Modern reality needs to be put into practice, asserted as a program of practical activity by newly developed theoretically approaches, among which the archetypal approach seems to be one of the most promising, since it takes into account the real motives of the actors as subjects. The features of the archetypal approach to activities in certain spheres of social practice from the point of view of realization in everyday life, and not only in theory, are highlighted in the article. Thus, examples of the application of the archetypal approach in marketing practice, in particular branding, in pedagogical practice and in the practice of political diplomacy, are considered. The importance of taking into account the archetypal tendency of the objects of influence in these spheres and the construction of an adequate scheme of activity, including on these principles, is emphasized. An extensive list of individual archetypal classifications is given, archetypes and roles differentiated. The model of the twelve archetypes of M. Mark and KS Pearson was used as a methodological base, among which the types "Simple", "Glorious Small", "Careful", "Creator", "Sage", "Seeker", "Rebel", "Clown", "Hero", "Mage", "Ruler". The difference between the content of the outlook of these archetypes is exemplified by their actual or potential legitimation in the practice of branding, pedagogy and diplomacy. The author uses Ukrainian realities, in particular, conducts an archetypal analysis of diplomatic negotiations between the leadership of Russia and the heads of European states over the end of the war in eastern Ukraine. We propose our own assessment of the reasons for the ineffectiveness of such negotiations in terms of archetypal approach. An overview of the achievements of modern Ukrainian scientists in the direction of legitimizing the archetypal approach in different spheres of practice is given. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]