In March 2017, the son of Sberbank President German Gref Oleg left the appraisal and consulting company NEO-Center Artem Avetisyan, where he worked for eight years. He was not without work for a long time. Today Oleg Gref is the managing partner of the consulting company Brayne.

Brayne provides services for asset management, support of M&A transactions and PPP projects. A separate line of business - capital construction project management - is developing under the Green Development brand. According to Kontur.Focus, the founder of Green Development is Georgy Gusev, the former general director of the leasing company RTK-Leasing, co-owned by Sberbank.

Many top managers of NEO-Center joined the company together with Oleg Gref. Of the 12 people listed on the Brayne website, all worked at NEO-Center and many supported projects in one way or another connected with Sberbank. Among them are the construction of an industrial park in the special economic zone "Alabuga" (Sberbank is the creditor) and a plant at the Natalka deposit owned by the Polyus Gold company (Sberbank is the creditor of Polyus), the Sukhoi Superjet 100 program (aircraft are supplied by Sberbank Leasing) , development of the Krasnaya Polyana resort (Sberbank is a co-owner). NEO-Center refused to comment on how many people left the company along with Oleg Gref.

Sberbank is listed as one of Brayne's financial partners. “Sberbank, to one degree or another, participates in the economic life of most of the country, so Gref’s son will almost always have indirect contact with Sberbank when it comes to doing business in Russia,” says Ilya Shumanov, head of Transparency International Russia. He notes that traditionally, any participation of relatives of bank top management in transactions with the bank requires additional approval and bankers try to avoid such situations in order to avoid getting into ethical scandals. “Children of high-ranking government managers either choose a field where there is no obvious overlap with their parents, or they begin to build a career outside their home country,” explains Shumanov. “Russia in this regard is rather an exception to the general rule.”

Oleg Gref came to NEO-Center in 2009. He was offered to become the vice president of the company by the founder of NEO-Center, Artem Avetisyan. Two years after the arrival of Oleg Gref, NEO-Center earned 651 million rubles from appraisals and 900 million from consulting and took 1st place in the rating of appraisal companies by Expert RA. Sberbank was one of the company's main clients. A former employee of NEO-Center told Forbes that large volumes of transactions passed through NEO-Center, for example with mortgage clients of Sberbank.

Oleg Gref left NEO-Center in March 2017. A few months before his departure, PPF Management filed a lawsuit in New York against Sberbank. The claim is related to the loss of control over the Russian crushed stone mining enterprise Pavlovskgranit, which until 2009 belonged to Sergei Poimanov, and then was transferred to Sberbank for debts. PPF Management accused Sberbank (as well as NEO-Center, which assessed Pavlovskgranit) of raider takeover and demanded compensation of $750 million. But the New York court did not see signs of raiderism in the evidence of PPF Management, and Poimanov was recognized in July 2017 bankrupt in the USA.

Gref German Oskarovich went through a long and thorny path until he reached the financial Olympus. Now he is the chief manager of Sberbank. Gref was the head of famous holdings Yandex, Gazprom and Lukoil. For some time he served as Minister of Trade and Economy. He managed to introduce several conceptual ideas into the Russian economy - he created free economic zones and reforms of the taxation system.

Biography

G.O. was born. Gref February 8, 1964 in the northeast of Kazakhstan, in the village of Panfilovo. He appeared in a family of ethnic Germans exiled to the steppes of the country from Donbass back in early 1941, the reason for which was their nationality. They lived under harsh conditions of the commandant regime. In such an environment, German managed to grow up, retaining all his human qualities and doing many useful things for Russia.

Gref German

In the Gref family he was the youngest child. He has a sister Elena and a brother Evgeniy. German's parents - Emilia Filippovna and Oscar Fedorovich - are intelligent and educated people. The head of the family, Gref, worked for many years as an engineer, and his mother worked as an economist in the village council.

Childhood and youth

At the age of one and a half years, Herman lost his father, and his mother had to raise three children alone. She was helped by her grandmother, who taught the children such useful qualities. From an early age, the children in the family learned two languages ​​- Russian and German.

At school, the children were diligent students and never showed their bad side. Despite their lack of interest in science, they did not cause their mother any trouble, realizing that it was already difficult for her. Herman loved basketball and became the captain of the team at his school.

After school, Herman entered, but after a year he left his studies, which was the reason for joining the army. He served in the USSR Ministry of Internal Affairs, where he also committed actions that deserved the respect of his senior ranks. After demobilization, he managed to enter the State Law University in Omsk, Faculty of Law. Herman was a public figure, which became the reason for his political interest after graduation. Despite this, he remained working as a teacher.

At the age of 26, German Oskarovich entered graduate school in Leningrad. There he was noticed by his “godfather” in his political career - Anatoly Sobchak(former mayor of St. Petersburg). Thanks to him, Gref became a member of the St. Petersburg administration, where he met other politicians.

Career of German Gref in Leningrad

In 1991 year he became a legal consultant, and a year later he headed the agency of the Petrodvortsovo District Committee. After 2 years, he left this position, choosing the position of director of the department, responsible for the management of state property in St. Petersburg.

Gref and

At this time, the work of German Gref was severely criticized by opposition forces. It was he who was blamed for the failure of the housing and communal services reform. This caused the illegal privatization of city historical sites and caused a sharp increase in the cost of utility bills. In 1997 he became vice-governor and member of the board of directors of the Lenenergo joint-stock company.

German Gref in government agencies

After V.V. Putin became President of Russia, and the post of Minister of Economic Development was created for Gref. The main task of German Oskarovich was to conduct negotiations regarding the entry of the Russian Federation into the World Trade Organization. The principle in this was the observance of such conditions so that Russia does not lose its own benefits. This caused some difficulties and significantly delayed the deadlines. accession to the WTO.

WTO

Gref managed to successfully complete negotiations with world trading powers. In 2003, he became a laureate of the Darin Academy of Entrepreneurship and Business Award. In February 2004, German Oskarovich left his post voluntarily and resigned. After leaving the post of minister. In March of the same year, a new cabinet of ministers was already formed under the leadership of M. Fradkov. Herman was given his previous position, which confirmed his importance as a political figure.

German Gref and Sberbank

In 2007 Gref left the government. His post was taken Elvira. He was elected to the post of head of Sberbank. He holds this position to this day (06/18/2018).

In his new position, Gref managed to achieve enormous success:

• increasing the level of service;
• global expansion of the customer base;
• increase in the profit of a financial organization by more than 70%;
• making the bank a leader in Europe thanks to rebranding and the introduction of the so-called system of remote service channels.

The new president of the bank, after taking on a new position. It was received rather coldly by shareholders. They spoke out about the fact that Gref had destroyed the country with his course and intended to do the same with Sberbank. Despite this, German Oskarovich did not give up and decided to do everything possible to lift the country’s economy from its knees. He explained this by saying that it is typical perfectionist, calling this quality of his character a mental illness. In this regard, he tries to do everything as well as possible, even if no one needs it.

Gref G.O. started its activities as follows:

1. Completely restructured the issuance of loans.
2. Took measures to reduce the technical gap from private financial institutions.
3. He did everything possible to strengthen Sberbank’s position in deposits and loans.
4. He gave an order to change the mentality of the staff, which entailed huge queues at bank branches.

The first breakthrough was non-cash payments, which was achieved due to technological developments. The quality of retail products began to surpass most Western banks. Thanks to modern technologies, according to experts, Sberbank has a good base for development for 5-10 years ahead.

Among the significant achievements of German Gref, one should highlight the radical reform of issuing loans. This approach allowed us to grow our business without risks. Sberbank began to change along with the world market, and in some things even ahead of it. Personnel were strengthened using a system of constant retraining. Among the significant advantages, we should highlight the development of remote channels, which became the impetus for the formation of trends by the credit organization.

Personal life of German Gref

The first wife of German Oskarovich - Elena Velikanova. Gref met her at school. Lena herself chose Herman, and they began to be friends in the 5th grade. She was the most beautiful girl from the whole school, but despite this she did not respond to the advances of numerous fans. They got married and left for Omsk to enter the university immediately after school.

A year later they had a son, who was named Oleg. They couldn't stop looking at their firstborn. The first and true love did not last long, they soon broke up. They had problems in their relationship from the very beginning, because they were young and not yet ready for family life. Herman’s wife and he himself remain silent about the reasons for the divorce, as well as about the years spent together.

