) , either as they can convert that recognition into votes or by reason of their competence to transfigure the entity into an adequate pressure group. Professionalization of government, which depends on professionals , minimizes the advantages of self governance and citizen involvement . (Gittell and Newman, 2012) The types of partici - pants who launch and back citi zen participation (P etcu, 2014) represent a various and reciprocally interacting environment . Mechanisms of political contest via elections offer individuals a good justification to back and follow the schemes that derive from the former : they have had cha nces to select the policy makers. Rightly vetted, individuals who are not political experts may perform for grounds that promote concerns that are more widely shared by other persons . The latter may hold epistemic benefits over more qualified political par ticipant s. Legitimacy may hold closely to the essential recognition between citizens at -large a nd decision ma kers. Numer ous multisectoral problem -solving, networked governance, or collective governance endeavors do not bring about a significant function for individuals . The latter can assist in expressing specific problem s in more precise and feasible manners than experts performing alone. (Fung, 2015) With citizen involvement , devised schemes ma y be mor e r ea listica lly established in citizen choices , individua ls ma y become mor e supportive appraisers of the diffic ult decisions that government decision -makers have to make, and the enhanced backing from citizens may gen erate a less disruptive , contentious public to supervise . A thorough citizen engagement process can assist in surpassing the obstacles to successful policy broug ht abo ut by the sound -bite media culture. Knowledgeable and implica ted persons become citizen -professio nal s, grasping technically hard situations and identifying holistic community -wid e explanation . Several citizen involvement programs 140 may chiefly satisfy a marketing reason , where the engagement process com - prises government members steer ing the individuals toward decisions that the decision maker would have made originally . Influencing the citizens by interacting with them frequently and fundamentally earning their confidence an d companionship may be the only manner that regulators can further novel schemes in communities where anti -government attitude runs high. (Irvin and Stans bury , 2004) The deficiencies of the advanced democracies lie in a pervasive citizen unease concerning the formal entities (Mulligan, 2015) , and prevalent opinions among citizens that politi cal entities under achieve . Demo - cratic shortfalls may weaken the strength s of democratic political systems to develop (Tognato, 2015) and re construct into ever more adequate and war - ranted agents of individuals . A viable democracy should empower people to ho ne their political resources: individuals should be able to concentrate their voting on selecting representatives who will defend nearly all of their concerns (democracy is diminished when the citizenry are deficient in collective agents for public reasons ). (Warren, 2009) 3. The Relevance of C itiz en Involvement and Participatory D emocracy in Constructing a Feasible Society Global entities are short of a democratic citizenry: decision -making is far eliminated from the citizens’ choices . The democracy sho rtage entails a dep - rivation of responsiveness to the choices of the individual s, both concerning the delivery of outcomes and the employment of decision -making processes. Decisions on global treaties taken by the citizenry earn considerable legitimacy . Democracy is established on the belief that individuals can make political decisions in a fair manner . In a representative democracy, the experienced representatives are sensitive to the citizens’ choices , particularly at election time. The latter ca n ma ke logically argues politica l dec isions: the mor e widespread individuals ’ direct participation rights are, the better is the public economy ma na ged . T he notion of giving persons a dir ect influence with reference to global entities can make progress towards an international civil society easier . (Frey and Stutzer , 2006) When decisions entail significant ethical or material trade -off s, individuals may be most highly positioned to resolve them . Citizens who are frequently most impacted by endeavors to aim at public problems are well positioned to supply data significant to formulat ing solutions and assessing enforcement . Individuals may become directly involved in finding answer