Russia's Socio-Political and Economic System

I. Introduction (root cause diagnosis)

Russia's socio-political and economic system went through serious changes from 1990–2017. These changes took place within various spheres, including the public sector related to education and youth policy.

At the end of the Soviet Union era, the government was concerned about problems related to youth. The Komsomol—a political youth organization in the Soviet Union for citizens aged 14–28, which was primarily a political organ for spreading communist teachings and preparing future members of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union—was in deep crisis and needed reorganization.

In 1990, the post of the Commissioner for Youth Affairs was established under President Mikhail Gorbachev of the USSR, which in 1991 was transformed under the newly appointed Russian government into the State Committee for Youth Affairs.

The administrative reform in Russia continued, and in 1998 the State Committee was restructured and renamed to the Department of Youth Affairs under the direction of the Ministry of Labor and Social Development. Two years later, it was renamed to the Department of Youth Policy, and its functions were delegated to the Ministry of Education of the Russian Federation.

In 2007, this structure came back to its initial name the State Committee for Youth Affairs of the Russian Federation and was transferred under the direction of the Ministry of Sport, Tourism and Youth Policy of the Russian Federation. Just a year after, it was renamed the Federal Agency for Youth Affairs.

Until May 2012, the Agency was under the Ministry of Sport, Tourism and Youth Policy of the Russian Federation. In 2012, it was transferred under the Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation.

Until now, the Federal Agency for Youth Affairs is a federal body of executive authority, providing state services and managing state property related to the youth policy, and implementing, jointly with public organisations and movements representing youth interests, projects to encourage healthy lifestyle habits, provide moral and patriotic education, and help young people attain their professional aspirations.

However, this leapfrog of subordination, as well as the range of legal and organizational problems and absence of flexibility and efficiency of organizational structure led to future problems.  Moreover, the organization inherited a lot of problems from its predecessor – Komsomol, such as a lack of professional managers, well-developed strategy, political activism instead of development regular program activities, propaganda rather than the promotion of educational and cultural programs and so on.

Firstly, since 1990, formally this Committee/Agency was referred to the executive branch of the state being a part of one of the Ministry of the Russian government. However, informally, every chief of this institute had subordinated to Presidential Administration and personally to the First Deputy Chief of Staff of the Presidential Administration of Russia, who was responsible for Domestic Policy, being his creature. Therefore, these leaders were concentrated on internal, mostly political, issues, disregarding other aspects of management work.

Secondly, while this Committee/Agency shifted between different institutes, no one thought about a long-term strategy because all authorities were trying to avoid responsibilities. As a result, the level of youth policy in the country remained undeveloped all this time.

Thirdly, before becoming the head of the Agency (the key figure in the structure), most of the leaders were involved in political work and propaganda. For instance, one of the longest ruling chiefs of the Agency was the former head of a pro-government, state-sponsored political youth movement, and the most controversial one. Over the years, this political institute was involved in various public political events, including book burnings, targeting opposition politicians and protests outside some embassies in Moscow.

Forthly, the Agency had poor HR Planning and Management, as well as an incompetent and poorly functioning human resources department. Employee training and development programs were underestimated for, and hiring practices were skewed. Loyalty was the priority in order to get a promotion. Disloyal personnel got fired immediately. It was a cause of lack of not only innovative leaders and creative visionaries who understand the various environments that their organizations are operating in, and are able to differentiate between these different environments, but also middle managers involved in the planning process processes in the organization.

Fifth, an annual activity of the Agency was concentrated around one event – youth camp, which brought together young people to study and discuss issues in political science, economics, art, literature and culture. However, over time its political bias compromised the public image.

Finally, the organization didn't try to implement new technologies and tools for purposes of communication with its young audience. The Agency didn’t realize the benefits of modern tools, which could help to spread information and improving accessibility to its events.

II. Types of Change Management approach

In 2014 the Agency faced extraordinary challenges; firstly some media had blamed the head of the Agency for corruption; secondly, the company was adjusting to a major reorganization; thirdly, the backdrop was a weakened economy, following the annexation of Crimea and imposed economic sanctions.

Under this new situation, the government appointed a new head of the Agency, who in face of these tricky questions, started changes in organizational structure and culture.

The Agency used Lewin’s Change Management Model, which included three stages of change:

1. Unfreeze – Most people make an active effort to resist change. In order to overcome this tendency, a period of thawing or unfreezing must be initiated through motivation.

In case of the Agency, the organization kept all previous projects and an existing employees for almost a year. The top management convinced staff that they will remain their positions.

Also, in this period, employee compensation included a wage and incentives. It encouraged the employee to stay with the Agency and cooperate with new staff, who started to appear.