Questionable Values Produce Resignation at Goldman Sachs

ETHICS CASE

Questionable Values Produce Resignation at Goldman Sachs

Allegations of serious impropriety and perhaps illegality surrounding Goldman Sachs’s contribution to the 2008 financial crisis have been well publicized. Allegations included trading for their own benefit directly against the interests of its clients (e.g., the ABACUS deal involved deliberately stuffing collateralized debt obligations with inferior mortgage assets, selling them to clients, and then short selling them for their own account) and abusive practices generally.1 These allegations and a description of the ABACUS deal are the subject of the ethics case “Goldman Sachs’s Conflicts: Guilty or Not?” which begins on page 685.

The underlying values associated with this kind of activity were obviously troubling. This was further illustrated in 2012 when Greg Smith, head of Goldman’s U.S. equity derivatives business in Europe, Africa, and the Middle East, wrote an op-ed piece in the New York Times about his resignation2 in response to the appalling deterioration of the firm’s culture. Goldman’s old culture had previously been recognized for its ethicality that he describes as revolving around “teamwork, integrity, a spirit of humility, and always doing right by your clients.” The modern culture he describes as “toxic” and “destructive.” The following are some quotes from his article: 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. Leadership (in Goldman) used to be about ideas, setting an example and doing the right thing. Today, if you make enough money for the firm … you will be promoted into a position of influence. 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.” He comments on what he believes to be the three quick ways to become a leader at Goldman:

a) Persuade your clients to invest in stocks or other products that Goldman was trying to get rid of because they were not seen as being sufficiently profitable (described as the firm’s “axes”).

b) “Hunt elephants,” that is, persuade your clients to buy the products that are the most profitable for Goldman rather than what is best for the client.

c) Trade “any illiquid, opaque product with a three-letter acronym.” Of course, Goldman disputes this view of its practice, but Smith’s interpretation intuitively explains how it—and other firms with similar cultures—got so far off the rails during the subprime lending crisis.

Questions According to Greg Smith, the culture he describes existed in 2012, long after the 2008 financial crisis and subsequent fallout, suggesting that the lessons have not been learned and that the problems are at least as bad as they were before the crisis.

1. How could the culture described be changed?

2. Who will need to cause this culture to change?

3. What will have to happen to cause this change?

4. Is it likely that Goldman Sachs will be able to hire the best and brightest recruits unless they change the culture described? Why and why not?

5. Corporate psychopaths would likely be attracted to a firm with Goldman’s modern culture. How would Goldman ensure that they are not hired?

 

find the cost of your paper

Strategic Management Project

Assignment Content Review the Strategic Management Project Background and your strategic management research journal entries from Weeks 1–4. Create a 10-slide presentation for Caterpillar Inc. leadership in which you summarize your key findings, propose….

Case Problem Investment Strategy

Case Problem Investment Strategy J. D. Williams, Inc. is an investment advisory firm that manages more than $120 million in funds for its numerous clients. The company uses an asset allocation model that recommends the portion of each client’s portfolio to be invested in a growth stock fund, an income fund and a money market fund. To maintain diversity in each client’s portfolio, the firm places limits on the percentage of each portfolio that may be invested in each of the three funds. General guidelines indicate that the amount invested in the growth fund must be between 20% to 40% of the total portfolio value. Similar percentages for the other two funds stipulate that between 20% to 50% of the total portfolio must be in the income fund and at least 30% of the total portfolio value must be in the money market fund.   In addition, the company attempts to assess the risk tolerance of each client and adjust the portfolio to meet the needs of the individual investor. For example, Williams just contracted with a new client who has $800,000 to invest. Based on an evaluation of the client’s risk tolerance, Williams assigned a maximum risk index of 0.05 for the client. The firm’s risk indicators show the risk of the growth fund at 0.10, the income fund at 0.07 and the money market fund at 0.01. An overall portfolio risk index is computed as a weighted average of the risk rating for the three funds where the weights are the fraction of the client’s portfolio invested in each of the funds. Additionally, William’s is currently forecasting annual yields of 18% for the growth fund, 12.5% for the income fund and 7.5% fir the money market fund. Based on the information provided, how should the new client be advised to allocate $800,000 among the growth, income and money market funds? Develop a linear programming model that will provide the maximum yield for the portfolio. Use your model to develop a managerial report.   Managerial Report: a.Recommend how much of the $800,000 should be invested in each of the three funds. What is the annual yield you anticipate for the investment recommendation change? b.Assume that the client’s risk index could be increased to 0.055. How much would the yield increase and how would the investment recommendation change? c.Refer again to the original situation where the client’s risk index was assessed to be 0.05. How would your investment recommendation change if the annual yield for the growth fund were revised downward to 16% or even to 14%? d.Assume that the client expressed some concern about having too much money in the growth fund. How would the original recommendation change if the amount invested in the growth fund is not allowed to exceed the amount invested in the income fund? e.The asset allocation model you developed may be useful in modifying the portfolios for all the firm’s clients whenever the anticipated yields for the three funds are periodically revised. What is your recommendation as to whether use of this model is possible?  

Case Analysis

You can view the article (the case), “The Man Who Got Honeywell’s Groove Backt”, by linking to the course EReserves  Follow the Case Analysis Outline given in your syllabus. This is….