找回密码
 注册
搜索
查看: 3312|回复: 22

[转贴] 今天花街最热的一个topic

[复制链接]
发表于 2012-3-14 06:11 PM | 显示全部楼层 |阅读模式



Why I Am Leaving Goldman Sachs
By GREG SMITH

TODAY is my last day at Goldman Sachs. After almost 12 years at the firm — first as a summer intern while at Stanford, then in New York for 10 years, and now in London — I believe I have worked here long enough to understand the trajectory of its culture, its people and its identity. And I can honestly say that the environment now is as toxic and destructive as I have ever seen it.

To put the problem in the simplest terms, the interests of the client continue to be sidelined in the way the firm operates and thinks about making money. Goldman Sachs is one of the world’s largest and most important investment banks and it is too integral to global finance to continue to act this way. The firm has veered so far from the place I joined right out of college that I can no longer in good conscience say that I identify with what it stands for.

It might sound surprising to a skeptical public, but culture was always a vital part of Goldman Sachs’s success. It revolved around teamwork, integrity, a spirit of humility, and always doing right by our clients. The culture was the secret sauce that made this place great and allowed us to earn our clients’ trust for 143 years. It wasn’t just about making money; this alone will not sustain a firm for so long. It had something to do with pride and belief in the organization. I am sad to say that I look around today and see virtually no trace of the culture that made me love working for this firm for many years. I no longer have the pride, or the belief.

But this was not always the case. For more than a decade I recruited and mentored candidates through our grueling interview process. I was selected as one of 10 people (out of a firm of more than 30,000) to appear on our recruiting video, which is played on every college campus we visit around the world. In 2006 I managed the summer intern program in sales and trading in New York for the 80 college students who made the cut, out of the thousands who applied.

I knew it was time to leave when I realized I could no longer look students in the eye and tell them what a great place this was to work.

When the history books are written about Goldman Sachs, they may reflect that the current chief executive officer, Lloyd C. Blankfein, and the president, Gary D. Cohn, lost hold of the firm’s culture on their watch. I truly believe that this decline in the firm’s moral fiber represents the single most serious threat to its long-run survival.

Over the course of my career I have had the privilege of advising two of the largest hedge funds on the planet, five of the largest asset managers in the United States, and three of the most prominent sovereign wealth funds in the Middle East and Asia. My clients have a total asset base of more than a trillion dollars. I have always taken a lot of pride in advising my clients to do what I believe is right for them, even if it means less money for the firm. This view is becoming increasingly unpopular at Goldman Sachs. Another sign that it was time to leave.

How did we get here? The firm changed the way it thought about leadership. Leadership used to be about ideas, setting an example and doing the right thing. Today, if you make enough money for the firm (and are not currently an ax murderer) you will be promoted into a position of influence.

What are three quick ways to become a leader? a) Execute on the firm’s “axes,” which is Goldman-speak for persuading your clients to invest in the stocks or other products that we are trying to get rid of because they are not seen as having a lot of potential profit. b) “Hunt Elephants.” In English: get your clients — some of whom are sophisticated, and some of whom aren’t — to trade whatever will bring the biggest profit to Goldman. Call me old-fashioned, but I don’t like selling my clients a product that is wrong for them. c) Find yourself sitting in a seat where your job is to trade any illiquid, opaque product with a three-letter acronym.

Today, many of these leaders display a Goldman Sachs culture quotient of exactly zero percent. I attend derivatives sales meetings where not one single minute is spent asking questions about how we can help clients. It’s purely about how we can make the most possible money off of them. If you were an alien from Mars and sat in on one of these meetings, you would believe that a client’s success or progress was not part of the thought process at all.

It makes me ill how callously people talk about ripping their clients off. Over the last 12 months I have seen five different managing directors refer to their own clients as “muppets,” sometimes over internal e-mail. Even after the S.E.C., Fabulous Fab, Abacus, God’s work, Carl Levin, Vampire Squids? No humility? I mean, come on. Integrity? It is eroding. I don’t know of any illegal behavior, but will people push the envelope and pitch lucrative and complicated products to clients even if they are not the simplest investments or the ones most directly aligned with the client’s goals? Absolutely. Every day, in fact.

