Knowledge@Wharton Leadership and Change Research Article

View Article on Knowledge@Wharton Mobile

Opinion: Greed Reflects a Failure of Leadership

Published: June 20, 2008 in Knowledge@Wharton
Article Image
Print Get PDF of Article Send a Comment Send to a Friend get the book
Bookmark and Share

Hardly a day goes by without yet another twist or turn in the credit crisis that has engulfed the U.S. financial system for more than a year. Bear Stearns, one of the country's largest underwriters of mortgage bonds, has been swallowed up. Venerable institutions such as AIG, Wachovia, Lehman Brothers, Merrill Lynch and Citigroup have brought new CEOs on board. Media reports suggest that the world's biggest financial institutions have absorbed more than $300 billion in asset write-downs and credit losses even as home foreclosures are at record high levels and Wall Street has laid off thousands of employees. While much of the discussion about the crisis has focused on its causes and the need for regulatory reform, former Wharton dean Russell Palmer, author of a new book, Ultimate Leadership, writes in this opinion piece that the situation offers an opportunity to learn crucial lessons about leadership.

While much of the discussion about the crisis has focused on its causes and the need for regulatory reform, I have a different perspective: I believe the situation offers an opportunity to learn crucial lessons about leadership, and if these are heeded, the U.S. will end up with a financial system that is stronger than ever.

I find it puzzling when I hear experts describe the current situation as "the biggest crisis since the Great Depression," which took years to get over. The situation is serious, but I do not believe it has yet grown to that proportion, and won't, because we have more and better means of dealing with the beginning of a crisis than we had during the 1930s. Matters could still spiral out of control, but it does not appear, now, that this will happen.

What caused the crisis? In my view, greed was the underlying factor. Wall Street hedge funds and others are looking for any financial machination that they can find to hype their financial returns. The whole mortgage fiasco is just the latest example. The dot-com bubble of the late 1990s was another instance. Anyone with any sense knew that during the dot-com mania, you couldn't sustain high prices for stocks on companies that had no current earnings, only losses. It was a bubble, just like the Tulip Mania that investors lived through during the 17th century. With the present subprime crisis, the people originating the mortgages had to know that the higher the risk on the mortgage terms, the greater exposure there was to the mortgage going to foreclosure. So did the people who bought the mortgages, securitized the mortgages, and so on.

Not everyone kept playing the game until the roof fell in. T. Rowe Price, early on, got out of the market because of the high risk level, as did others on Wall Street who bet against this Ponzi scheme. Greed reflects a failure of leadership; turning your head to ignore the high risk because you are making big earnings today certainly shows a lack of leadership. How many people on Wall Street have been subject to less than robust oversight by their organization because they were producing such big contributions to the firm's earnings? Allowing your organization to be a party to contributing to this scheme -- even if you know that you will not be directly affected -- is not a mark of leadership. It is a sign of greed.

Much debate has taken place in recent weeks about whether the Federal Reserve, led by Ben Bernanke, and the Treasury Department, headed by Hank Paulson, did the right thing in brokering Bear Stearns to be acquired by J.P. Morgan. While the Monday morning quarterbacks are welcome to their views, I definitely think that Bernanke and Paulson acted correctly. If this isn't an appropriate role for them as leaders of the Fed and the Treasury, what is? It's their job to stem the crisis without providing the perpetrators with a bailout so they can do the same thing all over again. In the Bear Stearns case, I realize there were some aspects of a bailout.

Since then, Paulson has proposed several sweeping changes to reform the financial system. Over time, these will probably be watered down to some degree, but it's evident that we need more transparency in the system than we have now. For example, hedge funds are among the least transparent investments that anyone can make. Still, investors keep pumping money into hedge funds because they get such high returns most of the time. Now that investors are seeing what can happen in hedge funds, they are more wary, but the investors need more transparency. That is the only way investors can make knowledgeable decisions on how much risk they are willing to take relative to the anticipated returns. With the complexity of investment banking/trading/hedge fund activities it is evident that we must put transparency into the system and have some overall controls that will provide either existing regulatory bodies or new regulatory bodies with the power to oversee some of the activities that are prevalent today. In the end, the investors must make their own decisions based on adequate information and take responsibility for those decisions.

With all this as background, let me now turn to some of the main leadership lessons to be learned from the crisis on Wall Street.

First and foremost, integrity is the key to leadership -- and that is not always evident on Wall Street, as the following example will show. Not long ago, I was on the board of a company that was one of the two parties to a major merger. Throughout the month-long negotiations, some of the advisors were constantly lying to each other. They said they had other parties that they would do the deal with, but they didn't. They said that if the price they wanted wasn't agreeable, they would walk away, but they didn't. They said that they weren't leaking details of the negotiation to the media, but they were.

