Is the world becoming powerless in the face of cascading disasters, systemic crises, and growing chaos? Why do some leaders reshape the world—while others lead it toward destruction? What unites Steve Jobs with the biblical Moses? And on what foundations must leadership stand in an era defined by artificial intelligence and global disruption?
The world is approaching a moment of singularity. Global social tensions, climate catastrophe, the erosion of capitalism and democracy, the rapid advance of AI poised to surpass human capabilities, and the unprecedented concentration of power in Big Tech are converging simultaneously. Everything, everywhere, all at once. This convergence demands an effective response—now—if humanity is to secure a viable future.
Sławomir Lachowski—an economic visionary, architect of disruptive innovation in finance, and founder of mBank, one of Europe’s first fully fledged online banks, which fundamentally reshaped the banking landscape of Central and Eastern Europe—argues that such a response requires a new model of leadership: one that is uncompromising in its relevance to the present moment, yet deeply rooted in the enduring values that have shaped civilization. To distill this model, Lachowski draws on figures and narratives ranging from Achilles to Bill Gates, from biblical patriarchs to Demis Hassabis, from Homeric heroes to a woman fleeing war-torn Ukraine.
His conclusion is unambiguous. The world does not need leadership driven by populist promises or short-term gains. It needs leadership grounded in values—and in relentless coherence between values and actions. As a leader who has taken difficult decisions himself and observed other pivotal figures of our era at close range, Lachowski understands the essential difference between leadership and mere power. In this book, he shares that insight—offering a bold and compelling blueprint for leadership at a decisive turning point in history.
KEY INSIGHTS FROM THIS BOOK
You will understand the world at a turning point
Why the era we are entering is not simply another stage of progress, but a profound paradigm shift—technological, social, and moral.
Discover the true essence of leadership
Why the difference between power and leadership lies not in instruments or authority, but in the human being. Learn how leaders create trust, purpose, and a sense of community in times of uncertainty.
Master a values-based model of leadership and management
Excellence, Execution, Responsibility, Readiness, Engagement—five pillars of coherent leadership that integrate deep reflection with decisive action.
See how values translate into results
How ethics, authenticity, and consistency become drivers of sustainable success—in business, in organizations, and in life.
Learn to recognize false leaders
From incompetence to corruption—understand the mechanisms of leadership failure and how to safeguard integrity in a world full of temptation.
Find inspiration to act
From Achilles to Jobs, from Moses to Hassabis, from Warren Buffet to Yvon Chouinard, from stories of individuals who found their path amid chaos. And an invitation to become one of them.
OTHER BOOKS BY THE AUTHOR
TABLE OF CONTENTS
- On the edge of the future — between the peak of development and the abyss of destruction.
- Technology as a driving force shaping the trajectory of civilization.
- The First Industrial Revolution — technology accelerates the advance of civilization.
- The Second Industrial Revolution — the age of electricity and mass production.
- Universities and laboratories as centers of research and development.
- Moore’s Law and the rise of the personal computing era.
- The Internet — the foundational infrastructure of 21st-century civilization.
- The smartphone reshapes the world — and human behavior.
- On the road to singularity.
- Demography, the environment, and the cost of progress.
- From wilderness to overpopulation.
- Prosperity and destruction.
- A climate crisis of our own making.
- Leaders in the face of catastrophe.
- The unfulfilled promises of the global economy.
- Instead of the end of history — a new era of uncertainty.
- The return of primal existential fear.
- The economics of dominance: technology fuels monopolization.
- Poverty as an existential threat — and wealth as a moral test.
- Wealth and power in the New Russia.
- How much is too much?
- A world in crisis — a moment for visionary leadership and management.
- Where have all the leaders gone?
- The dichotomy of leadership.
- When the absence of competence becomes a threat.
- Leadership without restraint.
- Ethics as performance.
- Greed as a cardinal sin.
- A crisis of trust and the erosion of standards.
- From prophets to *The Prince*.
- *The Prince* and its successors.
- From values to action.
- Leadership in practice.
- Excellence. Unattainable—yet worth pursuing.
- Execution. The most critical task.
- Responsibility. The ultimate test of leadership.
- Readiness. The key to times of upheaval.
- Engagement. The energy that drives action.
- The Changing Business Paradigm: From Profit Maximization to Value Creation.
- Values in Corporate Life.
- Managing by Values.
- The mBank DROGA.
- Humility and perseverance in a continuous journey toward improvement.
- Effectiveness under conditions of uncertainty.
- Responsibility: a new dimension of ethics in business.
- Readiness in a world of constant change.
- Engagement for the common good.
STRATEGIC CONTEXT
WHY?
We are living in a time that is not merely an era of change, but a change of era. It may well be the most profound turning point in human history. Its outcome remains uncertain: it can become a source of progress and renewal, or just as easily lead to regression, destabilization—and, according to some, even to global catastrophe.
The good news, however, is that we still retain the ability to influence the direction of these changes—provided that we consciously choose a path of responsibility, cooperation, and wise leadership. From the moment the forces of nature ceased to be the sole drivers of civilizational development and were replaced by human agency, humanity assumed control not only over its own fate, but also over the future of the entire planet. I am convinced that only effective leadership and capable management across all spheres of life—political, social, and economic—can rise to these challenges. Leadership and management grounded in universal values, however, appear to me as the only viable path for navigating this time of profound transition.
