details of their businesses. An outside observer might suppose that
a few thousand finance major M.B.A.s have a lot in common, but
the individuals themselves tend to be keenly aware of differences
between bankers, traders, and salespeople—even among those who
perform identical functions for different products.
Largely because of the nature of these professionals and the
work they do, the apprenticeship system evolved as the primary
vehicle for knowledge exchange in financial service firms. People
historically achieved technical excellence through the guidance
and mentorship of master practitioners who worked alongside them
on deals, with clients, or at trading desks. These mentors were
highly respected for their knowledge and experience, and the
strongest financial service firms developed a strong apprenticeship
culture, which became a competitive advantage in the marketplace
for top talent. The apprenticeship system had the further advan-
tage of not requiring professionals to take time away from their
desks. It was especially well suited to the temperament of financial
service professionals, who tend to be highly practical people with a
bias toward action. They are quick to dismiss as “too theoretical”
any ideas without apparent and immediate application. (One of the
most derogatory epithets from this highly educated group of pro-
fessionals is “academic.”)
Laying the Groundwork for Leadership
Development at Goldman SachsAll the foregoing notwithstanding, at least one financial service
organization has decided that leadership development and knowl-
edge transfer are important priorities. At Goldman Sachs, senior
management asserted that the firm’s traditionally strong appren-
ticeship culture needed to be supplemented with more structured
means of knowledge transfer and leadership development. There
was no desire to diminish the coaching and mentoring roles of
more senior leaders; on the contrary, this was an aspect of the
320 LEADINGORGANIZATIONALLEARNING