I am not suggesting that all firms on Wall Street lack integrity, but many of them do. Something as important as our system for financial transactions and our economy has to be built on integrity and trust as opposed to questionable and disreputable activities. Integrity begins at the top.

Another important leadership lesson involves the role of board members. Too often, in the past, boards of directors have let the CEO escape responsibility by firing a couple of people down the line and going back to work. That did not happen in the Bear Stearns case, and that's good. Boards of directors must provide appropriate oversight, but boards will never know enough about the complex world of finance and the derivatives transactions that are being effected today. Boards need to provide detailed oversight, and so they have the responsibility to see that outside experts are brought in, if necessary, to assess the risk profile of the organization. They have to rely on experts such as their auditors, regulators, and others to see that effective oversight occurs.

Finally, the leaders of these firms must be at the forefront of addressing the crisis and take personal responsibility.

At a time of crisis, leaders need to keep in mind several strategies that can make for effective execution:

  • As the leader, remember that you are the person in charge. You must be the one ultimately to call the shots and be personally involved in the situation.
  • Communication is essential, and key communication needs to be directly with you and not filtered through some third party.
  • Denial is a major problem that plagues companies that are on their way toward a crisis but fail to recognize the symptoms. Recognize the warning signs well ahead of time and take corrective steps before the situation escalates into a full-blown crisis.
  • You can also use the crisis, either during the heat of the battle or after things calm down, as a time to make transformational change. You have a burning platform and it enables you not only to accomplish change rapidly, but also to get systemic change through the organization that otherwise might be much more difficult to implement.

Even though Bear Stearns has gone under, I see no reason why that should happen to the financial system. Strong leadership leads to resilience. Once the system regenerates, in some cases with new leadership, I am convinced that it will be as strong as before, if not stronger.

Back to Top

Here's what you think...

Total Comments: 12

#1    Failure of leadership

Excellent article but seems to be missing one important point. There may be one voice at the top but there is a management hierarchy.

Granted, top managmement may chose like minded executives BUT in every business that I have been associated with, I have always seen a few in the management hierarchy who have voiced dissenting positions and have been heard.

The main problem exists when top people have not fostered a team environment whereby representatives from all levels of management give input.

Essentially the biggest problem and one of the contributing reasons for insolvency that I have experienced has been the EGO of the chief executive.
By: Myra Dodick, Myra Dodick
Sent: 04:30 PM Fri Jun.20.2008 - US

#2    Couldn't agree more

There's a lot to be said about the lack of leadership by senior managers which contributed to this mess. It demonstrates what happens when unchecked greed is allowed to pervade organizations. Unseating some senior leaders may make good headlines and suggest boards are serious about addressing this problem, but a long lasting fix has to be deeper. Getting at the heart of this problem requires changing the incentives that drive the behavior of the people far removed from the executive suite. This is hard to do, especially when it may run counter to the desire to make money. It's just so easy to go along with what everyone else is doing because who wants to be left on the sidelines while everyone else is earning?
By: Curt Bergstrom,
Sent: 10:10 PM Fri Jun.20.2008 - US

#3    Integrity?

I am not in the financial field and I want to fully understand your position with regard to analysis and potential remedies for the catastrophic consequences of yet another Wall Street scam.

First, deregulation of the lending industry allowed for unscrupulous policies with regard to high risk mortgages. Secondly, these mortgages were sold and packaged to conceal the risk. Thirdly, these bad mortgage backed securities were sold by and to hedge funds and other financial institutions all over the world and paid for with their clients money on margin. I think I got it right.

Then, it all collapsed. The result is the horror we are living through. Not just the paper loss, but the savaging of all our venerable financial institutions has also resulted in a run up of our commodities market, the price of oil, corn are now the only place these vultures can invest funds and hope to generate a bottom line. Again, there is no concern for the consumer, their country or their world.

This is not about integrity, this is pure and simple criminal activity and should be treated as such.

You will never be successful in creating a world with integrity on Wall Street. It is antithetical to the creed of "Masters of the Universe". The CEOs should be tried and prosecuted and sent to prison. I'm liquidating my holdings and hoping that even with inflation my mattress is a safer place then any investments.
By: Janice Barandes, Associate Broker
Sent: 08:27 AM Sat Jun.21.2008 - US

#4    Opinion: Greed Reflects a failure of leadership

Like Captain Renault's remark about gambling in Rick's cafe why should anyone be surprised or "shocked, shocked" to find greed on Wall Street? Greed has been and is a prime motivator of behavior on Wall Street. On the positive side it can contribute to the entrepreurial and innovative spirit that is justly celebrated by the WSJ as the "animal spirits of capitalism." But when unrestrained by any sense of morality, decency, or caring about the impact of actions taken upon anyone else - so the only question asked is not "should we?" but "can we get away with it?" - this greed leads to the excesses that represent the dark side of our society and the denial of our common interests. It is sobering to realize that the profits of financial firms came to account for (I believe) over 30% of the profits of the private sector in the U.S., which puts the industry in an entirely different place from where it should be - a lubricant for creating value - to seizing for itself an excessive proportion of the value which others create, harming others in the process. One truly disturbing aspect of the subprime mortgage mess is that whereas one might have thought that excesses comparable to those of the dot com and telecom bubbles, Enron etc. would only occur once every generation after they had been forgotten by a new generation, this scandal is happening a mere seven years after the last big one, analogously to 100 or 500 year floods that seem now to be arriving every 15 years or so.

