Frank Coulson - A Man Who Truly Made A Difference

Last Friday I was travelling home from New York City and started a conversation with the man sitting next to me. In short order we figured out that he was a good friend of the daughter of a dear friend of ours. A few minutes later another connection was made. A colleague travelling with him used to work at Goldman Sachs in the Philadelphia office. In chatting with this gentleman the conversation quickly went to someone I knew we both knew well from that office, Frank Coulson.

Frank was a partner in the fixed income division and a truly legendary bond salesman. I told my new friend that I would very likely not be on this plane, not be doing what I am doing now, if it were not for Frank Coulson. I went on to tell him the story about the largest single trade I ever did as a mortgage backed bond trader at Goldman, and that trade was with Frank. The story of that trade is forever captured in the book “More Than 85 Broads: Women Making Career Choices, Taking Risks, and Defining Success on Their Own Terms.”

The story contrasts how two men treated a young woman (me) on the trading floor one particular day, doing her best to be the best trader she could be. Frank was the hero of the story. Frank was the hero because on that day he trusted me, despite my inexperience, to execute a huge trade for his best client when he could have easily gone over my head. That day, that trade, that TRUST truly changed my life. It was that day I realized I could survive and maybe even thrive as a Wall Street Trader.

After sharing that story I went back to my seat, grabbed my journal and started writing about Frank. Today I heard that Frank Coulson passed away. My deepest condolences go to Frank’s family. He was a spectacular man and I am grateful to have known and worked with him. He really did change my life.

Goldman's Research on Women

There are a lot of reasons not to like Goldman Sachs right now (including that they only have one board member that is a woman) , but let me give you a BIG positive. For years now Goldman has been producing cutting edge research on women and the economy. They have highlighted the growing economic power of women in terms of their collective purchasing power as well as how a country will be better off on multiple fronts by working to narrow the gender gap. Please find below a link to their reports and a synopsis. Thanks to Goldman for this compelling reserach.

"Australia's Hidden Resource: The Economic Case For Increasing Female Participation" November 30, 2009

-An alternative source of highly educated labour is already at Australia's disposal and with the right set of policy options this pool of labour can be unlocked. Closing the gap between male and female employment rates would have important implications for the Australian economy. The authors estimate that closing this gap would boost the level of Australian GDP by 11%. Indeed, much progress in closing this gap has already occurred over the past 30 years with the rise in the female employment rate since 1974 boosting economic activity by 22%. In this respect, Australia is only 2/3rds of the way to unlocking the hidden value of the female labour pool.

"Power of the Purse: Gender Equality and Middle-Class Spending" August 5, 2009

-In the BRICs and N-11 countries, gender gaps in education, employment, health and political representation are narrowing. At the same time, laws and social norms that have discriminated against women are shifting in many countries.Together, these factors are giving women greater decision-making power. Improving gender equality coincides with the rapid growth of the “global middle class.” Sectors likely to benefit from women’s growing buying power include food, healthcare, education, childcare, apparel, consumer durables and financial services.

"Women Hold Up Half the Sky" 2008

-The Chinese proverb that ‘women hold up half the sky' has long been more aspiration than fact. In developed and developing countries alike, gender gaps persist in education, health, work, wages and political participation. Education is key to gender equality. Educating girls and women leads to higher wages; a greater likelihood of working outside the home; lower fertility; reduced maternal and child mortality; and better health and education. The impact is felt not only in women’s lifetimes, but also in the health, education and productivity of future generations.

"Womenomics: Japan's Hidden Asset" October 2005

-Don’t underestimate the power of the purse. Higher female participation in the workforce can help mitigate some of Japan’s demographic pressures and raise the long-term trend growth rate. Womenomics is likely to become a secular investment theme, and we identify potential beneficiaries.

Sylvia Ann Hewlett and The Center for Work Life Policy

I adore Sylvia and had the honor of serving on the board of The Center For Work Life Policy, an organization she started, for many years. ( click here from FB) The center does cutting edge research on human capital management issues and the Hidden Brain Drain Task-Force turns this research in to action. For a list of their research click here.

Thursday Sylvia had an OPED published in the Financial Times called "A Final Push Can Break the Glass Ceiling" on their newest Sponsor Effect research. It is an extremely well written piece and a timely one given the prior days announcement of a new round of GS partners.

Here is my summary of her article:

- Yes progress but women still hold only 15% of corporate board seats, make up less then 5% of top earners and 3% of Fortune 500 CEOS. Numbers are worse in the UK.

-Why? Talk of discrimination,work/family trade-offs, lack of the 'vision thing', nor ambitious enough. She says.. much more to it.

-Her new research - "women who are qualified to lead stall not for lack of drive, but for lack of push." It is about sponsorship.

