Is the financial sector job market contracting or stretching due to emerging technologies, automation, computerization, etc.?

Updated on : December 3, 2021 by Bobby Rose



Is the financial sector job market contracting or stretching due to emerging technologies, automation, computerization, etc.?

It is different in each market, so difficult to say in general. But I will give an example:

In the UK between 2007 and 2015 it decreased by 6.8% (or 76,300 jobs). (source: https://www.statista.com/statistics/298370/uk-financial-sector-total-financial-services-employment/)

Why? My guess would be that there are 2 main trends:

1. We may experience a worldwide decline in the number of physical branches of financial institutions (and the UK is no exception). Internet and mobile are gaining more and more customers. The effect would be fewer customer service jobs in that industry. (example: https://thefinancialbrand.com/36981/bank-branch-closing-trends/)

2. We have a technological revolution in the financial sector from digital transactions, through automated accounting processes and ending with robo-advisors in investments.

On the other hand, if you look at some of the institutions in that industry, they are continually looking for ...

There are 2 types of jobs in particular that are in high demand:

- Computer science (programmers and architects)

- Analysts (with a lot of focus on big data management) (source: https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/big-data-analytics-war-ibm-watson-v-kaggle-bernard-marr?trkInfo= VSRPsearchId % 3A72211271478900154133% 2CVSRPtargetId% 3A6187367399449247744% 2CVSRPcmpt% 3Aprimary & trk = vsrp_influencer_content_res_name)

So depending on your background or experience, the impact of the technology you referenced in your question may or may not be working in your favor.

NO. Not now. Never.


I. Humans and Computers / Robots

When considering artificial intelligence, it would be wise to remember the lessons of previous technological revolutions: focus on the effects of technology rather than chasing broad-based fears about the technology itself. Technology has steered us towards a cleaner and greener planet. We do not need to deviate in a new direction. If we do so, we run the risk of delaying progress.

However, I see that many people are afraid of the "revolution" of Artificial Intelligence. Most people are afraid that they will lose jobs and ruin their careers.

* Technology is neither good nor bad. That

Keep reading

NO. Not now. Never.


I. Humans and Computers / Robots

When considering artificial intelligence, it would be wise to remember the lessons of previous technological revolutions: focus on the effects of technology rather than chasing broad-based fears about the technology itself. Technology has steered us towards a cleaner and greener planet. We do not need to deviate in a new direction. If we do so, we run the risk of delaying progress.

However, I see that many people are afraid of the "revolution" of Artificial Intelligence. Most people are afraid that they will lose jobs and ruin their careers.

* Technology is neither good nor bad. It is a tool that we must use wisely to benefit all of us.

On the subject of the future of humanity along with technological advances, history has shown that such developments have the power to change the world, but are "never deterministic" on their own.

Technology itself is neutral, neither good nor bad, and it's up to us to make sure we use it for something positive in the workforce. How you view AI depends on which side of the hustle spectrum you are on. While it may seem like a rat race when it comes to embracing new technology, it's crucial not to neglect the humans who will ultimately drive that change.

While the last great revolution brought discoveries like trains, cars, electricity, and television, it didn't tell us what to do with it.

As emerging technologies, such as artificial intelligence and biotechnology, become increasingly important, humanity still has a choice about how they will be used. We are still in control.

Technology can be used unconsciously or consciously. The key is to put it to work for you rather than being pushed around by it.

This is the job of governments. The problem is that many administrations around the world focus on "old problems" and do not pay enough attention to the potential of emerging technologies.

Compounding matters is the fact that the public remains "quite ignorant about these issues" and subject matter experts in private business or academia do not have the political mandate to regulate these new inventions.

So we should spend less time worrying about the AI ​​getting out of control and more time worrying about the people who control the AI.

* While it may be true to some extent, the one thing AI can't replicate is creativity. The logic is replaceable. Anyone can count 1 + 1.

Computers are fast, accurate, and stupid.

Humans are incredibly slow, inaccurate, and brilliant.

Machines follow rules.

Humans use judgment and reason.

As the speed of computing doubles roughly every eight months, humans will soon cease to be the fastest computer. However, the human brain is in no danger of being replaced. Computers can mimic how we process information. But how we feel, and how it affects what we do with information, that can never be encoded. Human beings possess the ever-in-demand skill of creativity that computers cannot master. With our creativity and soft skills, we can change and adapt to an environment. Computers are not capable of thinking outside the box in ways they were not programmed for.

However, computers can facilitate that change and adaptation to advance human intelligence. Computers are very fast jerks who are very good at doing easy (but tedious) work. And by taking over those tasks, you free up human workers to do the most challenging jobs (i.e. financial advisors, etc.) that require intelligence (beyond what automation is capable of today). Therefore, activities that can be easily automated only include physical activities in highly predictable and structured environments, as well as data collection and processing. Especially for many workers in routine and repetitive jobs, the risk of being replaced by robots is very high. Definitely,

* It was inevitable that one day AI would take over logical jobs. But the answer to technological disruption lies in our ability to apply humanity to the challenge.

The question is not whether automation will eliminate jobs. There is no finite number of jobs that we have been dividing since the Stone Age. New jobs are being created and they are generally better and more creative jobs. So the question is: how quickly will this transition occur, what types of jobs will be deleted, and what types of jobs will be created?

I believe that automation, over a long enough period of time, will replace all non-creative jobs. This is not a new problem: throughout history, automation has replaced jobs. But it has always freed people for new creative jobs. Technology makes jobs obsolete, but there is no upper limit on the number of technology jobs per se. Temporary displacement, not permanent.

