The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. is an American investment banking and securities firm that engages in global investment banking, securities, investment management, and other financial services primarily with institutional clients. Goldman Sachs was founded in 1869 and is headquartered at 200 West Street in the Lower Manhattan area of New York City, with additional offices in major international financial centers. The firm provides mergers and acquisitions advice, underwriting services, asset management, and prime brokerage to its clients, which include corporations, governments and individuals. The firm also engages in proprietary trading and private equity deals, and is a primary dealer in the United States Treasury security market.
Former employees include Robert Rubin and Henry Paulson who served as United States Secretary of the Treasury under Presidents Bill Clinton and George W. Bush, respectively, as well as Mark Carney, the governor of the Bank of Canada since 2008.
Employee affinity networks and interest forums, which are open to all employees, develop programming and initiatives to support the firm’s diversity and inclusion strategy. The networks and forums deliver training and educational programs, create networking forums, host leadership conferences, and sponsor client events. To foster a supportive and inclusive environment, we have developed and support over 80 affinity networks and interest forums globally at the firm.
• The Asian Professionals Network serves as a bridge for the recruitment, retention, development and promotion of Asian professionals. The network is a channel to share ideas, raise awareness and create a sense of collaboration and community among Asian professionals and the broader community.
• The Firmwide Black Network aims to enhance professional development and advancement opportunities for Black employees and advises senior business managers regarding the firm's diversity strategy and issues of importance to the firm's Black community.
• The Firmwide Hispanic/Latin Network focuses on recruitment, retention, promotion, development and advocacy for the Goldman Sachs Hispanic/Latin community.
• The Lesbian, Gay, Transgender and Bisexual (LGBT) Network advocates a work environment that respects, welcomes and supports lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender professionals and enables them to perform to their fullest potential and contribute to the greater goals of the firm.
• The Goldman Sachs Women’s Network enhances the Goldman Sachs experience for female professionals by implementing programs that foster greater interaction among peers as well as the broader community, while acting as a collective voice for raising women's issues to senior management.
• The Disability Interest Forum aims to create an inclusive environment at Goldman Sachs that is accessible to current and future employees, clients, candidates and guests with a disability. This includes providing support for employees with a disability, those who develop a disability during employment and those who are caregivers for people with disabilities.
• The Working Parent Forum works to create a support community for working parents, and act as a forum for raising parents’ issues to senior management.
• The Informal Religious Support Groups work to increase awareness and understanding about how religious practices and beliefs impact the workplace and are a helpful resource for managers and employees to facilitate the accommodation of religious practices at work.
These groups provide an opportunity for our people to share concerns and feedback, and to develop professional relationships with those from other business units and divisions. Additionally, these initiatives help our people to identify opportunities for professional development and advancement, in order to achieve their full potential.
Health Care, Insurance and Other Benefits
Goldman Sachs provides a variety of benefits that vary by region but generally include the following features:
Health care: a choice of medical plans, as well as prescription drug, vision and dental care plans
Insurance: life, disability and sickness, and business travel accident insurance plans
Holiday and vacation policies: a competitive offering of holidays and vacation time, generally based on employee status and years of service
Retirement
The firm offers a variety of retirement and financial plans that differ by region and are designed to allow employees to build a strategy for meeting their personal long-term financial objectives
Paradoxal, asa cum arata o analiza a celor de la Bloomberg, secretul succesului a fost asumarea riscului. Pe 20 septembrie, Goldman Sachs a “socat”, practic, intreaga lume financiara, anuntand realizarea in trimestrul trei a unui profit de 2,85 de miliarde dolari (2,02 miliarde euro), o crestere de 79 de procente fata de perioada similara a anului trecut.
Aceasta, in conditiile in care nume precum Merrill Lynch, Citigroup, Bank of America sau UBS s-au inscris, rand pe rand, pe lista victimelor ale caror pierderi totale vor depasi, potrivit Financial Times, 20 de miliarde dolari (14,19 de miliarde de euro).
Merrill Lynch, cel mai important broker american, si UBS, cel mai important bancher european, au inregistrat primul trimestru cu pierderi din ultimii cinci ani.