Unfortunately behavior on Wall Street is not an isolated phenomenon although it is perhaps the most egregious example of a selfish, narrow minded, "me first" mentality that seems to have been gaining ground in our society over the past quarter century. It is surely time for rethinking the balance between the rights we have as individuals and as members of specifc groups, and the obligations we owe to others. For example, one of the more idiotic and dishonest remarks made by people advocating tax cuts (the only nail that their hammer can target) is that the Government is taking away "your money." Yet it requires only a minimal degree of honesty and self awareness to acknowledge that as individuals we are only able to do what we do today because of the help we have received directly and indirectly from many others in current and past generations, often acting in the context of investments funded by taxes. We have today because others in the past have created and given and sacrificed, and the success of our society depends upon a continuation of this compact both between and within generations.
By: Martyn Roetter, MFRConsulting
Sent: 09:32 AM Sat Jun.21.2008 - US

#5    Greed and the Oil Companies

While the mortgage crisis has affected homeowners and financial institutions, the greed-driven crisis in the oil sector is affecting everyone. When a war has to be justified to capture the world's 2nd largest oil reserve, and oil prices need to be increased to keep the sponsor country's economy afloat, everyone, not just Americans are affected, but poor nations as well. Historically, as this article has partially discussed, the nature and dynamics of things has a way to hitting back. The impact on the automotive sector and food prices is hopefully not just the tip of the iceberg. Instead of hiring PhDs to optimize price and profit, leaders need to help optimize overall societal welfare and common good.
By: JF Columbus,
Sent: 04:37 PM Sat Jun.21.2008 - -

#6    Greed can be tamed through knowledge

I fully agree with the author's view that greed can be the failure of the leadership. However I have some more points to add.

Greed per se is a basic human instinct which is beyond control in a conscious stage. If anybody claims to have conscious control over his or her greed, he is ignorant of human instinct.

Like any other human instincts, greed can also be managed through proper education, knowledge and wisdom. Fortunately, in today's world, knowledge can be available to anyone, anytime and anywhere subject to his or her interests.

Most of the time, people are ignorant about the subject and demands. With continuous education, these demands can be synchronized. If a person is able to compile the set of information needed to formulate his or her future, then he could be a manageable greedy person.
By: KK Verma, Innovative Institute
Sent: 04:23 AM Mon Jun.23.2008 - AU

#7    Greed

This history of greed is a long one. What disguises our most current crisis is the magnitude of the losses and the community of willing corporate participants. This band of conspirators includes real estate brokers, banks, and Wall Street financial institutions that bought all that bad paper. Remember home buyers, many misinformed and ignorant, purchased assets with the belief that real estate would appreciate forever and rates would not go up. So they, too, are part of the greed culture.

So responsibility or lack of it resides on many levels. But clearly the greed prize goes to those that were in a position to personally profit by adding tens of millions of dollars to their personal balance sheet without concern for their actions.

What might have happened if the leaders of the large Wall Street firms knew that they would be held accountable for the consequences of their actions by their stockholders and the SEC? It was very clear that home buyers who were employed as janitors and delivery drivers should not be purchasing $400,000 homes. It was clear that retired couples in Florida had no intention of living in 10 condominiums concurrently. I am not an economist but when almost 40% of the housing being built prior to the end of the bubble was slated for investment purposes, we have a major problem brewing. Any mature leader who had access to this simple information knew this behavior was rampant and should be addressed. Yet they did nothing.

The history of greed is that it is always there. Many of our business leaders, who knew better, redefined the rules of conduct and promoted greed and deceit. Until some of the perpetrators are held personally accountable which includes surrendering their windfall profits, losing their securities licenses and their ability to move into another industry ripe for a bubble, I believe that greed -- or rather the consequences of greed -- will live on.
By: Richard Grossberg,
Sent: 09:38 AM Mon Jun.23.2008 - US

#8    Greed Must Not Go Unpunished

The author is on the money... One would think that the lessons exposed in this opinion piece would be well known to the seasoned executives at Bear Stearns, Citigroup, Mwerril Lynch and others, all those who dictate and mandate ethics training for their employees. Common sense would dictate that the leaders would hold themselves accountable to fundamental tenets of ethical behavior and risk management, but of course not! When greed is at play, common sense" seldom becomes common practice.

