Do the humanities have value in today's banking world?
I recently got to sit down with a partner at a major MM IB firm (think Baird, HLHZ) who was a history major in college and we worked our way to the question of what value humanities degrees hold in the marketplace today. He thought they're highly underrated, because unlike most quantitative degrees (engineering and CS aside), the humanities teach problem-solving and understanding of entire systems of argument while many econ/math majors come out and have to learn how individual pieces and parts work together to form the whole. This is good at the analyst level, but advancement beyond that requires a level of understanding that most analysts don't have at the start.
He also pointed out that many of his fellow partners don't necessarily agree and usually just want to hire the econ/math/CS majors because they can learn to model the fastest, and thus hit the ground running before the humanities kids can.
So what's your take--do the humanities have a place in investment banking, or have they been fully superseded by more quantitative fields? And if not, what should a humanities major do to make themselves more appealing?
Bullshit. Do you honestly think an English major has better problem solving skills than someone majoring in EE?
That being said, if you are a completely unrelated major and you nail the technicals better than a lot of the econ/business kids that shows that you're extremely motivated.
English majors are extremely intelligent. I definitely agree humanities majors a lot of times go underrated.
Talk about painting with a broad brush....
Just to piggyback off this, Political Science kids are some of the brightest and well rounded students especially if you have a good undergrad PoliSci program. People think that Political Science is a lot of theorizing, but most top-20 UG programs are quant heavy requiring multiple labs. It doesn't hurt that you have kids who have fantastic reading comprehension, communication skills, and an idea of what is going on in the world.
Undergrads of PS programs go on to law school, or continue in academia unfortunately and our exposure is limited.
The humanities majors can learn the technical skills but do they want to go into banking?
*Finance. Econ is a humanity degree.
I'm getting MS'd on for some reason I'm not privy to. There's an ongoing debate on this and I majored in it. I think it is a humanity.
If you view economics as a moral and political philosophy (as Adam Smith did), then yeah, you could make the case that it is a humanities degree. Most people consider it a social science, especially now that economics has become far more quantitative and modeling intensive.
I don't know why this comment got so much monkey Sh*t. I am an Math/Econ major. To a certain extent, Econ is a humanities degree...actually I'd say even Math
Yeah, I'm not sure about the MS everyone's getting here--Econ is quantitative sociology with a stronger (?) philosophical underpinning IMO so it could be a humanity. My college split them apart from each other (and split math off too) so it's debatable, but it isn't wrong enough to get this much ms.
You get a Bachelor of Arts for majoring in Econ and a Bachelor of Science for majoring in Finance. So Econ by definition is a humanity type major... trying to understand how you got so much MS. Unless it's different at every other school, and it's not a knock on Econ, it just is what it is.
It's like getting mad that a tomato is a fruit, BC you have some inferiority complex in the fruit vs veggies debate.
From my experience humanities majors could do a lot of finance roles, but they will require extra assistance. I worked with a philosophy major who happened to know how to code and works in Asset Management now. He is more middle office than front and it took him years to get to where he is. I know also worked with a communications major that ended up as a PM, however, he got his start in the mid 90's and honestly the world has changed since then.
Overlooking lib arts majors is foolish, however, you do have to be ready to explain the basics to them - think as simple as futures and options contracts. Also, I think saying that a math/finance major is not going to be able to handle the higher level problems is even more foolish. I have met plenty of humanities majors who could not run any organization. The majority of higher level problem solving capabilities are going to come from experience and the individual person. What they major in is not going to be what defines them over the long run.
In my general experience and according to some stats (GRE/SAT scores), philosophy majors are smartest out of all humanities.
Well, they are basically majoring in thinking. This guy was definitely smart, however, he also had early exposure to programming.
The field of philosophy is kind of an anomaly in the humanities world. Fact of the matter is that logic is a subfield of philosophy that has a lot of overlap with computer science. Likewise within economics, the subfield of econometrics has a lot of statistics involved
My view is that one of the biggest potential benefits from college is to learn how to solve problems, and subjects like history and english don't award you with problem solving skills the same way that STEM subjects do. On the flipside, humanities leave you better equipped to communicate and craft persuasive arugments
It also depends where you go to school
There was a really good thread on this a while ago, but I unfortunately cannot find it. The partner is 100% correct. I think the outside the box type thinking taught in the liberal arts is very valuable for a career in IB. If I were screening resumes, I would choose the history or English major over the finance or STEM major for IB 100% of the time all else being equal.