It is not enough to respond to symptoms—what is required is an approach that reaches the roots of human action, placing moral principles, responsibility, and the common good at the forefront. In times of chaos, values become the compass, setting direction for both individuals and organizations. This book is personal in nature. It is grounded not only in the articulation of ideas, data-driven analysis, and critical examination of both well-known and lesser-known cases, but also in my own experience—successes as well as failures. I chose to write it with full awareness that I have lived and worked at an exceptional moment in history: a period of Poland’s dynamic development alongside transformative economic and technological shifts unfolding worldwide. Moreover, I had the privilege of delivering unique business initiatives that demanded not only vision, but also mature leadership and the highest standards of management. For this reason, I draw directly on personal experience, distilling lessons from practice. I also invoke examples of effective and responsible leadership and management that have been—and continue to be—a source of inspiration for me. I believe that it is through practical illustrations and authentic stories that the meaning of values—those that form the foundation of good and enduring change—can be conveyed most fully, and shared most effectively.
ON THE EDGE OF THE FUTURE - BETWEEN THE PEAK OF DEVELOPMENT AND THE ABYSS OF DESTRUCTION.
Technology has, since the dawn of history, been a driving force of civilizational development. Each successive technological breakthrough has opened new possibilities, while simultaneously introducing new risks—military, social, and cultural.
Human history is a continuous dialogue between invention and the consequences of its application. The pace of change over the past fifty years surpasses, in aggregate, all previous eras across the roughly (or merely—depending on perspective) 300,000-year history of humanity.
All indications suggest that the next two decades will be even more transformative—their impact on civilization may exceed the cumulative changes of the entire prior history of the Homo sapiens species.
The avalanche-like expansion of artificial intelligence is already exerting a profound impact on our everyday lives, social structures, and the functioning of the economy. What only recently was seen as a vision of the future is rapidly becoming reality—from the automation of work and personalized services, through new tools for communication and education, to breakthrough applications in medicine and data analytics. The frenetic, exponential pace of change carries enormous potential—creating opportunities for a better quality of life and for overcoming many of the constraints and deficits of contemporary civilization. Only a few decades ago, the idea of machines capable of independent thinking, learning, and decision-making belonged to the realm of science fiction.
Today, leaders of companies developing artificial intelligence—caught in the fever of technological competition and driven by the ambition to secure global primacy—outdo one another in predicting the imminent arrival of the so-called singularity: the moment when AI will surpass human cognitive capabilities. This opens unprecedented prospects for social and economic development, yet simultaneously creates apocalyptic risks that cast a long shadow over these optimistic visions. At the same time, many eminent scientists warn against naïve enthusiasm and call for the urgent establishment of robust systems of oversight, control, and accountability. Superintelligent artificial intelligence, if allowed to escape effective governance, could threaten social and political stability on an unprecedented scale. There is a real risk that AI systems, developed without sufficient caution, may be exploited—or may autonomously make decisions—at odds with human values. The notion of the singularity also raises a fundamental question: who will control this power—corporations, governments, or no one at all?
A failure to place values at the core of leadership may result in reaching the technological singularity (AGI) rapidly but without adequate control—potentially with dramatic consequences. In such a scenario, rather than reaping the benefits, the world could awaken to a state of crisis in which the pace of innovation outstrips the capacity of institutions to ensure security, fairness, and an ethical order.
The Planet at a Turning Point
The prophecy of the Old Testament, recorded in the Book of Genesis more than 2,500 years ago, has been fulfilled—humanity has populated nearly the entire planet, and in some regions has driven it into outright overpopulation. Over the course of just a few thousand years—particularly in the modern era—human beings, largely through the development of technology as a powerful instrument for transforming the world, have brought nature under their dominion in almost every respect.
As it turns out, the prevailing model of civilizational development has led us into a dead end—one that has produced a climate crisis which, over the long term, threatens the very foundations of human life.
The environmental crisis is therefore not an isolated phenomenon. On the contrary, it is deeply intertwined with demographic, economic, social, and political challenges, forming a complex web of global risks. Growing pressure on natural resources fuels migration, conflict, and destabilization, reinforcing a vicious cycle of problems confronting contemporary civilization.
In light of these facts, the time has come for profound reflection—but also for decisive action. Such action requires courage, determination, and the capacity for self-restraint, both at the individual and collective levels. Technical fixes alone are insufficient; what is needed is a fundamental rethinking of humanity’s relationship with the planet. This transformation will not occur spontaneously. It requires—let me emphasize this once again—a new quality of leadership and management, grounded in responsibility, long-term vision, and the ability to reconcile the interests of present generations with the well-being of those yet to come. Only leaders capable of looking beyond the horizon of immediate gains, ready to implement systemic change and inspire collective action, will be able to reverse current trends and set civilization on a new, sustainable trajectory of development. The social, political, and economic processes unfolding alongside accelerating climate change now form a complex, multi-layered reality. Within it collide national and global interests, short-term political calculations and long-term civilizational goals, the need for stability and the pressure for radical transformation. This multidimensional chaos not only hampers the implementation of effective solutions, but also deepens uncertainty, amplifies social anxiety, and destabilizes relations between states. In a world where the climate crisis overlaps with geopolitical conflict, economic instability, and the erosion of trust in institutions, a new type of leadership becomes essential—bold, far-sighted, capable of grasping the full scope of the challenge, integrating fragmented efforts, and shaping a coherent global strategy for action.