-Why the difficulties in getting sponsors? Reluctance to give women feedback, fear of mentor ship either being perceived as or leading to more (the sex thing), and more.

- UK is pushing forward with a 'plan to take female representation on corporate boards to 50%."

- This week on Tuesday "a group of major companies launched a new "30% club" aiming to increase female board representation to 30% by 2015."

Personally I was blessed to have some amazing sponsors at GS, including a man named Mike Mortara who was my immediate boss and later the head of fixed income. There is no doubt that I would not have made partner without his intentional support and mentor ship. There were others as well and I could not agree more with Sylvia's findings and the importance of these strong relationships. Later when I worked on the partner selection process it was so clear that without a senior person pushing for the candidate, they were less likely to make it through. When push came to shove and it was one candidate versus another, the power and voice of who was in the room pushing for them made all the difference. It was also my experience that it was more likely that a woman did not have that voice in the room, and their road to partnership became much longer.

Thank you Sylvia for the work you do. It is truly an honor to be in your circle and connected to the work of the Center. If you have not already read it, I would highly recommend Syliva's book "Creating a Life: What Every Women Needs to Know about Having A Child and a Career," as well as her latest, "On Ramps and Off Ramps: Keeping Talented Women on the Road to Success." ( click here for Amazon)

Goldman Announces a New Partner Class

It is a big day for over 100 people who were named the new Goldman Partners. I remember getting the phone call in 1996 from Jon Corzine, as did my husband Greg, and it was special indeed. At the ripe old age of 32 I was invited to be part of a club, perhaps the club, and one of only a handful of women to be so named. Two years ago I wrote an oped about it, and in the words of Forest Gump - "That's all I have to say about it." Well.. maybe not all, but that is all I have to say for now.

Congratulations to all the new partners, and in particular the women partners. Use your position wisely and for the benefit of the women to follow. Though I cannot tell how many of the new partners are women one web-site said it was 10%, which if true, is disappointing. For a leader in corporate diversity my fingers are crossed that the numbers are much, much higher.

ps - I hope you all are still having that brunch.

The Lack of Women in Finance - A RANT!!!!!!

Women in Finance is a hot topic these days. (click here from FB) I can barely keep up with the articles talking about the lack of women on the street, pay disparities, lawsuits and more. Here is the most recent from BLOOMBERG filled with great stats:

- Women in Finance earn 63.9 cents for every dollar men made in 2000.
- Same stat for 2001 - 58.8 cents

- Biggest gap in any of the 13 industries surveyed by the Government Accountability Office

- Number of women in finance, banking and insurance in the US fell by 537,000 between the second quarter of 2007 and the second quarter this year

- Citigroup does not have any women on their executive committee - 19 men

The reasons as to " why so few" are many and the research paper "Women in Fund Management: A Roadmap to Critical Mass and Why it Matters" addresses this in detail ( click here ), but her is more of my personal take:

- Pipeline issues - Fewer women then in math, science and business programs. Fewer women choose to enter the field out of undergrad or graduate school. That said, when the environment is perceived as not "women-friendly", no wonder.

- Gender Discrimination and Bias - Wall Street and finance in general is still very much a 'boys club.' Some firms are better then others, but all the major institutions are governed by men and many of them bring their personal biases to work place and for some, bad behavior. When I began on Wall Street strippers still made visits to the trading floor in celebration of someone's birthday, and thank heaven those days are behind us. That said, it is naive to think that men who think that it is fine to stuff hundred dollar bills in g-strings of naked women at night, don't bring some of that to the workplace with them in terms of how they manage, mentor, co-exist with women in the work place. On the other hand I think some women bring too much of their sexuality in to the workplace and I have seen them use it as a tool to get ahead. It is a delicate balance and one that women, more then men, will have to manage. More relevant is the reality that we are more comfortable with, and confident with people that look and act like ourselves. If you are a man, that means men. In a male dominated work place it takes a huge effort to move away from that tendency and needs to be driven by a deep belief that talent comes in both genders, and all colors. Great new book on this - Laura Liswood "The Loudest Duck: Moving Beyond Diversity While Embracing Differences to Achieve Success in the Workplace."

- Problems with Diversity Initiatives and Programs - Despite a lot of good intentions and good programs, too many managers remain ill-equipped to manage a diverse population. Many firms have pages of programs, but the numbers are not changing and it is time to ask why. Too many firms are just checking the box with programs rather than creating accountability for their outcomes. Evaluate. Measure. Rewards positive outcomes.