Society will always create new jobs, but it is impossible to predict what those jobs will be. Could you have predicted, 10 years ago, that people could create vast amounts of wealth through podcasting? - NO.

The Internet has vastly expanded the possible space of racing. Most people have not yet realized this. Technology makes jobs obsolete, but there is no upper limit on the number of technology jobs per se. Temporary displacement, not permanent.

If you look at the technologies that have been introduced over the years and how they have impacted what people do, new jobs have always emerged. If you think about the number of emails and the number of documents that you write yourself. In the past, a large company would have had a group of people in a room somewhere writing those documents. Now they don't do that. What I see is not so much the disappearance of jobs but the shift, for the most part from a productivity standpoint, to something higher, something more productive, something bigger in that combination. The jobs will remain, but they will require a whole new set of skills to perform. New technologies will make some jobs obsolete; Nevertheless, they will also reduce costs and drive expansions that will lead to job growth in new areas. In all jobs, individuals would be required to take on new or expanded tasks that have a greater element of judgment and creativity, while tasks of a more repetitive and rule-based nature are automated. While machines will become more and more powerful, humans will actually be more essential.

The challenge of the next decade is not Artificial Intelligence, but Human Intelligence. Can we retrain the workforce as knowledge workers?

Believing that technology will create permanent unemployment is the same as believing that people cannot be educated to build technology.

One of the myths we have today is that adults cannot be reeducated. We see education as a thing where you go to school, you go to college, you go out and you finish ... no more education. Well that's wrong.

The race is not a destination where we stay for the rest of our lives; it is an ever-changing journey that provides the opportunity to learn, grow, and be recognized for our efforts. This is especially relevant, since the half-life of the learned skills has been reducing, and some suggest that at this time we could reduce it to five years. In other words, half the knowledge you acquired five years ago is now out of date.

So the problem in finance is not that technology replaces jobs. These are old skills that don't match the new jobs. With many finance professionals fearful that their jobs are being replaced by machines, we actually see banks scrambling to find the right talent - that is, people who understand both finance and technology. So the problem we're starting to see today is not technology replacing jobs, but a mismatch between new jobs and old skills. The question is how do we automate without leaving low-skilled people behind. Finding out that will require employers,

The best way to solve that problem is by training professionals. Over the next decade, our world will be tasked with solving some of the most pressing problems it has ever faced, including climate change, wealth gaps, and health costs in rapidly aging societies. Only by building a strong foundation for the new skills economy, investing in our youth, and supporting lifelong learning programs for our existing talented workforce can we ensure that our nations and people are ready to face a turbulent tomorrow. In this age of technology-driven transformation, helping our people train in technology is essential.

The people least likely to be replaced by machine learning are machine learning. The key is to ensure that the workforce receives adequate training and that the old educational norms that we take for granted must be changed. You need to retrain three or four times throughout your career. You go to high school, you go to college, you learn a career, you do that for 30 years, that's over because you're going to need to be retrained three or four times in the course of your life. This is a very different educational model.

Be perfectly imperfect and start exploring now before it's too late. Focus on creative skills and sharpen your thinking skills. This is how you take advantage of life in the post-internet world and make a living doing it. If you are constantly on the go, trying to increase added value for yourself, and looking for new ways to challenge and improve yourself, then AI will help you reach your goals faster. History shows that technological innovation, from the combine to the computer, can make work safer, more productive, and ultimately strengthen the economy. It is clear that technology will not replace many of the skills needed for the jobs of the future. It will simply act as a supporter and integrator, making digital fluency as important as literacy and numeracy in the future. Together,

If you're not willing to change and adapt, and you just want to rot in the same job for 25 years, forget about AI, anyone can replace you. Yet innovation can also produce losers - the often low-skilled workers displaced by technology and the communities that depend on those workers. In the 21st century, the really great fight will be against irrelevance. It is far worse to be irrelevant than to be exploited.

The demand for technology skills will grow much faster than the supply. All industries must plan for workforce transformation and develop talent. All industries must address the challenges of adapting technology head-on by addressing the talent gap that will eventually form in today's workforce.

Unions have a responsibility to defend the interests of more than just their current members, just as industry has a responsibility to help the next generation of workers prepare for a new kind of job.

The government has to prepare communities for the changes to come, while doing a better job of ensuring that the benefits of increased efficiency and productivity are not captured only by employers who hire fewer workers. One thing we can do to protect ourselves against automation. We need a culture of adult education (orienting them towards creative professions). What could it look like? Every 5 to 10 years, the government would pay you to go back to school / re-educate yourself in a different profession.


II. Human Investors and Advisors

Financial advisor and financial analyst are two extremely different jobs. Here I am talking about financial advisers, including stock brokers, insurance agents, tax preparers, stock brokers, money managers or portfolio managers or fund managers, wealth planners, bankers, financial planners, and more.

Basically, we cannot and should not compare humans to robots, or human advisers to robo advisors. Theft services do not provide the qualities that people want in an advisor. Digitized advisors can function as a complement to humans, but they can never replace the expertise of a flesh-and-blood adviser. Creating and advising households by carrying out an optimal comprehensive financial plan still depends on the responsiveness and communication that only a traditional advisor can provide.

Theft advisers do a great job of maintaining client portfolios. But that's only part of the job of financial management. Many investors want to grow (1) their wealth quickly and need the kind of personalized and professional service (2) (3), and that is why human advisers cannot be replaced.

1. Returns

Computers are better at investing in the public market than humans.

Returns on public markets will not be as good, for whatever reason. (Perhaps because efficient investing in robots and indices has raised valuations and lowered expected future returns?)

Humans are better than computers at investing in strange markets.

