Victor Liakh, the President of East Europe Foundation

Aircraft are designed to withstand turbulence — a phenomenon caused by the interaction of rising and falling air currents. It can be uncomfortable in the cabin during such periods, and it is essential to follow safety instructions carefully to avoid injury. That said, turbulence is usually short-lived and does not pose a threat to aircraft. 

It has become customary to describe the times we live in as turbulent — times in which we work, build teams and organizations, achieve results, and, in the Ukrainian context, often simply try to survive and see the dawn. So, to be honest, I don’t really like this term. "Turbulence" is understandable and widely used, but at its core it is too ‘soft’ a concept to describe what we are dealing with, especially in Ukraine. 

Instead, the term ‘VUCA world’ (Volatility, Uncertainty, Complexity, and Ambiguity) — a world that is volatile, uncertain, complex and ambiguous — is the framework within which we live and build modern leadership. This concept (VUCA) originated at the U.S. Army War College following the end of the Cold War as a way of describing a new world characterized by greater instability, uncertainty, complex interrelationships and ambiguity. Later, the term found its way into business and management as a useful model for explaining conditions in which it is difficult to predict events and make decisions. And the theory has been reinforced by the sheer scale of Ukraine’s experience, a country that not only lives in this world but also achieves results, changes established approaches, and serves as an example to others.

Recently, I returned from Marseille, where I took part in a gathering of civil society and volunteer organizations from around the world under the umbrella of the American NGO Points of Light, which operates in over 30 countries. I spoke on one of the panels, where we discussed leadership in today’s world, and each organization's leader shared their experience and vision. 

For over 10 years, I have been managing East Europe Foundation — a Ukrainian non-governmental organization that has so far invested over $66 million in the country’s development.

When I joined the Foundation, it was a small organization with a small staff who, naturally, all knew one another. By 2020, there were 40 of us. Over the past four years, we have tripled in size and increased our program budgets several-fold. How did we manage to achieve this? How did we go from being a family-style organization to having over 140 specialists on board? What lessons have I learned as a leader and head of an organization that implements projects of significant scale and impact in Ukraine?  

You need to rethink your approach to leadership

Firstly, rapid growth is both an achievement and a challenge that requires flexibility and a re-evaluation of oneself as a leader. As the team grew, it became clear that intuitive management wasn't working. We needed to implement systems, processes, rules, procedures, and policies — all the things that leaders often instinctively dislike, as they seem to stifle the organization's spirit. But without this, the organization simply cannot function on a larger scale. This transition from an entrepreneurial style to structured management was perhaps the least noticeable from the outside, but one of the most difficult for me personally. 

At the same time, scale demands a shift in focus. There inevitably comes a point when a leader cannot (and should not) keep an eye on every corner of their organization: the structure becomes more complex, distances grow, and processes multiply. So the key challenge for me was to understand where that focus should be. Where are those "reference points" I need to monitor to know whether things are okay or not? Finding the answer to this question is yet another challenge. 

It is harder to change one’s own management style than organizational culture

Next came the Covid-19 pandemic. Within a matter of days, we moved all our operations online. For a non-governmental organization in Ukraine, this meant rethinking not only the our programs, operations, and so on, but also the very culture of interaction — with our team, with our partners, and with local communities. 

For me personally, this was probably the most profound transformation, as it required a change not in the organization's culture, but in my own management style. The key issue was respect for, and trust in, my team. 

Trust is when I know that the team will act in the organization's best interest, even when the leader cannot be physically present and does not oversee every decision. Respect is when I recognize that a person in their role sees and understands their context better than I do, and I am prepared to accept their decisions, even if I would have done things differently myself. Without respect, trust turns into blind faith. Without trust, respect remains a polite distance. They only work together.  

The third challenge was Russia’s full-scale invasion in 2022. In the early days, we focused on ensuring the physical safety of our team. Some people were evacuated, some stayed where they were, and others found themselves under occupation. We had to look after our staff while continuing our work for the communities that needed us more than ever. 

It was a challenge that also required flexible thinking and an inclusive approach. There are people who freeze in a crisis, there are those who run away, and there are those who spring into action immediately. But all these people comprise the team you rely on above all else. So a leader must be as inclusive as possible to become a bridge of safety and support for everyone. 

See the person first, and their role and position second 

Sometimes organizations operate on the principle that the role comes first, and the person fits into it later. At the start of the full-scale invasion, our team crossed the Rubicon — traditional roles disappeared. Everyone did everything. Communications specialists became fundraisers, digitalization managers became logistical, and accountants became legal advisors. 

For years, I had been building the organizational structure, defining roles, formalizing processes, and setting KPIs — and all of this was right and necessary. But crises show that beneath this structure lies another layer — human potential — that may even go unnoticed in normal times, confined within the boundaries of functional responsibilities and job descriptions. 

The approach that leaders in various sectors require is to maintain a space where the team is able to go beyond the confines of the job description without disrupting the system. Because first comes the person — with their abilities, energy, motivation — and then they find the place where they can offer the most. 

How do you preserve this approach? Because when the intensity of the crisis subsides, the organization naturally returns to structure, to roles, to KPIs. And this is necessary — it’s impossible to operate effectively in the long term without a system. But how can we preserve that space where people can step beyond the confines of their formal roles? How can we build a system that provides structure without stifling initiative? 

My current answer — and I'm not sure it's final — is that structure should be a framework, not a cage. A framework holds the shape, but inside there is room to move. For us, specifically, this means: yes, everyone has a role and a scope of responsibility. But we consciously create space for cross-functional initiatives, for people to take on tasks outside their formal perimeter. Because we know that's often where the highest value lies. 

How have these challenges shaped my leadership? Growth has taught me to let go of control and focus on the right things. The pandemic has taught me to trust and respect others — genuinely, not just in words. The war has taught me to be flexible and inclusive — to see not only those who react in the same way as you but also diversity. It is important to learn to switch between different roles, sometimes within a single day. 

And the most challenging aspect of all this is that these transformations did not occur sequentially. They overlapped. To draw an analogy, in the context of a VUCA world, Ukrainians are successfully refitting an aeroplane mid-flight, where turbulence itself has become a familiar backdrop.