- Fear of law-suits and the challenge in firing poor performers that are women and minorities. This is a big issue that is not being talked about. It is a chicken and the egg thing. Because there are so few women and minorites, if they end up not being good at their job ( and that may be because of bad management) it is hard to fire them. The are 'saved' as one manager said to me and this creates huge resentment by the manager and the team. The effect might well be that managers who have experienced this become reluctant to hire women and minorities unless they feel they are a "sure thing." It is just easier to fire men if they are not good, so why not hire just them to begin with? Think about this scenerio. You are a guy with good intentions who tries to hire the best talent for his team. Most of the hires are MBASs with no real experience and thus it is all about perceived potential. You have men and women candidates. They look the same. You had the experience with a prior hire, a woman, who proved not to be cut out for the job but despite your efforts to train her and HR would not allow you to fire her. You were told to pour more and more energy in to her success and it just was not working. Sure if she is great you get pats on the back and you have a great team member, but the downside is there. If you just hired the guy and he was great, great! If he did not work out, bye bye. It is at this level that we must think about as it is at the heart of WHY so few women I believe. We have to think hard about the personal and organizational incentives and disincentives around creating a more diverse workforce.

-Maternity Leave - Let's be real. This is a big issue. If you have a desk full of 20-30 year old women, they are going to have babies. As a manager if your employee is out on maternity leave, it means more work for the rest of team, likely without additional compensation. In an industry where all employees are worked to the bone, this is an issue. Again it is about incentives. Firms need to take a big look at this issue.

- Work-life Balance. This will always be more of an issue for women then men. Women have the kids and the pressures to be a 'good mom' are big. This may be the ultimate reason why we don't get to 50/50. That said, I have met PLENTY of women who choose not to have kids, have husbands with more flexibility and so on. This challenge can be addressed institutionally with more flexibility in roles, but the cultural issues remain. Men in finance have to want to be more then the funders of their families for things to really change. They have to want to be great dads in the same way that I think most women want to be great moms. It means being there for more then weekends and family vacations. I KNOW there are some amazing dads out there who are also senior organizational leaders, so this is a generalization. There is a win/win here for all if corporate America cared more about supporting families.

- CULTURE CULTURE CULTURE - First institutionally. I worked at Goldman Sachs for 14 years. Their culture prides itself on being a meritocracy. That belief is core to their being. I had this experience years ago at a management committee/partnerhship committee offsite on diversity. We were in a small group discussion about why so few women and minorities at the firm. At my table were 9 men and myself. I asked them "look around this room filled with our most senior leaders. Do you think this room is 90% white men because they are the best, the brightest, the hardest working?" They answered YES. They truly believed it. It was not long after that I left the firm. These are not bad people, in fact most of them are GREAT people. They do not know what they do not know and most of them walk around in the world as privileged, powerful, white men. ( I walk around as a privileged white woman)Most of them do not experience exclusion or discrimination and because of it they have no frame of reference for it. They are immune. They do not personally experience discrimination so it is easy for them to assume it does not exist. That classic well it did not happen to ME so I guess it does not happen at all. Catalyst did a GREAT report about getting men engaged in diversity initiatives and they said that the men most likely to be diversity champions have experienced BIAS PERSONALLY!!!

Our broader CULTURE. We still live in a world that values men and boys more then women and girls. This is the issue I will work on for the rest of my life. This manifests itself in a million different ways in our homes, in the media, in the workplace and in the world in general. We have focused a lot of energy towards building up girls self-esteem which is awesome. Increasingly the world recognizes the need to get financial resources in the hands of women, especially in the developed world. Again awesome. But.. we have a long way to go. We are talking about power and control and changing the status quo so it will be hard.

Bottom line is this. We all have to care about creating a workplace, a world, where access and opportunity is available for all. We have to digest that the world is not fair, and if we made it to a place of privilege we OWE it to others that they have their shot too. We have to recognize that gender discrimination is everywhere and we have to look for it so we can eliminate it. I believe with all my heart that a more gender balanced world is in the best interest of all. In that world there will be more women leading institutions and more men free to be in the home being amazing husbands and fathers. Men and women are suppose to be in it together.

The Glass Hammer ...and the GS Lawsuit

Nicki Gilmour is the founder of the GLASSHAMMER and one fantastic young women. If you do not know of this site please subscribe and better yet contact her to find out more about her business.

Nicki had this to say about the GS Lawsuit. She too sees the downside of litigation. There is no doubt that the low numbers of women on Wall Street, particularly in senior leadership positions, indicate that gender discrimination is still alive and well. That said it is not the ONLY reason and I truly believe there are a lot of well intending people who want to do better in the hiring, retention and promotion of women. What is needed is some open, honest and constructive dialog on WHY diversity programs and policies have failed to deliver the intended results. For a resource on this topic please download the research paper from the National Council for Research on Women.

BBC - Women's Hour - GS Class Action Suit

Airing today is a segment where I spoke to the GS Class Action Suit. Click here to listen.

Class Action Launched Against GS

A class action law suit was filed today against Goldman Sachs. The entire suit can be found on this link. ( click here ) The details are below.