Returns in foreign markets will be better, for whatever reason. (Because robots haven't gotten involved yet, or are they getting paid more to take liquidity risks?)
.

Financial firms are always coming up with new and complex instruments to trade and invest.

Human advisers are the ones who can look beyond the public markets (which include multi-billion dollar stock exchanges, bond trading platforms, and big deals backed by private equity and venture capital, etc.) and put money from your clients in strange illiquid things. where computers can't compete. The point about these investments is that they require "high human capital" to manage, even if they are abundant. It is like "dark matter": they dwarf the visible things illuminated by the markets.

As such, customers will not be able to compare their performance to that of computers. Money managers certainly underperformed the S&P 500, but they can't be compared to the S&P 500. They were investing in refugee camps, where of course the risk / return profile is completely different.

Therefore, human money managers should flee to assets where computers cannot follow them, because weird things will be better for customers. But perhaps what money managers should do is resign. It depends on whether strange assets are a good idea.

2. Personalized service

High net worth investors need, and want, the human touch. Human advisers will be needed for the foreseeable future to advise wealthy clients with complicated financial planning needs.

For the machine, it's about using data and machine learning to make market predictions and identify business opportunities.

While artificial intelligence is very promising (63% of fintech professionals cited it as the key technology most worth watching), its application is too unpredictable to fully rely on a family's peace of mind and financial savings. . In finance, a machine may excel at making accurate market predictions, but it does so in a "black box," a very dark and unknowable group for high-net-worth investors in particular. These people are used to high trust relationships, as in private equity, where there is a premium for explaining how an investment strategy is structured and expected to work. Even the most accurate black box probably won't earn the trust of a high-touch customer who relies on a human relationship. While retail investors accept robo-advisors, high-net-worth clients who are used to high-touch services will still need the human side of the mind-machine collaboration. For this clientele, it is a matter of trust.

The main problems you would have with robo advisors would be the quality of the data entry. Have you ever done a personality quiz online? In doing so, have you ever been aware that the answers can be tailored to what you want the results to be, knowing that you are under a test? Until there is a true way to tie together an individual's mosiac theory and their needs, whether through IOT or other methods, the tricky part of automated financial advice will always be the true quality and relevance of the data entry. Simple risk tolerance questionnaires, which serve as the core of the robo advisers' customer discovery process, they do not get to the heart of understanding the totality of an investor's financial needs and goals and how their investment portfolio works in the context of their entire financial situation. situations.

For humans, it's about relationships and building trust, an area of ​​expertise in which people still have a considerable advantage over computers.

For most wealthy investors, handing over a lifetime's savings to an advisor of any kind requires a level of trust that a purely electronic interface cannot replace. Traditional human advisers can provide the kind of hands-on, personal service investors consistently say they want. Investors have consistently cited an advisor's willingness to take the time to understand their needs and goals, look at their full financial picture, and explain the analysis clearly as the most important qualities they look for in an advice provider. By working with an advisor, clients can create personalized plans that address everything from the changing insurance needs of a growing family to balancing multiple savings goals and,

Just as important, advisors can also offer ongoing training to address challenges clients face along the way, from market volatility to cash flow needs, to ensure transient issues don't devastate your long-term strategy. Critics say human advisers are prone to unscrupulous moves, such as pushing investments that are suboptimal for the client but profitable for the advisor. There are bad actors in any profession, of course, but the vast majority of consultants are doing their best to serve their clients. In addition, it is important to note that the use of robo advisers does not eliminate this type of conflict.

3. Professional management

Why are there still teachers when we are able to read books on our own?

Why are there postmen when we can deliver mail on our own?

Why are there waiters when we can take our orders on our own?

There are many people who give their service for things we can do alone, but they prefer not to. While there are many computers / robots that allow you to choose stocks for yourself and buy and sell them yourself, human advisers are the ones LICENSED to do so. They exist to guide and offer help in many cases or while you are using a computer.

A professional investment manager looks after your investment through careful research and skillful negotiation. Mutual fund managers are professionals, which means that they will help you avoid some of the risks you would take if you bought your own stocks personally. Not to mention, active mutual funds can be a great way to get diversified exposure to just about any asset class (discipline diversification). Since you pool money from many smaller investors, you can invest in certain assets or take larger positions than a smaller investor could take. For example, the fund may have access to IPO placements or certain structured products only available to institutional investors.

This means that robots cannot replace human advisers.

Legacy Big Box financial advisers introduced automated investment services, while robo advisors added a human touch after admitting their algorithms alone were insufficient. Neither has struck the perfect balance. I stand firm in my belief that nothing on the market can match the benefits of an experienced, conflict-free, technology-enabled bionic financial advisor.

Human advisors will work alongside rapidly evolving machines to address customer needs, which will require human skills to evolve as well. By bringing together expertise in each field, those who know the algorithms and those who finance can deliver powerful collaboration. A collaboration between humans and computers makes an unbeatable combination. Together, the "brain on a bike" partnership can lead to "Human Version 2.0" - accelerating breakthroughs and advancing discoveries.

Those of the tech people should guide her to augment humans, not replace them. And business and society as a whole must invest in education to ensure that we and our children are prepared for jobs we can't even imagine yet. By doing that, as our ancestors did in the early 20th century, we can help ensure that AI ushers in an era of opportunity and wealth for all. People must position themselves for a lifetime of learning, as the skills demanded by the workplace are changing faster than ever. Traditional college degrees no longer lead to stable long-term employment opportunities; new training in new skills has much more impact.

