I saw this on a firms homepage. It looks boarderline for violating ethics. “Our mission at investment firm is to help discerning, long-term investors generate consistently superior investment results.” Any thoughts? The ‘superior investment results’ is what is catching my eye.
I think that as long as it is the mission of the company, it does not violate any standards. It is what they are aiming to do, not what they promise to do. mission statement from BusinessDictionary.com Definition Written declaration of a firm’s core purpose and focus which normally remain unchanged, whereas business strategies and practices may frequently be altered to adapt to the changing circumstances. Properly crafted mission statements (1) serve as filters to separate what is important from what is not, (2) clearly state which markets will be served and how, and (3) communicate a sense of intended direction to the entire organization. A mission is different from a vision in that the former is the cause and the latter is the effect; a mission is something to be accomplished whereas a vision is something to be pursued for that accomplishment.
That’s not a violation. They say its their “mission”, not a gurantee. Everyone’s mission is to have superior returns in the investment business.
Check out Goldman Sachs website, their about section. Since its not a guarantee… its fine.
I’m still becoming accustom to ethics, but this seems to IMPLY that one will have superior returns which in my opinion violates standards of practice.
Another example: Lehman Brothers: …Our mission is to build unrvaled partnerships with and value for our clients through the knowledge, creativity and dedication of our people leading to superior returns for our shereholders. This is an aim, not a promise.
KJH Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I’m still becoming accustom to ethics, but this > seems to IMPLY that one will have superior returns > which in my opinion violates standards of > practice. This is a simple mission statement. No assurance is offered (explicitly or otherwise) as to the likelihood of fulfilling the mission. I agree with the other responses above.
There’s no violation since there is no guarantee explicitly provided. We cannot assume certain things and then base our decisions on such assumptions. That is not the goal of Codes and Standards.