National Class Action Lawsuit in Federal Court Charges Violations of Federal and Local Civil Rights Laws
Business Wire
NEW YORK -- September 15, 2010
Goldman Sachs has engaged in systemic and pervasive discrimination against its female professional employees, a lawsuit filed today in federal court in New York alleges.
The lawsuit, Chen-Oster v. Goldman Sachs, Inc., Case No. 10-6950 (S.D.N.Y.), filed by three highly-credentialed women represented by Outten & Golden LLP and Lieff, Cabraser, Heimann & Bernstein, LLP, accuses Goldman Sachs, a leading global investment banking, securities and investment management firm, of engaging in a pattern and practice of gender discrimination against its female Associates, Vice Presidents, and Managing Directors. The women allege violations of federal and city laws, including Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the New York City Human Rights Law.
The case is pending before United States District Court Judge Leonard Sand.

According to the complaint, the ``violations of [Goldman Sachs'] female employees' rights are systemic, are based upon company-wide policies and practices, and are the result of unchecked gender bias that pervades Goldman Sachs' corporate culture. They have not been isolated or exceptional incidents, but rather the regular and predictable result of Goldman Sachs' company-wide policies and practices.''

``The gender-equality issues raised by this lawsuit are all too familiar – Goldman Sachs systematically undervalues the efforts and achievements of its female employees. This is an important step in our efforts to eradicate discrimination within the financial-services industry,'' said plaintiffs' attorney Adam T. Klein of Outten & Golden LLP of New York, New York.
``This case challenges Goldman Sachs' practice of treating its talented female professionals like disposable, second class citizens,'' said plaintiffs' attorney Kelly M. Dermody of Lieff, Cabraser, Heimann & Bernstein, LLP of San Francisco, California. “By coming forward, the plaintiffs are working to ensure a level playing field across Wall Street.”
The complaint charges that, among other things, Goldman Sachs compensates its female professionals less than similar male professionals, disproportionately promotes men over equally or more qualified women, and offers better business opportunities and professional support to its male professionals.
Attorneys Adam T. Klein, Cara E. Greene, and Jennifer Liu of
Outten & Golden LLP and Kelly M. Dermody, Anne Shaver, and Heather Wong of Lieff Cabraser Heimann and Bernstein LLP represent the plaintiffs.
The case is Chen-Oster v. Goldman Sachs, Inc., Case No. 10-6950 (S.D.N.Y.).

So where do I stand on this as a former GS partner ( trader ), an executive who worked in human capital management for two years with a focus on diversity, compensation, lateral hiring, succession planning, performance measurement and more? I am working on that entry................. more soon.

Goldman Sachs, FCIC Inquiry, What Caused the Crisis and more...

Goldman Sachs is in the news, again, well always, this time it is with respect to an FCIC inquiry for more information regarding the valuation and pricing of assets and liabilities related to transactions with AIG. Their detailed response provides an interesting overview of the mortgage meltdown and Goldman's participation in the CDO and other related markets. Did GS act appropriately? I am not aware of enough facts to comment, but the level of detail GS is able to provide seems to indicate to me that they were very careful about what they were doing and in line with industry business practices.

As a former trader of mortgage-backed securities, married to another former one (now ordained pastor), we have had many discussions about not just good, but ethical business practices in sales and trading. I do believe their is a strong distinction between retail ( you and me ) and institutional ( hedge funds, pension funds...) clients with respect assumed levels of understanding of product offerings. Honesty, appropriateness, and full transparency should always be governing principals for both. That said people will have differing opinions about whether a security is cheap or rich, and that is what makes markets. Valuation of securities, bonds, stocks or CDOs is ALWAYS based on assumptions regarding underlying cash flows, and people have different assumptions. So does all this mean that "SCF 8A A1NV an early 2006 vintage mezzanine super senior CDO" ( from GS press release) should have ever been created? Debatable. Arguably market forces should dictate what is created (with disclosure rules) and where there is demand, supply will follow.

The deeper question is what forces created the demand for toxic waste securities? I have a yet to be written essay on that topic but I believe the main, but not only reason, was the thirst for incremental yield. With interest rates so low for so long, and with Fannie and Freddie needing to grow earnings through expanding their investment portfolios and business lines, thereby collapsing spreads and yields, both the FED and these agencies played a major role in crowding out other investors and forcing them in to look for yield in all the wrong places. I am sure there are whole BOOKS dedicated to this topic that I wrote just three sentences on, but that is my premise.

As for Goldman they have done a heck of a lot in response to the crisis, as they should. They recently set up a committee to review their business practices, which will be made public and perhaps set a new industry standard. They have not been against financial reform, and in fact they outlined their recommendations here. Bottom line, I do not believe GS was doing anything most other firms were not doing, but that does not make it all ok. There was a massive train wreck and they played a role, as did so many others, and have to accept the consequences. Hopefully the outcome will be healthier and more sustainable financial markets. Time will tell.

