Abstract: The paper deals with the problem of the planning. The planning economy was indeed one of the most important achievements of the XX century. It allows avoiding such negative phenomena as unemployment and poverty. Nowadays the planning economy in Russia is rejected because after Gorbachev’s perestroika the leaders have decided to rely only on the market relations. They thought the reason for the economic collapse of the Soviet Union was the planning. The aim of the paper is to prove that the main error of the Soviet planning economy was not the planning itself, but the absence of interaction between the public management system and population. The text gives valuable information on the origins and development of the Soviet planning. The Soviet planning appeared in the difficult political and social context of the Civil War. From the beginning, the planning was developed by eminent scientists of their time. The political leaders used the planning in theire own aims; putting unrealizable tasks and using the economic failures to find and accuse the “enemies”. Conclusions are drawn about the necessity of the development of the planning system as a system of system of reconciling the needs of the people and the interests of public administration.

Abstract: The research subject is value-normative structure of regional public servants defining their motivation, and its transformation in the process of restructuring, which had taken place in 2016. Within the framework of this study, motivation is understood as readiness to pursue working within the system of public service, career planning and work satisfaction. The author defines the following key motives: material, i.e. orientation to high income, social benefits and guarantees, career and status motives, employment stability and intensity of work. The research is based on the method of questionnaire survey. The author uses stratified quota sample of 274 respondents with confidence interval of 5.55% and confidence probability of 95%. The author concludes that the key motive, which determined public servants’ readiness to pursue working in executive authorities in 2016, was stability of employment, and after restructuring – material motives. Besides, the key factor, defining the appeal of public service as a place of employment, is career expectations and stability of employment. During restructuring, the motivation had decreased. As the key demotivators, respondents mention low incomes and increased intensity of work. The author also notes high correlation between work satisfaction and public service period. Financial gain, social status and psychological climate are also significant factors of motivation. It means that under the conditions of frustration, public servants seek for other incentives to pursue working for public service.