Sofiya Opatska, Founding Dean of the Ukrainian Catholic University (UCU) Business School, Vice-Rector for Strategic Development at UCU, and a member of the Board of Directors of the Association of Ukrainian Entrepreneurs, is actively engaged in the global academic advocacy of Ukraine. She notes that the experiences Ukraine is currently navigating due to the war are in high demand internationally, and the primary objective of this global cooperation is to emphasize the critical importance of supporting Ukraine.
From left to right, Oksana Vysochanska and Sofiya Opatska
Ms. Opatska believes that lifelong learning is no longer a matter of choice, but a necessity. Today, individuals attend universities not solely for academic knowledge—which is largely accessible online—but to acquire essential professional skills and, most importantly, to cultivate social connections.
The UCU Business School serves experienced, successful business professionals and managers who apply their acquired knowledge both to optimize their own enterprises and to contribute to the nation’s development.
Q: You recently returned from the United States. What was the purpose of your trip, and what topics were discussed?
Opatska: Since the onset of the full-scale invasion, our university and faculty have actively pursued partnerships with foreign institutions. We seek not only to provide tangible value for our students, but to utilize these collaborations as a platform to speak to the world. During our recent visit to the United States, we engaged with the University of Notre Dame—a reliable partner with whom we have cooperated for over 25 years. Since the start of the invasion, this relationship has evolved into a vital source of support and friendship.
In the months following the initial invasion, our partners at the University of Notre Dame called us weekly to determine how they could best assist. This human concern fostered an exceptionally close partnership. While our current focus is on joint scientific projects, it remains a priority that these initiatives provide mutual benefit to both Ukraine and our partners.
During this trip, we hosted a significant event in Washington, D.C., alongside our partners, and held several advocacy meetings. It is imperative that we continue to advocate for Ukraine; in the United States, the volume of public discourse matters. While we must ensure our message is conveyed effectively and with the appropriate tone, the sheer consistency of our presence—continually bringing information from Ukraine—directly influences decisions made in the Senate and Congress. In a particularly turbulent time for the United States, it is vital that our voice continues to be heard, and ensuring that was our primary task.
Sofiya Opatska. Source- Facebook
Q: You work closely with this university; do you have a general sense of how widespread initiatives like yours are in other U.S. educational institutions, and what results they are yielding?
Opatska: There is significant support, yet there are also substantial challenges. For a very long time, Ukrainian studies were largely subsumed under so-called “Russian Studies.” The narratives prevalent in those departments were often not pro-Ukrainian; in many cases, these centers acted as promoters of propaganda—perhaps even operating as hubs for foreign agents. This is a reality that must be acknowledged. It is not something that can be dismantled quickly, as universities are institutions with long, established histories. Implementing structural change in such environments is an inherently lengthy process.
However, alternative centers for Ukrainian studies are beginning to emerge. While they already existed in the United States and Canada, they are now expanding. There is currently an initiative led by the First Lady of Ukraine and the Ministry of Education to consolidate these efforts. This is a crucial undertaking; although it will not yield immediate results, progress is being made incrementally. For instance, at the University of Notre Dame, students have begun taking the initiative to study the Ukrainian language on their own.
Q: What is their motivation?
Opatska: An understanding that the world is changing and that many critical security issues are being decided here. I believe this provides a strong impetus for young people to realize that this region warrants deep study. Relying solely on the perspective—or the “optics”—that Russia has long promoted regarding Eastern and Central Europe is no longer sufficient. This realization encourages many to pursue dedicated study. While these cohorts are currently small, it is a start. It is vital that students feel motivated to study Ukraine—its language and its history—to better comprehend the current geopolitical climate.
Q: So, this is less about the romanticism of Ukraine’s struggle and more about a far-sighted, pragmatic recognition of the region’s future importance?
Opatska: I certainly hope it is a pragmatism that will endure. Romanticism is fleeting; once the “rose-colored glasses” are removed, interest often wanes. Pragmatism, however, is a sustainable foundation, and I am encouraged that this realization has taken hold.
Q: Regarding your recent trip, how has the nature of your communication and your arguments with American colleagues evolved? In light of high-profile corruption investigations currently underway in Ukraine, how do these developments impact your advocacy?
Opatska: Each target audience requires a tailored approach. There are certain “red lines”—not in the sense of restrictions, but as foundational themes—that help convey our perspective effectively.
For example, Archbishop Borys Gudziak often notes that we underestimate the influence of the global Catholic community. We need a clear message regarding why they should support Ukraine. We often highlight the situation in occupied territories, where Russia frequently weaponizes the themes of the “Russian World” and “Russian Orthodoxy,” claiming that minorities are oppressed or denied rights. We must address these claims calmly and logically. We need to explain the specific challenges the Church faces in those occupied regions. It is about finding the right language for each audience.
