If You Thought The Firing Scene in Jerry McGuire Was Public.

polaris_x

EdsonNascimento wrote:

Really? An op-ed piece has a better chance of creating change then actually working on the INSIDE? That's an interesting take. I know when I leave my company, I stop having any impact. I guess next time, I'll leave unprofessionally, so I can have a greater impact.....

most definitely ... publicly traded companies like this are all about the bottom line ... that's why the "street" rewards companies for firing people despite record profits ... maybe, if you worked for a small firm - you could foster real change ... but we are talking goldman sachs here ... he's 1 guy swimming with sharks ... this is investment banking here ... there is no room for altruism ... it's all about $$$$$ ... you think young kids coming in think about working there to make the world a better place!? ... hell no - it's about getting that beamer or the condo over looking central park and dating some hot model ...

EdsonNascimento

81 wrote:

EdsonNascimento wrote:

Really? An op-ed piece has a better chance of creating change then actually working on the INSIDE? That's an interesting take. I know when I leave my company, I stop having any impact. I guess next time, I'll leave unprofessionally, so I can have a greater impact.....

it's true, once you are gone you are gone...and you get blamed for everything

i can see the OWS movement latching on to this piece/guy and pointing at wall street, we told you so.

You are right about that - That's the beauty of having someone leave - there's a good 3 to 6 months you can blame it on them.

And, kind of funny someone else thought of OWS in relation to this piece. Pandering to the masses (and if folks want to know why I have such a problem with this - it's this. We can look at this stuff simply, and interpret it the way we CURRENTLY see the world. OR, we can question it and integrate it while not swallowing it).

EdsonNascimento

polaris_x wrote:

EdsonNascimento wrote:

Really? An op-ed piece has a better chance of creating change then actually working on the INSIDE? That's an interesting take. I know when I leave my company, I stop having any impact. I guess next time, I'll leave unprofessionally, so I can have a greater impact.....

most definitely ... publicly traded companies like this are all about the bottom line ... that's why the "street" rewards companies for firing people despite record profits ... maybe, if you worked for a small firm - you could foster real change ... but we are talking goldman sachs here ... he's 1 guy swimming with sharks ... this is investment banking here ... there is no room for altruism ... it's all about $$$$$ ... you think young kids coming in think about working there to make the world a better place!? ... hell no - it's about getting that beamer or the condo over looking central park and dating some hot model ...

But, if you have no clients, how is the "street" rewarded? He's claiming this course will lead to lost clients. Ultimately, how does that benefit the share holders?

EdsonNascimento

polaris_x wrote:

EdsonNascimento wrote:

Really? An op-ed piece has a better chance of creating change then actually working on the INSIDE? That's an interesting take. I know when I leave my company, I stop having any impact. I guess next time, I'll leave unprofessionally, so I can have a greater impact.....

... you think young kids coming in think about working there to make the world a better place!? ... hell no - it's about getting that beamer or the condo over looking central park and dating some hot model ...

All the more reason for him to stay and mentor them.

EDIT: Or, quietly start his own company and do it the "right way."

polaris_x

EdsonNascimento wrote:

But, if you have no clients, how is the "street" rewarded? He's claiming this course will lead to lost clients. Ultimately, how does that benefit the share holders?

well ... that's the thing that is at the crux of many of our problems ... short-term strategies and thinking ... we are short-term culture with no patience ... it's all about bottom line numbers now ... <see housing bubble> ... when the clients leave, then they will figure it out then ... but by that time the execs would have cashed one hefty bonus after another ...

polaris_x

EdsonNascimento wrote:

All the more reason for him to stay and mentor them.

EDIT: Or, quietly start his own company and do it the "right way."

if the kids goals are materialistic ... how is mentoring them that they should treat their clients with respect and sacrifice $$$ going to work? ...

EdsonNascimento

polaris_x wrote:

EdsonNascimento wrote:

All the more reason for him to stay and mentor them.

EDIT: Or, quietly start his own company and do it the "right way."

if the kids goals are materialistic ... how is mentoring them that they should treat their clients with respect and sacrifice $$$ going to work? ...

:?

EdsonNascimento

polaris_x wrote:

EdsonNascimento wrote:

But, if you have no clients, how is the "street" rewarded? He's claiming this course will lead to lost clients. Ultimately, how does that benefit the share holders?

well ... that's the thing that is at the crux of many of our problems ... short-term strategies and thinking ... we are short-term culture with no patience ... it's all about bottom line numbers now ... <see housing bubble> ... when the clients leave, then they will figure it out then ... but by that time the execs would have cashed one hefty bonus after another ...