German Oskarovich did not remain a bachelor for long. In 2004, he began living with a new lover - Yana Golovina, who worked as a designer and was also divorced. They played a luxurious wedding in Peterhof. This caused gossip and negative reviews. The common people were amazed that an architectural monument, which is of great value for the country, was involved in the event.

Yana

After 2 years, she gave birth to German Oskarovich’s daughter, and in 2008 another one. Gref always surrounded his children with care, attention and love. Despite the fact that the head of the family was constantly busy, he found time to raise his offspring. He was always aware of their studies, victories and successes, and in case of failures he did everything possible to help. Despite his rather busy schedule, Gref tried to see his children as often as possible.

Today, German Oskarovich’s wife has plunged headlong into the field of education, forgetting about her past hobbies. Yana Vladimirovna managed to open an elite school where only selected children could study. She was paid about 50 thousand rubles.

Gref advocated the complete privatization of Sberbank

German Gref now

In 2015 G.O. Gref was elected to the position of head of Sberbank for a longer term - until 2019. After some time, he gave a critical assessment of the work of the government, drawing attention to the fact that the economic crisis was the result of the fact that the Cabinet of Ministers was slow to respond to changes taking place.

In 2015 German Gref managed to show his best side. He demonstrated his human qualities. He, as the head of Sberbank, was addressed to an open letter by the famous writer Samuel Lurie, who had cancer and was being treated in the USA. His message described an incident that occurred with the writer’s sister. Sberbank did not give her the pension due to Lurie, despite the provision of a power of attorney certified by the consul. Gref, in his response to Samuel Lurie, not only explained the situation, but also apologized for the misunderstanding that had occurred. By this act he earned everyone's respect.

German Gref sometimes speaks harshly about the people, but fairly, because they fully reflect reality. Not long ago, the chairman of the board and president of Sberbank called Russia a downshifter, implying that the country is a loser. - Vice Speaker of the State Duma, reacted negatively to this statement and suggested that German Oskarovich resign voluntarily.

Herman also made the following statement: “Once the people understand what is the basis of their personality, it will become very difficult to govern them.”. Regarding the modern Russian economy, he says that our country is losing the competition and the oil age is over. The only chance is the development of business, education and science.

German Gref about the population

To change the situation in the country, German Gref proposed including Russia in the technological revolution. To do this, it is necessary to change the Soviet era education model, which is still in effect today. It is with these changes that you need to start acting so that changes for the better begin.

German Gref achieved great success in the political sphere and beyond. In 2013, he entered the Forbes TOP 5 as the most expensive manager in Russia. German Oskarovich's annual income is approximately $15 million. Despite the fact that German is a former politician and the current head of Sberbank, he remains a real man and a person who loves his country, doing everything possible to improve its situation.

Gref was born in 1964 in the village of Panfilovo in northern Kazakhstan to a Jewish mother and a German father, expelled from the Donbass in 1941 (so the label “German-Jewish fascist” that arose during his reformation is correct). When he was one and a half years old, his father died, the boy was raised by his Jewish mother and grandmother. He studied averagely, with C's and B's, but was persistent and managed to enter MGIMO, which was then the main humanitarian university of a huge country (this was possible in the USSR), but was expelled after the first year. According to his official biography, the 17-year-old boy became a legal adviser to the district agricultural administration.

He served in the special forces of the internal troops, whose functions included escorting dangerous prisoners, searching for fugitives, and suppressing riots. How someone who served in the army without exams got into the workers' faculty of Omsk University and entered the Faculty of Law, where he became a Komsomol organizer and head of a student operational detachment. After graduating from high school in 1990, Gref entered graduate school at Leningrad State University, but did not defend his dissertation: it was no longer needed for a career in modern times.

Gref's scientific advisor turned out to be Sobchak, and in 1991 the graduate student became a legal adviser to the Committee for Economic Development and Property of the Administration of the Petrodvortsovo District of St. Petersburg, and in 1992 headed the Committee for Property Management of this district. In 1994, he became deputy chairman of the City Property Management Committee (KUGI) of the “northern capital” and managed all the city’s real estate.

After Yakovlev’s victory over Sobchak, Gref took the initiative and, as one of the ideologists of the housing and communal services reform, climbed to a new step on the career ladder, becoming the first deputy chairman of KUGI, although the liberal reform led to the usual results (rents doubled without improving service). After the murder of the head of KUGI Manevich, Gref took over his post, becoming vice-governor.

Numerous accusations against Gref of crimes characteristic of liberal reforms had no consequences; Thus, the case of the illegal transfer of the Sennaya Market in the center of St. Petersburg for a bribe was closed after the murder of the only witness.

Five days before the 1998 default, on the recommendation of Chubais, he was appointed First Deputy Minister of State Property of Russia.

After Primakov’s resignation, Gref reached a new level: he became a member of the board of state representatives at Rosgosstrakh and Transneft, the board of the Federal Securities Market Commission, the boards of directors of Aeroflot and Gazprom, and chairman of the board of directors of Sheremetyevo airport.

In December 1999, he headed the Center for Strategic Research, which Putin instructed to develop a strategy for 10 years. Titled reformers seemed to shy away from this honor as troublesome and unrelated to material benefits, but Gref jumped at the chance to come to the fore.

And just as the “500 Days” program brought Yavlinsky into politics, the 2010 strategy brought Gref into the government: in May 2000, he headed the Ministry of Economic Development and Trade created for him.

Lord of reforms

The CSR gathered the vast majority of qualified Russian experts, but their work was wasted.

An example is work on banking reform. Almost all the country's specialists presented reasoned proposals, which were discarded, and the text was written “from scratch” by one person who did not even know what types of banking licenses there are in Russia. The absurdity of the result caused a categorical protest from the leadership of the Central Bank, and this section was excluded from the strategy.

It was an undeveloped, incoherent, unstructured set of unreasonable demands. The summary attributed by Kommersant to Prime Minister Kasyanov, “The mountain gave birth to a mouse. It’s good that it wasn’t a cockroach,” was perceived as a soft and balanced assessment.

The government never approved it.

However, a number of its provisions were pushed through by liberals in the form of separate reforms, which caused enormous damage to Russia.

The key mechanism of the strategy is to stop the outflow of capital from the country by improving the investment climate, although with a strong outflow of capital such an improvement is impossible with liberal prescriptions (it is reminiscent of taking pills to treat dizziness caused by blood loss due to a ruptured artery). The investment climate can only be improved through government regulation measures, primarily the modernization of infrastructure, which contradicts the interests of global business and is therefore rejected by liberals.

Helpless babble about reducing capital outflow for unknown reasons served as a simple cover for the main and only well-developed tool for ensuring economic growth: cutting government spending by a quarter, primarily through social spending in the regions.

The state's refusal of social obligations, “social default” as the core of the strategy gave it the character of social genocide and made a liberal dictatorship its necessary condition.

The strategy required the abandonment of non-tariff regulation of foreign economic activity, which soon led to the destruction of the standardization system and the destruction of the product quality control system. The demand to join the WTO, of which Gref was the main lobbyist, was fulfilled - on completely colonial terms - and sharply slowed down the economy, replacing confident investment growth with a recession.

The promise to “remove obstacles to the bankruptcy of ineffective enterprises” resulted, along with the “de-bureaucratization” of the economy, the engine of which was also Gref, in the creation of ideal conditions for unpunished raiding, the rampantness of which destroyed the very idea of ​​property rights.

The “legalization of the export of capital” resulted in the abolition of currency regulation, which made Russia defenseless against fluctuations in the global market. How can one not remember the oligarch Bendukidze, for whom the main human right and criterion of democracy was the right to freely export a million dollars!

The reform of natural monopolies outlined in Gref's strategy was realized in the disaster of the electric power industry and the lesser-known disruption of railway transportation.

The housing and communal services reform led to a terrifying increase in tariffs while disorganizing the industry.

Labor relations reform has deprived workers of real opportunities to protect their inalienable rights.

The cuts to social assistance were implemented in the form of cannibalistic monetization of benefits, pension reform, and the destruction of education and health care.

In the first versions of the draft strategy, Gref directly pointed out the need to overcome the tendency to form a “welfare state.” The attempt to abolish the Constitution, which enshrines the social character of the state, failed: direct self-exposing formulations were removed from the text, but the ideology was implemented.

Finally, the judicial reform, as far as one can judge, created administrative control over the courts and led to the disintegration of the latter, essentially depriving Russians of access to justice.