Climate change represents the most serious long-term challenge humanity has ever faced. Extreme weather events, rising sea levels, and environmental degradation are already triggering migration, resource conflicts, and the destabilization of entire regions. The climate crisis exposes one of the most fundamental weaknesses of contemporary leadership: the inability to take difficult and costly decisions in the name of future generations. Politicians operate within electoral cycles; corporations focus on quarterly financial results—yet the climate demands thinking in terms of decades. This disconnect may ultimately determine the survival of civilization itself.
Climate leadership today requires the courage to speak uncomfortable truths and to undertake unpopular but necessary actions. The deeper challenge, however, lies in the fact that the climate crisis is not a stand-alone problem—it is entangled with other threats that, until recently, appeared to belong to entirely separate domains.
Global Strain: Uncertainty, Anxiety, Inequality.
At the turn of the 20th and 21st centuries, it seemed that the world was finally moving toward a calmer future. The collapse of communism and the dissolution of the Soviet Union opened the path to European integration, and Francis Fukuyama proclaimed the “end of history”—the triumph of liberal democracy and the market economy.
It appeared that humanity was entering an era of stabilization, prosperity, and gradually diminishing inequality.
That vision, however, quickly proved illusory. Globalization, which was meant to connect nations and level the playing field, delivered not only dynamic economic growth but also new challenges: the concentration of wealth in the hands of a few, the dominance of transnational corporations, mounting pressure on labor markets, and widening social divides. Today, instead of the promised “end of history,” we are witnessing its acceleration. Rising geopolitical tensions, the climate crisis, large-scale migration, and the digital transformation of everyday life are making the world increasingly unpredictable.
We are living in an era that requires us to abandon linear thinking about history—as an orderly, predictable sequence of events. This is a time of turning points, instability, rising anxiety, and widening inequalities, which have become not only social and political challenges, but above all a moral one.
The COVID-19 pandemic exposed the fragility of our civilization. Within months, global supply chains were disrupted, economies faltered, and healthcare systems were pushed to the brink. It also demonstrated how unforeseen threats can paralyze the world and reveal vulnerabilities long ignored during extended periods of prosperity.
The war in Ukraine reminded Europe that armed conflict is not a relic of the past. Tensions in the Middle East once again underscore the global risk of conflicts capable of destabilizing the entire international order.
Social unrest, amplified by social media, has introduced a new dimension of destabilization. Digital platform algorithms reward extreme content, deepen polarization, and weaken fact-based communication. Disinformation has become a highly effective weapon, while the public sphere fragments into hostile “information bubbles” in which a shared understanding of reality gradually disappears.
Rising social and economic inequalities are not merely a moral concern—they pose a direct threat to political stability. As the gap between elites and ordinary citizens widens, societies lose cohesion and democracy loses legitimacy. Populism and extremism flourish on the frustration generated by systemic injustice.
THE FAÇADE OF ETHICS
In 2006, I completed the New York City Marathon alongside the legendary Lance Armstrong, a seven-time winner of the Tour de France, who broke the three-hour barrier in that race. The streets of New York were lined by 3.7 million spectators. Through years of relentless effort and extraordinary determination, Lance Armstrong built the image of a modern-day hero. He was held up as a role model in life, sport, and business—also because his greatest athletic achievements came after he had been diagnosed with cancer: testicular cancer with metastases to the lungs and brain.
He came close to death, but thanks to two surgeries and four cycles of debilitating chemotherapy, he overcame the disease and returned to elite competition. Eighteen months after his diagnosis, in July 1999, he entered the Tour de France—a race spanning more than 3,000 kilometers, encircling France along the mountain roads of the Alps and the Pyrenees, with grueling competition lasting three weeks. From that year onward, for seven consecutive years, he finished the Tour as its winner. In 2004, in a televised interview with Oprah Winfrey, Lance Armstrong confirmed that he had used performance-enhancing drugs in every available form—erythropoietin, testosterone, and blood transfusions—throughout nearly his entire career. Why?
He attracted a vast following of fervent supporters around the world, but also many critics who found it hard to believe that one could win repeatedly in such a demanding race without the aid of performance-enhancing drugs.
In 2006, the British newspaper The Sunday Times was ordered to pay him one million dollars in damages for allegedly defaming him by accusing him of doping. Armstrong himself repeatedly insisted that he had never used banned substances or methods to enhance physical performance in any form, while the US Postal team proclaimed a policy of “zero tolerance for doping” as the foundation of its ethical code.
When asked why—in an interview with Oprah Winfrey—he replied: “
Everyone was doing it at the time. It was impossible to win without doping. But there was nothing that others had access to that I did not. I didn’t feel that I was cheating. We were simply competing on the same level. I wasn’t afraid of being caught. Back then, testing was infrequent—especially outside races—or easy to avoid, and during races you were already clean.
Through this profoundly hypocritical stance, he also manipulated millions of people worldwide who believed he was winning because he worked harder and was willing to make greater sacrifices than others—not because he was using performance-enhancing drugs.
“It was one big lie that I repeated many times. The whole story was simply too good to be true,” Lance Armstrong admitted on Oprah Winfrey’s program.