It astounds me how little senior management gets a basic truth: If clients don’t trust you they will eventually stop doing business with you. It doesn’t matter how smart you are.

These days, the most common question I get from junior analysts about derivatives is, “How much money did we make off the client?” It bothers me every time I hear it, because it is a clear reflection of what they are observing from their leaders about the way they should behave. Now project 10 years into the future: You don’t have to be a rocket scientist to figure out that the junior analyst sitting quietly in the corner of the room hearing about “muppets,” “ripping eyeballs out” and “getting paid” doesn’t exactly turn into a model citizen.

When I was a first-year analyst I didn’t know where the bathroom was, or how to tie my shoelaces. I was taught to be concerned with learning the ropes, finding out what a derivative was, understanding finance, getting to know our clients and what motivated them, learning how they defined success and what we could do to help them get there.

My proudest moments in life — getting a full scholarship to go from South Africa to Stanford University, being selected as a Rhodes Scholar national finalist, winning a bronze medal for table tennis at the Maccabiah Games in Israel, known as the Jewish Olympics — have all come through hard work, with no shortcuts. Goldman Sachs today has become too much about shortcuts and not enough about achievement. It just doesn’t feel right to me anymore.

I hope this can be a wake-up call to the board of directors. Make the client the focal point of your business again. Without clients you will not make money. In fact, you will not exist. Weed out the morally bankrupt people, no matter how much money they make for the firm. And get the culture right again, so people want to work here for the right reasons. People who care only about making money will not sustain this firm — or the trust of its clients — for very much longer.

Greg Smith is resigning today as a Goldman Sachs executive director and head of the firm’s United States equity derivatives business in Europe, the Middle East and Africa.
发表于 2012-3-14 06:19 PM | 显示全部楼层
再找遍新工作就不容易了, 来胡同吧
回复 鲜花 鸡蛋

使用道具 举报

发表于 2012-3-14 06:32 PM | 显示全部楼层
hehehe, this is good.
回复 鲜花 鸡蛋

使用道具 举报

发表于 2012-3-14 06:51 PM | 显示全部楼层
executive director


这个级别不高嘛?
回复 鲜花 鸡蛋

使用道具 举报

发表于 2012-3-14 07:08 PM | 显示全部楼层
回复 CoolMax 的帖子

就比Managing Director低一级
回复 鲜花 鸡蛋

使用道具 举报

发表于 2012-3-14 07:10 PM | 显示全部楼层
丁一一 发表于 2012-3-14 16:08
回复 CoolMax 的帖子

就比Managing Director低一级

不到VP,只能算中层吧。
回复 鲜花 鸡蛋

使用道具 举报

发表于 2012-3-14 07:11 PM | 显示全部楼层
本帖最后由 CoolMax 于 2012-3-14 16:15 编辑
高盛衍生工具部门副总裁史密斯(Greg Smith)


你看中文翻译,以为是个VP。
Director的正确中文翻译,应该是总监。
所以,Greg Smith是个执行总监,高级中层干部。
回复 鲜花 鸡蛋

使用道具 举报

 楼主| 发表于 2012-3-14 07:19 PM | 显示全部楼层
本帖最后由 lite1067 于 2012-3-14 19:20 编辑
CoolMax 发表于 2012-3-14 19:11
你看中文翻译,以为是个VP。
Director的正确中文翻译,应该是总监。
所以,Greg Smith是个执行总监, ...


no. he was just a VP.

In GS's internal memo in response to this:
"And, what do our people think about how we interact with our clients? Across the firm at all levels, 89 percent of you said that that the firm provides exceptional service to them. For the group of nearly 12,000 vice presidents, of which the author of today’s commentary was, that number was similarly high. "
回复 鲜花 鸡蛋

使用道具 举报

发表于 2012-3-14 07:23 PM | 显示全部楼层
lite1067 发表于 2012-3-14 16:19
no. he was just a VP.

被降职啦?