Gref was the driving force behind almost all liberal reforms, both in his position and due to his personal preferences.

When creating the Ministry of Economic Development and Trade (MEDT), he tried to take on as many functions as possible in order to maximize his influence. As a result, it turned out to be a cumbersome monster, unmanageable due to the volume of its functions (only at the beginning there were 159 of them, and the number of departments exceeded 50).

The unmanageability of the Ministry of Economic Development and Trade was caused by the unification of heterogeneous, unrelated functions (for example, regulating foreign trade and ensuring northern supplies), as well as the unification of tasks, the implementation of which required different types of management organization. Their unification ensured organizational incompatibility of the corresponding control contours, permanent internal conflict and, as a consequence, loss of controllability. The Ministry of Economic Development and Trade was reminiscent of Kurchatov, who would have been tasked with making an atomic bomb in three years... provided he simultaneously worked as a traffic controller.

The inability to work was aggravated by the lack of professionalism, which became the hallmark of the “Grefdom”: the Minister of Economic Development himself was a lawyer, M. Dmitriev, who studied banks until 1997, was in charge of pension affairs, A. Sharonov, who was involved in social policy, was in charge of reforming natural monopolies, and A. Dvorkovich, who analyzed the budget.

This is probably no coincidence: the destructive nature of liberal reforms in Russia precludes their implementation by specialists.

The owner of the people's money

In 2007, Gref suddenly became head of Sberbank, leaving the government, following the example of Chubais, for a large state-owned company. He was probably bored with the apparatus struggle, and he wanted to become the absolute owner of a large structure that would provide him with legal wealth and not administrative, but socio-political influence.

Sberbank, which permeated the daily life of most Russians and had branches in all more or less significant settlements, corresponded to this goal no less than RAO UES of Russia.

The Sberbank reform caused numerous scandals; Thus, the rebranding, carried out in a crisis, not really justified and hardly noticed by anyone, cost 20 billion rubles.

Gref sharply increased the pay of Sberbank’s top management and in 2013 became the fifth most paid manager in Russia, according to Forbes.

With the most severe cuts in other costs, a significant part of the old employees were fired, and their place was taken by young people (probably agreeing to lower salaries), whose efforts, I remember, were not often supported by professional knowledge. The result, as far as one can judge, was a decline in the bank’s service and reputation, but also an increase in profits.

The employee who wrote on the social network “If you stick a Sberbank sign in an open field, she will immediately have a line of pensioners” was fired, but this joke seemed to clearly reflect the state of Sberbank during the reform.

The increase in fees for household payments, with the widespread introduction of payment at automatic machines and Internet banking and the closure of many branches, was intended to reduce costs. There was a feeling that Sberbank, earning most of its money from corporate clients and financial transactions, was striving, under the guise of talk about “customer focus,” to minimize face-to-face communication with the public, viewing it as nothing more than a source of costs to be reduced.

During the 2008-2009 crisis, Sberbank loans became fatal for a number of businessmen. A classic example is MAIR, from which Sberbank structures, as far as one can understand, demanded early repayment of the loan; the case ended with the destruction of the business, the elimination of a mass of jobs and the criminal prosecution of the creator of MAIR, Makushin, who was forced to flee the country. The degree of absurdity of the accusations is evidenced by Cyprus’ refusal to extradite him to Russia - the second in the entire history of relations between our countries.

As a result, Sberbank's profitability increased, but the attitude towards it, as far as one can judge, worsened. The situation was aggravated by stories about frequent “technical failures” in Sberbank’s payment machines and even in its Internet banking, leading to financial losses for clients. This may be due to the large volume of transactions - but I have never heard anything like this about other banks.

The memorable liberal initiative to corral all of Russia into 28 huge megacities, which reached the government, was apparently caused by Sberbank’s desire to cut costs. After all, the smaller the settlement, the lower the profitability of the Sberbank branch located there (in small settlements they can be unprofitable). But it is impossible to deprive the population of Sberbank due to its unique position. This means that for maximum efficiency of Sberbank, the entire population must be gathered into huge megacities.

Consideration of this idea discredited the government apparatus, but it was probably not born of evil liberal intent, but only of Gref’s desire to minimize Sberbank’s costs, without regard to anyone’s interests and values.

A man of liberal ideas

Gref has a reputation as a strong market man, even compared to Kudrin, giving the impression of a man not burdened with economic knowledge, which, of course, strengthens his liberal beliefs.

For example, when he took up the task of stimulating investment, he was surprised by both the lack of ready-made large investment projects (in 2006 they simply had nowhere to come from), and the fact that they needed at least a year to prepare.

And in July 2013, when corruption, monopolism, the Medvedev government’s refusal to develop and the colonial WTO rules were breaking the back of the Russian economy, when industrial production was declining, and the slowdown in GDP growth promised to turn into recession, Gref said: “Russia has one of the best in the world among all countries of macroeconomic situations."

According to those who know him, without an economic education, Gref does not like and cannot conduct a reasoned debate. Blind faith in the absolute intrinsic value of private property, the need for the state to withdraw from the economy, redundancy of social assistance to the population and intolerance to objections very successfully replace knowledge for him.

Gref is hot-tempered; Thus, at a government meeting, he demanded that the people who burned his effigy, who were protesting against the criminal pushing of Russia into the WTO on obviously enslaving conditions, should be severely punished for extremism. During a visit to Brussels, in front of his subordinates, he gave a beating to the head of the Russian delegation to the European Commission, Fradkov, which “backfired” on him in the latter’s premiership. True, stories about Gref’s promises to “hang” his subordinates with a rope are accompanied by ritual assurances of his politeness.

When Putin met with the Pope with him in 2003, some media called Gref a Protestant, while others called him a Catholic.

At the St. Petersburg Economic Forum in 2012, a completely innocent question suddenly provoked Gref into scandalous frankness, which revealed the categorical unacceptability of democracy not only for Russian reformers, but also for modern liberals in general.

“You are saying terrible things,” Gref replied. “You are proposing to transfer power into the hands of the population... As soon as people understand the basis of their “I” and self-identify, it will become extremely difficult to control them, it will become extremely difficult to manipulate. People do not want to be manipulated when they have knowledge. How to live, how to manage such a society, where everyone has equal access to information, everyone has the opportunity to judge directly, receive unprepared information through government-trained analysts, political scientists and huge media machines engaged in building and preserving (social) strata? “Your reasoning makes me a little scared; to be honest, it seems to me that you don’t quite understand what you’re saying.”

“Such large-scale changes cannot take place perfectly, but it’s good that the elephant (as Gref affectionately called Sberbank after his appointment. - Vedomosti) came to life,” says Ruben Vardanyan, the former owner of Troika Dialog, who sold the company to Sberbank, after which worked in it.

Gref for the people

Of course, the transformation of Sberbank would have been impossible without German Gref and the team he assembled, albeit not the first time, says Sergei Guriev, chief economist of the EBRD.

He is now probably one of the best financial CEOs in the world, because the return on capital that Sberbank shows is one of the highest, says Oleg Tinkov, co-owner of Tinkoff Bank.

Gref’s management style is far from all these principles of agile and turquoise corporations (complete freedom reigns, there are no clear job descriptions and strict KPIs. - Vedomosti) that he is so keen on - rather, it is a vertical structure, closed on the personality of Gref himself, there is no democracy , his subordinates are afraid to once again make any comments to him, one of the federal officials knows. At the lower levels, he undoubtedly managed to build a corporate culture, working mechanisms, he introduced a project approach - in this sense, Sberbank is far ahead of other banks, argues another official.

“Gref is very confident in his ideas, he defends them fanatically, but then he can admit that he was wrong and lose faith in them forever,” says an official who has known Gref for a long time. When he came to Sberbank, he was pestered by these lines of grandmothers, such disrespect for people, and he said from the very beginning how he would like to change this, he recalls.

“Gref once strongly scolded our team at a meeting, declaring our proposals fascist. And after a short period of time, he himself offered a job. Gref cuts from the shoulder, can say unpleasant things, and then changes his point of view, even if it may take time,” says the second official, an acquaintance of Gref.

“I feel comfortable working with Gref. We have a friendly relationship. We are probably quite similar in temperament: quite emotional, maybe even sometimes explosive,” says Kostin. If we take, for example, the situation with Mechel, he continues, then “as creditors we were definitely on the same side. It seems to me that in this situation we were able to achieve good results for both the company and the banks.”