4. Investment strategy

After all, you get what you pay for:

High cost = High risk / return + Personalized service

Low cost = Low risk / return + Public service

Some say that a passive and automatically managed portfolio will outperform a portfolio actively managed by a human being. While money has moved from more expensive actively managed funds to less expensive passively (theft) managed funds, and more generally from mutual funds to exchange-traded funds (ETFs), which are for the most part passively managed, that's just one investment question. strategy, not an argument to go exclusively with digital advisors.

Many human advisers can recommend passive investment strategies, depending on the client's needs.

Clients whose financial goals are fully met by achieving market performance, minus a minimal spend fee, are advised to stick with robot-managed index funds, while those who need (or want) to generate more are You can recommend that they select more active funds.

* Here is the route I recommend for beginners:

Index Funds => Mutual Funds => Index Funds or ETFs

The starting point should be an index fund, with due diligence done on any available active fund options. For beginners, an easy way to invest is to expose yourself to the market as a whole, such as the S&P 500. Building your own portfolio of stocks, bonds, and other securities provides the highest level of control. You have to understand how to put your money to work for yourself before taking any further steps.

After that, consult an accountant, attorney, and financial advisor so these professionals can explain the tax consequences and other ramifications for you, your family, and your heirs.

The end point should be index funds or ETFs. Once you have mastered all the investment techniques, you can become passive if you wish to avoid unnecessary fees (index funds or ETFs).

NONE. After looking at the mechanics and processes that are required for humans to do what they do, I have determined that there are no jobs safe from robotics and AI. That's right. NONE. The beginning of the end has already begun: Research is underway on AI creativity and music composition, key things that were thought to be human traits.

When it comes to the banking industry, FORGET IT. Artificial intelligence and robotics could do 100% of banking and financial work. Especially analytical work. When all the jobs are done by AI, guess what happens next? The need for all these people diminishes and

Keep reading

NONE. After looking at the mechanics and processes that are required for humans to do what they do, I have determined that there are no jobs safe from robotics and AI. That's right. NONE. The beginning of the end has already begun: Research is underway on AI creativity and music composition, key things that were thought to be human traits.

When it comes to the banking industry, FORGET IT. Artificial intelligence and robotics could do 100% of banking and financial work. Especially analytical work. When all the jobs are done by AI, guess what happens next? The need for all these people diminishes and with that certain industries that serve people will be threatened. Right now we have an economy based on consumption. That will end with the AI ​​taking over. People will not have jobs or will have some kind of good. You can't support the economy the way we know it as well.

There are some people who will see the obvious: get rid of all these extra people that aren't necessary. So you have the context for a war. I think it will be a war like none that we have seen before because everyone will use it as an excuse to launch their blows against each and every one of those who have a grudge.

Some folks here are talking about the AI ​​threat being in the distant future. Let me ask you a question: if you see a wispy cloud of dust from a huge army of homicidal maniacs armed to the teeth with every type of conventional weapon imaginable, and you're sitting there, outgunned, outgunned, short on supplies, and out of shape. win in the moment you're going to do. Just sit down and say, “Hey! They are still SO MUCH WAITING AWAY! "Or do you do something about it?

Here's the deal: With AI, we're now at the point where human existence, as we know it, is being threatened. That's why pro-AI folks like Mark Zuckerberg keep talking about how much better AI will do for us. Firstly, most suffer from a psychological disorder that I call digitalcentrism that prevents them from seeing reality outside of the construction of some computing cultural bias, and secondly, those at the top of the movement toward AI, who really will benefit. of that - don't give a damn about the rest of us anyway.

The writing is on the wall. People will have to decide: are they for humanity or not? Discussions are over ...

Hold your breath. It's not going to be investment banking, private equity, consulting, hedge funds, or venture capital. Can you guess?

It is the FINTECH. In my opinion, financial services have faced the least disruption over time. It can be credit card, ATM, Pay pal. Anything big you can think of. Now comes the fintech revolution. One of the industries facing the most exciting innovation disruption today is financial services. Financial technology (Fintech) has the potential to revolutionize the way consumers conduct financial transactions. It can go from facilitating the mobile and or

Keep reading

Hold your breath. It's not going to be investment banking, private equity, consulting, hedge funds, or venture capital. Can you guess?

It is the FINTECH. In my opinion, financial services have faced the least disruption over time. It can be credit card, ATM, Pay pal. Anything big you can think of. Now comes the fintech revolution. One of the industries facing the most exciting innovation disruption today is financial services. Financial technology (Fintech) has the potential to revolutionize the way consumers conduct financial transactions. It can range from facilitating online and mobile payments and transactions, to providing financial advice and planning, to helping consumers and businesses receive loans and financing.

The size of the fintech market is constantly increasing. You know, which is the fintech capital of the world. Any guess? It is London. Brexit is putting a cloud over your dreams. However, experts believe that London will overcome temporary difficulties. Germany is trying to take something from London. A van even passed through London with a message: 'Don't worry! Come to Berlin 'Sure, London fintech startups are concerned and some are seriously considering moving to many alternative attractions in Europe, but nothing can replace London. Dublin in Ireland may be the closest thing.

Now coming to America. Again another trivia. New York fintech startups attracted more funding than Silicon Valley fintech startups. In the US alone, around 20,000 fintech startups are responsible for creating 500,000 jobs. Over $ 50 billion is reported to have been invested in fintechs around the world. In the first quarter ending March 2016, fintechs are estimated to have attracted an investment of $ 5 billion.

Let me list some of the familiar areas in fintech and some popular and some less popular names currently in fintech. There are thousands around the world aiming big.