I was an accounting and finance major BTW.
What "outside the box type' thinking are you referring to? I can see how a philosophy major might possess that, but how are you going to rationalize a history or English major possessing it? And then beyond that, why wouldn't an engineer or math major possess that? I'll concede that a biology major would probably not learn to think outside of the box since it's a major where good memorization skills will serve you better than thinking skills would.
I gain some solace in knowing that your statement is more of a testament to how intellectually non-challenging IB is, and that, like most things in life, it's a skill or set of knowledge that can be gained over time.
It seems many posters in here have mistaken this as an attack on STEM majors- it's not. I never stated that a STEM major cannot think critically- it's just that their critical thinking is different. STEM fields deal with absolutes, while liberal arts majors deal with many relativities. Liberal arts also frequently allow students to reach their own conclusions, whereas STEM fields frequently have one right and many wrong answers. This all lends to a type of thinking that makes for a successful investment banker.
The important thing to remember is that IB never has been a quantitative field. IB has always been an art, not a science.
To me there's nothing worse than a engineering/science/finance/econ major who thinks he (or she) is the shit for doing a "hard skill" major. Those types of people tend to be the least interesting, least intellectually curious and most unprepared for the real world.
Philosophy major in IBD here -- I think the real value is that you're a well rounded person and are just generally intellectually curious. If you just spent your college career taking a ton of finance classes you probably know a lot about finance, but you're probably such a simpleton. Being well rounded academically has paid off when talking to clients.
Finance/Math major here that just got into IBD - I think that the traditional liberal arts argument teaches you how to think is a croc of shit. It's propaganda that older generations have been spouting for a long time. Majoring in a certain field of study isn't going to make your problem solving abilities intrinsically stronger than they already are. That being said remember why you're going to university: to network, put a brand on your resume, and maybe learn the basic theory behind your field. First if you don't get the same network that the kids in your undergraduate business school do you're at a serious disadvantage, which a lot of liberal arts kids get screwed on. Second, learning about humanities doesn't translate into quantitative skills no matter what way you put it. I've met some brilliant liberal arts guys that wanted to break into finance, but there is just such a steep learning curve that they just couldn't cut it when it's all said and done. If you like liberal arts but want to go into finance, make it your minor because having a degree in finance is paramount to breaking in.
Strong words, but I agree with this message. The idea that you "don't learn how to think" studying finance/math/STEM is pretty dumb. Most college educations require some liberal arts core, anyways. Sure, there's kids that are very narrow-minded, but that's the case for any field. We just see more "narrow-minded" technical majors because at least they have the technical skills to become our peers - the humanities/liberal arts kids who didn't have the critical thinking skills don't have even make it into the conversation because they have no redeeming qualities on the technical side.
On the point of philosophy majors having the highest standardized scores, I think there is a bit of self-selection there - you have to be a real intellectual type to want to major in philosophy since there's little allure of "easiness" (marketing, art history, cultural studies) or money (finance, science).
Yah I don't actually believe philosophy majors have the highest standardized test scores. I believe math majors actually do. And the reason for that is because pure math majors literally have to be geniuses. I took a functional analysis course in undergrad (it's the lifeblood theory of all analysis done in academic literature) and let me tell you it was a doozy, I struggled to get the pitiful B- I got. Classes like that, which are common in upper level math all the way to the doctorate level, are so abstract by nature that the logical order of your problem solving abilities must be perfect to even comprehend the basic ideas behind the subject. Go talk to a Berkeley Mathematics PHD, and I guarantee you he/she can solve just about anything. They're real life wizards.
IDK why you're getting MS thrown at you. For all those people who feel their pride has been hurt by your comments I ask y'all this: you think an MD or VP gives two shits about your humanities background and your ability to think philosophically?
No they want someone who can get shit done without being a burden and also someone who has a thick skin and understand their role in the hierarchy of things. If they needed you for your ability to think critically about industry X or the merits of a pending M&A transaction you wouldn't be an Analyst.