The role of Gref’s personality is enormous; all changes began with him, Vardanyan notes: sometimes thanks to perseverance, sometimes through audacity and emotionality. Not everyone could receive such a credit of political trust, he points out, and, despite the fact that political weight plays an important role, Gref’s personal contribution to the history of changes at Sberbank is colossal.

“It was quite difficult to negotiate with him [Gref] [on the sale of Troika Dialog]; nevertheless, he is first and foremost a strategist and a visionary, and only secondarily a businessman. But if you come to an agreement, then there are no more problems,” says Vardanyan.

“In Russia, clients are divine”: this is what German Gref said

Anton Novoderezhkin / TASS

“We live in managerial chaos for very long periods of time. Then, when the problem is already upon us, we mobilize all conceivable and inconceivable resources and rush to solve the problem. In such a situation, no one counts either money or human lives - no resources. Everything is thrown into the furnace of the result, and in the end the problem is heroically solved” (interview with Forbes, 2016)

Dmitry Serebryakov / TASS

“We are all in the abstract for change. Let everything change around, let all the power change. But what if the changes affect you personally? For example, you will have to change your existing lifestyle and habits. Let’s say you’re used to getting up at 8.30 in the morning, “catch” something and go to work. And you will have to get up at 6.00 in the morning and start the morning with a 7 km cross-country race, and then go to work not by car, but by bicycle, for example. I'll see if you want these changes. Yes, you will say: leave me alone, you will agree to any changes, just not those that directly affect you" (Vedomosti, 2015)

Denis Grishkin / Vedomosti

“If you use the Russian management style from morning to evening in management, then it’s hard to demand satisfaction from employees and ask them to pass it on to clients” (interview

Denis Abramov / Vedomosti

“Even respected professors often say that my ideas about introducing regular management in public administration are not applicable in practice. I said at one meeting: don’t you think it looks funny when professors who have never worked a day in the civil service or in business sit and tell a person who spent 16 years in the civil service and eight in big business that Is this not applicable?! I worked in a municipality, worked in a large city, in a large state and was responsible for reforms in the country. And you tell me what applies and what doesn’t!” (Harvard Business Review interview, 2017)

Maxim Stulov / Vedomosti

“I worked in the government for eight years. It turns out to be an eight-year cycle - now I have already gone into an extra cycle. You know, fatigue depends on interest. There is a result - there is interest. We are an amazing place to work” (Harvard Business Review interview, 2017)

The best version of yourself

The hardest thing then was to hire talented people for the team, recalls Sberbank CFO Alexander Morozov. In 2007, the state bank was associated with bureaucracy, confirms Moody’s Vice President Olga Ulyanova, who in 2007 herself preferred an international rating agency to the state bank.

The changes began with a complete change of the management team, improvement of business processes, rebranding, Ulyanova lists. The transformation took place using the tactics of “small steps”, which allowed Sberbank to maintain its historically established unique competitive advantages. The new team, in her opinion, skillfully used an extensive network, national recognition of the brand, the image of a calm haven where one can wait out the storm, especially since the Central Bank and financial authorities were and remain ready to support the bank.

“The new team realized in time that the state bank, with its huge and relatively cheap passive base and its normal established credit process, is a goose that lays golden eggs. The main thing is not to deviate from this course into risky segments and transactions,” says Danilov.

True, of the 10 managers who came to Sberbank to work for Gref, only two remain - financial director Morozov and co-head of Sberbank CIB Alexander Bazarov.

“When selecting candidates for the highest level 10 years ago, we used a negative filter - there is a super goal and mission, if you are in doubt, we go to the next one,” recalls Ward Howell President Sergei Vorobiev. Only a third of top managers could not withstand the pace of change and the rigid corporate culture, he believes, a third left with a promotion, and the rest are evolving. And this is a good result for such a rate of change in a huge organization, he believes.

At Sberbank, Gref quickly realized that you can’t just go from point A to point B, the latter always eludes, continues Vorobiev. Gref and his employees have to live in a constantly changing world, he explains, and if, surprising the market, they manage to change technologically quickly, then the corporate culture does not always keep up with the changes. But this is logical: it is more difficult to change people’s behavior and habits.

“Gref correctly creates for employees a feeling of burning earth under their feet, a sense of urgency of changes, to which the team must respond more quickly every year,” states Vorobiev. “It’s especially hard for those who are closer to him, the top management: they live at the highest speeds, at the mouth of a volcano.”

In the strategy until 2020, Sberbank will write that it will strive to move from bureaucracy and hierarchy to team play, promised the deputy chairman of the board of the state bank, Yulia Chupina, in November at the Winning The Hearts management forum. Feedback from employees showed that the corporate culture lacks humanity, respect, openness and cooperation, Chupina noted, and Sberbank is ready to help them become the best version of themselves.

“There is a feeling that Sberbank is becoming the reincarnation of Uralsib from the time of Nikolai Tsvetkov,” says one of the former top managers of Sberbank. – This is quite a strong intrusion into the lives of employees. And of course, not everyone likes it, but it’s almost impossible to convince Gref.”

The leader’s task is to set the direction and manage to maneuver between threats and opportunities, reliability and changes, which in itself is a big test that forces a change in style, Vorobiev points out: “The ability to play well with the team, achieving greater efficiency and speed, constantly raising the bar, but also supporting you at every next step requires both effort and patience from all participants.”

Monopoly and risks

Gref’s team inherited the rich monopolistic heritage of Sberbank, but its market share has been growing all these years in all areas: lending, deposits, investment business. With the arrival of new managers, Sberbank increasingly influenced deposit rates, says one of the former employees of the state bank, and made good money from it: “Just calculate how much you can earn if, having a deposit base of 20 trillion rubles, you reduce the rate by only 1 percentage point."

Ulyanova considers the main factor in Sberbank’s successful history to be a balanced approach to risk taking: “Among all state-owned banks, Sberbank has the most balanced and diversified loan portfolio.” Sberbank's twenty largest borrowers in total make up about 1.5 of its Tier 1 capital, while other large state-owned banks - VTB, Gazprombank and Rosselkhozbank - have the same or a greater proportion of capital made up by their 10 largest borrowers. Diversification of credit risks allowed Sberbank to incur fewer credit losses during the crisis, Ulyanova is sure, to remain profitable and accumulate capital, which lays the foundation for technological transformations.

“It’s nice to talk about Sberbank; it’s a rare success story of this magnitude,” admits Ulyanova. Sberbank is a rare case: a large financial institution does not ask for money to replenish capital. In particular, unlike VTB and Rosselkhozbank, it did not participate in the additional capitalization program through OFZ.

The bank does a lot of project lending and, although loans issued for political reasons cannot be ruled out, they are insignificant from the point of view of the bank’s business, Ulyanova concludes.

The main challenge for a state-owned company is the ability to resist political temptations, for example, not to comply with proposals to issue loans to companies with political connections, Guriev is convinced: “As a member of the board of directors in 2008–2014, I can say that in the vast majority of cases Sberbank succeeded cope with".

“Success is determined, first of all, by the team, by the professionals who work in the bank, by the technologies that the bank uses,” says Kostin. – I would say this: relations with the shareholder, relations with the authorities, of course, are important, but they are not the determining and key factor of success. Because you can have great political resources and poor performance results.”

Europe, space, friendship and other failures

Expansion into Europe and Turkey began in 2012 - but ran into sanctions and negative rates from the European Central Bank and began to resemble traveling with a suitcase without a handle. Sberbank Europe AG (formerly Volksbank International) was bought by Sberbank for 505 million euros; it is represented in 10 countries of Central and Eastern Europe. Sberbank paid 2.8 billion euros for Turkish DenizBank. In Europe, geopolitical tensions and the specifics of the market with low rates and profitability played a role, and in Turkey, where DenizBank has good performance, the environment is very difficult and competitive, Danilov points out.

Sberbank - primarily due to its scale - does not always show flexibility, Zadornov points out: the reform of the organizational structure there has not been completed, the tasks set in Sberbank's headcount reduction strategies are not regularly fulfilled. Only in 2017 did Sber carry out a noticeable optimization of its staff.

