L EA D E RS H I P

D EV E LO P M E N T AT
G O L D M A N S AC H S
 Introduction

• Leadership Development Advisory Committee developing the leadership development plan

• Based on extensive 6- month research conducted on benchmark companies dealing in
different sectors(Financial services, corporations, Technology and professional services)
• The managers learned mostly through Apprenticeship Model when it was concentrated in
United States
• As the organization expanded globally, need arose to create and train leaders who could
infuse GS culture in emerging leaders of other countries
• Most productive revenue producers were not the best teachers
• The top level managers did not want to invest their time on training program
 Form and Location
New Jersey vs Manhattan
• Distinct physical location will communicate a message of status and commitment
• Presence of more than 1600 corporate universities in the US
• Manhattan based facility may be viewed as the lack of confidence of LDAC in the training program
• Cons –
– Different from GS’s culture of informal training,
– unwillingness of senior members to travel to distant location
– Unlike GE, the senior managers did not follow blindly their leaders
– Apprentice model was highly respected
– Time was valued more than anything
– Senior managers were highly performance oriented
• Suggestion - GS should initially pick up the Manhattan based location as the senior management is more focused on quality
and saving their time rather than on status. Changes should be introduced gradually as formal training program is being
perceived as a departure from the traditional approach of GS. As the training program succeeds, the facility can be built at 30
Hudson
 Faculty
Elite academics and inspirational leaders versus internal staff
• Lack of knowledge of GS culture
• Outside speakers might present generic or repetitive content and they might not be
sufficiently focused on GS needs
• Uncertainty of existing Goldman practices meeting the future leadership and talent
needs
Suggestion – The faculty should be brought from outside who has experience of working in areas
outside the USA.
• As the GS is expanding outside USA, cross cultural training needs will arise with time
• The academics should be someone who has some experience in investment banking so that he/she
can relate the theoretical concepts and its practical implications
• Training by internal staff might not help in fostering a innovative and risk taking capabilities in
emerging leaders
 Content and Format
Buy a popular model off the shelf or Customize a blend of existing approaches or design from scratch
• The training program should have a blend of GS culture and general leadership culture
– Simply copying and pasting a popular model may result in outright failure. The LDAC can take cognizance
from what works in particular sector.
• Suggestion – LDAC should build the training model from scratch by involving the senior managers and
MDs
– Involving the senior management and MDs will help in inculcating the GS culture in the model
– The senior management will be more attached to the training program as they have been involved in
designing the program
– The CEO should address the whole team(LDAC, senior management, MDs) to sensitize the
importance of
the training program
– The duration, timing and stage in career should also be decided in consultation with the senior
management and department heads
 Method
• Training method should reinforce, but not replace the traditional apprenticeship model
• In-role assignments (Project or action-based learning)
– Small groups of MDs working on the real business problems
– Constant Improvement through feedback on the quality of recommendations and the process followed to solve the problem
– Interaction with experienced leaders while doing the real work (Mentorship and Informal Coaching)
• Job structure and rotation
– Help in gaining the operational flow
– Other roles and parts of the business help in gaining collective knowledge of the organization
• Role modeling
– Helps in emulating the attributes of successful leaders
• 360 degree feedback
– Helps become aware of one’s strengths, areas of improvement
– Helps identify the actions to be taken to improve performance
– Effective leaders – good listening emotional awareness – impact of their behavior on others
 Target Audience
• Rapidly growing new line of Managing Directors
• Broad () vs Deep ( )
– Broad Courses - Unifying, Transmit culture
– Perceiving the training as too generic
– May show no interest as their specific challenges/ issues are not addressed
– Deep Courses – Customized offerings for small groups of MDs
• Should classes bring together leaders from different business units () or should various divisions have their own unique offerings (
)?
– Each MD faces a different leadership challenge
– Each division should have its own unique leadership training
– Helps to specifically concentrate on issues which are more relevant to them and the issues which they would actually face once
they assume the leadership roles
– Bringing together MDs from different BU’s for Behavioral Training
– Deepen the shared culture, promote dialogue, improves the network and builds trust and a friendly environment
 Target Audience (contd…)
• Should classes be offered to MDs with varying levels of experience ( ) or to groups with mixed tenure levels
() ?
– Integrated classes may result in the dominance of senior MDs
– Inexperienced MDs may mostly accept the views of seniors rather than bringing fresh perspectives onto
the table
– Hence, cater to varying levels of experience differently
– Promotes a feeling of oneness and freedom, than bringing in the biases of senior(superior) and
junior(inferior)
– Promotes competitiveness
 Governance and Sponsorship
• Who should own leadership development?
• Human Capital Management Division vs Stand-alone Structure
• HCM (  )
– LD – A task of Human Resource Management Division
– Integration of LD tools with existing HR metrics and objectives
– HCM Division may put in sufficient efforts to address to the needs and requirements of developing leaders
– Expertise in dealing with such training programs
– However, MDs may view it as a generic offering. Hence, LDP has to be projected in a way different than others
by involving the respective BU’s as well
• New stand-alone structure (  )
– Projects a view of LDP as a special, unique and distinct from the regular training
– Requires developing new mechanisms and structures for staffing, which Goldman Sachs is lacking now
Thank
s