The object of the paper is identifying and describing the consequences of excessive forms of political regulation of social organization functioning. The object of research is the interaction between the university and the relevant ministry during the fist decade of the 21^st ctntury. Structural and functional changes at the university caused by excessive regulation and counteracting it are the main subject of the article. The empirical base of the research includes 67 biographical interviews with the university staff and students, collected by the authors or provided to the author by his colleagues. Interviews were arranged in three groups: those taken in 2003, 2009 and 2010, which allows tracing the dynamics of the process. Quantitative analysis of the legal acts and other regulating documents issued by relevant ministry is additional material for the analysis.

The author shows that the reform of higher education was based on sustained myths present in the political field since the late Soviet period rather than its detailed study and the real power distribution within the university. Inability to reconcile mythological and real led the political structure to develop formal indicators for control of every form (both formal and informal) of university activity. «Bologna Process» and «accession into the world educational space» are ideological base of this administrative activity.

But, as the author shows, universities (especially provincial ones) function not so much due to being a part of international educational space, but owing to being integrated into the regional community. Breaking regional ties caused by increasing the control rigidity leads to degradation of universities. It generates a rather complex «avoidance tactics» on the part of universities. They strive to avoid conflicts with the relevant ministry, which is the main source of funding, and at the same time to keep the life-giving relationship with the region and customary system of practices.

Creation of special administration department acting as «protection layer» within the institution, which interacts with the Ministry, is becoming basic form of such kind of «avoidance practices». The «protective layer» however begins to grow deeper into the university structure, giving rise to new bureaucratic formations which gradually levels with faculties and departments. As a result, the time the teachers are physically able to devote to academic activities is reduced, and the academic activities become meaningless. The only legitimate meaning of education then becomes the testimony about the social consistency of its owner.