Valerii Mykhailovych Vorona is an epoch in Ukrainian sociology!

Yevhen Holovakha: «Valerii Mykhailovych Vorona – that is an epoch in Ukrainian sociology!».

March marked 83 years since the birth of academician Valerii Mykhailovych Vorona, for many years the director of the Institute of Sociology of the NAS of Ukraine, who sadly passed away in September 2022. Grateful colleagues have prepared and published a memorial book containing a variety of materials about their former head, which will be presented at a special meeting of the Academic Council of the Institute of Sociology of the NAS of Ukraine on Tuesday, 28 March 2023.

On the eve of the event, the current director of the Institute of Sociology of the NAS of Ukraine, corresponding member of the Academy of Sciences of Ukraine, Doctor of Philosophy, Professor Yevhen Holovakha shared some recollections of his renowned predecessor.

Corr.: Yevhen Ivanovych, how long ago did you meet Valerii Mykhailovych?

Ye. H.: In the 1980s. At that time I, a young candidate of sciences, headed the sector for the mechanisms of the democratisation of society within the department of social management of the Institute of Philosophy of the Academy of Sciences of Ukraine. And then the former rector of the Kyiv Institute of the National Economy (now the Kyiv National Economic University), Prof. Yu. M. Pakhomov, came to us as head of the sociology division of the Institute of Philosophy of the Academy of Sciences of Ukraine. It was he who in 1988 invited V. M. Vorona. I remember how Yurii Mykolaiovych then, in a conversation with me, justified this invitation by the fact that Valerii Mykhailovych, as vice-rector of the Kyiv Institute of the National Economy, had been a reliable comrade-in-arms to him as its then rector. Yu. M. Pakhomov emphasised not only V. M. Vorona’s solid theoretical knowledge and practical experience, but above all his devotion to work, his organisational abilities and his high human decency.

Corr.: Did Yu. Pakhomov convince you at the time? After all, the economist V. M. Vorona among the philosophers, psychologists and sociologists of the academic Institute of Philosophy might have seemed a somewhat, so to speak, alien phenomenon?

Ye. I. H.: You know, I will say honestly that what influenced me most was not the fact that Valerii Mykhailovych had experience as a vice-rector, and moreover as a head of department in industry – namely at the Kyiv Motorcycle Plant, although that was a solid professional credential. What impressed me was that Yu. Pakhomov placed the emphasis precisely on V. M. Vorona’s ability to devote all his energy to work, to throw himself into it wholeheartedly, to be responsible and reliable, on his democratic manner and his ability to find a common language with colleagues. And these were exactly the qualities we badly needed, because it was precisely then that several departments of the Institute of Philosophy were breaking away from their philosopher colleagues and consolidating within the sociology division of the Institute of Philosophy of the Academy of Sciences of Ukraine.

Corr.: So let us return to the key moment – the creation of the Institute.

Ye. I. H.: Yes, in 1990 the Institute of Sociology was created within the structure of the Academy of Sciences of Ukraine, and academician Yurii Pakhomov became its first director. Valerii Mykhailovych Vorona was, as always, at his side and headed the department of economic sociology. And when in 1991 Yu. M. Pakhomov was appointed director of the Institute of World Economy and International Relations of the NAS of Ukraine, the question arose of who would take the chair of our director.

Corr.: The question arose? Surely Yu. Pakhomov had enough influence to ensure continuity automatically and to «push through» the appointment of his long-standing, reliable deputy as the new director of the Institute of Sociology, so to speak in «his own» place?

Ye. I. H.: That is just the point: Yu. Pakhomov both wanted and recommended and campaigned for the candidacy of Valerii Mykhailovych, in whom he believed. At the same time there were other contenders, and that was a genuine manifestation of scholarly and organisational democracy. Yet in the end V. M. Vorona did become director and, as subsequent events showed, that was the right choice.