s public problems and th er efore provide supplementary resources via coproduction . By re arranging themselves to integrate mor e significant citizen involvement , public agencies can raise their strength by employing more data and the specific potentials and resources of individuals . (Fung, 2015) 141 For numerous public authorities, involvement implies notifying citizens of plans and decisions. T he most unmanageable disputes between various political groups , unconditioned concerns and individuals have broadened out of the setting up and advancement of considerable public infrastructure schemes . Demands of backing for local democratic process may be accelerated by signed citizen solicitations gathered by persons or civic associations . (Carson and Lewanski, 2008) Citizen involvement may diminish the level of citizen disbelief in government, and instruct individuals about government undertak - ings . The objective is for citizens to have a dynamic function in decisions and not just be compliant users of government services. Concern in citizen participation has comprised the public budgeting operation , where significant scheme and resource allowance decisio ns are made. Public input influences budgetary decision -making, especially when a group of individuals associate on a specific matter : the intricacy of the budget and the sensed general absence of citizen concern are considerable obstacles to participation . (Ebdon, 2002) 4. Governance Operations in which Individuals Enhance G overnmental Responsibility via Their Involvement At the operationa l level, bur eaucrats will intera ct mor e customar ily a nd successfully with citizens to grasp the hopes and requir ements of community inhabitants . Governments have introjected the notions of responsibility and operation in such a manner that individuals do not sense that public under - takings frequently fulfill prevalent demands . Direct democracy provides the chance not only for individuals to become more instructed but also for lead - ers, devisers , and bureaucrats to establish what agendas and decisions are relevant to citizens , and to evidence and report responsibility and operation in more r elevant fashions . Bureauc rats need to steer elected officials via the labyrinths of citizen participation while simultaneously advancing and support - ing the civic engagement undertakings in their governments. T he governance operation in which community arrangement is associated with benchmar king and performance supervision is a crucial component for reuniting citizens via the participatory operation and for advancing a more manifest measure of responsibility . (Gibson et al., 2005) Digital technologies and social media may generate the resources for individuals to receive data about public aspects and infor mation about themselves that prepare them to be more qualified collaborators in public problem solving. P articipatory budgeting involves a diversity of institutional patterns in w hich dir ect citizen engagement is a n essential component, but the furtherance of social justice is a conditional effect . Citizen participation may be a solution to reinforcing the democratic legitimacy of governance operations . (Fung, 2015) 142 Including indiv iduals in making strategies is a starting point for first -rate planning practice. Plan enforcement depends on the extent to which citizens regard plans as a warranted foundation for taking action (Popescu Ljungholm , 2015b) and evidencing public reasons to directly impact private property and decision making. Crowdsourcing, as with any citizen engagement undertaking , can be both effective and convincing for a massive group if it draws on the place -based interests and reliabilities held by actors , and if invo lvement is perceived as a process for both having an effect and earning consideration a mong peer s. Va luable c itizen pa rticipation is the outcome of a host of techniques and chances in a planning operation . Citizen engagement covers allowing us to get to be tter decisions in partnership , with better expectations for being partly responsible for legitimate and habitable communities. T he swiftly forward -moving practice of employing urban data flows to notify both decision makers and individuals constitutes a bo ost of novel work and chance . (Seltzer and Mahmoudi, 2012) 5. Conclusions Citizen s should know something about their representatives’ trustworthiness (Nica, 2015), grounded on assessments about arrangements of concerns and relevance , and should engage to the degree that they can guarantee that they are being spoken for . Individuals may choose that