1. PAYMENTS: PAYPAL, Square, Transferwise, Coin and Stripe.

2. Treasury functions: Coinbase, Digital Asset Holdings, Blockstream, Ripple.

3. LOANS: CreditKarma, Sofi, Lending Club, Prosper, Funding Circle, Kabbage, LendUp, OneDeck, Avant.

4. RETAIL BANKING: Circle Internet Financial, Mozido.

5. INVESTMENT BANKING: Kensho, Circleup, Axial, Iex.

6. WEALTH MANAGEMENT: Robinhood, Wealthfront, Improvement.

7. FINANCIAL INFORMATION: Angellist, Equidate.

These are just a handful and there are hundreds of them all over the world trotting around one place.

For their part, big banks like Citibank (it has more than 50 percent of its retail banking business and is therefore more threatened) have set up a separate central unit to work on fintech solutions and JPMorgan is following a method unique to allow fintech startups to work side by side with their staff, for a period of 6 months and any successful start-up will have the benefit of bank financing.

The answer is too long. I have not talked about cryptocurrencies, blockchain technology, etc.

So if you want some action, get ready.

Right now. When do you expect it to happen? The day after you walk in the door, five or six or seven years from now? Or in 15 years? Or 25? Assuming the most unlikely event (that is, it actually happens), what do you suppose would happen to it?

Do you expect some Monday morning to come home from work, only to see a notice on your front door that the industry was automated and would cease to exist for the weekend and that everyone was laid off? Don't you think it would be more likely that there would be some kind of phase-out, downsizing and consolidation of the industry over a period of years?

Keep reading

Right now. When do you expect it to happen? The day after you walk in the door, five or six or seven years from now? Or in 15 years? Or 25? Assuming the most unlikely event (that is, it actually happens), what do you suppose would happen to it?

Do you expect some Monday morning to come home from work, only to see a notice on your front door that the industry was automated and would cease to exist for the weekend and that everyone was laid off? Don't you think it would be more likely that there would be some kind of phase-out, contraction and consolidation of the industry over a period of years (as has happened with all other industries that have faded away)?

Do you expect to have no usable business skills, transferable elsewhere, if the IB industry closes its doors? That you wouldn't have already made a hefty pile, more than enough to live the rest of your life? That you would become some kind of outcast whom no one else wanted to hire? That you couldn't start a proper business on your own? What would have become, in effect, a kind of specialized machinery, suitable only for investment banking and therefore obsolete overnight?

Please have more confidence and respect for yourself, than that.

Suppose the IB industry will automatically cease to exist one day, before you are ready to retire. Do you think it would be the first industry to be swept away by technology, between now and then? Or are others, even many others, likely to be bypassed long before a people's business like investment banking is destroyed? Wouldn't you expect to have years, even decades, of advance warnings and signs of progressive business automation?

Why are you worried about not having time to prepare, to adapt, to change, to collect, to find a safe harbor in the highly unlikely event that the industry ceases to exist in an automated way?

You're only 18, so you can be excused for not having a mature and sensible pattern of thought, and for panicking over some apocalyptic speculation out of a comic. Fortunately, you have many years ahead of you to grow up and make some sense, and perhaps even learn to think critically.

Until then, try to stay calm. Your world won't end overnight. Forces beyond your knowledge and understanding will not leave you jobless or helpless. You have plenty of time to learn about the investment banking business (and many other good career opportunities), to keep up with technological changes and advancements, and to make a good and successful career in this field.

If something bad happens in the next 20 or 30 years, you will have plenty of advance warnings. By then you will have matured enough to know what to do, to take care of yourself.

Exactly when is hard to predict, but when it happens it will be much faster than you imagine.

TL; DR; By 2040. And this time the employment revolution is different. This time, the humans won't find a new job because they just can't work. We are not prepared at all for our inevitable future.

From the "The AI ​​Revolution" articles below:

There is some debate as to how soon AI will reach human-level general intelligence (the median for the year in a survey of hundreds of scientists of when they thought it would be most likely that we would not have reached AGI was 2040), that's only 25 years later now,

Keep reading

Exactly when is hard to predict, but when it happens it will be much faster than you imagine.

TL; DR; By 2040. And this time the employment revolution is different. This time, the humans won't find a new job because they just can't work. We are not prepared at all for our inevitable future.

From the "The AI ​​Revolution" articles below:

There is some debate as to how soon AI will reach human-level general intelligence (the median for the year in a survey of hundreds of scientists of when they thought it would be most likely that we would not have reached AGI was 2040), that's only 25 years then now, which doesn't sound that big until you consider that many of the thinkers in this field think that the progression from AGI to ASI is likely to occur very quickly. Like, this could happen:

It takes decades for the first AI system to reach low-level general intelligence, but it finally happens. A computer is capable of understanding the world around it as well as a four-year-old. Suddenly, an hour after reaching that milestone, the system launches the great theory of physics that unifies general relativity and quantum mechanics, something that no human being has been able to do definitively. 90 minutes after that, the AI ​​has become an ASI, 170,000 times smarter than a human.

Superintelligence of that magnitude is not something we can remotely grasp, nor can a bumblebee understand Keynesian economics. In our world, smart means an IQ of 130 and stupid means an IQ of 85; We don't have a word for an IQ of 12,952.


Some things you might want to check:

PART 1 - The Artificial Intelligence Revolution: The Road to Superintelligence
The Artificial Intelligence Revolution: The Road to Superintelligence - Wait, but why?

PART 2 - The AI ​​Revolution: Our Immortality or Extinction
The AI ​​Revolution: Our Immortality or Extinction | Wait but why

Humans don't need to apply

A story will answer your question! At least I hope so.