Merrill a anuntat pierderi de 5,5 miliarde dolari (3,90 de miliarde euro), motivand ca vinovate de aceasta situatie s-ar face “fluctuatia fara precedent a pietelor financiare si lipsa de lichiditate inregistrata in trimestrul trei”.
Goldman Sachs a inteles ca fluctuatia burselor inseamna oportunitati de castig si a ales sa creasca gradul de risc al investitiilor sale. Un risc, totusi, calculat si nu chiar atat de mare pe cat si-ar putea inchipui unii, dupa cum explica Michael Holland, de la fondul de investitii Holland & Co, “lumea reala arata mult mai bine decat este prezentata in stirile de jurnal”, iar asa cum arata Bill Grayson, de la fondul de investitii Falcon Point Capital, “carnagiul din aceasta vara a reprezentat pentru investitorii dornici sa isi asume riscuri o oportunitate uriasa”.
Ca orice fond de risc, Goldman Sachs si-a asumat mai multe riscuri decat rivalii sai. Astfel, banca a acceptat in trimestrul trei un nivel asumat de pierderi de 139 milioane de dolari (98 milioane de euro) per zi, unul cu 51 de procente mai mare decat cel din anul trecut, cel mai ridicat din istoria companiei, potrivit rapoartelor interne. Morgan Stanley a acceptat un nivel de doar 87 milioane de dolari (61 milioane de euro), iar Lehman Brothers, unul de 96 milioane (68 milioane de euro).
Valoarea titlurilor Goldman Sachs a crescut de la inceputul anului cu 14,6 procente - cea mai buna performanta intre primii cinci jucatori de pe piata americana de capital.
Cheia succesului
Goldman Sachs a inteles ca fluctuatia burselor inseamna oportunitati de castig si a ales sa creasca gradul de risc al investitiilor sale.
Employee retention and turnover are topics of a lot of conversations centering on HR. in today’s competitive world, company loyalty and a familiarity with the organization most often takes a back seat when a talented employee gets an attractive offer from another company. As he decides whether to take the leap or not, his predicament is made worse by his present firm whose members decide to try every trick in the book to persuade him to stay. If he decides to leave, the story does not finish here. Rather, the pressurizing tactics only get worse. Some people succumb to this pressure and stay while others are slightly braver and enter the world of the unknown, specifically a new company. But the question is, when do organizations go too far in trying to keep an employee who has decided to leave? There must be a boundary between acceptable and unacceptable behavior. And is employee turnover really so bad? These are the questions to be answered from here on.
Today, recruiting and training costs have become so high that employers are trying whatever is within their reach to keep employees. And this makes perfect sense. This is because after all, all the company wants to do is keep one of its most valuable assets. But there are certain ethical issues involved. In the article by Denise Lugo, when the employers at Goldman Sachs found out that three of their Italian foreign exchange specialists were planning to leave because of their enmity with a particular boss, they fired the boss and retained their employees. Psychological pressure, promises of salary increases and tactics like the one mentioned earlier are the lengths which the firms go to prevent their employees from jumping the ship. There is no set line, beyond which it can be said that the firm has gone too far. It is a subjective matter, where it is impossible to judge whether the firm acted in good faith or out of spite, ego, or its selfish interests. Turnover, as will be discussed later can be good and bad. If the employee who is leaving is definitely an asset to the company, and if the cost of replacing him is far more than what would cost to entice him to stay, then it is best that the company does try its utmost to keep him. But according to Joe Grimm who is Recruitment and Development Editor at the Detroit Free Press, “Offer growth. People want to get better … if yours is a place where it takes five years to find a new opportunity, people will find another way.” Companies should try to help their employees’ careers in order to get them to stay, instead of trying to please them in hopes of low turnover
There are a lot of factors which go into this: the headhunter's fee, the defector's lost leads and contacts, the new employee's depressed productivity while they are learning, and the time co-workers spend guiding the new employee, attracting applicants, entrance interviews, testing, pre-employment administrative expenses, medical exams; and acquisition and dissemination of information. There is no arguing with this point: employee turnover is bad because it takes a lot of time, energy and resources (Pinkovitz, Moskal & Green, 2004; Hansen, 1997).