bureaucrats share their concerns , and will maintain the confidence established in them by the public (Mircică, 2014), and that their typical representatives will inform them when and if their confidence seems misplaced. A sound democracy would empower citizens to split their connections to government between those of dynamic involvement and those of conf idence established on knowledgeable respect . Operations that citizens appreciate to be uncoordinated , incompetent , uneco - nomical , unjust ified, or biased can under mine individuals’ trust in public sector entities . (Warren, 2009) REFERENCES Blomgren Bingha m, Lisa, Tina Nabatchi, and Rosemary O’Leary (2005), “The New Governance: Practices and Processes for Stakeholder and Citizen Participation in the Work of Government,” Public Administration Review 65(5): 547 –558. Carson, Lyn, and Rodolfo Lewanski (2008), “ Fostering Citizen Participation Top - Down,” International Journal of Public Participation 2: 72 –83. de Beaufort, Viviane, and Lucy Summers (2014), “Women on Boards: Sharing a Rigorous Vision of the Functioning of Boards, Demanding a New Model of Corporate Governance,” Journal of Research in Gender Studies 4(1): 101 –140. Ebdon, Carol (2002), “Beyond the Public Hearing: Citizen Participation in the Local Government Budget Process,” Journal of Public Budgeting, Accounting and Financial Management 14(2): 273 –294. 143 Frey, Bruno S., and Alois Stutzer (2006), “Strengthening the Citizens’ Role in Inter - national Organizations,” The Review of International Organizations 1(1): 27 –43. Fung, Archon (2015), “Putting the Public Back into Governance: The Challenges of Citiz en Participation and Its Future,” Public Administration Review 75. Forth- coming Gibson, Pamela D., Donald P. Lacy, and Michael J. Dougherty (2005), “Improving Performance and Accountability in Local Government with Citizen Participation ,” The Innovation J ournal: The Public Sector Innovation Journal 10(1): 1–12. Gittell, Ross, and Kathe Newman (2012), Activist Scholar: Selected Works of Marilyn Gittell . Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Irvin, Renée A., and John Stansbury (2004), “Citizen Participation in Decision - Making: Is it Worth the Effort?,” Public Administration Review 64(1): 55 –65. Lăzăroiu, George (2015), “Employee Motivation and Job Performance,” Linguistic and Philosophical Investigations 14: 97 –102. Lăzăroiu, George (2013), “Besley on Foucault’s Discourse of Education,” Educa - tional Philosophy and Theory 45(8): 821 –832. Mircică, Nela (2014), “Constructive Communication in Effective Negotiation,” Analysis and Metaphysics 13: 64 –72. Mulligan, Casey B. (2015), “The Impact of Health Reform on Employment and Work Schedules,” American Journal of Medical Research 2(1): 5 –40. Nica, Elvir a (2015), “Public Administration as a Tool of Sustainable Development,” Journal of Self -Governance and Management Economics 3(4): 30 –36. Nica, Elvira, and Ana -Mădălina Potcovaru (2015), “Labor Management and Dress Culture in the Victorian Textile Industry,” Economics, Management, and Finan - cial Markets 10(2): 96 –101. Nica, Elvira, and Ana -Mădălina Potcovaru (2014), “The Social Construction of Organizational Reality,” Psychosociological Issues in Human Resource Manage - ment 2(2): 56 –61. Petcu, Carmen (2014), “Wittig on the Semantics of Grammatical Gender,” Review of Contemporary Philosophy 13: 72 –77. Popescu -Ljungholm, Doina (2015 a), “The Im pact of Transparency in Enhancing Public Sector Performance,” Contemporary Readings in Law and Social Justice 7(1): 172 –178. Popescu Ljungholm, Doina (2015b), “Pay -for -Performance in the Public Sector ,” Geopolitics, History, and International Relations 7(1 ): 90 –95. Roberts, Nancy (2004), “Public Deliberation in an Age of Direct Citizen Participa - tion,” American Review of Public Administration 34(4): 315 –353. Seltzer, Ethan, and Dillon Mahmoudi (2012), “Citizen Participation, Open Innova - tion, and Crowdso urcing: Challenges and Opportunities for Planning,” Journal of Planning Literature 28(1): 3–18. Tognato, Carlo (2015), “The Aesthetics of Responsible Business: Outline of a Research Agenda,” Knowledge Cultures 3(3): 186 –205. Warren, Mark E. (2009), “Citize n Participation and Democratic Deficits: Consider - ations from the P erspective of Democratic Theory,” i n Joan DeBardeleben and Jon Pammett (eds.), Activating the Citizen; Dilemmas of Participation in Europe and Canada . Chippenham and Eastbourne: Palgr ave M acmillan: 17 –40. R epro duce d w ith p erm is sio n o f th e c o pyrig ht o w ner. F urth er r e pro ductio n p ro hib ite d w ith out p erm is sio n.