As for whether internal issues in Ukraine hinder or help our advocacy: I do not believe they hinder us, provided we communicate proactively and honestly. While it is deeply regrettable that corruption scandals continue to emerge, the fact that these issues are being raised and addressed amid an active war speaks volumes about Ukraine’s democratic character. However, we have yet to convince the world that our judicial system functions as it should. If we successfully bring these cases to trial and secure fair verdicts, that will become a powerful argument in our favor. I view these transparency efforts as an essential dimension to add to the context of my advocacy work.
Sofiya Opatska. Source- Facebook
Q: Given the American emphasis on pragmatism, how do you explain to U.S. audiences that supporting Ukraine is in their best interest?
Opatska: The approach depends entirely on the audience. While it is easier to convey this to Europeans because we share a continent, even within Europe—specifically in Southern Europe—our message often does not resonate.
When speaking to North American audiences, abstract concepts such as international law or the reports of human rights violations in de-occupied territories can sometimes feel distant. However, there are undeniable truths that resonate in any conversation. I emphasize that for us, these discussions are not merely about territory; they are about people. I strive to share stories that carry weight—the accounts of families, or of individuals who abandoned their civilian professions and family lives to serve their country. Those human stories leave a lasting emotional impact that facts alone cannot achieve.
Q: What qualities should Ukrainian leaders possess today? What is currently lacking in the leadership landscape?
Opatska: When we discuss leadership, three qualities are paramount: competence, character, and commitment.
There is rarely a deficit of competence in the world today. In fact, this realization became widespread following the 2008 global financial crisis. The individuals who presided over a disaster of that scale were graduates of the world’s finest business schools and universities; they were highly competent, yet they demonstrably lacked character.
This brings us to a third, critical dimension: loyalty. Unfortunately, Ukrainian society is currently experiencing a divide regarding character and loyalty. There are those prepared to demonstrate both, and those who are not. The challenge is not a lack of expertise—good experts can always be hired or consulted—but the presence of character and loyalty, which are the true pillars of leadership. We are now seeing a much clearer divide between those who embody these values and those who do not. Character is rooted in authenticity and the ability to foster cooperation. It encompasses a set of virtues, such as a profound sense of justice, that empower an individual to lead effectively.
These virtues can be developed. We are actively working to instill them in managers and entrepreneurs, and, significantly, we are now working closely with military personnel to help them cultivate these same qualities.
I also believe we are often too hasty in our expectations. We demand immediate results because the modern world has accelerated, leading us to expect systemic reforms within six months or to demand results from public officials within their first 100 days. While this impatience is understandable, I believe that, as a society, we have evolved tremendously over the past 30 years. We are shedding old habits and acquiring new, essential skills. Change may not be as rapid as we desire, and we still struggle with professional efficiency, focus, and the strategic allocation of effort. However, in the aggregate, we have made immense strides forward.
Q: Ukrainians are known to be an enterprising people, but are we strong entrepreneurs and business leaders on a global scale?
Opatska: If we measure this by our national GDP, the results are currently modest, as the indicator remains quite low. This is a significant challenge for the country—one that may become even more pressing once we reach a state of peace, as international support may diminish and contract rapidly.
Conversely, many Ukrainians who have relocated to other countries following the full-scale invasion have discovered that banking systems elsewhere are often less user-friendly and less digitized than those in Ukraine. They have found that train rail services elsewhere are frequently delayed, and postal services can be slow or unreliable compared to their Ukrainian counterparts. We have developed a new perspective on customer orientation, service, and accessibility. In my opinion, we have become more confident in these areas; we have advanced through innovation and creative approaches to products and services.
Many Ukrainian companies are currently exploring entry into Western markets, and many have already begun this process, as evidenced by the number of successful business relocations.
However, we must remain grounded: no one is waiting for us. Markets are already mature and highly competitive, with established family-owned businesses, deep-rooted traditions, and strong customer loyalty—particularly in Europe. The global market operates according to its own rhythms, pace, and challenges.
If we intend to enter these markets, we must be prepared to learn. We cannot assume we will be welcomed with open arms. We must research, adapt, and accept that mistakes are inevitable. We will need to pivot our strategies, and only those with sufficient perseverance and determination will succeed. I believe we have significant potential in many of these markets.
Q: What does European integration mean for Ukraine and the Ukrainian business community? It is a two-way street; while we are entering European markets, European firms will also seek to expand into Ukraine. How should we address these challenges?
Opatska: The challenges are real. Regarding Ukrainian companies looking to expand abroad, the first hurdle is compliance. They must adhere to rigorous standards and regulations, and they must fully understand and implement these requirements. We must initiate these conversations now. The Union of Ukrainian Entrepreneurs is already doing a great deal in this regard, focusing on helping Ukrainian companies prepare for integration with European markets.
