"The poisonous pen letter" by Smith threw the company, Goldman Sachs, into the spotlight. Again more so with Levin yelling at Blankfein. But ethically? It is suspicious and shady that he went to the public on his last day with his issues. Not only does it reflect the idea that he doesn't care about the actual standards of his work place that he would try to change it or influence it while he's there, but it also shows that he is unprofessional. While it is a well-written letter, to say the least, it is definitely passive aggressive. I think the company handled it well and called it by its appropriate name. They acknowledged the issue and "expressed their shock and disappointment" but also the tardiness of the complaint. In a show of good faith, however, they said they would work to improve the internal climate. I think they made a good move changing their PR person too, especially with the fact that the new professional is well-liked.
Smith- what was holding you back during your time with the company? Why didn't you try to change these standards then? He refused to discuss more on the subject beside his general pen letter, besides the fact that he was writing a 'tell-all'. But the real question is whether his letter forced more people to speak out or if it disrupted the reputation in general with its employees and clientele.
No comments:
Post a Comment