Before getting into a famous Central Bank (I wouldn't say the "brand" I'm not here to advertise my CV) I spent six months in front of a Treasury Desk. It was 2015.

Financial providers are the way

You know that period of time, you had to inform your boss by mail that you had just closed the order in the market and you handled it getting a good price? It's already finished in 2015. If you can use financial providers, you can focus on the financial side and leave a lot of routine tasks, like sending an email with my ticket.

Keep reading

A story will answer your question! At least I hope so.

Before getting into a famous Central Bank (I wouldn't say the "brand" I'm not here to advertise my CV) I spent six months in front of a Treasury Desk. It was 2015.

Financial providers are the way

You know that period of time, you had to inform your boss by mail that you had just closed the order in the market and you handled it getting a good price? It was already finished in 2015. If you can use financial providers, you can focus on the finance side and leave a lot of routine tasks like emailing my order ticket to the "machine".

Therefore, the ability to work while interacting with such vendors was and remains a very valuable skill.

Analytics is on the rise

Do you have a job providing slides, written procedures and documents or checking for errors (eg internal audit)? In that case, my opinion is very pessimistic. This work is being automated. At a Central Bank, I spent two years automating those tasks in SQL and SAS. Now, the employees in that office have to click some buttons as a daily task.

The ability to produce interesting dossiers and reports by querying data with SAS, SQL to process that data, perhaps in Tableau, is actually one of the HOTTest skills you may have.

In short, all roles related to:

  • verify data
  • produce a report in pdf or power point
  • make more beautiful slides or reports "by hand"
  • Ctrl + c + ctrl + v functions in many law offices
  • internal control in banks
  • data entry
  • sales that don't even know what C ++ or SQL is
  • accountant

All previous roles will die in the near future

In the end, this is my personal opinion! Take it seriously, but not too seriously. Things can change!

A wide variety of opportunities can be found for those wanting a career in finance in the private, public, and non-profit sectors, especially with a master's degree in finance.

Most people in the financial services industry are employed in areas such as commercial banking, corporate finance, financial planning, investment banking, money management, insurance, and real estate.

Additionally, almost all businesses, government agencies, and organizations have financial managers who oversee financial reporting, strive to reduce risk, direct investment activities, and implement a cash management strategy.

Keep reading

A wide variety of opportunities can be found for those wanting a career in finance in the private, public, and non-profit sectors, especially with a master's degree in finance.

Most people in the financial services industry are employed in areas such as commercial banking, corporate finance, financial planning, investment banking, money management, insurance, and real estate.

Additionally, nearly all businesses, government agencies, and organizations have financial managers who oversee financial reporting, strive to reduce risk, direct investment activities, and implement cash management strategies.

Financial career options

  • Commercial Banking: A career in commercial banking offers opportunities in financial management, accounting and auditing, securities, commodity sales, and financial services, as well as financial and credit analysis.
  • Corporate Finance - Employees working in corporate finance find the money to run the business, grow the business, make acquisitions, plan for their financial future, and manage available cash.
  • Financial planning: Financial planners help people plan for their financial future.
  • Insurance - Insurance jobs involve helping individuals and businesses manage risk to protect themselves from catastrophic losses and to anticipate potential risk issues. A variety of areas in insurance include work as an insurer, sales representative, asset manager, or actuary.
  • Investment banking: Investment bankers help companies and governments issue securities, help investors buy securities, manage financial assets, trade securities, and provide financial advice.
  • Money Management: Money managers hold stocks and bonds for institutional clients.
  • Bienes raíces: En los campos de bienes raíces, muchos están empleados en áreas tales como seguros de títulos, construcción, banca hipotecaria, administración de propiedades, tasaciones de bienes raíces, corretaje y arrendamiento.

Maestría en Finanzas vs. MBA

La diferencia básica entre estas dos opciones es que una Maestría en Finanzas es un título altamente especializado que le permitirá enfocarse casi exclusivamente en temas relacionados con las finanzas. Por el contrario, un programa de MBA le permitirá desarrollar un conjunto general de habilidades de gestión además de conocimientos financieros específicos.

Cada uno tiene sus ventajas:

  • A master’s program will enable you to delve into finance issues in greater depth
  • An MBA program will allow you to spend your first year developing a set of skills that can be transferred to other areas
  • Both a master’s degree and an MBA concentration will prepare you to hold management positions within the field of finance
  • An MBA degree may also qualify you to hold management positions in other fields, should you become interested in a different career

What You’ll Study

Coursework generally covers these subjects:

  • Statistics
  • Economics
  • Accounting policies and procedures
  • Corporate budgeting
  • Financial analysis methods

Advanced courses in options pricing or bond valuation and knowledge of risk management are often covered. Courses in investments, taxes, estate planning and risk management also are helpful.

Finance Skill Set

Financial professionals must be detail-oriented, highly motivated researchers and knowledgeable about U.S. and international tax laws, economics and money markets. In addition to self-confidence, maturity and the ability to work independently, candidates for financial industry positions need a broad range of skills including:

  • Excellent mathematical and computer skills
  • Excellent analytic and problem solving skills
  • Excellent oral and written communication skills
  • Strong interpersonal skills

Licensing and Certification

A license is not required to work as a personal financial advisor, but advisors who sell stocks, bonds, mutual funds, insurance or real estate may need licenses to perform these additional services.

Certification, although not required for financial analysts or personal financial advisors to practice, can enhance professional standing and is strongly recommended by many financial companies. Financial analysts may receive the title Chartered Financial Analyst (CFA) and personal financial advisors may obtain a Certified Financial Planner (CFP) or Chartered Financial Consultant (ChFC) designation. Both titles demonstrate to potential customers that a planner has extensive training and competency in the area of financial planning.

