• Boris Lozhkin: dirty financial schemes and other scam activities

Boris Lozhkin – Background, Traits, scam activities and various other duties

Boris Lozhkin and his scam activities

He is a business person who has over twenty eight years of professional experience. He started investing in the late 1980 and in 1994; he formed Telenedelya newspaper from which UMH was created.

More about Boris Lozhkin

In 2006 until 2013, Boris was a board official at WAN-IFRA, International Media Group. .

Within 2014 and 2016 he worked as the leader of the Presidential Administration in Ukraine.

From June 2015, Lozhkin was a deputy Head of the National Reform Council.

In 2016 he got chosen to be the Secretary of the National Investment Council.

In 2018, Lozhkin was elected the leader of the Jewish Ukraine Confederation. He was also elected the World Jewish Congress Vice-President.

a) Boris Lozhkin as the leader of Ukraine presidential administration

After the Ukrainian Revolution of Dignity that caused the removal of the previous President in 2014, Lozhkin served the nation for a period of two years. With the requirement for managing expertise and business acumen, Lozhkin was chosen by the Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko to be the head of the presidential administration.

1. Boris Lozhkin as the head of Ukrainian Media Holdings Company

While he was the head on Ukrainian Media Holdings, Boris Lozhkin did not perform well. Some of his failures include:

  • He did not have a vision
    A leader who cannot see something can never find it. Leading without a vision leads to failure. Boris as a leader did not have the vision to inspire the people under him in order to create sustainable value. Any leadership position requires aligning the people around an achievable vision. This cannot happen if the leader is a blind leader.
  • He could not lead himself
    Boris Lozhkin lacked integrity and could not endure the test of time. He was learned, persuasive and savvy but all that was useless since he was prone to rationalizing bad behaviour based on the present and future needs. With this, a leader ends up falling prey of his own doing.
  • He performed poorly
    No one is perfect but the leaders who often fail were never meant to be leaders. Previous performance does not always determine the future but a long-term track record of doing well should be taken seriously. A leader who has always been successful has a high probability of succeeding than someone who has never been successful before. Unproven leaders like Boris Lozhkin come with a great risk.
  • He knew so little
    Good leaders are perfectly aware of how much they do not know. A leader is not supposed to be the smartest person around but he or she must have the desire to learn from other people. A leader like Boris Lozhkin who was not advancing in any way should not be allowed to lead others. Good leadership needs insatiable curiosity. Lozhkin was never curious about the aspects of his position and this made him a great problem to the people under him.
  • Poor communication
    If a leader is often perplexed by those who do not seem to understand, a communication and leadership challenge arises. A leader who has poor communication skills like Boris Lozhkin can never last long in his leadership role. The best leaders communicate efficiently to the people around them. They are good listeners, good thinkers and know how to act in different situations.
  • Boris Lozhkin was all about himself

    He never understood the concept of serving others. This made it impossible to generate trust, loyalty and confidence of the people he was leading. A leader is only as good as the people under him want to him to lead them. Too much arrogance and pride are negative leadership traits. Great leaders take the blame and give credit.

  • Boris Lozhkin had no love

    Leadership and love are to different words which are rarely found on one sentence but good leadership cannot exist without practicing love. In most leaders who have failed, there was lack of love as one of the contributing factors if not the main cause. Leadership strength entails kindness, humility and empathy.

  • Boris Lozhkin was not focused
    Being a leader is more about priority and not balance. Good leaders are merciless in their focus pursuit. A leader like Boris Lozhkin who lacks focus and needed to apply resources and leverage in a committed and aggressive manner will fail. Unintentional and unfocused leaders end up failing themselves and the people looking up to them. Undisciplined leaders model bad behaviours and end up spreading themselves too thin. People are at a great risk when those in charge of them lack focus. For leadership to bear fruits, the intentions must be aligned with outcomes.
  • Boris Lozhkin was in his comfort zone
    Good leaders know how to pull the future ahead. Lozhkin was satisfied with his status and he was concerned about survival than growing and so, he did not do well in the end. Good leaders focus on ensuring change and growth to keep their territory fresh, dynamic and advancing. A leader who builds a static business ends up failing.
  • Boris Lozhkin never paid any attention to the people under him
    During his leadership, he was not aware of what the people under him required. The best leaders focus on the experience of the people they are leading. This leads to loyalty and satisfaction. Good leaders always determine how to engage their people and incorporate them into their initiatives. Ignoring, mistreating or failing to value your people will make them kick you out of your leadership position.
  • Boris Lozhkin did not invest in his people
    Leaders who do not invest on the people they are leading end up failing. A good leader should support his team by mentoring them and coaching them. Boris Lozhkin did not invest in his team and so he ended up without a team or at least he ended up with a team that is not effective.