While Sberbank has been able to standardize its work with small businesses and the public, so far it has not done so well with the titans of Russian business. One of the largest borrowers - according to bankers, this is $5-7 billion in debt - are businesses owned by the family of Mikhail Gutseriev. This is an unprecedented amount of risk that Sberbank has taken on one group of clients. Among the twenty largest borrowers of Sberbank, Fitch notes two related to the oil and gas sector and real estate, which owe 500 billion rubles, which is a similar $7 billion. Danilov refused to talk about these borrowers. Several bankers explained this situation by the good relations between Gutseriev and Gref.

Gref did not stand on ceremony with another large borrower, the main owner of the Eurocement Group, Filaret Galchev. He was not present at the Sberbank credit committee, where the restructuring of the company’s debts was discussed. Galchev was preparing to go into space and studied at the Cosmonaut Training Center. Gref, Vedomosti wrote in 2015, contacted the leadership of Roscosmos and asked to leave Galchev on Earth - “he has a lot of problems here.” Representatives of the businessman do not comment on the situation, but point out that Galchev did not fly by decision of the management of Roscosmos: test cosmonaut from Kazakhstan Aidyn Aimbetov went to the ISS instead of Sarah Brighton.

To Sberbank’s credit, it must be said that it never delays in admitting losses, Danilov points out, citing as an example the restructuring of Mechel’s debts by more than 80 billion rubles. Sberbank was the only creditor who created a 100% reserve for them and threatened Mechel with bankruptcy. VTB and Gazprombank took a softer position towards the company and its owner Igor Zyuzin, while Gref repeatedly said that things were heading towards bankruptcy.

System support

Ten years ago, no one could imagine how far Sberbank could go, says Guriev: it has become a leading Russian company not only in capitalization, but also in the quality of service and focus on innovation at an international level. But Guriev considers his main achievement to be the proof of the “existence theorem” of meritocracy: “The team managed to show that in Russia – as in other countries – it is possible to build a successful service business based on human capital and innovation. This is critically important for the Russian economy.”

Sberbank, even in the worst years, was the main profit generator of the banking system, but if before its share was 40–50%, then after the crisis it was 60–70%, Ulyanova points out. The crisis contributed to the deepening of the gap between strong and weak players, which Sberbank was able to effectively take advantage of: it relied on an even greater attraction of retail deposits and by the end of 2015 - much earlier than other banks and the system as a whole - it replaced expensive Central Bank money with deposits .

Before the last crisis, the banking sector provided a seventh of the profits in the Russian economy, now it is about a tenth, so the role of Sberbank is very large, Zadornov admits. Sberbank, in addition, sets trends in the technology market, which is important both for competitors and for companies from other sectors of the market, he is sure. The former owner of B&N Bank, Mikail Shishkhanov, admitted to Vedomosti that he simply looked at Sberbank and repeated after him.

Foundations instead of oligarchs

“It is known how we had some additional issues [people’s IPOs] - they were bought by oligarchs on instructions,” said banking business guru and owner of Vozrozhdenie Bank Dmitry Orlov in 2010, clearly referring to Sberbank. Among the shareholders then was the owner of Nafta-Moscow Suleiman Kerimov, Galchev, the founder of Inteko and the wife of the then mayor of Moscow Elena Baturina. The previous team of managers actively lent to businessmen when they bought Sberbank shares, fortunately they could be pledged to the bank. Gref stopped this practice. Later, Western funds became interested in investing in the bank - in 2017, non-residents owned 45.4% of the shares of the state bank. Only the Central Bank has a large share.

Western investors are buying and holding its shares despite sanctions. Such shareholders make decisions based on profits and dividend payments, and these indicators at Sberbank are very strong and are based on fundamental, not opportunistic factors, Ulyanova notes.

The question of what will happen to the bank when Gref is not there is discussed by Tinkov: “In a sense, investors are hostages of this success - if he leaves, the bank’s capitalization will decrease. But Apple went through this with Steven Jobs, and Google.”

Even after Gref leaves, the bank will continue to move by inertia - this aircraft carrier is equally difficult to transform and to sink, Vardanyan is sure.

Tinkov believes that Gref’s personal managerial resource prevails over politics: “We compete with them [Sberbank], and their decisions are subordinated to commerce, not politics.”

Margarita Papchenkova and Elena Mukhametshina participated in the preparation of the article

Gref, German

President and Chairman of the Board of Sberbank of Russia

President and Chairman of the Board of Sberbank of Russia since November 2007. Previously - Minister of Economic Development and Trade of the Russian Federation (2000-2007), First Deputy Minister of State Property of the Russian Federation (1998-2000), Vice-Governor - Chairman of the Committee for City Property Management of the Administration of St. Petersburg (1997-1998), Deputy Chairman - Director Department of Real Estate, First Deputy Chairman of the Committee for City Property Management of the Administration of St. Petersburg (1994-1997). Chairman of the Board of the Center for Strategic Research, member of the Board of Directors of NK OJSC Lukoil.

German Oskarovich Gref was born on February 8, 1964 in the village of Panfilovo, Pavlodar region of the Kazakh SSR, where his parents - ethnic Germans - were exiled in 1941 from the Donbass. According to legend, Gref’s ancestors settled in Russia less than a hundred years ago: in 1913, his grandfather came to St. Petersburg to teach Greek philosophy. According to other sources, his German ancestors moved to Russia and settled in St. Petersburg during the time of Peter the Great. The Gref family communicated in both Russian and German. According to media reports, Gref later took part in the return of exiled Germans to Russia - with his assistance, the entire German village of Strelna was built near St. Petersburg (a number of publications pointed to numerous violations of the law in connection with the implementation of this project).

After graduating from school, Gref entered the Faculty of International Economic Relations at MGIMO University of the USSR Ministry of Foreign Affairs, but after the first year he was expelled from the university. According to other sources, after school, Gref and his first wife Elena Velikanova entered Omsk State University, but failed the exams. According to the official biography, in 1981-1982 Gref worked as a legal consultant for the district agricultural administration of the Irtysh district of the Pavlodar region.

From 1982 to 1984, Gref served in the Armed Forces, in special forces units of the internal troops of the Ministry of Internal Affairs, stationed in the city of Chapaevsk, Kuibyshev (now Samara) region (military unit 3434). The media noted in 2005 that among members of the Russian government, Gref is almost the only one who completed military service in the army. Economist Mikhail Delyagin told reporters of the Sobesednik newspaper: “They say in the White House about Gref’s strong-willed qualities: well, whatever you want, the man went through prison special forces.” The publication indicated that Defense Ministry employees unofficially referred to Gref’s military specialty as a sniper. Referring to the words of veterans of the internal troops, the "Interlocutor" pointed out that in 1982-1984, service in these troops meant escorting prisoners, searching for fugitives, and suppressing prison riots. In November 2005, the Rossiyskaya Gazeta published information that Gref, together with the Commander-in-Chief of the Internal Troops of the Russian Ministry of Internal Affairs, Colonel General Nikolai Rogozhkin, visited the “semi-secret” special forces center for training internal troops personnel for operations in mountainous and wooded areas in Krasnodar edge .

According to a number of media reports, Gref, having completed military service without exams, was enrolled in the workers' faculty of Omsk State University. In 1984, Gref entered the Faculty of Law, where he became a Komsomol organizer and head of the student operational squad (other publications wrote that from 1984 to 1985 he studied at the preparatory department of the university). The dean of the Law Faculty of Omsk State University in those years was Sergei Baburin (in the future - Deputy Chairman of the State Duma of the Russian Federation). The media also published information about Gref’s classmates: in particular, it was alleged that the chairman of the St. Petersburg Property Management Committee, Igor Metelsky, is one of Gref’s student friends.

In 1990, Gref graduated from the university, according to some media reports, with honors, receiving a diploma in jurisprudence, after which he taught for some time at Omsk State University. In the same 1990, Gref moved to Leningrad, where, according to Sobesednik, on Baburin’s recommendation he entered graduate school. In 1993 (according to other sources - in 1994) he graduated from graduate school at the Faculty of Law of St. Petersburg State University. Other information was also published: a number of teachers claimed that Gref did not study in graduate school, while others reported that he studied, but did not defend his dissertation. The head of the press service of the Faculty of Law of St. Petersburg State University, Victoria Nasledova, when asked about Gref by Interlocutor journalists, answered: “There is no such person on the lists of defended graduate students.” The press called Gref’s supervisor in graduate school Anatoly Sobchak.