Armstrong was stripped of all his victories, medals, and titles, and was additionally banned for life from participating in the Olympic Games and other official sporting events recognized by the International Olympic Committee. The organizers of the New York City Marathon also removed his name from the list of participants in the 2006 edition of the race.
CRISIS OF TRUST AND THE EROSION OF STANDARDS
Corruption represents one of the most widespread—and at the same time most serious—manifestations of bad leadership. According to the International Monetary Fund, the annual cost of bribery amounts to approximately $1.5–2 trillion, equivalent to around 2 percent of global GDP.
Corruption is typically associated with countries marked by economic instability or weak institutions—not with Germany, a nation widely regarded as a bastion of stability, the rule of law, and order. For years, Germany has ranked highly in Transparency International’s Corruption Perceptions Index, which measures perceived levels of corruption. In 2006, it placed among the world’s top ten least corrupt countries, outperforming many advanced economies.
The Siemens scandal revealed in 2006—implicating one of the world’s leading technology companies, spanning sectors from electrical engineering to infrastructure and energy—a brand that for more than 170 years had embodied German precision, innovation, and reliability—sent shockwaves around the globe.
Between 1994 and 2006, Siemens spent a total of €1.3 billion on bribes—a sum that makes this scandal one of the largest corruption cases in history. These practices covered more than 330 projects across multiple sectors, from telecommunications and energy to infrastructure, and resulted in over 4,200 illegal payments.
Corruption at Siemens was not the result of isolated incidents, but a coordinated, global system of bribery—designed to secure contracts worldwide in countries such as Greece, Nigeria, Argentina, and Russia.
Yet corruption is not limited to bribery alone; it also encompasses favoritism and the trading of influence. Appointing individuals on the basis of personal connections rather than merit undermines innovation and efficiency, raises labor costs, and diminishes quality. Over time, this leads to higher unemployment and a loss of economic competitiveness. The functioning of democracy and a free-market economy rests on the rule of law, respect for private property, rational economic decision-making, and on trust and moral commitments—such as integrity and fairness—that ensure equal treatment of market participants and the honoring of contracts. Corruption systematically erodes these foundations. It is not a marginal phenomenon, but a systemic one, spreading like a virus. The source of the disease is often the leader whose unethical conduct first infects the immediate circle—confidants, loyalists, and those who follow by example—and then permeates broader social and institutional structures.
THE MYSTIQUE OF LEADERSHIP AND THE RETURN TO VALUES
After years of analyzing leadership traits and competencies—traditionally regarded as the determinants of an effective leader—I have come to the conclusion that leadership begins and ends with values: good or bad. Values determine who we truly are in our family, social, and professional relationships, and consequently define us as leaders in different situations. Shaping one’s leadership style is therefore grounded in leadership by values.
It begins with identifying one’s personal values, acting consistently in accordance with them in both private and professional life, and clearly communicating this value system in situations that require assuming a leadership role. Such an approach creates a shared framework of understanding, enables the setting of objectives, and clarifies the methods for achieving them. Authentic leadership emerges from the recognition of one’s spiritual and professional values, which become the axis of collaboration in pursuing common goals. For this reason, authentic leadership does not stem from formal authority or positional power, but from the leader’s personal authority—rooted in professional competence, moral integrity, and ethical judgment.
The mystique of leadership does not imply anything mysterious or esoteric. It goes beyond a set of management techniques or a catalogue of competencies. It is an intangible yet decisive element that leads people to follow a leader not only out of obligation or self-interest, but also out of a sense of meaning, belonging, and shared values.
It can be understood as the space in which three dimensions of leadership converge:
the spiritual dimension, rooted in values, ethics, and the leader’s inner coherence; the emotional dimension—the capacity to build bonds, trust, and authentic connection with others; and the visionary dimension, which transcends day-to-day practice and gives broader context to everyday decisions and actions, elevating leadership beyond administration or management.
The “mystique of leadership” is the secret of a leader’s influence—something that cannot be fully reduced to textbook knowledge. It is a kind of aura: a synthesis of character, values, experience, and charisma that together build trust and inspire others to act. This is why, when we speak of the mystique of leadership, we are speaking of more than effectiveness—we are speaking of the ability to give meaning to collective effort, to offer hope in times of crisis, and to combine rationality with intuition and responsibility. It is precisely this “mystique” that distinguishes a leader from a manager—and allows leadership to be understood as one of the most important social phenomena of our time.
AUTHENTIC LEADERSHIP. FROM VALUES TO ACTION.
Leadership is often reduced to skills, competencies, and techniques. Experience suggests otherwise. In moments of real pressure, leadership rises—or collapses—on something more fundamental: values.
Not as slogans or declarations, but as principles lived consistently, shaping decisions, behavior, and accountability when it matters most.
This book is built around a canon of values that has guided my thinking and practice in leadership, business, and life over many years. Together, these values form a coherent framework: values as a path. Leadership is not a role to be claimed, but a journey to be taken—one defined by direction, discipline, and continuity of purpose.
The canon rests on five interdependent pillars:
#excellence;
#execution;
#responsibility;
#readiness;
#engagement.
Taken together, these values define leadership as a journey, not a destination. In times of volatility, values provide direction. They function as a compass when external conditions shift and familiar reference points disappear.
Each value carries weight on its own, but their true power lies in coherence. Leadership does not emerge from hierarchy or formal authority. It grows from personal credibility—earned through competence, integrity, and alignment between words and actions.