Furthermore, we have received many signals from European businesses indicating that, should the security situation stabilize, there will be substantial interest in the Ukrainian market. We must anticipate that large international players will arrive, seeking significant market share. Some Ukrainian companies are currently preparing their strategies for potential acquisition—a normal and viable path. Naturally, it will be the most systematic and transparent firms that are targeted for investment.
The management and accounting traditions of 10 to 20 years ago are insufficient for modern, transparent European business standards. Therefore, Ukrainian businesses have a significant amount of “homework” to do if they have ambitions to sell their companies, enter Western markets, or ultimately compete on an international level.
Q: We have touched upon the subject of relocated businesses. Do you believe we should actively encourage them to return to Ukraine?
Opatska: That is not necessarily the right question to ask. Business is inherently driven by the search for a competitive environment. Furthermore, these companies are now residents of other countries; they contribute to those economies through taxes and job creation. Ultimately, I believe this is less a matter of corporate policy and more a matter of personal history and individual decision-making. Those who wished to return have largely already done so. While parents may eventually choose to move back, it is likely that many children will remain abroad, as they have become integrated into foreign educational systems.
Q: What advice would you offer to current graduates and their parents?
Opatska: That is a pertinent question, particularly as I have a son who is a graduate himself. First, I believe a bachelor’s degree should provide a robust, broad-based foundation. Very few 17-year-olds have a clear vision of their long-term career path. Therefore, I highly recommend that students spend a few years working in their field after their bachelor’s degree to determine if that path is truly the right fit before pursuing a master’s.
The traditional four-year bachelor’s degree is increasingly being reconsidered; in Europe, three-year programs are the norm, and there are discussions about adopting this model in Ukraine. One should work first and then decide on the next step. A master’s degree may not always be necessary. If a student is interested in a specific niche, it is often more efficient to take targeted courses from the premier institutions in that field. We must begin to think differently about education, and at UCU, we are attempting to shift that perspective. A university experience is not strictly defined by the sequence of bachelor’s degree, then master’s degree, then certificate programs; it is a lifelong pursuit.
Sofiya Opatska. Source- Facebook
Q: Are Ukrainians prepared for this shift?
Opatska: Parents, in particular, need to understand how global education is evolving. We must accept the reality that individuals may hold several different professions throughout their lives, each requiring distinct, periodic retraining. For example, consider the data on veterans: many are unable or unwilling to return to their pre-war careers and require specialized retraining.
We at the university are adapting to this reality. Our student body is no longer limited to young people directed by their parents; it includes mature professionals who are pivoting to new career trajectories. Educational institutions must stop acting like “dinosaurs.” We must modernize every aspect of our operations—not only the content we teach, but the formats in which we deliver it. There is a wealth of research on how individuals learn at different stages of life, and we must utilize that data to improve our educational models.
Q: How should we address the use of AI by students in their academic work?
Opatska: This is a significant subject. AI must be utilized strategically and ethically. Many European universities have returned to oral or written examinations conducted without external tools to ensure academic integrity. However, I believe artificial intelligence can be used effectively to enhance learning, and we should embrace those opportunities. This is a topic of frequent debate within our university.
Ultimately, certain boundaries are non-negotiable. Plagiarism, for example, is entirely unacceptable. We must continue to educate our society on this point: intellectual property is akin to private property and must be treated with the same respect. This concept of property rights is foundational to entrepreneurship. For us, this remains a work in progress—a realization that rules must be upheld. We are still in the process of building the trust—both interpersonal and institutional—that is currently at a low level in our country. We are navigating that transition now.
Q: Can the Ukrainian entrepreneurial sector withstand such a prolonged war, especially given reports that many small businesses, such as cafes and restaurants, are closing due to labor shortages?
Opatska: I believe we must accept the reality that our current domestic labor pool is insufficient to sustain the economy at its pre-war volume. We will need to integrate foreign workers, and we must begin to prepare for this mentally. We were not mentally prepared for a full-scale invasion either, yet we adapted. If there is an economic necessity, we must organizationally facilitate the employment of foreign nationals. This process must be streamlined and accessible. We must also recognize the cultural differences involved and develop the capacity to manage them effectively. Many companies are already taking steps in this direction, though risks remain; we have already seen instances where foreign workers departed prematurely due to security concerns. We must manage these risks consciously and proactively.
Q: Five years into this full-scale war, what perspective and goals should Ukrainians adopt to ensure our nation survives, remains sovereign, and thrives?
Opatska: We need to think at least 100 years ahead. Specific plans will vary by industry and sector; however, as an educational institution, we strive to think in long-term horizons, as that is where we see our greatest contribution.
By thinking in longer periods while supporting one another, we can accomplish far more than we imagine. There is hope in this, as hope is rooted in the actions we take together—the collective efforts that propel us forward, regardless of the circumstances. In this sense, hope is truly an active endeavor.