According to a number of media reports, in 1990 Gref met the future President of Russia Vladimir Putin - at Leningrad University, Putin, who returned from a business trip to Germany, worked as Sobchak’s deputy, with whom Gref was writing his dissertation. Most publications noted that in 1990, Putin was indeed Sobchak’s adviser, but as the chairman of the Leningrad City Council, while Sobchak worked at the university in the department of civil law before his election to the Leningrad City Council (Putin supervised the university through the KGB). According to other sources, Gref met Putin in 1991-1992, when he already held a post in the administration of the Petrodvortsovy district of St. Petersburg. A number of media outlets, citing some St. Petersburg officials, reported that subsequently, in 1996, Gref was one of the few who continued to communicate with Putin and even helped him after he lost his post as vice-mayor of St. Petersburg.

From 1991 to 1992, Gref was a legal consultant to the economic development and property committee of the administration of the Petrodvortsovy district of St. Petersburg, and from March 1992 to October 1994, he headed the property management committee of the same district. The media reported that Sobchak introduced him to the Peterhof administration. It was also indicated that the head of the administration of the Petrodvortsovo district at that time was Alexey Ignatenko (later he worked as the head of the city KUGI department and was a subordinate of Gref).

In October 1994, Gref was appointed director of the real estate department of the State Property Management Committee (Kugi) of St. Petersburg, deputy chairman of the committee, ,. Within the walls of the administration of St. Petersburg, German Gref met Alexei Kudrin, Dmitry Kozak, Dmitry Medvedev, who later occupied key positions in the country's leadership. According to a number of media reports, in February 1997, Gref became one of the “ideologists” of housing and communal reform in St. Petersburg. By decision of the Governor of St. Petersburg Vladimir Yakovlev, it was KUGI that was appointed the department responsible for carrying out the reform, during which there was a twofold increase in rent in the absence of any improvement in service. A number of publications indicated that Gref failed in reforming the St. Petersburg housing and communal services.

In July 1997, Gref became first deputy chairman of KUGI. On August 18, 1997, he was appointed acting chairman of the committee (on that day, the chairman of KUGI, Mikhail Manevich, was killed). Subsequently, a number of media outlets, without drawing a connection between Gref and this crime, wrote that the reasons for Manevich’s “sudden death” should be sought “in the mechanisms of St. Petersburg privatization.” On September 2, 1997, Gref became vice-governor - chairman of the KUGI of St. Petersburg. Governor Yakovlev offered him this post. At his first briefing as head of the St. Petersburg KUGI, Gref said that he considers himself “a man of Yakovlev, Chubais and Nemtsov at the same time.” Literaturnaya Gazeta wrote in 2001 that Gref is characterized by “political versatility,” which “can be very useful in terms of career growth” (as an example, the publication cited the fact that, despite his closeness with the first St. Petersburg mayor Sobchak, Gref worked well with the new governor Yakovlev). In 2005, the media, calling Gref “the champion of resignation rumors,” wrote that Gref retained the high posts of deputy minister and minister of economy at a time when the government was replaced by five prime ministers.

The media wrote that during his leadership of KUGI, Gref was accused of abuse of official position, in particular, of the illegal transfer of the Hay market for a bribe (the case was closed after the murder of the only witness), the illegal privatization of the Gorchakov Palace (the case was also closed). , however, these publications had no consequences. In 2000, the French newspaper Le Monde published information that from 1997 to 2000, Gref, together with Putin, were consultants and members of the advisory board of the German real estate company SPAG (St. Petersburg Immobilien und Beteiligungs AG), created on the initiative of the northern mayor's office. capital Cities. The mayor's office, according to the publication, was a co-owner of this enterprise. On May 13, 2000, the head of SPAG, lawyer and brother of Liechtenstein's Minister of Economy, Rudolf Ritter, was arrested in Vaduz on suspicion of money laundering and links to organized crime. A report by the German secret service BND alleged that Russian criminal elements were transferring funds through the Romanian bank IRB for the purpose of purchasing real estate in Russia. This, according to them, brought profit to Ritter, the main shareholder of SPAG (real estate was sold through this company). The Russian presidential administration denied any connection between Putin and SPAG. SPAG director Markus Rese, in turn, did not refute the fact that Gref and Putin worked for the company, but argued that it was an “unpaid position, a kind of patronage.”

In September 1997, Gref became a member of the board of directors of JSC Lenenergo. In January 1998, he was introduced to the board of the Ministry of State Property of the Russian Federation. In April 1998, Gref joined the board of directors of OJSC Sea Port of St. Petersburg, and in June of the same year, he joined the board of directors of OJSC Petersburg - Channel 5.

On August 12, 1998, Gref was appointed first deputy minister of state property of the Russian Federation. According to a number of media reports, Gref came to Moscow on the recommendation of Anatoly Chubais. By resolutions of the Government of the Russian Federation of December 30, 1998 and January 21, 1999, Gref was included in the Coordination Council on Economic Issues of Regional Policy of Russia and the board of representatives of the Russian Federation at Svyazinvest OJSC. On April 28, 1999, he was appointed head of the government commission to audit the activities of the Russian Federal Service for Insolvency and Financial Recovery (FSDN). At the same time, he joined the board of directors of Svyazinvest JSC.

On May 10, 1999, in accordance with the order of the Russian government, Gref joined the board of state representatives at the Russian State Insurance Company (Rosgosstrakh). On June 4 of the same year, he joined the board of the Federal Commission for the Securities Market (FCSM), where he worked until September 2000. On June 26, 1999, Gref was elected to the board of directors of Aeroflot - Russian International Airlines, and on August 26, as a representative of the state, he was included in the board of directors of Gazprom. In September 1999, Gref became a member of the board of state representatives at Transneft OJSC. In the same year, Gref was elected chairman of the board of directors of Sheremetyevo International Airport OJSC.

In December 1999, Gref was elected chairman of the supervisory board of the Center for Strategic Research Foundation. According to Delyagin’s memoirs, Gref was the only one who agreed to lead him - “the place is not a good one, they don’t give bribes there.” A number of media outlets wrote that the country’s development program for the coming years, which was prepared by the TsSR headed by Gref, “outlined the main vector of development of the country’s economy - in the direction of its further liberalization.” Other publications, on the contrary, noted that everyone forgot about the “Gref program” immediately after its adoption. In addition, during the same period, Gref became part of Putin’s election headquarters and was among his authorized representatives on financial issues.

In 2001, Gref headed the commission for holding auctions for the sale of industrial quotas for catching (extraction) of aquatic biological resources, and also became a member of the commission on tariff regulation in federal railway transport. In January 2001, Gref was recommended for the post of chairman of the board of directors of Project Privatization Company OJSC, created by the Russian Federal Property Fund and the Ministry of Property Relations of the Russian Federation for the sale of 50 million shares (6.13 percent) of Lukoil OJSC on international stock markets. In April 2001, Gref was appointed as the government's official representative when the chambers of the Federal Assembly considered the draft Land Code. On April 28, 2001, Gref was appointed as a representative of the Russian Federation to vote at a meeting of shareholders at OAO Gazprom and was re-elected to the board of directors of RAO UES of Russia. In May 2001, Gref was appointed deputy chairman of the Russian Government Commission for coordinating the activities of federal executive authorities and state authorities of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation on the implementation of production sharing agreements and was re-elected to the board of directors of Aeroflot-RMA OJSC (since June 2001 - OJSC "Aeroflot - Russian Airlines"). In August 2001, he was also again elected chairman of the board of directors of Sheremetyevo International Airport OJSC. In August 2001, Gref became a member of the government commission on structural reform of railway transport.

In January 2002, Gref became deputy chairman of the Russian Government Commission on Electric Power Industry Reform and joined the board of directors of JSC Federal Grid Company of the Unified Energy System (FGC UES). In 2002, Gref opposed plans to switch to 100 percent payment for housing and communal services by the population. He called for “to stop scaring the population with 100 percent payment,” since due to the plight of the majority of citizens, this task is “unnecessary and unrealizable.”

On October 21, 2003, Gref was elected chairman of the assessment committee created on the board of directors of Gazprom. In its report, RIA Novosti noted that the committee’s competence includes analysis and preparation of proposals to improve the assessment of the value of the property of Gazprom and its subsidiaries, conclusions on the feasibility of transactions with property, as well as recommendations for voting of representatives of the OJSC in the management bodies of subsidiaries and affiliates companies Subsequently, Gref was re-elected to this post several times.