Career Paths

The financial field offers many possibilities to MBAs, but the most sought after jobs are within corporate finance, investment banking and securities firms. Finance MBAs often go into the corporate world as Financial Analysts or Investment Banking Associates. Other careers for MBAs are in asset management, equities research and private client services.

Many MBAs become management consultants with expertise in cash management, restructuring and workouts, emerging markets or strategy. MBAs on the corporate side may aspire to careers that lead to corporate treasury, and ultimately the Chief Financial Officer (CFO) role in the corporation.

Financial analysts may advance by becoming portfolio managers or financial managers, directing the investment policies of their companies or those of clients. Personal financial advisors who work in firms also may move into managerial positions, but most advisors advance by accumulating clients and managing more assets.

All substantial technology improvements destroy jobs in the short term. For example, the number of bank teller jobs have been substantially decreased because of ATMs. This ultimately creates new, more specialized, higher paying jobs, such as ATM manufacturing and maintenance companies.

And of course, displaced labor becomes available to harness in entirely new ways.

Here's what you need to know-

Point #1– We can’t yet build computers that think like people.

I've seen people predict that General Artificial Intelligence (AGI), or Artificial Intelligence (AI) that thinks and acts like people, is j

Keep reading

All substantial technological improvements destroy jobs in the short term. For example, the number of bank teller jobs has dropped substantially due to ATMs. Ultimately, this creates new, more skilled, and higher-paying jobs, such as ATM manufacturing and maintenance companies.

And of course the displaced workforce is available to be harnessed in entirely new ways.

This is what you need to know

Point # 1 - We still can't build computers that think like people.

I’ve seen people predicting that Artificial General Intelligence (AGI), or Artificial Intelligence (AI) that thinks and acts like people, is just around the corner. Regardless of how many movies you’ve seen showing computers thinking like people, this is a bunch of hooey. The best AI technologies we have today apply complex statistical models to a specific problem within narrow constraints, are then trained by people what optimal outputs look like based on various inputs, and hundreds of thousands of iterations later, you get a computer program that can predict optimal patterns most of the time. This is not human-like thinking.

Just because we can teach a computer to drive a car, compose specific kinds of music, or play chess doesn’t mean that we can make a robot that will know that a wooden board with an 8x8 grid is actually a cutting board and we need to cut vegetables instead of setting up chess pieces for a game. We do not know how to teach computers to deal with the unpredictability of reality. Computers do pretty well in sandboxes with all relevant conditions preselected, but terrible in random circumstances that people deal with all day, every day. We can’t build a “Terminator” or even an R2D2, instead our robots today create the “Poopening.”

When I was a child, AI scientists were predicting achieving AGI in 50 years. Today, it is still 40-50 years away. I’ve spoken to leading brain molecular biologists and famous psychological theorists about this. When you ask them, they will tell you frankly, we still haven’t got the foggiest idea of what a mind actually is, nor how to replicate one. One well-respected scientist told me, we’re still at a Kindergarten level of understanding of how the human brain works. Renowned futurist Ray Kurzweil bucks the trend by predicting we’ll see an AI beat the Turing Test by 2050. If or when that happens, I echo Kurzweil’s words about a similar AI test– “Once a computer performs as well or better as humans in chess, we will either think more of computer intelligence, less of human intelligence, or less of chess. If history is a guide, we will think less of chess.”

Point #2– People will always be needed.

Even if we someday create an AGI, there will never be a time that all humans are more comfortable with machines than people. There are many people today who have a person ring up their groceries instead of using automated self-checkout stations. Most of us will talk to a doctor instead of looking up information on WebMD. Once we began creating perfect, machine-made products, people began paying a premium for flawed, hand-made goods.

Point #3– Automation is going to change everything.

That said, automation is going to continue to get better and will not just change some things, it’s going to change nearly everything. Research is already showing that low-technology jobs are disappearing… entirely. If you do something mostly technology-less now, by the time you retire, your job as it exists today will likely not exist anymore. Free markets will ensure that any disruptive technologies that greatly improve efficiency will be widely adopted. Those who refuse to utilize these will go out of business, or radically change their business model.

Point #4– Technology increases the productivity of workers.

Capital expenditures on technology have been increasing worker productivity for years, no, decades, no, centuries, no, millennia… well, at least for recorded history. The pattern for work has changed immensely over the period of time. We started out as hunter/gatherers and almost immediately began using technology to improve our ability to provide for ourselves and families. It hasn’t stopped. It likely won’t stop unless we stop educating ourselves or stop being curious. This use of technology to increase productivity causes costs to drop.

Point #5– As our productivity has increased, new kinds of work have been created.

Professional sports teams, and all of the people who build and maintain stadiums, comment, professionally cheer for, sell food and souvenirs at, and provide betting services including under/over spreads for did not exist 100 years ago. This is also true of all computer technology and related jobs. There was also nothing like the vacation and tourism industry- there were no theme parks or resorts. The number of research positions has skyrocketed.

Point #6– Change is constant.

All of this has been happening for all of recorded history. New categories of work are created and old categories of work are retired. The only times these were stable was when scientific, cultural, and technological progress had largely stopped. Those times sucked. See the Dark Ages.

Point #7– Change, especially the kind that sunsets your chosen career, is scary.

People are afraid of not only losing their jobs but having their skills become obsolete. This can become so severe that it ends in class warfare and violence. See Luddite.

Point #8– Quality of life has, for the most part, increased.

