This blog is written by the Japanese International Businessman having the speciality in IT Technology and global finances.
Actually, I would like to post this my comment to New York Times, but comment for the articles (Why I am Leaving Goldman Sachs) is not being accepted by New York Times any more as of now, maybe because of too much amount of replies around the world for this silly articles.
So, I upload my comment to my blogs.
On this Mar.14, the surprising article was listed on the website of New York Times, which was some kind of essay of ex-Goldman Sachs' executives.
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.
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.
After my reading this articles, my candid opinions is "so what?".
As a big company like Goldman Sachs, there are many staffs who can NOT adjust to the concept and philosophy of the company for which he/she is working.
In such a case, the only option to be taken is just to leave the company quietly without making any wave.
I know, Mr. Greg Smith is frustrated wit the corporate culture of Goldman Sachs.
So, just leave it.
That is all what he can and should do.
I do not know whether he might drop from the corporate ladder at Goldman or something, and decided to "revenge" to his ex-company using mass media.
But, this kind of attitude should be criticised and even looked down, at least in Japanese business culture.
In Japanese culture, this kind of attitude is described as "Nasake nai" or so miserable and "make inu" or real losers.
Company is basically the profit generating machine by definition.
So, although I admit that the such philosophy is sometimes too excessive at some companies, the attitude to purse profit greedy itself is not be criticised.
If Mr. Greg Smith wants to work for someone without any materialised financial profit, he can work for NPO(Non-profitable organisation) as a volunteer staff.
If he posts his complain to his blog or something, it still be understandable.
But, New York Times does NOT need to announce "the frustration of an unadjusted person of the peculiar private company" to the world.
It looks like the violence by mass-media....