The reflections in this book are grounded in practice. Rather than abstract theory, I rely on case studies, a method long valued in executive education and business leadership. Real understanding comes from concrete situations: difficult decisions, moral trade-offs, and moments where values are put to the test. Many of the leaders presented here are unconventional, yet their actions illuminate what excellence, responsibility, readiness, and engagement look like under real pressure.
Through these examples, values cease to be abstractions. They become operational—visible in choices made, risks accepted, and consequences owned. This is leadership not as rhetoric, but as action. Not as image, but as substance.
EXCELLENCE. UNATTAINABLE, YET WORTH PURSUING.
Throughout history, there have been individuals whose pursuit of excellence—driven by relentless self-improvement, vision, and determination—has fundamentally altered the course of civilization. Demis Hassabis, the founder of DeepMind, unquestionably belongs to this group.
In 2010, at a time when almost no one took artificial intelligence seriously and its widespread application remained a vague aspiration—closer to science fiction than reality, sustained largely by a small circle of academics and science-fiction enthusiasts—he co-founded DeepMind together with his fellow University College London alumnus Shane Legg and his childhood friend Mustafa Suleyman, assuming the role of chief executive.
DeepMind articulated its mission with clarity: to build artificial general intelligence and to harness its potential to address humanity’s most pressing challenges—from medicine and education to climate change and renewable energy.
In October 2024, the scientific community was taken by surprise by the announcement that the Nobel Prize in Chemistry had been awarded to Demis Hassabis, John Jumper, and their DeepMind team for their groundbreaking work on AlphaFold. This marked a historic milestone for several reasons: it was the first time a Nobel Prize had been awarded for an achievement in artificial intelligence, and the first time in history that a computational system was formally recognized as a co-author of a transformative scientific discovery.
In his Nobel Lecture, entitled “Artificial Intelligence as a Scientific Catalyst: A Journey from Mind to the Discovery of Protein Structures,” Hassabis set out a vision in which AI becomes a “scientific partner”—a tool that not only accelerates existing research processes, but fundamentally transforms the way new knowledge is discovered:
“We stand at the threshold of a new scientific renaissance, where artificial intelligence will help us answer questions that once seemed beyond our reach. From protein structures to the foundations of quantum physics, from understanding the climate to combating disease—AI will be a catalyst for breakthroughs that are difficult for us to fully imagine today.”
In closing, he emphasized the importance of the responsible development of AI and the need for international cooperation to ensure that this powerful technology is used for the benefit of humanity. He invoked the idea of “scientific altruism” as a guiding principle for the development and deployment of artificial intelligence systems.
Among the many facets of Demis Hassabis’s personality and career, his leadership style stands out in particular, deeply rooted in values. An analysis of his public statements, business decisions, and approach to scientific research reveals that excellence lies at the very core of his leadership philosophy.
For Hassabis, excellence is not merely a technical standard or a business objective, but a comprehensive philosophy of life encompassing three essential dimensions: knowledge, practical skills, and morality. In numerous public appearances, he has stressed that true excellence requires balance among these three elements. His interdisciplinary education and relentless pursuit of new fields of inquiry reflect a deep conviction that learning is a lifelong process that should never cease.
“One thing is certain: we will have to keep learning throughout our entire lives and careers,” he remarked in one address. “The critical skill will be the ability to learn.”
This idea leads to an even broader reflection: in a world of accelerating technological change, the defining competence of the future becomes “learning how to learn”—the art of learning, adapting, and developing meta-skills that enable rapid knowledge acquisition, paradigm shifts, and movement across disciplines. Hassabis emphasizes that this is not merely about accumulating facts, but about recognizing patterns, transferring insights between domains, and creatively applying knowledge in new contexts.
The values that guide Hassabis extend beyond the organizational boundaries of DeepMind and shape his vision of the role of artificial intelligence in society. His consistent calls for international cooperation in governing AI development, his emphasis on ethical principles and responsibility, and his commitment to using AI to address global challenges all reflect a deep belief that technology should serve humanity. This approach is evident in DeepMind’s strategic decisions—such as making AlphaFold freely available to the global scientific community, rather than commercializing this breakthrough technology.
EXECUTION. THE MOST IMPORTANT TASK.
RESPONSIBILITY. THE ULTIMATE TEST.
READINESS. CRITICAL IN TIMES OF UPHEAVAL.
“You know, everyone here wants to give advice, but no one wants to assume shared responsibility,” said Tadeusz Mazowiecki, Prime Minister–designate of the first government of the Third Polish Republic, to Leszek Balcerowicz, to whom he offered the position of Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Finance.
“It is difficult for me to explain precisely why I said yes,” Balcerowicz later recalled. “I did not see it as a life adventure. I knew—although reality ultimately exceeded my expectations—what I was taking on. Perhaps it was that brief impression from my first visit to the Prime Minister that proved decisive: Mazowiecki’s barely concealed disappointment that yet another candidate preferred to advise rather than to assume responsibility.”
The threat of a complete economic collapse carried with it the risk of losing public trust in the newly formed, non-communist government—potentially halting the process of democratic transformation. Tadeusz Mazowiecki, an outstanding intellectual, was fully aware of this danger. “I believed we needed someone who— as I put it—would be my Erhard: someone capable of proposing a coherent strategy for leading the country out of economic misery, while remaining loyal and consistent.”
