[ by Melanie Gretchen ]

Sallie Krawcheck has worked on Wall Street.  Before leaving Bank of America last year, she was BofA's president of global wealth management, served as CEO of Smith Barney, and was CFO of Citigroup.  Since then, she has redefined herself as an advocate for Wall Street reform.  Here's where she stands, as told to Crain's New York:
 

Do you see yourself working for a giant bank again?

Put it this way: It may take me a while to learn lessons, but I do learn them. I want to stay in financial services because it's an industry that can really make people's lives better, and that's why I'm working with startups. And I'm working to help government and the industry work through changes.

 
This is an industry that can seem impervious to change, though.

I think it's just extraordinary. For example, reforming money-market funds was something that needed to happen, yet the SEC got a lot of pressure from the industry and couldn't agree on how to do it. That was a watershed failure, because it was the first regulatory matter since the financial crisis that involved protecting individual investors. The job of the SEC is not to protect the asset management business and keeping it from having to raise capital—a significant part of the SEC's job is to protect individual investors. Now the battle isn't over. [Treasury Secretary] Timothy Geithner says reform is needed.

Might your professional future include being a regulator?

No comment. But I'll say this: We're at a weird and important moment after the crisis. People ask me, "Why are you doing this? Why not spend time with your kids, work on the next stage of your career?" And I'm doing all that. But given my background, it's my responsibility to engage in the discussion.
 

What can be done about excessive banker pay?

Well, as the returns generated by the banks fall, pay is falling, too. Utility executives don't make zillions, and you're seeing pay for the bank CEOs fall, too. But we also have to address the structure of pay. A big mistake after the crisis was the move to pay CEOs in more stock. That's a mistake because it encourages executives to take more risks so the value of their stock will rise. And one thing we don't want is bankers taking more risk—banks are already big bundles of risk. One alternative that I advocate is paying CEOs in bonds instead of stock.

For further details, go to [Crain's, 10/21/12].