Regardless of the above, the march of history has shown that the quality of life has generally greatly increased with the introductions of new technologies. For example, most of us not only don’t grow our own food, but most of us don’t even cook anymore. Hunger, disease, and suffering has been largely eradicated in modern times, except for failures in government. e.g. North Korea vs South Korea. (See the next two points.)

Point #9– There has never been a shortage of people who want to run your life, for a cost, of course.

Authoritarian governments draw those who crave power like flies to poop. Have you ever met an honest, transparent, authentic politician? I don’t know about you, but the only politicians I’ve met that meet these qualifications are, for the most part, unsuccessful. The authoritarian types will promise to solve the automation problem for you by punitively taxing or outright prohibiting all the evil business people who want to use automation. They would like for you to have any choice you like in life, as long as it’s one that comes from one of their political donors or a government agency they run, and has received their bureaucratic stamp of approval. The Affordable Care Act in the USA is a good example of a program that promised the moon (keep your doctor! everyone will pay less! the uninsured will be insured!) and delivers… well, a lot less. (uh, you can’t keep your doctor, your costs are way up, and we forced a lot of people into healthcare products they didn’t want.)

Point #10– Getting government involved with business really screws things up.

You want phones that aren’t connected to wires that let you read Facebook and take photos? It wasn’t possible until telecom was deregulated. And I won’t even get into how regulated healthcare is and was. In fact, there’s a direct correlation between how regulated a specific industry is and how unhappy people generally are with it. Seriously, check it out. Of course, this shouldn’t be a surprise to anyone who honestly evaluates how well their Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV), Veteran’s Health Administration (VHA), or Internal Revenue Service (IRS) does. Government involvement decreases competition, investment, and entrepreneurship- all necessary for innovative and inexpensive products and services. More government and more regulation generally means less customer satisfaction, because businesses have to spend resources complying with laws instead of using those resources on researching new products and services, and making their customers happier.

So what are we supposed to do?

The way to fix this mess is to reduce regulation, stop trying to tax robots and penalizing any business owner using automation, and to stop thinking that Things Are Different This Time™ about socialism and authoritarianism.

As in the past, get out of the way and let the people figure out what they want and how to make things better. We need to stop government from picking winners and losers- this slows innovation and advancement. A winner should be who you and I choose to spend our money with. People will adapt to the new ways of doing things, but burdensome taxes, laws and regulations always lag industry, and make transitions even more painful.

If we can make losing government jobs the thing people worry about, we’ll all be better off. New kinds of jobs will be created that we aren't even imagining yet!

I’ll leave you with another Ray Kurzweil quote:

We have already eliminated all jobs several times in human history. How many jobs circa 1900 exist today? If I were a prescient futurist in 1900, I would say, “Okay, 38% of you work on farms; 25% of you work in factories. That’s two-thirds of the population. I predict that by the year 2015, that will be 2% on farms and 9% in factories.” And everybody would go, “Oh, my God, we’re going to be out of work.” I would say, “Well, don’t worry, for every job we eliminate, we’re going to create more jobs at the top of the skill ladder.” And people would say, “What new jobs?” And I’d say, “Well, I don’t know. We haven’t invented them yet.”

Surgeons, carpenters and plumbers. These jobs are highly improvised. It is not something a robot is very good at unless it is tremendously skilled, and it is not an easy thing to teach an AI. I mean jazz musicians too, only computers are starting to compose music that isn't horrible, and you don't need anything more than a speaker to make the music come out.

Hookers (WestWorld notwithstanding), because I suspect that most human beings would rather fuck another human being. However, we now have remote control dildos. Heard it's for the best after being there.

Maids and butlers, because

Keep reading

Surgeons, carpenters and plumbers. These jobs are highly improvised. It is not something a robot is very good at unless it is tremendously skilled, and it is not an easy thing to teach an AI. I mean jazz musicians too, only computers are starting to compose music that isn't horrible, and you don't need anything more than a speaker to make the music come out.

Hookers (WestWorld notwithstanding), because I suspect that most human beings would rather fuck another human being. However, we now have remote control dildos. Heard it's for the best after being there.

Maids and butlers, because the whole point is to have a human servant. I think personal service is going to make a big comeback once computers and robots really begin to take over jobs. Not that housecleaning isn’t something a robot could do effectively for the common masses. It’s the snob-appeal of having a human servant, when you could have a robot.

A recent study by researchers at Oxford University and consultants Deloitte may have given finance professionals pause for thought. It found that, based on the nature of their work and the expected advance of machine intelligence, it is 95% likely that charted accountants will be replaced by some form of automation over the next 20 years.

That's a staggering number, but it should come as no surprise that finance department work is ripe for automation. Since 2004, the average number of full-time employees working in the function in large companies has decreased by 40% to around 71 people for

Keep reading

A recent study by researchers at the University of Oxford and Deloitte consultants may have given finance professionals pause. It found that, depending on the nature of their work and the expected advancement of machine intelligence, it is 95% likely that registered counters will be replaced by some form of automation over the next 20 years.

That is a startling figure, but it should come as no surprise that the work of the finance department is ripe for automation. Since 2004 the median number of full-time employees working in the function at big companies has declined by 40% to about 71 people for every US$1bn of revenue, down from 119 people, according to Hackett Group, a consulting firm. This is due, in part at least, to the increased use of automation within the finance department, the researchers say.

In fact, as a survey of business leaders in the US and western Europe by The Economist Intelligence Unit reveals, finance executives are especially eager to automate. It found that 62% of finance executives plan to launch or oversee an initiative to increase automation in their department in the next two years. No other function included in the study is more consistent in its intentions.

Other Guides:


GET SPECIAL OFFER FROM OUR PARTNER.