At the moment Balcerowicz received the offer to assume the position of Minister of Finance, he was cognitively prepared to meet the challenge—he possessed the knowledge, skills, and competencies required to act.
Expectations were enormous, and the pressure to succeed even greater—failure of the economic reforms could have undermined the hard-won achievements of Poland’s democratic political transition.
Balcerowicz had no doubts: he entered government in order to pull the Polish economy back from catastrophe and to introduce free-market capitalism.
Readiness is a concept that integrates cognitive, emotional, and practical mental dimensions of such situations. It encompasses both a state of preparation and a willingness to act. Cognitive readiness means possessing the knowledge, skills, and competencies necessary for action—not merely theoretical understanding, but also practical capabilities and competence, understood as the ability to apply theory effectively in concrete circumstances.
Balcerowicz led the work of the so-called Balcerowicz Group, which met regularly at the Institute for Economic Development of the Warsaw School of Economics (SGPiS). As its founder later recalled:
“We abandoned the idea of designing an improved version of socialism. And quite by accident, we completed our homework for the future—we developed a general strategy: what to aim for if Poland were a free country. Without this, I would never have accepted Tadeusz Mazowiecki’s offer at the end of August 1989.”
His practical skills and competencies—the ability to apply theory effectively in real-world conditions—formed the foundation of the success of Poland’s economic transformation.
Explaining the scope of the necessary changes, Balcerowicz declared before the Polish Parliament (Sejm) in 1989:
“The system we inherited from our predecessors cannot continue to exist. It has become a source of economic decay, disorganization, degradation of life, and the dehumanization of human relations. We must put an end to the false game in which people pretend to work and the state pretends to pay them.”
He justified the radicalism of the reforms—later labeled “shock therapy”—succinctly:
“It is better to undergo a short, painful therapy than to drag the illness on for years.”
Poland’s post-1989 economic transformation stands as one of the most compelling examples of successful systemic change in contemporary economic history.
Over the course of three decades, the country moved from a centrally planned economy of chronic shortages to a dynamic market economy that has steadily strengthened its position both in Europe and globally. A key measure of the effectiveness of Poland’s transition toward a free-market system is the share of employment in the private versus state sectors, as well as the contribution of private and state-owned enterprises to gross output. Within the first five years, Poland became a capitalist economy: the majority of the workforce was employed in the private sector, which generated nearly 60 percent of GDP.
Medium-term economic indicators confirmed the validity of Balcerowicz’s approach. Despite the fact that Poland’s reforms were among the most radical in the former communist bloc, the country experienced the smallest output decline among Central and Eastern European states during the transition. Poland was the first post-communist country to record economic growth following the initial recession. In the long run, Poland stands out as an exceptional economic success relative to other post-socialist countries in Central and Eastern Europe. Since 1989, the Polish economy has more than tripled in size—the strongest performance in the region. Slovakia, the second-fastest growing economy, merely doubled its GDP over the same period. Poland has also been the undisputed growth leader within the European Union over the past 35 years, with an average annual growth rate of 4.3 percent, compared with just 1.6 percent for the EU-27.
It is worth recalling that for the previous 600 years Poland had significantly lagged behind Western Europe in terms of economic development, measured by GDP per capita—reaching only 30–56 percent of Western levels. Yet within just three decades, the country achieved a remarkable leap: from 35.5 percent of the EU average to 76.4 percent of the EU average, and to 84.2 percent of Spain’s level and 82 percent of Italy’s. Never before in history had it even been plausible to speculate about when Poland might attain living standards comparable to those of countries such as Italy, Spain, or Germany.
Meanwhile, projections of GDP per capita growth measured by purchasing power parity (PPP) for Poland, Spain, Italy, and Germany for the period 2024–2035—assuming annual growth rates of 3 percent for Poland, 1.5 percent for Spain, 1 percent for Italy, and 0.5 percent for Germany—indicate that Poland will catch up with Italy as early as 2034, and with Spain the following year. In terms of PPP-adjusted income per capita, Poland could converge with Germany by 2042.
FROM PROFIT TO VALUES IN BUSINESS AND MANAGEMENT
Values matter—for individuals as well as for enterprises. For individuals, they constitute the foundation of a dignified life, a source of meaning and fulfillment, and a moral compass that guides sound choices. For organizations, values are a guarantor of resilience and a prerequisite for longevity: they set the direction of development, strengthen internal cohesion, and build trust with the wider environment.
Within companies, values also serve as a vital bridge: they attract talented people, shape an organizational culture conducive to collaboration and innovation, and support the development of capabilities while enabling strong financial performance. Crucially, these results remain aligned with the expectations of employees, stakeholders, and owners alike, creating a durable balance between economic effectiveness and social and ethical responsibility.
I am convinced that the same values prove decisive both in personal life and in business.
This claim may appear controversial, given the entrenched stereotype that morality and ethics apply to the private sphere, while the economy operates according to different, harsher rules. In the popular imagination, business is an arena of brutal competition, where survival and profit maximization dominate. It was precisely this belief—along with the dogma of shareholder primacy—that for decades passed as self-evident, so deeply ingrained that challenging it seemed naïve, or even dangerous.