Top Ten Risks for the Global Economy ( GS 2005 )

I am in the process of packing up our home for a big move out West and coming across some interesting things while doing it! In 2005 I attended a conference at Goldman Sachs entitled "The Top 10 Risks in the Global Economy." The speakers included heads of states, economists, investment managers and more. All these challenges continue to be extremely relevant today!

Here is what they were. ( again 2005)

1) Hedge Funds and Derivatives

2) World Oil Supply

3) Wealth Disparities in Emerging Nations

4) Global Regulatory Challenges to Economic Growth

5) Opportunities and Challenges For Growth in China

6) Trade Liberalization

7) Environmental Accords

8) Geopolitical Conflicts

9) Global Terrorism

10)World Health Conditions

There is so much to write about, so so much... but the packing boxes are calling my name !!

Bethany McClean - on the GS Hearings and more..

I have a very long list of favorite people on the planet, and Bethany McClean is one of them. For many years she wrote for Fortune Magazine, and more recently moved to Vanity Fair. In addition she co-wrote "The Smartest Guys in The Room" - a book about Enron, and you if you have not seen the movie, you should.

She weighed in about the Goldman, well, mess... by writing this oped for the New York Times - Meet the Real Villain of the Financial Crisis. She has this to say.....

"But the transaction at the heart of the S.E.C.’s complaint is a microcosm of the entire credit crisis. That is, there are no good guys here. It’s dishonest and ultimately dangerous to pretend that Goldman is the only bad actor. And the worst actor of all is the one leading the charge against Goldman: our government."

This article is a must read as it puts other actors in to both this transaction and others like it that are at the heart of this crisis. I did not watch the hours and hours of testimony yesterday, only about 30 minutes, but if you did, I ask you, what was accomplished? Do you think the folks asking the questions asked balanced ones? Do you think they understood the nature of this transaction, or even how institutional market making firms like GS work? ( from what I watched, not at all ) Where does it all go from here?

I am not defending GS in this transaction. I am not even defending Wall Street. Nor am I attacking anyone. It just seems to me that educated, unemotional, thoughtful and truth seeking dialogue was not what I witnessed yesterday and I would have thought that would be the purpose of those hearings.

A list of other lead articles written about the testimony yesterday... "'Fabulous Fab' breaks cover to face grilling as Goldman's woes mount"-Financial Times, "Goldman Sachs on the defensive as senators ask blunt questions"-The New York Times, and "Goldman is bruised, defiant in senate"-The Wall Street Journal.

Goldman and the SEC Case....

This from a friend of mine about the Goldman case....

"I have been studying this area for months now. The SEC case against Goldman is a very technical one on the issue of fair disclosure. The Wall Street Journal says the allegations were that Paulson initiated the idea of that deal and had been in discussions with respect to bond selection with the credit manager for the deal ACA. And the SEC feels that that fact should have been disclosed to investors. As stated, that is really a stretch.

The newspapers are putting on a different spin. That these deals were sucker plays in which investors were sold securities with the knowledge that another party was short the securities. What the papers fail to understand is that unlike with other securities, a credit default swap always has mirroring long and short positions from the get go. So for every synthetic CDO deal done, the investment bank knew (and investors should have known) there was someone buying protection out of the insurance created in the deal, hence short.

The much more troubling aspect of all this comes out of a much earlier NY Times article on December 24, 2009 by Gretchen Morgenson

That article says that Goldman created synthetic CDOs for the purpose of creating capacity in credit default swaps to cover its own long positions in real estate. And that it is the reason Goldman kept the policies on their books rather than sellling them off to likes of Paulson.

If that is the case, then Goldman could be criticized on its ethics and perhaps sued.

As an addendum, I used to wonder why insitutions were willing to invest in synthetic CDOs and thereby become the issuer of a credit default swap giving protection on pools of subprime mortgages. The answer is that writing a credit default swap and receving the quarterly "insurance premiums" plus owning a Treasury is equivalent to owning a high-yield bond, and a bond having a credit rating. "

This OPED in the Wall Street Journal today is certainly worth a read. They come to the defense of Goldman with respect to this case which has knocked off some $1o billion in market value, to be felt not just by Goldman people, but everyone who owns a share of stock. They say the "real impact of this case is political. The SEC charges conveniently arrive on the brink of the Senate debate over financial reform, and its supporters are already using the case to grease the bill's passage." The WSJ has critisized the firm in the past over many issues, but this is not one of them.

Here is the challenge - To bring appropriate reform to the financial system while maintaing sufficient confidence and trust in those implementing the reform, and those on the receiving end. They have to work together. I do not see this as a war where one side wins and the other loses, but rather working in partnership for a better long term outcome for all. I know... dream on.