I'm not saying he's not highlighting a problem. And don't use the housing bubble as an example. That had far more to do with the Clinton Administration "forcing" loans that folks couldn't afford then anything else. So, yes, the execs reaped rewards, but some of it wasn't their own doing (as sadly ironic as that is).

As for short term - ok. Now, you're talking about bonuses to execs. That's fine. Before you were talking about the "street."

Based on this line of thinking, I guess we could assume the guy was denied a bonus b/c he's the only one that has a moral compass :roll: , so he's bitching about it.

Sorry. I'm extremely cynical when it comes to this stuff. He's such a do-gooder, but instead of instituting change (either internally or via his own works), he takes out an op-ed piece. I know. This is just phase 1 of his larger plan. We'll all know what his plan is when Goldman Sachs or he claim bankruptcy.

It's easy to paint everyone with such a broad brush. But, until you're willing to DO something about it, shut the pie hole. Tell us about the great new venture you're doing that will give flowers to every client that comes through the door.

polaris_x

EdsonNascimento wrote:

Sorry. I'm extremely cynical when it comes to this stuff. He's such a do-gooder, but instead of instituting change (either internally or via his own works), he takes out an op-ed piece. I know. This is just phase 1 of his larger plan. We'll all know what his plan is when Goldman Sachs or he claim bankruptcy.

It's easy to paint everyone with such a broad brush. But, until you're willing to DO something about it, shut the pie hole. Tell us about the great new venture you're doing that will give flowers to every client that comes through the door.

really!?? ... you're a cynic!? ... didn't notice! ...

who's to say the guy didn't try? ... and failed? ... and the simple fact is he's doing something about it now ... it would be more cynical to think this guy keeps getting paycheck after paycheck, bonus after bonus and feeling this way ...

look ... i don't know this guy from the next ... i do know he gave up a huge salary and i do know what he speaks is truth ... so, yeah - maybe there are ulterior motives, maybe he isn't the kind of person he's making himself out to be ... i dunno ... but the bottom line is that culture is prevalent (like you said - you didn't learn anything) so, this is his avenue to try and foster change ...

EdsonNascimento

It's this simple to me - Who is he telling?

A) The rich folk that must have gotten there by luck and stupidity?
The small investors that don't have enough invested to "move the needle?"
C) The 401K investors that pick from a menagerie of options and never really speak to anyone?
D) The "public?" And if so, to what ends? So, some can stare blankly and nod in agreement at their ingrained stereotypes?

I'm not even clear on who his audience is.

This seems like The Robot from Land of the Lost - Warning! Warning! Danger, Will Robinson! when we can all see the paper mache monster.

But, the masses will eat it up. So, more power to him. Just know that while he's sipping champagne on his yacht, he doesn't really give a crap what happens to Goldman Sachs or YOU.

EdsonNascimento

The final word - a "response" to the OP's Op-Ed piece:

Why I am leaving the Empire, by Darth Vader14-03-12
TODAY is my last day at the Empire.



'I no longer have the pride, or the belief' After almost 12 years, first as a summer intern, then in the Death Star and now in London, I believe I have worked here long enough to understand the trajectory of its culture, its people and its massive, genocidal space machines. 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, throttling people with your mind continues to be sidelined in the way the firm operates and thinks about making people dead.

The Empire is one of the galaxy's largest and most important oppressive regimes and it is too integral to galactic murder to continue to act this way. The firm has veered so far from the place I joined right out of Yoda College that I can no longer in good conscience point menacingly and say that I identify with what it stands for.

For more than a decade I recruited and mentored candidates, some of whom were my secret children, through our gruelling interview process. In 2006 I managed the summer intern program in detecting strange disturbances in the Force for the 80 younglings who made the cut.

I knew it was time to leave when I realised I could no longer speak to these students inside their heads and tell them what a great place this was to work.

How did we get here? The Empire changed the way it thought about leadership. Leadership used to be about ideas, setting an example and killing your former mentor with a light sabre. Today, if you make enough money you will be promoted into a position of influence, even if you have a disturbing lack of faith.

What are three quick ways to become a leader? a) Execute on the firm's 'axes', which is Empire-speak for persuading your clients to invest in 'prime-quality' residential building plots on Alderaan that don't exist and have not existed since we blew it up. b) 'Hunt Elephants'. In English: get your clients - some of whom are sophisticated, and some of whom aren't - to tempt their friends to Cloud City and then betray them. c) Hand over rebel smugglers to an incredibly fat gangster.

