Why the article written by Greg Smith has gained so much traction, at least in my view, is that it is completely emotionally driven. In the same way a whistleblower communicates what everyone knows, but no one says, he has caught the attention of the mass media in a big almost viral way.
I have my views on the content of his letter to the editor. Each person is entitled to take a position on this - whether it be a) he's a courageous person for speaking up against something he doesn't believe in or b) what a sour puss - he probably didn't get the promotion or make the millions he had hoped for. In the end, as a rowing coach of mine once said "you are the master of the spoken word, however the written word is the master of you". Greg is now bound by his words, something that will probably make his future difficult.
Having something interesting or important to say, together with a willing and hungry audience is a powerful combination. More often than not, the barrier to not saying what you think is a certain rationality recognising the ramifications of speaking up. However to break the silence, there are only two things that can achieve this - 1) torture although even then it's not certain you'll find the truth and 2) an emotional drive to capitalise on the power given to you by your audience. The same emotional drive that wants retribution.
I would love to know the full story behind this letter to the editor!
Knowing when it is time to leave an organisation is usually an epiphany. It comes at a time when you realise you have moved on or things have moved on around you or you don't have the influence you once thought you had. For right or wrong. In a rational mindset it is easy to say c'est la vie, realise the situation and either try to do something about it or walk away. More often than not you can't do anything about it and out of principal don't want to walk away. This is where rationality gets throw from the window. This is where there the search for power starts to play out. This is where an inner burning for retribution is kindled. Subsequently this is where the trouble starts and the opportunities for those who wish to capitalise on their power -of speaking out to an audience who wants to hear- are realised.
Have we gained anything from this story? I would argue not. We have read a sensational piece of news, supporting what we already knew, what we already subscribed to (knowingly or unknowingly) but not moved forward. Soon, Greg will be forgotten, another story of GS will appear but again be swept away and the crux of the issue, bankers allegedly behaving badly, will be left to the markets and associated regulators to deal with.
I see the real takeaway from this article being the average readers' ignorance as to the inner workings of the world we live in and also the wasted opportunity that a, now former, employee had to change things that he once believed in.
I have my views on the content of his letter to the editor. Each person is entitled to take a position on this - whether it be a) he's a courageous person for speaking up against something he doesn't believe in or b) what a sour puss - he probably didn't get the promotion or make the millions he had hoped for. In the end, as a rowing coach of mine once said "you are the master of the spoken word, however the written word is the master of you". Greg is now bound by his words, something that will probably make his future difficult.
Having something interesting or important to say, together with a willing and hungry audience is a powerful combination. More often than not, the barrier to not saying what you think is a certain rationality recognising the ramifications of speaking up. However to break the silence, there are only two things that can achieve this - 1) torture although even then it's not certain you'll find the truth and 2) an emotional drive to capitalise on the power given to you by your audience. The same emotional drive that wants retribution.
I would love to know the full story behind this letter to the editor!
Knowing when it is time to leave an organisation is usually an epiphany. It comes at a time when you realise you have moved on or things have moved on around you or you don't have the influence you once thought you had. For right or wrong. In a rational mindset it is easy to say c'est la vie, realise the situation and either try to do something about it or walk away. More often than not you can't do anything about it and out of principal don't want to walk away. This is where rationality gets throw from the window. This is where there the search for power starts to play out. This is where an inner burning for retribution is kindled. Subsequently this is where the trouble starts and the opportunities for those who wish to capitalise on their power -of speaking out to an audience who wants to hear- are realised.
Have we gained anything from this story? I would argue not. We have read a sensational piece of news, supporting what we already knew, what we already subscribed to (knowingly or unknowingly) but not moved forward. Soon, Greg will be forgotten, another story of GS will appear but again be swept away and the crux of the issue, bankers allegedly behaving badly, will be left to the markets and associated regulators to deal with.
I see the real takeaway from this article being the average readers' ignorance as to the inner workings of the world we live in and also the wasted opportunity that a, now former, employee had to change things that he once believed in.