NST – Dr M and the Penang Bridge

May 10, 2012 in Articles, Spotlight, Tun Dr. Mahathir

May 10, 2012 | By Lee Myung Bak 
A SOURCE OF PRIDE: Looking back on decades of bilateral ties between Malaysia and South Korea
.

THE first time I met former prime minister Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad was during the late 1970s, when Hyundai was building the Kenyir Dam in Malaysia. One of my jobs when travelling overseas was to meet with  leaders of various countries.

Whenever I was in Malaysia, I would drop by Dr Mahathir’s office. Dr Mahathir was interested in our experience in ending poverty.

Read the rest of this entry →

NYT – Lead, Follow or Get Out of the Way

May 7, 2012 in Articles, Spotlight

TRAVELING in the post-Awakening Arab world, I have been most struck by how few new leaders have emerged from the huge volcanic political eruption here. By new leaders, I don’t just mean people who win elections, I mean leaders — men and women with the legitimacy and the will to tell their people the truth and build the coalitions required to get their societies moving forward again.

Read the rest of this entry →

NST – Humble beginnings of a visionary leader

May 3, 2012 in Articles, Tun Dr. Mahathir

Rumah Kelahiran Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad has been restored in its original form by National Archives.

WELCOME to Rumah Kelahiran Tun Dr Mahathir, birthplace of one of the nation’s great sons, Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad,

Located in Lorong Kilang Ais here, this humble-looking abode built in 1900 has retained its original form.

Read the rest of this entry →

International Herald Tribune – Why I Am Leaving Goldman Sachs

March 16, 2012 in Articles, Spotlight

Published: March 14, 2012 | OBy GREG SMITH

TODAY is my last day at Goldman Sachs. After almost 12 years at the firm — first as a summer intern while at Stanford, then in New York for 10 years, and now in London — I believe I have worked here long enough to understand the trajectory of its culture, its people and its identity. And I can honestly say that the environment now is as toxic and destructive as I have ever seen it.

To put the problem in the simplest terms, the interests of the client continue to be sidelined in the way the firm operates and thinks about making money. Goldman Sachs is one of the world’s largest and most important investment banks and it is too integral to global finance to continue to act this way. The firm has veered so far from the place I joined right out of college that I can no longer in good conscience say that I identify with what it stands for.

It might sound surprising to a skeptical public, but culture was always a vital part of Goldman Sachs’s success. It revolved around teamwork, integrity, a spirit of humility, and always doing right by our clients. The culture was the secret sauce that made this place great and allowed us to earn our clients’ trust for 143 years. It wasn’t just about making money; this alone will not sustain a firm for so long. It had something to do with pride and belief in the organization. I am sad to say that I look around today and see virtually no trace of the culture that made me love working for this firm for many years. I no longer have the pride, or the belief.

But this was not always the case. For more than a decade I recruited and mentored candidates through our grueling interview process. I was selected as one of 10 people (out of a firm of more than 30,000) to appear on our recruiting video, which is played on every college campus we visit around the world. In 2006 I managed the summer intern program in sales and trading in New York for the 80 college students who made the cut, out of the thousands who applied.

I knew it was time to leave when I realized I could no longer look students in the eye and tell them what a great place this was to work.

When the history books are written about Goldman Sachs, they may reflect that the current chief executive officer, Lloyd C. Blankfein, and the president, Gary D. Cohn, lost hold of the firm’s culture on their watch. I truly believe that this decline in the firm’s moral fiber represents the single most serious threat to its long-run survival.

Over the course of my career I have had the privilege of advising two of the largest hedge funds on the planet, five of the largest asset managers in the United States, and three of the most prominent sovereign wealth funds in the Middle East and Asia. My clients have a total asset base of more than a trillion dollars. I have always taken a lot of pride in advising my clients to do what I believe is right for them, even if it means less money for the firm. This view is becoming increasingly unpopular at Goldman Sachs. Another sign that it was time to leave.

How did we get here? The firm changed the way it thought about leadership. Leadership used to be about ideas, setting an example and doing the right thing. Today, if you make enough money for the firm (and are not currently an ax murderer) you will be promoted into a position of influence.

What are three quick ways to become a leader? a) Execute on the firm’s “axes,” which is Goldman-speak for persuading your clients to invest in the stocks or other products that we are trying to get rid of because they are not seen as having a lot of potential profit. b) “Hunt Elephants.” In English: get your clients — some of whom are sophisticated, and some of whom aren’t — to trade whatever will bring the biggest profit to Goldman. Call me old-fashioned, but I don’t like selling my clients a product that is wrong for them. c) Find yourself sitting in a seat where your job is to trade any illiquid, opaque product with a three-letter acronym.

Today, many of these leaders display a Goldman Sachs culture quotient of exactly zero percent. I attend derivatives sales meetings where not one single minute is spent asking questions about how we can help clients. It’s purely about how we can make the most possible money off of them. If you were an alien from Mars and sat in on one of these meetings, you would believe that a client’s success or progress was not part of the thought process at all.

It makes me ill how callously people talk about ripping their clients off. Over the last 12 months I have seen five different managing directors refer to their own clients as “muppets,” sometimes over internal e-mail. Even after the S.E.C., Fabulous Fab, Abacus, God’s work, Carl Levin, Vampire Squids? No humility? I mean, come on. Integrity? It is eroding. I don’t know of any illegal behavior, but will people push the envelope and pitch lucrative and complicated products to clients even if they are not the simplest investments or the ones most directly aligned with the client’s goals? Absolutely. Every day, in fact.