It is also worth emphasizing that companies which have left a lasting mark on the history of management as benchmarks of excellence and innovation are distinguished by a clearly defined set of core values and an enduring sense of mission—the overarching purpose of their existence. It is precisely these values and this mission that remain intact over time, while strategies and operational practices adapt flexibly to evolving environmental conditions. Moreover, personal values such as integrity, reliability, professionalism, trust, honesty, development, passion, and effectiveness largely overlap with those that are critical to business success. This is no coincidence: visionary organizations build their foundations on principles that resonate with human nature and ethics. Conversely, values traditionally associated with business—such as innovation, modernity, and quality—are increasingly reflected in personal value systems, particularly in the era of digitalization and globalization.
Awareness of the fundamental importance of values for organizations was recognized by outstanding business leaders long ago. They were described in different ways—core values, shared values, belief systems, credos, or operating philosophies—but were invariably treated as a decisive factor of sustainable, long-term success. In their book “Built to Last: Successful Habits of Visionary Companies”, first published in 1994, James C. Collins and Jerry I. Porras presented the results of extensive research into companies that had stood the test of time.
In their conclusions, they went so far as to pose a fundamental question: can a company truly be considered good if it lacks clearly defined and appropriate values? Analyzing the histories of 18 companies recognized as visionary—including Walt Disney, Hewlett-Packard, 3M, Ford, IBM, and Sony—the authors demonstrated that the close relationship between corporate success and the values shared by employees is critical to sustained long-term growth.
More recent research confirms the findings advanced by Collins and Porras three decades ago. Companies characterized by a strong ethical culture and clearly articulated values achieve significantly superior business performance. Over a five-year horizon, they generated higher shareholder returns (by 7–12 percent), recorded on average 15 percent higher revenue growth over a seven-year period, and approximately 17 percent higher operating profit growth. In addition, over a three-year horizon, they achieved stock market performance that was on average 8–12 percent stronger than that of companies lacking a clearly defined value system.
VALUES IN ACTION: THE mBANK JOURNEY.
<
In August 2002, as mBank celebrated the first anniversary of its spectacular success, I wrote a letter to employees proposing the creation of a canon of values to guide us both in our professional work and in our private lives.
I was not planning a revolution—I was simply looking for a binding force that would keep the organization in a state of constant readiness along the long road toward lasting success. Intuition told me that this required acting beyond the framework of traditional management theories.
The process I initiated at mBank was an experiment with an uncertain outcome. At the time, I did not yet realize that I was participating in the birth of a new school of management—and that I would play the role of a student more than that of a teacher. I knew only that traditional methods would not suffice for an organization ambitious enough to change the world. I needed something more than procedures and metrics—I needed a shared language of values.
With the benefit of hindsight, I can see that the decision to create a Code of Values marked a turning point not only for mBank, but also for my own understanding of leadership.
Excellence, Execution, Responsibility, Readiness, and Engagement—became the compass that allowed us to navigate the turbulent waters of digital transformation. Above all, they demonstrated that managing by values is not a philosophical luxury; it is a practical necessity.
Many managers hold an unfounded prejudice that values are impractical and of little use in achieving strong business performance. The example of mBank demonstrates precisely the opposite—values directly support the delivery of above-average results.
The introduction of a values-based performance appraisal system grounded in the DROGA framework, and its integration with the financial incentive scheme, produced spectacular outcomes. Even after accounting for significant headcount growth during this period—from 3,200 to 4,800 employees—the increase in bonuses paid per employee was striking. Average bonuses amounted to:
- PLN 8,900 in 2004,
- PLN 20,200 in 2005,
- PLN 25,900 in 2006,
- PLN 32,110 in 2007.
In doing so, I fulfilled the promise made to mBank employees at the outset of the project: that success would be shared by all who contributed to it. This became a self-fulfilling prophecy—for employees and shareholders alike.
mBank’s profits increased from PLN 237 million in 2004 to PLN 338 million in 2005, PLN 576 million in 2006, and PLN 955 million in 2007. At the same time, the bank’s share price on the Warsaw Stock Exchange surged—from PLN 100 in November 2004 to PLN 500 in early 2008. This was accompanied by a more than fivefold increase in market capitalization, rising from PLN 2.44 billion in 2004 to PLN 12.24 billion in 2008.
RESPONSIBILITY: A NEW DIMENSION OF BUSINESS ETHICS.
Great companies are often the elongated shadow of their founder—an extension of his or her dreams and a reflection of deeply held values. The soul of a company is born in the heart of its creator—and this is precisely the case with Yvon Chouinard and Patagonia.
“I wanted to distance myself from those pale corpses in suits I kept seeing in airline magazine advertisements. If I was going to be a businessman, I intended to do it on my own terms,” Chouinard recalled.
Patagonia is more than just a company—it is a manifesto of dissent against the traditional values of capitalism.
It presents a new model of responsible enterprise, grounded in the conviction that the conventional economic system—built on perpetual growth and leading to environmental degradation—must be replaced. At the same time, Patagonia and its approximately 3,000 employees demonstrate to the world that operating in accordance with ethical principles and care for the planet is fully compatible with economic success. On the contrary, they show that doing the right things can be the very foundation of a healthy and profitable business.
Patagonia has functioned from its inception as a conscious experiment—an attempt to translate responsibility into everyday business practice. As Yvon Chouinard has repeatedly emphasized, the company was created to produce the highest-quality products that people genuinely need, and to take concrete actions required to halt irreversible environmental degradation and the potential collapse of our civilization.