怪不得牢骚多多。
回复 鲜花 鸡蛋

使用道具 举报

发表于 2012-3-14 07:24 PM | 显示全部楼层
本帖最后由 CoolMax 于 2012-3-14 16:25 编辑
For the group of nearly 12,000 vice presidents


回复 鲜花 鸡蛋

使用道具 举报

发表于 2012-3-14 07:29 PM | 显示全部楼层
本帖最后由 CoolMax 于 2012-3-14 16:29 编辑

30,000雇员公司,这个12000VP连中层都算不上。
回复 鲜花 鸡蛋

使用道具 举报

 楼主| 发表于 2012-3-14 07:31 PM | 显示全部楼层
本帖最后由 lite1067 于 2012-3-14 19:31 编辑
CoolMax 发表于 2012-3-14 19:23
被降职啦?

怪不得牢骚多多。


not demoting.

For GS in US, there are only VP and then MD, no ED in the middle. But in UK, it has. Greg Smith was relocated to UK a year ago. I guess he was VP when he was based in US.

回复 鲜花 鸡蛋

使用道具 举报

发表于 2012-3-14 07:33 PM | 显示全部楼层
本帖最后由 CoolMax 于 2012-3-14 16:37 编辑
lite1067 发表于 2012-3-14 16:31
not demoting.

For GS in US, there are only VP and then MD, no ED in the middle. But in UK, it ...


12,000/30,000,这个咋能算高层呢?

跟小StartUp一样,除了President,人人都是VP。

你说反了吧,MD > ED
回复 鲜花 鸡蛋

使用道具 举报

发表于 2012-3-14 07:34 PM | 显示全部楼层
回复 鲜花 鸡蛋

使用道具 举报

发表于 2012-3-14 07:44 PM | 显示全部楼层
--- 你说反了吧,MD > ED

eng, Executive director higher than Managing Director. That's my company's case, at least.

点评

Not for GS.  发表于 2012-3-14 07:54 PM
回复 鲜花 鸡蛋

使用道具 举报

发表于 2012-3-14 07:56 PM | 显示全部楼层
SEC需要调查一下Insider Trading。
回复 鲜花 鸡蛋

使用道具 举报

发表于 2012-3-14 08:35 PM | 显示全部楼层
本帖最后由 vlo 于 2012-3-14 21:39 编辑
CoolMax 发表于 2012-3-14 19:51
这个级别不高嘛?


不是吧,能挂上Executive的都是高层了。我们行也是花街属一属二的大户,应该跟GS部门设置差不多。虽然我不是IB这块的,但是我观察过IB的org chart, VP那是满地走,director也多如狗,但是只要挂executive title的,基本上就是直接report给 CEO of line of Business,也就是和公司CEO只差2-3级的人物了。

我靠,google了一下,酷大说的还真是。GS一个14个人的operation division,里面就有8个ED.这都什么烂title呀。

http://www.goldmansachs.com/care ... erations/index.html

点评

Xie Xie info  发表于 2012-3-15 12:04 AM
回复 鲜花 鸡蛋

使用道具 举报

发表于 2012-3-14 08:37 PM | 显示全部楼层
本帖最后由 CoolMax 于 2012-3-14 17:39 编辑
vlo 发表于 2012-3-14 17:35
不是吧,能挂上Executive的都是高层了。我们行也是花街属一属二的大户,应该跟GS部门设置差不多。虽然我不 ...


12,000 VP out of 30,000 employee

他不是executive VP, 而是executive director.
回复 鲜花 鸡蛋

使用道具 举报

发表于 2012-3-14 08:42 PM | 显示全部楼层
CoolMax 发表于 2012-3-14 21:37
12,000 VP out of 30,000 employee

他不是executive VP, 而是executive director.

嗯,跟我们是不一样,我们line of business几万个人,也就只有5,6个Executive title.都是能进Executive Leader Team讨论公司决策的。

点评

Yep  发表于 2012-3-14 08:44 PM
回复 鲜花 鸡蛋

使用道具 举报

发表于 2012-3-14 11:56 PM | 显示全部楼层
美国的大投行/银行,起码1/3的人都是VP。拿张名片在外招摇,还真能唬不少人的。

点评

Learned.  发表于 2012-3-15 01:16 AM
回复 鲜花 鸡蛋

使用道具 举报

您需要登录后才可以回帖 登录 | 注册

本版积分规则

手机版|小黑屋|www.hutong9.net

GMT-5, 2025-7-18 09:55 PM , Processed in 0.093133 second(s), 16 queries .

Powered by Discuz! X3.5

© 2001-2024 Discuz! Team.

快速回复 返回顶部 返回列表