On February 24, 2004, when the president dismissed the Kasyanov government, Gref became the acting minister of economic development and trade of the Russian Federation: Putin signed a decree “On the Government of the Russian Federation,” according to which the government of the Russian Federation was instructed to fulfill its duties until the formation of a new cabinet of ministers. On March 9, 2004, Gref was again appointed Minister of Economic Development and Trade of the Russian Federation, and Mikhail Fradkov became Chairman of the Government of the Russian Federation. Izvestia wrote that by that time there was already a long-standing and mutual hostility between them. According to the publication, it originated in 2000, when the Ministry of Trade headed by Fradkov was abolished and transferred to the Ministry of Economic Development and Trade. During the period of Fradkov’s work in the Security Council and the tax police, his relations with the head of the Ministry of Economic Development and Trade were also quite tense, but without aggravation. The most serious clash between them occurred in the second half of 2003 during one of Gref’s visits to Brussels, where Fradkov was Russia’s special representative to the EU. According to eyewitnesses, Gref then sharply reprimanded Fradkov for “bad work with the EU” in front of his subordinates. According to other sources, two high-ranking officials at Brussels airport began shouting at each other, without paying attention to witnesses. In 2005, Profile wrote that the ideological incompatibility of Fradkov and Gref (one is a Soviet bureaucrat, the other a convinced “marketeer”), aggravated by personal hostility, led to the fact that not a single government meeting was complete without a spat between the prime minister and the minister of economics . But, according to the publication, over the years the situation has changed, and the working relationship between them has become completely different than at the first stage.

According to media reports, Gref has repeatedly opposed the monopolization of the oil and gas sector of the economy. In an interview with the Kommersant newspaper in January 2005, Gref said that the state should transfer “any profit-generating activity into private hands,” and that it itself “should concentrate efforts on creating understandable rules of the game that are strictly followed by everyone.” He called the direct presence of the state in the oil sector “unjustified.” In particular, Gref was opposed to the nationalization of Yuganskneftegaz, a subsidiary of the Yukos Oil Company, but subsequently publicly approved the deal to acquire it. According to media reports, Gref changed his mind because the government decree obligated state representatives in joint-stock companies to vote in accordance with the directives and powers of attorney of the Ministry of Property of the Russian Federation.

Gref took part in the fate of the state company OJSC NK Rosneft, including in organizing the initial public offering of ordinary shares (IPO) among Russian and international investors in Russia and the UK in June 2006. At the same time, the head of the Ministry of Economic Development and Trade emphasized that more 70 percent of Rosneft shares will remain with the state.

Gref paid great attention to the Russian Regional Jet (RRJ) program, a joint project of Sukhoi Civil Aircraft, the Ilyushin Aviation Complex and Boeing. The goal of the program was to create an aircraft that would meet the existing and future requirements of the Russian and international markets. During a press conference on November 2, 2005, Gref called this project one of the priorities for Russia and promised that the obligations of the Russian side would be fulfilled on time. According to him, the state was supposed to invest 8.6 billion rubles in the project. It was assumed that six aircraft should be produced by the end of 2007, and their serial production should begin in 2008.

In November 2005, Gref headed a commission that was involved in forming a list of projects applying for money from the Investment Fund of the Russian Federation. The list of investment proposals to the government included projects for the construction of a complex of oil refineries in Tatarstan and a project for the development of the Lower Angara region, as well as a number of projects for the development of the country’s transport infrastructure: the construction of the Western High-Speed ​​Diameter in St. Petersburg, a section of the Moscow-St. Petersburg toll highway, a new exit the Minsk highway on the Moscow Ring Road and the railway to mineral deposits in the Chita region, as well as the construction of the Orlovsky tunnel under the Neva. It was planned to allocate 164 billion rubles for the implementation of these projects.

On July 27, 2006, Gref made a statement on the transfer of authority to the Federal Tax Service (FTS) to maintain a unified state automated information system for accounting for alcoholic beverages. He made this statement after a group of members of the Public Chamber addressed an open letter to the head of government, Mikhail Fradkov. In the letter, representatives of the Public Chamber asked the Prime Minister to deal with violations of the production and supply schedule of alcoholic beverages that arose due to a failure in the operation of the Unified State Automated Information System (USAIS), the development and maintenance of which was carried out by FSUE Atlas under the FSB of Russia.

Gref was a supporter of Russia's early entry into the World Trade Organization (WTO) and has repeatedly stated that Russia could be admitted to the WTO by 2007. After representatives from Moscow and Washington again failed to agree on this issue during the G8 summit held in July 2006 in St. Petersburg, Gref sent a letter to US Trade Representative Susan Schwab. It indicated that in the event of further failure of negotiations on accession to the WTO, Russia will be forced to reconsider agreements on the import of meat from the United States, according to which quotas for the supply of poultry, beef and pork from this country were increased.

On June 26, 2006, Gref proposed to the board of directors of RAO UES of Russia to work on the idea of ​​creating a Power Engineering Center on the basis of the Power Machines (SM) concern. OJSC Power Machines, whose turnover in 2004 amounted to 639 million US dollars, was called by the media the leading Russian manufacturer of power equipment. Previously, the German concern Siemens expressed a desire to buy the OJSC, but the Russian Federal Antimonopoly Service (FAS) denied the right to purchase it under the pretext that the company carries out, among other things, military orders. Only after RAO UES of Russia acquired a controlling stake in Power Machines did Siemens receive a blocking stake in the enterprise. According to media reports, by the end of August 2006, the energy holding directly owned 22.43 percent of the company's shares and about another 30 percent was in trust management of RAO; 2.5 percent of the shares were concentrated under the jurisdiction of the St. Petersburg Generating Company. Analysts saw Gref's proposal as an attempt to convince the management of RAO to take Power Machines under its full control. The board of the energy holding, as stated in the issued communiqué, accepted the proposal of the head of the Ministry of Economic Development and Trade for consideration.

In July-August 2006, Gref's name was mentioned in the press in connection with the process of approving the draft budget for 2007. The submission of the draft document for consideration by the government was postponed, as Gref’s department delayed the transfer of an updated forecast of government spending to the Ministry of Finance.

In December 2006, the Ministry of Economic Development approved the creation of special economic zones (SEZ) of a tourist type. Their residents will have to receive an income tax benefit (20 percent instead of 24 percent), will be able to avoid paying property and land taxes for five years, and the unified social tax will be paid at a rate of 14 percent instead of 26 percent (but only from annual salaries up to 280,000 rubles). In the 2007 budget, 1.1 billion rubles were allocated for the creation of tourist zone infrastructure, so it was planned to create two or three, maximum five SEZs of this type. After the meeting of the competition commission at the end of October, seven regions scored the most points: Altai Territory, Gorny Altai, Buryatia, Irkutsk Region, Krasnodar and Stavropol Territories, as well as the Kaliningrad Region. “It’s a difficult choice, you can’t throw anyone out,” Gref said at the decisive meeting of the commission and offered to support all applications. The commission agreed with him.

Describing Gref's personality, the media wrote that he has a reputation as a strong market leader and liberal who is ready to implement unpopular reforms. He, according to a number of publications, believes in his ability to change Russia for the better. At the same time, it was noted that Gref lacks the depth and consistency of economic knowledge (he does not have an economic education). He believes in the absolute intrinsic value of private property and the need for the state to withdraw as much as possible from the economy, and even state social programs, according to a number of publications, are an unnecessary burden in the eyes of the Minister of Economic Development. Gref does not accept anything that contradicts these principles, and it is absolutely impossible to convince him, since he does not like and cannot conduct a reasoned argument (it was even suggested that this was one of the main reasons for his hostility towards the former presidential adviser on economic issues Andrei Illarionov, known for his love of discussions).

The media associated Gref's weak economic preparation with the opinion expressed by a number of senior officials, according to which Gref allows Finance Minister Kudrin to “play on his own field.” As a result, departments that should balance each other are unable to work together. Speaking about the rivalry between Gref and Kudrin, a number of publications mentioned the supposed advantages of the Minister of Finance over the head of the Ministry of Economic Development and Trade. According to them, Gref’s personal services to Putin are more modest than those of Kudrin, who actively helped the future president find a job in Moscow after he left St. Petersburg in 1996. The media also wrote about alleged mutual hostility between the ministers. However, the FeldPochta newspaper published the words of Gref himself, refuting this opinion: “We can argue and conflict as much as we like, but in difficult times we are ready to come to each other’s aid.” It is known that in 2004 Kudrin was among those invited to Gref’s wedding.

