Vladimir Putin and the Timeless Universality of "Transactional Leadership." By Ronald F. White, Ph.D.

 Recent events in Ukraine underscore the importance of Leadership Theory in making sense of the ever-changing landscape of leader-follower relationships. First of all, it is essential that we acknowledge that there are two forms of "sociopolitical integration:" Vertical Integration and Horizontal Integration.  Both organizational schemas are are found throughout nature. Vertical Integration is evident in sociopolitical contexts where organizations are that organized top to bottom, where one leader (or a few leaders) exercise power from the top down. Followers embrace leaders for a variety of reasons. Transactional leaders rise to power and maintain power via bribery: If you support me I will give you X... Positive Leader-follower Transactions usually involve sharing power and/or resources (usually money). Negative Leader-Follower Transactions involve threats: If you do not support me I will harm you and/or your followers. Thus, longstanding political leaders like Putin employ both "carrots" and "sticks" to secure and maintain power over would-be competitors. In theory, all totalitarian regimes are vertically integrated. Putin remains in power in Russia, largely, because the most wealthy oligarchs and military leaders have benefitted (financially) from Putin's transactional leadership. Horizontal Leader-Follower relationships involve power-sharing among equals. In theory, Democratic Regimes are horizontally integrated. However, as Plato noted, democracies are often overthrown by tyrants who are highly skilled at creating and/or manufacturing threats, and subsequently promising to remove those threats. Worldwide, the ultimate threat to democratic political regimes, is warfare. Internal Political Revolutions are most often put to rest by military leaders, who threaten to exterminate opposition. That's why many political leaders, worldwide, are former military leaders that are highly skilled in positive and negative transactional leadership. The populace (citizenry) of most totalitarian regimes are kept poor, and therefore easily bribed via positive transactions. Totalitarian leaders of poor countries often reward male followers with jobs within the military, which is often the largest employer. Non-military organizations, especially corporations, are easily bribed with the promise of lower corporate taxes, and by offering to purchase corporate products and services at higher than market prices. That's why both totalitarian and democratic regimes routinely obfuscate their budgets, especially military budgets. In most nations military spending is disguised by the "Military-Industrial Complex." In democracies, most corporate bribery takes place under the guise of contributing to political campaign, whereby corporate media outlets market aspiring leaders, in exchange for future political favors. In democracies, campaign finance laws tend to mask transactions behind a wall of impenetrable legal jargon and bureaucratic procedures. Totalitarian Regimes, like Putin's Russia, do not attempt to mask widespread bribery, in fact, most Russian corporations seek to overtly benefit from Putin's deep pockets and transactional generosity, especially Russia's oil, gas and banking industries. These industries fully expect to benefit from Putin's ultimate annexation of Ukraine, steal its' natural resources,  and eventually, share in the rebuilding of Ukraine's urban infrastructure, which Putin has efficiently destroyed. In short, Vladimir Putin, is a multibillionaire who has mastered transactional leadership, in all its manifestations, Therefore he will be very difficult to non-violently remove from office.