Patagonia’s activities across all areas demonstrate that its alternative—often counter-conventional—approach to established business practices is effective both in terms of relationships with customers and the broader environment, as well as in delivering strong financial performance and value creation. Notably, Patagonia’s mission says nothing about profit maximization. Instead, the company defines its ultimate measure of success as “the amount of good the company has done over the course of the year” in addressing the environmental crisis and social relationships. Yet to lead corporate America by example, the company must remain profitable—and in Patagonia’s case, it has done so with remarkable consistency for many years.
“I didn’t know what to do with the company, because I never really wanted to own one,” Yvon Chouinard admitted after finalizing the landmark decision to transfer all Patagonia shares and future revenues to environmental causes. “Now I could die tomorrow, and the company would continue to do the right thing for the next fifty years—and I no longer need to be around.” That same day, an unequivocal statement appeared on the company’s official website, serving as the symbolic culmination of this decision:
“Earth is now our only shareholder.”
Until recently, responsibility was primarily understood as a personal stance—a character trait, a sign of maturity, a moral obligation toward oneself and one’s immediate circle. Today, however, in the face of global crises—climate change, technological disruption, social inequality, pandemics, and geopolitical tensions—responsibility becomes a collective, systemic, and intergenerational category. We live in an era in which decisions made by politicians, business leaders, and ordinary citizens alike have consequences that extend beyond national borders, time horizons, and generations. Responsibility no longer pertains only to what is “mine”; it increasingly concerns what is “ours.” The world we shape today will also be home to those yet to be born.
Responsibility in management and business has therefore assumed fundamental importance.
It ceases to be merely a moral attribute of an individual or organization and becomes a pillar of organizational culture and a principle structuring relationships—both interpersonal and those between a company, its environment, and future generations. In an era of rapid technological, social, and environmental upheaval, responsibility is no longer optional; it is a prerequisite for the legitimacy of management and leadership, and a guarantor of long-term success and social trust.
IT IS POSSIBLE!
The year is 2050. A quarter of a century has passed since human civilization reached a sharp inflection point in history. The world did not descend into chaos. On the contrary—it underwent an unprecedented turn. It rose to the existential challenges of an era of upheaval because it found an answer that neither populist political strategies, nor the market pragmatism of liberal theories, nor even the most sophisticated algorithms of artificial intelligence were able to provide.
The pivotal years 2020–2030 were a time of crisis—but also of the birth of a new paradigm. The decisive response proved to be leadership and management grounded in values. What had once been dismissed as an idealistic concept or a niche approach to leadership and management ceased to be so. It became a common practice, a global culture, an operating system for a new civilization. Today, in 2050, we can say with humility and hope: the world that chose the path of values avoided the materialization of the existential threats visible in 2025. It was then that a global movement of leaders, institutions, and communities emerged—one that rejected short-term thinking, national egoism, and technocratic determinism. In their place, it put values at the foundation of action. Today, in 2050, we can say with humility and hope: the turn toward a new model of values-based leadership and management made it possible to avert catastrophe.
A utopia? Yes, I have described a utopia—because I believe we need dreams and visions that reach beyond the horizon of our current capabilities. The vision I have outlined is not a dream of a perfect world, but a blueprint for a possible one. A world that can come into being if we find within ourselves the courage, determination, and consistency required to build it.
But is this truly nothing more than a utopia? As humanity, we now command resources unprecedented in history. We possess technologies that only a generation ago belonged to the realm of science fiction. We have knowledge of social, economic, and political mechanisms that enables us to shape reality consciously. And perhaps most importantly, we have awareness of our own capabilities. Even our democratic systems—imperfect as they are—continue to demonstrate a remarkable capacity for self-correction and adaptation, provided that leaders emerge who are capable of activating these mechanisms.
The problem, then, does not lie in a lack of resources or knowledge. It lies in the fact that we too often choose not to use them, excusing ourselves by pointing to the complexity of the challenges or the alleged powerlessness of individuals in the face of global conflicts and contradictions. This, however, is a false alternative. Between megalomania and helplessness there exists a space for a sober, illusion-free sense of agency.
We already know what kind of leadership we truly need. We know that effective management requires a long-term perspective; that durable solutions emerge from cooperation rather than confrontation; and that real power lies in unlocking the potential of others, not suppressing it. We also know that technology in itself is neither good nor bad—it is the values that guide its application that give it meaning and direction.
So can we really afford to indulge in the illusion that “nothing depends on us”?
On the contrary—very much depends on us, perhaps even everything. Every decision we make as voters, consumers, citizens, parents, managers, and leaders helps shape the future. Every choice of values we stand for, every example of leadership we set within our small and large communities, matters. It is from these everyday choices that the foundations of the world in which we—and future generations—will live are built.
For this reason, it may be worth looking to the future not so much with hope—which can sometimes sound like a pious wish—but with a clear-eyed conviction in our own agency. The future is not something that simply happens to us. It is something we create every day, through every decision, every act of leadership—large and small.
This calls for a form of leadership rooted in readiness for continuous learning—leadership that is effective, grounded in responsibility and engagement, and at the same time marked by the courage to make decisions that are not always easy, but are necessary. The courage in question is not the heroic gesture of an individual, but the daily practice of leaders capable of combining vision with action, reflection with decision, and values with pragmatism. This is the courage of true leaders, equal to the demands of times of profound transition.