Employee turnover however, gives employers a chance to refresh the company and rid it of people who are not helping the company’s cause in the grand scheme of things. When a company tries too hard to retain employees who simply don’t belong, it introduces in the environment a certain blandness and mediocrity. The company feels that it has to keep all of its employees and tries to please them in every possible way. Employees start to stay because of the benefits plan of the company, and not because they are particularly passionate about the company and its culture. Before long, the talented employees start paying attention to headhunters, since they want to be in a company which regards success in terms of market share and the below average employees secure their place in the company knowing they won’t get these fringe benefits anywhere else. Secondly, employees who want to leave but are persuaded by employers to stay often do so out of loyalty or pressure. These are dissatisfied employees who will not be very productive anyway at the end of the day. Hence, turnover can be good, in certain situations. But turnover of talented employees must be avoided
Goldman Sachs acknowledged in an SEC filing that mounting criticism in the press is a risk to the firm. Goldman should be concerned. A firm’s reputation affects employer brand, employee engagement and employee retention. In the past Goldman employees were proud to say they worked for the firm. Not so today following a long string of articles where Goldman has been referred to as a blood-sucking leech in the economy that cares only about its bottom line. I cringe when I read such reports because I have several good friends who work or have worked at Goldman and without exception I trust and respect each one. That said, having worked on Wall Street for most of my career, I know that people get caught up in thinking what they do is a game the score of which is determined by how much money they make relative to others. This mindset encourages imprudent risk-taking and behavior that may meet the letter of the law, but not the spirit. (Note: the gamesman profile was first described by Michael Maccoby in his book The Gamesman.)
I advise leaders that they must clearly communicate a set of virtuous values and keep them in front of employees. The most effective leaders do this by celebrating the stories of individuals who exhibit the right values and getting rid of employees who don’t. Absent a clear focus on virtuous values, an organization’s members will eventually stray into ethically questionable behavior that can destroy the firm. And with organizations such as Goldman that are interconnected to many companies and countries via derivative contracts, they can take the economy down with them. That’s one reason I agree with Paul Volker and others who support effective regulation of financial services organizations.
Former employees include Robert Rubin and Henry Paulson who served as United States Secretary of the Treasury under Presidents Bill Clinton and George W. Bush, respectively, as well as Mark Carney, the governor of the Bank of Canada since 2008.
Employee affinity networks and interest forums, which are open to all employees, develop programming and initiatives to support the firm’s diversity and inclusion strategy. The networks and forums deliver training and educational programs, create networking forums, host leadership conferences, and sponsor client events. To foster a supportive and inclusive environment, we have developed and support over 80 affinity networks and interest forums globally at the firm.
• The Asian Professionals Network serves as a bridge for the recruitment, retention, development and promotion of Asian professionals. The network is a channel to share ideas, raise awareness and create a sense of collaboration and community among Asian professionals and the broader community.
• The Firmwide Black Network aims to enhance professional development and advancement opportunities for Black employees and advises senior business managers regarding the firm's diversity strategy and issues of importance to the firm's Black community.
• The Firmwide Hispanic/Latin Network focuses on recruitment, retention, promotion, development and advocacy for the Goldman Sachs Hispanic/Latin community.
• The Lesbian, Gay, Transgender and Bisexual (LGBT) Network advocates a work environment that respects, welcomes and supports lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender professionals and enables them to perform to their fullest potential and contribute to the greater goals of the firm.
• The Goldman Sachs Women’s Network enhances the Goldman Sachs experience for female professionals by implementing programs that foster greater interaction among peers as well as the broader community, while acting as a collective voice for raising women's issues to senior management.
• The Disability Interest Forum aims to create an inclusive environment at Goldman Sachs that is accessible to current and future employees, clients, candidates and guests with a disability. This includes providing support for employees with a disability, those who develop a disability during employment and those who are caregivers for people with disabilities.