Goldman Sachs - In the News

GS is in the news, again, and their stock tumbled, in reaction to a law suit brought on by th SEC alleging that Goldman engaged in fraud as it relates to a CDO transaction from 2007.

Their official reaction is that this suit is unfounded. The full suit can be found here. I have received many phone calls and emails asking what do I think? I have not worked at GS for 8 years, nor do I engage in any sort of discussions with them on this topic but many of the conversations with others have brought up the timing of this suit. The administration is obviously pushing for financial reform, and are having trouble getting it passed. The more outraged the public continues to get against Wall Street, the more pressure on politicians to pass a tough bill. The 'street' has obviouslybeen lobbying hard against it. Now could GS be in the wrong? I would have no idea one way or the other. What is clear is that the level of scrutiny has gone way, way up, and so has the risk associated with owning the stock of financial services companies.

Ironically I attended a panel yesterday yesterday on corporate ethics in the banking industy hosted by Auburn Seminary - the panel included Ken Feinburg ( the pay czar ), John Thain ( former GS President and now CIT CEO ), Beth Brooke ( Global Vice-Chair of Public Policy at Earnst and Young), and more....I cannot report on the discussion but I can write more on the topic, which I plan to do....

NCRW - Making a Difference Awards Dinner and More..

Yesterday was a special day. Eight years after leaving Goldman Sachs to pursue philanthropic interests, the primary of which being to help advance women’s leadership, I was back at 32 Old Slip, a secondary GS building, to moderate a panel discussing that and more! The convening organization was the National Council for Research on Women, where I a proudly serve as a Board Member Emeriti.


The title given to the conversation was “From Turbulence to Transformation” – challenges and opportunities for advancing real and substantive social change. My fellow panelists were
- Melanne Verveer – U.S. Ambassador-at-large for Global Women’s Issues
- Edith Cooper, Managing Director, Global Head of Human Capital Management at Goldman Sachs
- Chris Grumm, President and CEO, Women’s Funding Network
- Letty Chirwara, UNIFEM Cross Regional Programmes

We had an amazing two hour discussion, and although we did not solve all the world’s problems, it felt like we had some great moments and I hope some solid take-aways.

The issue of gender inequality is a wicked one indeed, but one that is being tackled every moment of every day in a million different ways. Melanne spoke of the passion Secretary of State Clinton has and continues to frame women’s rights as human rights. Edith connected the incredible economic research Goldman has done on the contribution narrowing the gender gap has on growth and GDP to their decision to launch their 10,000 Women Initiative. Letty told stories of Unifem’s economic development work with women in many countries including Kenya, some of whom were present, and how creating markets for their products is transforming communities. Chris articulated the incredible work of women’s funds around the world, and how resourcing women led solutions offer the highest return on investment. Hopefully we will have video available to share as I would need pages and pages to do this conversation justice ……

The discussion was followed by the annual awards dinner where in addition to Ambassador Verveer and Edith Cooper being honored, so was
- Michelle Clayman of New Amsterdam Partners
- Wayne Windborne of Prudential
- Matthew Winkler , Editor-in-Chief, Bloomberg New

I had the additional honor of being seated with Eve Ensler, playwright and Founder of V-day, Senior Correspondent Judy Woodruff and so many other incredible people. A big shout out to my friends and family who came in support of NCRW!

The work of the Council is so important because, as I believe Allison Bernstein, Vice President of The Ford Foundation said, if it did not exist we WOULD have to create it. Credible research informs decision making. We need an organization that works to organize, to convene, to amplify, to create, to promote research and research organizations that focus on women and girls and NCRW is that organization.

I was asked to close the evening’s program and in addition to asking for support for NCRW I asked that everyone in the audience consider this…. Are you doing enough? Can you do more? How can you “do what you can, with what you have, where you are, to make a difference around gender inequality?” I ask you dear reader to consider this as well................. as am I.

Let the Games Begin.

Let the games begin! Tomorrow is the first hearing of the Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission, which will bring to Washington Wall Street’s top brass. Andrew Ross Sorkin, Author of Too Big Too Fail and NYTimes journalist provided quite the list of questions for the interrogators. It is impossible to pick a favorite as they are hit to the core of the issues and concerns I am sure we all have. It will be an interesting few days. Stay tuned!