Corr.: Sometimes a new director begins with radical steps, brings in a new team, starts a reorganisation and so on. What were V. Vorona’s first steps as director?

Ye. I. H.: Valerii Mykhailovych was in no hurry. For quite a long time he observed, entered into the subtleties of the Institute’s life now from the position of its head, and pursued his line thoughtfully and almost imperceptibly at first. The point is that during his own directorship Yu. Pakhomov actively and widely brought many people into work at the Institute, because he had the opportunity to do so; he secured a good many new posts and expanded the staff. So a group of employees accumulated who, for various reasons, were insufficiently active in their work. Under V. Vorona the situation gradually began to change. Little by little the Institute began to be left by those who at that stage had become either temporary fellow travellers, or were simply sitting out their situation at the Institute until they found something of their own, or were unproductive.

Corr.: And did the Institute’s premises always look as pleasant from the inside as they do now?

Ye. I. H.: It is good that you asked about that. These premises once housed the Institute of the History of the Communist Party of Ukraine. And I remember that when we had already moved in here, I, and many others too, had a certain sense of greyness and discomfort; we felt ill at ease within these walls, we did not want to come here, it was uncomfortable to be here. And then we noticed that our new director was little by little improving the internal design and changing the interior. Later the deputy director for general affairs, Ihor Volodymyrovych Burov, also actively contributed to this. Plants in pots appeared, the walls were decorated with portraits of scholars and with paintings, repairs were carried out. It might seem like trifles? Perhaps someone thinks so. But these are not trifles, because psychologists proved long ago that the design of working premises noticeably affects mood, well-being and capacity for work. So, starting with the improvement of our own home – the Institute – gently harmonising the staff of researchers, supporting our ideas and projects, Valerii Mykhailovych brought the Institute of Sociology of the NAS of Ukraine to a new level. The scholarly core of the team consolidated, serious work intensified, the Institute’s authority grew.

Corr.: Was it precisely then that the most significant research projects of the Institute and its leading staff were launched?

Ye. I. H.: The start took place in the very first years of Valerii Mykhailovych’s leadership. It was then that the annual study «Ukrainian society: monitoring social change», which Natalia Panina and I proposed, began, and over the years it became a powerful indicator of the transformations along Ukraine’s historical path in the period of Independence. Valerii Mykhailovych initiated the creation in 1997 of a scholarly quarterly – the journal «Sociology: Theory, Methods, Marketing» – as well as of a postgraduate scholarly collection and of the yearbook «Ukrainian society», and supported the Institute’s inclusion in the «European Social Survey» programme. In general he supported everything that worked for the development of national sociology, everything that raised the public and scholarly authority of our sociologists and of the Institute as a whole.

The Institute grew, and so did we. Valerii Mykhailovych defended his doctoral thesis and became an academician; Mykola Oleksandrovych Shulha and I were his deputies for many years. A team of ten of our staff headed by academician V. M. Vorona received the State Prize of Ukraine in Science and Technology for 2014. The staff worked actively, candidate’s and doctoral dissertations were defended, young researchers grew up, new leaders emerged within the team.

Corr.: It so happened that Valerii Mykhailovych handed his post over to you?

Ye. I. H.: Well, this is not a monarchy. He did not hand it over, he recommended, and it was the staff who elected me. To be honest, for many years I avoided all sorts of proposals concerning directorships, including at other research institutions, but this time the arguments of Valerii Mykhailovych and of my colleagues convinced me. I am grateful to the team for their trust and I consider it a high honour. I would like to continue everything that V. M. Vorona did for our Institute. Above all to follow his style of leadership – democratic, tolerant, thoughtful, cultivated – a style of «soft power». We will do everything to preserve the memory of the outstanding organiser of the science of sociology, academician Valerii Mykhailovych Vorona. The book we are presenting is a confirmation and an expression of our grateful memory.

Author of the interview: Viktor Rybachenko, adviser to the director of the Institute of Sociology of the NAS of Ukraine