• The Working Parent Forum works to create a support community for working parents, and act as a forum for raising parents’ issues to senior management.
• The Informal Religious Support Groups work to increase awareness and understanding about how religious practices and beliefs impact the workplace and are a helpful resource for managers and employees to facilitate the accommodation of religious practices at work.
These groups provide an opportunity for our people to share concerns and feedback, and to develop professional relationships with those from other business units and divisions. Additionally, these initiatives help our people to identify opportunities for professional development and advancement, in order to achieve their full potential.
Health Care, Insurance and Other Benefits
Goldman Sachs provides a variety of benefits that vary by region but generally include the following features:
Health care: a choice of medical plans, as well as prescription drug, vision and dental care plans
Insurance: life, disability and sickness, and business travel accident insurance plans
Holiday and vacation policies: a competitive offering of holidays and vacation time, generally based on employee status and years of service
Retirement
The firm offers a variety of retirement and financial plans that differ by region and are designed to allow employees to build a strategy for meeting their personal long-term financial objectives
Paradoxal, asa cum arata o analiza a celor de la Bloomberg, secretul succesului a fost asumarea riscului. Pe 20 septembrie, Goldman Sachs a “socat”, practic, intreaga lume financiara, anuntand realizarea in trimestrul trei a unui profit de 2,85 de miliarde dolari (2,02 miliarde euro), o crestere de 79 de procente fata de perioada similara a anului trecut.
Aceasta, in conditiile in care nume precum Merrill Lynch, Citigroup, Bank of America sau UBS s-au inscris, rand pe rand, pe lista victimelor ale caror pierderi totale vor depasi, potrivit Financial Times, 20 de miliarde dolari (14,19 de miliarde de euro).
Merrill Lynch, cel mai important broker american, si UBS, cel mai important bancher european, au inregistrat primul trimestru cu pierderi din ultimii cinci ani.
Merrill a anuntat pierderi de 5,5 miliarde dolari (3,90 de miliarde euro), motivand ca vinovate de aceasta situatie s-ar face “fluctuatia fara precedent a pietelor financiare si lipsa de lichiditate inregistrata in trimestrul trei”.
Goldman Sachs a inteles ca fluctuatia burselor inseamna oportunitati de castig si a ales sa creasca gradul de risc al investitiilor sale. Un risc, totusi, calculat si nu chiar atat de mare pe cat si-ar putea inchipui unii, dupa cum explica Michael Holland, de la fondul de investitii Holland & Co, “lumea reala arata mult mai bine decat este prezentata in stirile de jurnal”, iar asa cum arata Bill Grayson, de la fondul de investitii Falcon Point Capital, “carnagiul din aceasta vara a reprezentat pentru investitorii dornici sa isi asume riscuri o oportunitate uriasa”.
Ca orice fond de risc, Goldman Sachs si-a asumat mai multe riscuri decat rivalii sai. Astfel, banca a acceptat in trimestrul trei un nivel asumat de pierderi de 139 milioane de dolari (98 milioane de euro) per zi, unul cu 51 de procente mai mare decat cel din anul trecut, cel mai ridicat din istoria companiei, potrivit rapoartelor interne. Morgan Stanley a acceptat un nivel de doar 87 milioane de dolari (61 milioane de euro), iar Lehman Brothers, unul de 96 milioane (68 milioane de euro).
Valoarea titlurilor Goldman Sachs a crescut de la inceputul anului cu 14,6 procente - cea mai buna performanta intre primii cinci jucatori de pe piata americana de capital.
Cheia succesului
Goldman Sachs a inteles ca fluctuatia burselor inseamna oportunitati de castig si a ales sa creasca gradul de risc al investitiilor sale.
Employee retention and turnover are topics of a lot of conversations centering on HR. in today’s competitive world, company loyalty and a familiarity with the organization most often takes a back seat when a talented employee gets an attractive offer from another company. As he decides whether to take the leap or not, his predicament is made worse by his present firm whose members decide to try every trick in the book to persuade him to stay. If he decides to leave, the story does not finish here. Rather, the pressurizing tactics only get worse. Some people succumb to this pressure and stay while others are slightly braver and enter the world of the unknown, specifically a new company. But the question is, when do organizations go too far in trying to keep an employee who has decided to leave? There must be a boundary between acceptable and unacceptable behavior. And is employee turnover really so bad? These are the questions to be answered from here on.