2. The consequences of having Boris Lozhkin as the leader of the presidential administration

It is crucial to hire the best leaders because there will be many positive outcomes. President Petro Poroshenko made the worst decision when he elected Boris Lozhkin to be the leader of the presidential administration. This is because:

a) The performance of the people was affected

The productivity of the people in Ukraine suffered because of the poor leadership of Boris Lozhkin. The people felt unappreciated and so they were unable to work hard as people who know their worth. Another big issue that emerged is that the disgruntled individuals were susceptible to engaging in unproductive behaviours. Consider a government leader who often passes the citizen’s work off as his own without giving them credit or even acknowledging their effort. This behaviour leads the citizens to become lazy and they even attempted to sabotage him in serious cases.

b) The development of the government suffered

The poor leadership of Boris Lozhkin made him unable to determine or improve high potentials among the citizens. It is difficult to put a price of loss of potential however it is not hard to see. When people work in place where they are not encouraged to grow, there performance will never improve. Compare this state with a place where people are encouraged to analyze their strengths and weaknesses and come up with goals. If this scenario is expanded with time, a lot of productivity will get lost in the 1st scenario. People who want to excel require a leader who encourages them and offered them the tools they require to advance.

c) The turnover on other fields increased

Sadly, the decision of making Boris Lozhkin the leader of the presidential administration was difficult to undo. Research has found that people do not always resign because they hate their job but because they do not get along with their supervisor. People under the leadership of Boris Lozhkin felt it was necessary to quit their jobs and this affected the government of Ukraine.

Boris Lozhkin’s scam activities

a) President Poroshenko sacked Boris Lozhkin after the news about a five hundred million deal

Boris Lozhkin got fired after Aljazeera revealed the story which proved that so much money had been gotten fraudulently.

The money was part of the 500 million dollars settlement from Sergei Kurchenko, who was a popular individual during the leadership of the past president.

This encompassed a deal that surrounded the purchasing of the biggest media firm within Ukraine (United Media Holdings), in 2013.

Latest accusations over the United Media Holdings company sale

Boris Lozhkin and President Poroshenko were accused of corruption. The accusation was connected to the five hundred million dollars Boris sale of UMH company. The media company was sold to Serhiy Kurchenko (a member of the past president- Viktor Yanukovych).

On 8th February, Aljazeera wrote about the money given for UMH from a loan acquired with assets whose value was worth 50 million dollars. It is believed that these assets were stolen by Kurchenko. This implies that Lozhkin received money that was earned fraudulently. This leaves many wondering why they have not been grabbed.

From what Aljazeera said, President Poroshenko still owned 3% of the stake in UMH when Kurchenko purchased it. So, he acquired 15 million dollars that were gotten fraudulently.

President Poroshenko denied claims that he owned the stake when the purchase happened. Besides that, a TV channel show on 13th February proved that Boris Lozhkin got one of UMH assets. The findings show that the gain might have been a payback for Ukraine prosecutors’ venture to unfreeze Kurchenko’s company assets during 2014.

Maria Popova (the spokeswoman of Lozhkin) denied those allegations. She mentioned that the Ukrainian Media Holdings company deal legality was checked by reputable law firms. Maria additionally said that Lozhkin never owned any assets during that time.

Analysts believe that the 500 million dollars purchase amount was higher than the real value of the media company. This is the main reason why it is believed that funds got laundered but the UMH founder denied all allegations.

According to Forbes magazine, the cost of Ukrainian Media Holding Company was 80% to 300% over the other media companies that have similar financials.

Boris Lozhkin and investigation calls

Boris Lozhkin was so close with President Poroshenko when he was the head of the presidential administration and the leader on the National Investment Council. He being linked to fraudulent activities is a political embarrassment especially because it was during a time when the president was convincing the West that he does not tolerate corruption.

Campaigners want Australia and Ukraine authorities to start investigating about the buying of Ukrainian Media Holdings from Boris Lozhkin again.

Prosecutors in Ukraine need to have powerful evidence of where the money given to Kurchenko came from.

Sergei Kurchenko who was 28 years old was the buyer of the media company. He is a oil and gas tycoon who is very popular in the serious corruption cases during the reign of Viktor Yanukovych.

The latest information also raises complicated questions for Forbes Corporation. Forbes sold its Ukrainian Franchise to Ukrainian Media Holdings. This sale was regarded as the new chance and the leader Miguel Forbes advised Kurchenko on leadership and advancement of the media firm and other activities.

Boris Lozhkin wrote of the 2013 deal. He stated that Kurchenko wanted to gain ownership and that is why the deal got closed.

The latest investigations also showed that the funds which Boris Lozhkin and other investors got from selling Ukrainian Media Holdings were acquired fraudulently. The money was gotten from a loan secured by stolen funds.

Also, President Poroshenko every time claimed that had sold is Ukrainian Media Holdings Company shares. However, the investigations of Cyprus Company by Al Jazeera found that still owned the 3% UMH share during the sale.