In January 2006, Fradkov signed the Russian development program for 2006-2008. Vedomosti called it "an excellent example of a compromise" between the prime minister and his subordinates - Gref and Kudrin. The signing of the program, according to the publication, was hampered by disagreements over the clause on doubling GDP in 10 years. Throughout 2005, Gref’s department introduced various revised versions of the medium-term program, but doubling GDP did not work out, despite the planned ultra-high oil prices. As a result, only the phrase remained in the program that the program should ensure GDP growth doubled in 10 years, but without indicating which years and without economic calculations. In exchange for this, Kudrin and Gref agreed to reduce the value added tax (VAT) rate to 13 percent, which Fradkov insisted on for more than a year, but also without specifying the timing of the introduction of this rate. In this regard, political scientist Alexei Makarkin noted that “Fradkov clearly does not have enough strength to push through decisions, there are too many centers of gravity in the office,” since “both Kudrin and Gref have direct access to the president.”

It was noted that Gref is absolutely intolerant of the slightest signs of corruption in his circle (allegedly his secretaries are afraid to take even a box of chocolates as a gift). In 2001, Literaturnaya Gazeta expressed the opinion that Gref clearly sees that the root of evil in Russia lies in corrupt officials. According to the publication, ninety percent of his efforts are aimed at combating them. At the same time, the newspaper noted, Gref’s sobriety in his assessment of Russian realities is at times strikingly combined with naivety: for example, he allegedly believes that if the authorities set an example of honesty and transparency, then the bureaucracy at lower levels will follow this example.

The press published statements about Gref as a proud, hot-tempered and not always restrained person. He reacts sharply to criticism and once at a government meeting he was indignant for a long time and demanded that the extremists who publicly burned his effigy be severely punished. His working vocabulary is also figurative and emotional (the media published stories from Gref’s colleagues that expressions such as “for such work you should be hung on a rope”, “lowered down the stairs” are commonplace for him). At the same time, the press emphasized that Gref always apologizes if he was wrong, and in ordinary situations he is quite polite and correct.

Putin, according to some reports, appreciates the simplicity, aphorism, and “unscientific” nature with which Gref sets out his views on the country’s development. It was even suggested that Putin’s expressions “wet in the toilet” and “the ears of a dead donkey” were born precisely “during meetings between the head of state and the minister of economics.” A number of media outlets mentioned that with other high-ranking officials, Gref very often uses a win-win argument: “I will go to Putin, and he will support me!” - despite the fact that the president does not like to interfere in conflicts between his associates.

In 2003, the television "News of the Week", calling Gref the only Russian Catholic minister, reported that he accompanied President Putin during his visit to the Vatican and appeared before Pope John Paul II. “Arguments and Facts,” in turn, also talked about the visit to the Vatican, but clarified that Gref adheres to the Protestant faith, which denies the very institution of the papacy, which, in their opinion, gave some piquancy to the situation.

In May 2006, in an interview with NTV channel, Gref said that he did not intend to work as an official all his life. Comparing civil service with service in the army, he noted that it is associated “with a huge number of restrictions, including personal restrictions.” “But this cannot last a lifetime,” he emphasized. In December 2006, in an interview with NTV, he again spoke about his resignation. Having said that the work of the Minister of Economy is extremely difficult, he said: “I believe that there are a large number of worthy people in the country who will cope with these responsibilities no worse than me.” He also mentioned the need for rotation in the government, noting that he “will need to be ‘changed’ in the near future, like other ... members of the government.” About his plans for the future, Gref said: “I would like to go into business somewhere, I don’t know where else, I need to change the field of activity...”.

On September 12, 2007, Gref became the acting Minister of Economic Development and Trade of the Russian Federation due to the fact that the Chairman of the Russian Government, Mikhail Fradkov, asked President Putin to resign his entire cabinet. The prime minister justified his request by the desire to give the president freedom of personnel decisions on the eve of parliamentary and presidential elections. Putin accepted the resignation, asking the prime minister and other ministers to temporarily perform their duties. Fradkov's successor as prime minister was Viktor Zubkov, whose appointment was approved by the State Duma on September 14. On September 24, a new government was announced: Gref was replaced by his former first deputy, Elvira Nabiullina.

On October 16, 2007, the Supervisory Board of Sberbank of Russia recommended Gref's candidacy for election as president and chairman of the board of the bank. A few days earlier, the former head of Sberbank Andrey Kazmin was recommended by Zubkov for the post of head of the Federal State Unitary Enterprise Russian Post. At the extraordinary general meeting of shareholders of Sberbank of Russia held on November 28, 2007, a decision was made to early terminate Kazmin’s powers “in connection with a transfer to another job.” As expected, Gref was elected in his place (no other candidates were put to the vote).

In June 2009, Gref, as chairman of the board of Sberbank of Russia, joined the board of directors of NK OJSC Lukoil (president - Vagit Alekperov).

In 2009, Gref repeatedly appeared in the press with forecasts about the future of the Russian economy and the possibilities of reducing the negative consequences for it during the global financial crisis. In January, he was quite optimistic: the head of Sberbank noted that simultaneously with the reduction in the number of banks as a result of the crisis, the technological level and quality of the banking system would increase, and “the old and, as it turned out, ineffective, risk management model would be replaced.” At the same time, Gref admitted that the crisis would last longer than could be expected. In April of the same year, he stated that “the banking crisis in the Russian Federation is now at the very beginning, and it will come from the real sector of the economy.” At the same time, he reported that back in September 2008, at a meeting of the Russian government, he predicted a decline in GDP in 2009 by four percent and a possible drop in the banking sector by 18.8 percent. “Everyone laughed at it then... But now it’s obvious that these are absolutely real numbers...” he said.

In December 2009, Sberbank of Russia announced rebranding. Gref said that the bank was going to change its corporate identity and instead of the existing logo choose a more “dynamic and youthful” one back in May of the same year. According to experts, changing the logo and updating all branches should have cost about 20 billion rubles. Even before the presentation of the new logo, experts said that although Sberbank’s rebranding is aimed at attracting new clients, it will only pay off if business processes are changed along with the corporate identity. The bank's new logo was introduced on December 14, 2009; At the same time, Gref announced a number of other measures aimed at creating the image of a “completely new Sberbank”, including the introduction of new formats for customer service offices. In September of the following year, the bank also changed its previous name "Joint-stock commercial Savings Bank of the Russian Federation (open joint-stock company)" to a new one - "Open joint-stock company "Sberbank of Russia"".

In January 2010, Gref, speaking at the Davos Economic Forum, spoke out in favor of reducing the state share in the capital of Russian banks: in particular, he proposed reducing the state stake in Sberbank from 57.6 percent to 50 percent plus one share. In March of the following year, the sale of 7.58 percent of Sberbank shares was approved by the National Banking Council, and in September 2012, the shares were sold on the stock exchange for $5.22 billion.

At the end of May 2010, it became known that Gref acquired a small number of shares of Sberbank - 0.000004 percent of the authorized capital. It was noted that the option programs being prepared at that time for Sberbank could have allowed Gref to significantly increase his stake in shares. However, already in June, Gref, without waiting for the start of the option programs, increased his stake in Sberbank immediately by 150 times, bringing it to 0.0006 percent of the authorized capital. By August 2011, his share in the authorized capital of Sberbank increased to 0.0016 percent and continued to grow.

In February 2011, Vedomosti reported the record profit that Sberbank received and the largest payments to its managers in the bank's history, amounting to almost 985 million rubles at the end of 2010. The quarterly report noted that the increase in payments was associated with an increase in the bank’s net profit from 21.7 to 183.6 billion rubles, i.e. more than 8 times. Gref spoke about the successes of Sberbank at a meeting with Prime Minister Putin. In response to this, as Vedomosti noted, the head of government asked how much the bank pays on deposits to its depositors, and, having heard the answer that for a period of six months the rate would be about 5 percent, he joked: “You are swindlers.”

Sberbank's net profit in 2011 was again a record, exceeding the previous year's result by 74 percent and amounting to 315.9 billion rubles. Only in the last quarter of the year, the bank showed a lower financial result than in 2010 due to increased contributions to reserves associated with lending growth outpacing the market. In the first quarter of 2012, Sberbank's net profit again exceeded the result of the previous year and amounted to 92.2 billion rubles against 86.8 billion in January-March 2011 [