"We Did It" - What Happens When Women Are Over Half the Workforce

This is another sign! The cover article for the first issue of 2010 of the Economist, my favorite magazine, is on "Female Power." I have felt for a while now that 2010 will be a year that is a game changer as far as women and power, and the facts presented in this article are the main reasons why. ( from facebook click here for full entry)

"The economic empowerment of women across the rich world is one of the most remarkable revolutions of the past 50 years." Revolutions. Just over a year ago I gave a speech called "Are You Ready for a Revolution", which you can watch in full if you become a member of 85 Broads! (event section - dec 9 2008), in which I said that the time is now for women to claim their space and share in decision making and leadership. The Economist goes on to say that "If the empowerment of women was one of the great changes of the past 50 years, dealing with its social consequences will be one of the great challenges of the next 50." True, so much has and will change BECAUSE of the numbers. Women now make up half of the work force in this country and earn almost 60% of the University Degrees. Those numbers simply do not line up with the fact that we are only 2% of Fortune 500 company CEOs and less than 13% of board members in America. Corporate America will have to change, as will government policies, the most important of which being the support for affordable, quality child care.

The article mentions some research done by Goldman Sachs regarding the connection between gender equality and economic growth. The reasons for supporting and enabling the increased participation of women in the workforce are strong. "Closing the male-female gap and boosting female productivity would help to address the problem of pension sustainability via boosting employment amount those of working age, lifting household saving rates and lifting taxation receipts for government."

Investing in women and girls - from a non-profit perspective and a for-profit perspective - is the investment thesis for this decade! ( and maybe longer) This will be the focus of my writing, speaking and consulting this year! Within a few weeks I hope to have my web-site up and running so as to provide you with an extensive resource list to support this thesis.

2010 - A Game Changing Year for Women and Girls!

A Few Resources - There have been SO MANY outstanding reports and articles this past year alone that support this trend, and here are just a few to get you started.

The FEMALE Economy - HBR Article Sept. 2009

Women Saviors of the World Economy - CNN Oct 25, 2009

Womenomics 101 Survey - October 2009

The Shriver Report - A Woman's Nation Changes Everything 2009

The Whitehouse Project Report - Benchmarking Women's Leadership 2009 !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

"In short, ensuring that women move into leadership alongside men is not a women’s issue, nor is it a trivial concern compared with the massive problems we face on a national and global scale. Increasing women’s leadership is an imperative. Advancing women serves us all — men and women, businesses and institutions alike. "

Financial Times Person of the Year - Lloyd Blankfein, Fannie and Freddie

The Financial Times names Lloyd Blankfein Person of the Year for how he handled his firm through the financial crisis. This bold nomination will most certainly be met with mixed feelings, but if you were to judge this CEO buy how his firm did for it's shareholders over the course of the year, you would have to say he did well. If you did not see this brilliantly written article by Bethany McClean in Vanity Fair about GS, read it now. I, like Bethany, tend to hold GS to a higher standard and I truly hope that they take on a greater role and responsibility for helping our economy return to solid ground. "To those to whom much has been given, much is expected."

If you are looking for a reason to get upset, and I encourage you not to, then read more about the goings on at Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. For the past two years I have been writing about the problems at these two government sponsored entities, and the craziness continues. The government just uncapped the level of support they will recieve, and the losses that they will suffer will be so high that even thinking about the number makes be want to gag. In addition, the big pay packages to top executives was just revealed. Yes there are reasons to be upset about Goldman and other financial institutions, but most of them actually paid back the government for their support, and with hefty dividends. Not so for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. I am truly not in to the blame game, but if you really must point fingers, then point them in the direction of Washington. I trace many of the problems we have had in the mortgage market to the growth of these two companies and the crowding out effect they created by growing their massive portfolios. One might ask if Fannie and Freddie did not leverage their cheap debt to invest in hundreds of billions of conventional mortgage product would wall street have created all the junk they did to generate higher yielding investments for their institutional buyers? We will never know.

I truly hope for a much better 2010. Though the equity markets have recovered greatly, deep problems in our economy, and around the world, remain. We are in such a deep fiscal mess and I doubt that the political will exists to make some very tough decisions that will lead us to longer term strong economic growth. Again, so many to blame, so many would a could a should a's, but I want to close that book and stop looking back and increasingly look forward.

I hope that 2010 will be the year of strong leadership, creative solutions, and thoughtful public engagement. Further I hope that 2010 will be a year that when we look back a decade from now, we will see that diversity of thought and action really took hold. We will see that 2010 was the year that we questioned old leadership and engagement models, and fresh perspectives found their voice because it was broadly recognized that was what was missing. I hope it will be a year that women's leadership takes a giant step forward, instead of a step back.

