REFLECTIONS ON CHARACTER AND LEADERSHIP

292 REFLECTIONS ON CHARACTER AND LEADERSHIP

that people are subjected to forces over which they have very little or

no control. Ironically, however, the same bureaucratic routines that offer

comfort make it hard to get anything done. Managing an organization

‘ by rules ’ is well - nigh impossible once the rules take on a life of their

own. As a consequence, when rules proliferate, so do loopholes. During

the Soviet regime, Russians became expert at fi nding subtle ways to beat

the system. Knowing that a frontal attack on authority was dangerous,

they had no ambition to reform the system. They preferred instead to

step back, endure, go around, and fi nd another solution.

As we saw earlier, Russians have long combined outward civility

with inward disobedience (Hamilton et al ., 1995 ). They rebel against

regimentation, however, whenever they can get away with it. Therein

lies one of the great paradoxes of Russia: the Russian people developed

rigid programming of activities as an expression of great discomfort with

uncertainty (their preference being for predictability and stability); but

now, with the process reversed, they have a strong desire to overturn

that programming.

Unfortunately, there are still many organizations (particularly in the

public sector) where petty bureaucrats — people who can make life

extremely diffi cult for others — seem to be in control. This problem

needs to be dealt with if Russians hope to be players in the global market

economy.

Paranoia: Legacy of the Tsars

Russia has had more than its share of tyrannical rulers and the Tsar

legacy created a preference for strong leaders long before Lenin or Stalin

came along. The tyranny of Lenin and Stalin was foreshadowed by the

terrifying rule of Ivan the Terrible in the sixteenth century, the authori-

tarian controllers instituted by Peter the Great in the seventeenth and

eighteenth centuries (and further refi ned by Catherine the Great), and

the autocratic role of Nicholas I in the nineteenth century. The com-

munists only strengthened a centralized authoritarian system that started

centuries ago.

Most tsars saw any form of criticism against their rule as l è se - majest é ,

a challenge to their sovereignty, and responded with banishment or even

death. This coercive process created in Russians a perception of human-

kind as basically evil. Even today Russians tend to assume that people

will exploit others for personal gain and view the social environment

beyond their immediate circle of family members and close friends as

dangerous. Vladimir Putin ’ s outlook is not much different.