It astounds me how little senior management gets a basic truth: If clients don’t trust you they will eventually stop doing business with you. It doesn’t matter how smart you are.

These days, the most common question I get from junior analysts about derivatives is, “How much money did we make off the client?” It bothers me every time I hear it, because it is a clear reflection of what they are observing from their leaders about the way they should behave. Now project 10 years into the future: You don’t have to be a rocket scientist to figure out that the junior analyst sitting quietly in the corner of the room hearing about “muppets,” “ripping eyeballs out” and “getting paid” doesn’t exactly turn into a model citizen.

When I was a first-year analyst I didn’t know where the bathroom was, or how to tie my shoelaces. I was taught to be concerned with learning the ropes, finding out what a derivative was, understanding finance, getting to know our clients and what motivated them, learning how they defined success and what we could do to help them get there.

My proudest moments in life — getting a full scholarship to go from South Africa to Stanford University, being selected as a Rhodes Scholar national finalist, winning a bronze medal for table tennis at the Maccabiah Games in Israel, known as the Jewish Olympics — have all come through hard work, with no shortcuts. Goldman Sachs today has become too much about shortcuts and not enough about achievement. It just doesn’t feel right to me anymore.

I hope this can be a wake-up call to the board of directors. Make the client the focal point of your business again. Without clients you will not make money. In fact, you will not exist. Weed out the morally bankrupt people, no matter how much money they make for the firm. And get the culture right again, so people want to work here for the right reasons. People who care only about making money will not sustain this firm — or the trust of its clients — for very much longer.

Greg Smith is resigning today as a Goldman Sachs executive director and head of the firm’s United States equity derivatives business in Europe, the Middle East and Africa.

News link

The Sun – Get our youth on board

March 16, 2012 in Articles, Spotlight

*Image from ayobonline.org

Posted on 16 March 2012 | By Keith Leong Yu Keen

IT’S almost like a movie plot: a group of bright young underdogs get together to invent against the odds a car that captures the imagination of the nation. Except the story is real, and it happened in Indonesia.

The place is Solo, an iconic city in Central Java with a population of over 520,000, and the car is the “Kiat Esemka”. It was engineered by a group of teenagers studying at the city’s Sekolah Menengah Kejuruans (SMK, a sort of vocational secondary school). Its name, “esemka” is a play on the way Indonesians pronounce “SMK”.

With the help of a local workshop owner – Sukiat (whose garage’s name, “Kiat Motors”, is part of the car’s name) who pitched the idea to local educational authorities – the students managed to design and build their own sports utility vehicle (SUV) based on a modified sedan that resembles a Toyota Land Cruiser.

The ultimate product of all this tinkering was the Esemka Rajawali prototype, a 1.5-litre engine and 105 horsepower SUV, which in turn led to other incarnations such as the Esemka Digdaya, Esemka Bima and Esemka Hatchback.

Even more remarkable is the fact that the cars were assembled largely out of domestically-made components, with only about 20% of the parts being imported. An Esemka Rajawali costs around 300 million rupiah to make, but the price could fall to as little as 95 million rupiah if mass-produced.

The Esemka was soon in the media eye, especially when Solo’s popular mayor Joko Widodo (or “Jokowi”) threw his support in for the Esemka. Jokowi bought one to use as his official vehicle and committed his administration to help mass-produce the cars.

This in turn led to a surge of interest in the Esemka, with Kiat Motors reported receiving 10,000 orders for it in January. Even the Wall Street Journal ran a feature on the car in their Southeast Asia Real Time blog.

Nevertheless, it has not been all smooth-sailing for the Esemka. The makers have been accused of copying the design of the Foday cars from Guangdong, China. Also, as the Wall Street Journalreported, it’s not clear if the makers of the Esemka’s foreign parts will consent to their goods being used for a competing vehicle.

To make matters worse, early this month the Esemka failed an emissions test necessary for it to gain approval for mass production, although both the students and Jokowi have vowed to try again.

Regardless of what happens to the Esemka, it cannot be denied that the whole affair is an inspiring story of innovation and entrepreneurial spirit. The students succeeded in putting together a usable and affordable car, at least before Jokowi came into the picture, without any government support whatsoever.

They deserve the highest praise for showing what young people, working with mentors willing to give their creative forces free rein can accomplish. Their teachers and Sukiat’s Kiat Motors are also a powerful example of how the public and private sector can work together to drive nascent innovation.

That’s more than can be said for many established car makers (insulated as they are by government subsidies and protectionism).

Despite talk on the need for “transformation” towards an “innovation” or “knowledge-based economy”, it’s hard, if not impossible to conceive a similar story as the Esemka saga taking place here in Malaysia. We seem to think that we can foster creativity by throwing money into projects or people and hoping for the best. It doesn’t work that way.

What private company in Malaysia would give our youth the chance that Kiat Motors gave the untested SMK students? Which school or public authority has the foresight and autonomy to facilitate the kind of collaborations with non-state actors that resulted in the Esemka?

Most of all, can we make the mental leap to be willing to concede that people younger, less educated or connected or experienced than the elite norm may actually know or can do better? Could it be that our economy seems to be going around in circles due to our inability to break from our addiction to hierarchy and authority?

We need to realise that innovation is the product of social, cultural and political forces as much as it is of legislation and infrastructure.

Keith Leong Yu Keen is a fellow at Institute for Democracy and Economic Affairs (IDEAS). Comments: letters@thesundaily.com

News Link