It is no different than the way leaders of nations mismanage and create collapses in economies and governments, thus causing immense hardships for the less privileged; greed is indeed the ultimate failure of leadership. And when leadership fails it must be held ... accountable, just like every ordinary worker is held accountable for satisfactory performance. If performance is unsatisfactory, greed-based, unethical and catastrophic, the employee will be terminated.

So must those who fail at their leadership duties!
Common sense, no?...
By: Maurizio Morselli, Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation
Sent: 10:09 AM Mon Jun.23.2008 - -

#9    Marketing Morality

As perhaps the most difficult aspect of a business to quantify, the character of leadership currently receives far too little weight in investment assessment. Traits such as ROI, P/E ratio, holdings, etc. are all (relatively) easy to input into an econometric model, or compare side by side with another investment, and allow investors to choose wisely. Character of Leadership, on the other hand, can only be gleaned based on historical decisions of the individual, prior experiences, and the "gut feeling" an investor gets from the leader. I am not offering a quantifiable solution, but I am asserting that whoever wants to create the next revolution in business affairs need look no further than creating a solid method to quantify character.

I think the world in general is close to the tipping point between individual and empathetic/collective incentive; the indicators I cite are the movement towards "green", the philanthropic efforts of some of the world’s richest individuals, and global exposure of high level failures of leadership, and their impacts on the little guys (Enron pensions). I can't quantify this statement, but I would guess that overall economic output has surpassed capacity needed to satisfy the basic requirements for all individuals on the planet. As we continue farther past that mark, I think the "unlimited wants" of a rational actor will increasingly include the well being of fellow man.

As the pace of globalization and global market action increases, it is unlikely the "rule books" will keep pace. This will leave many of the tough moral calls to the leaders, and a company that can prove that their leaders own the moral high ground will have the advantage.
By: Sammy Linn, Infantry Company Commander, US Army
Sent: 11:43 AM Mon Jun.23.2008 - US

#10    Greed: A Failure of Leadership

To me, the term greed needs definition. Greed is an unwholesome profit. Unwholesome is something beyond the norm, something harmful or injurious. I have no doubt that many on Wall Street and many bankers are greedy. But I have little doubt that CEO salaries at 400x the lowest paid worker, backdating options, or much of the "gaming" that transpires in business is not driven by greed also. Greed or avarice is precipitated and driven by lying; it is a kind of gluttony for security. But the security it promises can destroy institutions -- even nations that are founded on great values. Once successfully accomplished, greed becomes progressively blinding until the afflicted often aren't conscious of their greed. I have found the greedy to have limited belief in or find limited value in leading a principled life. They are unwilling to work hard and suffer for a wholesome profit and they are too often the first to cheat while holding subordinates to a higher standard. Unfortunately, the more greed flourishes, the more the message is that it is ok or even expected to be greedy. How else could entire corporations come undone unless many, maybe most, of the middle and top layers were greedy? To earn a wholesome profit, to play the game straight and not cheat, requires a desire to live for something more than money, property, or fame. We have forgotten much of this in America and especially in American enterprise. We will all suffer because of it.
By: Scott Benfield, Benfield Consulting
Sent: 04:47 PM Mon Jun.23.2008 - US

#11    Greed

Identifying the problem is always the first step toward solving it. However, you can't legislate morality. The people who are the subject of this article got into positions power in order to satisfy their greed by being aggressive, ruthless, coniving and dishonest.

Unfortunately, the author didn't offer any solutions to the problem. Perhaps it's because there aren't any. Human nature is what it is. There will always be a significant percentage of the population which will have the characteristics that allow them to get into positions of power. It is the same in business, politics, religion and every other organization.

Power corrupts.
By: Richard Reese, Benchmark Realty Corp.
Sent: 09:45 AM Thu Jun.26.2008 - US

#12    Personal Integrity

I do agree it comes down to a crisis in personal business ethics. A friend of mine reported clearly detecting multiple golfing partners cheating on their score cards recently at a prestigious corporate tournament on a famed club course. It was in their personal business interests to appear higher on the scoreboard amid the company of customers and competitors.

I know people in the financial field who, in arguing that all business is cyclical, follow a career strategy of riding peak periods to their unbridled limits with confidence they are squirreling away enough personal assets to survive inevitable, severe market corrections without great concern for their future well-being, including a likelihood of their own layoff.

Unless constructive whistle-blowing against scofflaw business practices is encouraged and supported to rein in unethical recklessness, these economic crises will dominate our lifestyles for generations.

By: JG Stone,
Sent: 10:20 AM Thu Jun.26.2008 - -
Comments are only open for the first 30 days after publishing.

Back to Top