Goldman Sachs Announces Changes to Executive Comp

I have been writing a lot about leadership over the past few weeks as responsible and moral leadership is much needed to lead us out of this financial, economic and social crisis. Yesterday I gave the shout out to CEO Jeff Immelt for his bold remarks, and today I would like to compliment the leadership shown by Goldman Sachs in adjusting their compensation structure. I have recently written about Goldman’s outstanding business principles and challenged them to ensure they are living up to them. They also have a set of compensation principles, which in print look outstanding indeed. CEO Blankfein was quoted as saying “we believe our compensation policies are the strongest in our industry and ensure that compensation accurately reflects the firm’s performance and incentivizes behavior that is in the public’s and our shareholders’ best interest.” Whether it be in cash or stock I am not sure what the ‘right’ level of compensation that is in the public’s best interest, but this recent action is most certainly a step in the right direction. More on this from the WSJ. A few weeks ago we called for them in this oped to be a leader in the industry, and they are doing just that!

For the record I am against these bank bonus taxes, and not because I was once a banker of sorts and have friends that are bankers. My reasoning relates to "what is a bank" and "what is a banker?" One of the main issues contributing to this crisis is the development of a shadow banking system, largely unregulated, that dwarfed the real banking system. Hedge funds, private equity funds, the GSEs, rating agencies, mortgage brokers, and so forth are all part of the system that contributed to this disaster and to impose a tax on only those in a classsic bank is just not right. I do think compensation got out of control in general and was deeply one sided and the public is paying for the clean up. That said what is needed is more of what I wrote about in the first paragraph. Responding to public pressure, shareholder pressure, and I hope in part by thinking about what is 'right' firms will and should rethink and be held accountable for their compensation practises. Government telling companies ( non bail out ) what they can pay their people is in my view against what this country is about and very dangerous indeed. What I have no space to go in to is the compexity and craziness of actually implementing something like this.... I deeply respect that so many people are suffering great financial hardship, but in this one writers opinion, a bonus tax does little to solve the problem. What will is real leadership and accountability.

"If Wall Street Repents Can Main Street Forgive?"

Last Sunday I co-wrote a piece for the Daily Beast called "Can Goldman Find God?" asking Goldman to put their resources to work to fund job creation. This week they announced their "10,0000 Small Business Initiative." Given this news, the apology by CEO Blankfein, and more... we decided to write another article to follow-up. It is called "If Wall Street Repents Can Main Street Forgive?" If you feel called to comment please do so on the DAILY BEAST site and not on this blog.

I don't think it coincidence that the sermon this morning at church was how to change our culture. Our minister asked us to consider how, as a follower of Christ, do we impact our culture? He suggested three ways - outlove our culture, outthink our culture and outcommitt our culture. This is exactly what I am trying to do in writing about Goldman Sachs, about Wall Street, about Money, about Social Change, about Gender Equality and more. I feel called to leverage my background as a former partner of Goldman Sachs, and a Christ follower, to speak out. We NEED a new form of capitalism to go to work in this country - responsible capitalism, moral capitalism, socially responsible capitalism, enduring capitalism! We need our culture to change - the culture of Wall Street and the culture of Main Street.

I am so far from perfect, and the person I most want to change is myself. I want to live a loving and generous life. A life that honors God and honors others. This is what we are all called to do...

I also think this piece is worth a read "Stop Blaming Goldman Sachs."

Have a great Sunday.

Goldman Sachs - "10,000 Small Business Initiative" - $500 mm

Well I would love to say that Goldman Sachs, after reading the CALL TO ACTION we sent out on Sunday on the Daily Beast, responded with this $500 million initiative, but this is clearly something they have been working on for some time. The“10,000 Small Business Imitative” was announced today will attempt an integrative and collaborative approach to address the barriers to growth for small business. ( read about it here on the GS web-site) The approach appears thoughtful and multi-faceted, much like their 10,000 Women Initiative, and appears to be a bold new step in corporate philanthropy. Only five times bigger!!!!!! The program highlights include:
- Business and Management Education
- Mentoring and Networking
- Access to Capital
- Advisory Council
I congratulate Goldman on this program and will look forward to reading a lot more about it. Clearly they are trying to respond to what they see as an urgent need, job creation and job security. And it is an urgent, urgent need.

We have to celebrate this. We have to. Why? Because the public has called them to do something, something big, and they did… and we want them and others to do more. Should we expect this from them? Yes we should. Let’s expect Goldman to be leaders in helping to rebuild our economy.

There is much that needs to be done around economic security, job creation, and financial literacy and let’s all use our creativity on how to make a difference in these areas. I am working on a proposal that would be PERFECT for a financial institution partner so if you are one of those, leave me a note! Women’s Funds around this country are “shovel ready.” By this I mean that money can have immediate impact as it is scaling up programs that are already in place and working. More to come on this…..

Goldman, Congrats. JP Morgan, Bank of America, Morgan Stanley, UBS, Blackrock, Fortress, and more ….. What are you going to do? The collective lack of leadership and responsibility of our country’s largest financial institutions played a role in creating and enabling this financial crisis and I would like to call you all to create your own “10,000 SOMETHING Initiative.” “To those to which much has been given, much is expected.”