When I was a first-year analyst I didn't know where the bathroom was, or how to tie my shoelaces telepathically. I was taught to be concerned with learning the ropes, finding out what a protocol droid was and putting my helmet on properly
so people could not see my badly damaged head.

My proudest moments in life - the pod race, being lured over to the Dark Side and winning a bronze medal for mind control ping-pong at the Midi-Chlorian Games - known as the Jedi Olympics - have all come through hard work, with no shortcuts.

The Empire today has become too much about shortcuts and not enough about remote strangulation. It just doesn’t feel right to me anymore.

I hope this can be a wake-up call. Make killing people in terrifying and unstoppable ways the focal point of your business again. Without it you will not exist. Weed out the morally bankrupt people, no matter how much non-existent Alderaan real estate they sell. And get the culture right again, so people want to make millions of voices cry out in terror before being suddenly silenced.

polaris_x

EdsonNascimento wrote:

But, the masses will eat it up. So, more power to him. Just know that while he's sipping champagne on his yacht, he doesn't really give a crap what happens to Goldman Sachs or YOU.

maybe ... maybe not ... you don't know him ... you like to think you do based on your own bias and cynicism ...

oh well ... to each their own ...

81

EdsonNascimento wrote:

The final word - a "response" to the OP's Op-Ed piece:

http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/news/society/why-i-am-leaving-the-empire,-by-darth-vader-201203145007/

copy paste?

doesn't want to open for me

Black Diamond

EdsonNascimento wrote:

Ehh. Sounds like a disgruntled employee that didn't get a promotion or something who wants to leave, but has a non-compete, so he can't take his biggest clients with him (irony alert!), so goes public to get sympathy. I'd be more impressed if he announced he was giving away his Mercedes, Ferrari and the 2 "extra" houses he has (I have no idea what he has, just sayin').

There's obviously truth in what he says (but we already knew that). But, it's also 1 side of a story (the one we WANT to believe is 100% true b/c it fits our view of the world). Do we honestly believe this guy is out to save Goldman Sachs (which is the underlying theme)? And if not, what's his motive?

The one point he's clearly right about - when their clients leave, their day will be over. And, he's made a very public stance on that b/c he can't get his clients to come with him any other way. So, who's the self serving one?

But, alas, in the end, it is what it is. It's like when folks come to these forums to bid farewell.... Good riddance.

This is the closest to the motivation I can see... Had very similar reaction and thoughts.

EdsonNascimento

polaris_x wrote:

EdsonNascimento wrote:

But, the masses will eat it up. So, more power to him. Just know that while he's sipping champagne on his yacht, he doesn't really give a crap what happens to Goldman Sachs or YOU.

maybe ... maybe not ... you don't know him ... you like to think you do based on your own bias and cynicism ...

oh well ... to each their own ...

Just like you don't know the people he's talking about. You like to think you do based on your own bias and lack of cynicism.....

EdsonNascimento

81 wrote:

copy paste?

doesn't want to open for me

Good idea. See above.

81

that was an aweful read.

perhaps we should delete all posts related to the new article and pretend it didn't happen.

polaris_x

EdsonNascimento wrote:

There's obviously truth in what he says (but we already knew that). But, it's also 1 side of a story (the one we WANT to believe is 100% true b/c it fits our view of the world). Do we honestly believe this guy is out to save Goldman Sachs (which is the underlying theme)? And if not, what's his motive?

haha ... dude ... this is what you wrote ... you already admitted there is truth to what he says ...

c'mon now ... i already said in various posts that i don't know the guy and that maybe your cynicism is correct ... but at the end of the day ... what he wrote is true ... you even admitted it ...

Black Diamond

81 wrote:

that was an aweful read.

perhaps we should delete all posts related to the new article and pretend it didn't happen.

EdsonNascimento

81 wrote:

that was an aweful read.

perhaps we should delete all posts related to the new article and pretend it didn't happen.

Yeah. A bit of a hack job. I just found the Jedi Olympics funny. Who cares if you did well at the Macabbai Games? Isn't THAT a short cut? (I couldn't make the real Olympics, but I made the religiously exclusive ones.) If he put that on a resume, I'd laugh. There's nothing wrong with the Macabbai Games. My cousin bowled a 300 game in it (and he didn't stop mentioning it my whole wedding weekend, so 14 years later, we still make fun of him), and I hope my kids play in the junior ones some day.

My kids always do well at Field Day. I'll make sure they put that on their college resume to point out they took no short cuts. When it was their turn to do the fill the water bucket relay, they ran ALL THE WAY to the far line before turning back....

I just find folks that feel like they need to take their member out to prove how right their view point is not only less credible, but funny (as in laughing AT them, not WITH them).