Today, recruiting and training costs have become so high that employers are trying whatever is within their reach to keep employees. And this makes perfect sense. This is because after all, all the company wants to do is keep one of its most valuable assets. But there are certain ethical issues involved. In the article by Denise Lugo, when the employers at Goldman Sachs found out that three of their Italian foreign exchange specialists were planning to leave because of their enmity with a particular boss, they fired the boss and retained their employees. Psychological pressure, promises of salary increases and tactics like the one mentioned earlier are the lengths which the firms go to prevent their employees from jumping the ship. There is no set line, beyond which it can be said that the firm has gone too far. It is a subjective matter, where it is impossible to judge whether the firm acted in good faith or out of spite, ego, or its selfish interests. Turnover, as will be discussed later can be good and bad. If the employee who is leaving is definitely an asset to the company, and if the cost of replacing him is far more than what would cost to entice him to stay, then it is best that the company does try its utmost to keep him. But according to Joe Grimm who is Recruitment and Development Editor at the Detroit Free Press, “Offer growth. People want to get better … if yours is a place where it takes five years to find a new opportunity, people will find another way.” Companies should try to help their employees’ careers in order to get them to stay, instead of trying to please them in hopes of low turnover
There are a lot of factors which go into this: the headhunter's fee, the defector's lost leads and contacts, the new employee's depressed productivity while they are learning, and the time co-workers spend guiding the new employee, attracting applicants, entrance interviews, testing, pre-employment administrative expenses, medical exams; and acquisition and dissemination of information. There is no arguing with this point: employee turnover is bad because it takes a lot of time, energy and resources (Pinkovitz, Moskal & Green, 2004; Hansen, 1997).
Employee turnover however, gives employers a chance to refresh the company and rid it of people who are not helping the company’s cause in the grand scheme of things. When a company tries too hard to retain employees who simply don’t belong, it introduces in the environment a certain blandness and mediocrity. The company feels that it has to keep all of its employees and tries to please them in every possible way. Employees start to stay because of the benefits plan of the company, and not because they are particularly passionate about the company and its culture. Before long, the talented employees start paying attention to headhunters, since they want to be in a company which regards success in terms of market share and the below average employees secure their place in the company knowing they won’t get these fringe benefits anywhere else. Secondly, employees who want to leave but are persuaded by employers to stay often do so out of loyalty or pressure. These are dissatisfied employees who will not be very productive anyway at the end of the day. Hence, turnover can be good, in certain situations. But turnover of talented employees must be avoided
Goldman Sachs acknowledged in an SEC filing that mounting criticism in the press is a risk to the firm. Goldman should be concerned. A firm’s reputation affects employer brand, employee engagement and employee retention. In the past Goldman employees were proud to say they worked for the firm. Not so today following a long string of articles where Goldman has been referred to as a blood-sucking leech in the economy that cares only about its bottom line. I cringe when I read such reports because I have several good friends who work or have worked at Goldman and without exception I trust and respect each one. That said, having worked on Wall Street for most of my career, I know that people get caught up in thinking what they do is a game the score of which is determined by how much money they make relative to others. This mindset encourages imprudent risk-taking and behavior that may meet the letter of the law, but not the spirit. (Note: the gamesman profile was first described by Michael Maccoby in his book The Gamesman.)
I advise leaders that they must clearly communicate a set of virtuous values and keep them in front of employees. The most effective leaders do this by celebrating the stories of individuals who exhibit the right values and getting rid of employees who don’t. Absent a clear focus on virtuous values, an organization’s members will eventually stray into ethically questionable behavior that can destroy the firm. And with organizations such as Goldman that are interconnected to many companies and countries via derivative contracts, they can take the economy down with them. That’s one reason I agree with Paul Volker and others who support effective regulation of financial services organizations.
Last edited: