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.
Greg Smith's open letter on Goldman Sachs, published in the opinion section of the New York Times, has created a stir in the investment banking industry. His devastating critique of the company is incredibly unusual. It also raises some fascinating questions about the company – and finance capitalism in general.
Smith complains of "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" and harks back to the days when the success of Goldman's clients was at the forefront of its executives' minds. But is his view a naive one? He says: "It makes me ill how callously people talk about ripping their clients off." But was this investment bank ever a benign force in the business world, or has maximising profit always been its overriding motivation? Doesn't the health of a business, according to the dogmas of 21st-century capitalism, rest on its ability to squeeze the most out of its customers?
And then there's Smith himself. Is what he's done a heroic act, sacrificing his own career for the greater good? Is he a whistleblower, or something different? And to what extent do individuals bear responsibility for the ethical conduct of the place they work? Should this burden be shouldered by management, or, indeed, regulators? Tell us what you think about the explosive letter.