I think that humanities degrees are WORTHLESS and TRASH. You cannot DISRUPT the industry without utilizing the FREEMIUM model.
/thread
Which majors make for the best sex dungeon participants?
MUSIC and EAST ASIAN STUDIES majors. YOU'RE WELCOME!
This from the man that studied History in college?
poor people major in STEM because they need to ensure they'll get paid after graduation
Intresting way to say that you aknowledge low employability of humanities majors
Judging people by their majors is like judging how quick a car is by the make/model.
Yes, the stereotypes are generally true, but get ready when that 10 year old V6 Camry blows the doors of most brand new, entry level 3 series, A4, or C class with their ubiquitous 2.0L turbo 4 cylinders.
CARS MAN SICK
Why Does This CEO Hire Humanities Majors (Originally Posted: 07/15/2017)
The CEO of a tech startup claims that he is hiring as many humanities majors as STEM majors. He claims that humanities majors are willing to learn and try new things. The article does not tell us which company this is but they created a video content management platform for business and were involved in the Y Combinator. He has examined his customer base as found that they first ask "what am I looking at here", this is where the STEM majors come into play. Next the customers ask "what does it mean", this is where the Arts and Humanities majors come into play. Arts majors, looks like you gotta a backup plan if GS doesn't hire you!
Here is the article
As you progress higher in IB, it becomes more and more a sales job so I would say your major has little to no impact on how strong you will eventually be in the field.
That being said, getting a CS/Engineering/Math/Physics degree will open a lot more doors than a Philosophy/History/English degree if you don't break into high finance. I have plenty of friends who tried breaking into IB with humanities degrees who graduated without a job, while most of my friends in STEM programs have something lined up. This is at a target school as well, so it's not necessarily a problem you'll only see at the supposed "non-targets."
Everyone is going to have their biases (I graduated with a STEM degree and I did like the Philosophy/Econ/History classes I took), but I think the STEM classes are more applicable to solving today's problems (although that really only starts to take shape when you take advanced electives in STEM departments). Still, if you do a STEM major, I would recommend taking some humanities classes with the same being said for humanities majors. It's about developing a well-rounded skillset.
Most people I know in finance value STEM degrees much higher. Ceteris Paribus, that would also mean they value STEM candidates higher than humanities majors. Say for the sake of argument that STEM candidates are slightly better, but every bank has a very large bias towards STEM candidates. Surely you have a relative advantage focussing on humanities candidates in that case, as they undervalued on average?
Humanities Grad School? (Originally Posted: 12/21/2009)
I'm thinking about applying to a 2-year program at Oxford (in a humanities subject) to add to my table of options for next year (I'm a senior at a top target). Assuming I got into this program, I think it's safe to say I would get a lot of personal fulfillment out of it; however, I'm worried about how job recruiters would look at it should I decide to go looking for a finance/consulting job afterward. The subject has NOTHING to do with business and isn't quantitative, so it should be bad, right? How bad?
Seems like a waste of time and money if you ultimately wish to pursue a career in finance/consulting. You will be viewed as someone who is unfocused. If you are simply applying to the program for your own personal development and edification it would make a lot more sense to simply get a library card or a discount card to a local book store.
STEM degrees are only valuable on the quantitative aspects of IBD/PE, the way those degree programs are structured today. That means, yeah, the average STEM major fellow will do good at an entry level compared to the average humanities major. STEM majors also benefit from a logically driven thought process that humanities majors may not have. But in recent years, I've seen this gap narrow down a lot (maybe thanks to standardized scores).
But banking and consulting shift focus soon enough. At VP+ levels, it's not about analyzing which numbers to get the desired output - it's about selling and convincing the other party that you're right. These skills, unfortunately, aren't taught by most STEM programs, while some humanities programs actually propel such thought processes by stimulating debate and argument in the classroom. That's when the humanities major excels over the STEM major, assuming all variables remain the same.
Disclaimer:- Engineering major here, who was told by a professor that he wasn't "fit to be an engineer". So now I make more money than him at the pinnacle of his career (and at the start of mine), while actively being involved with the upper management of a number of engineering firms as part of my job. God help those companies right?
The reason I noted the above example is because from my observation, most STEM majors turn out to be arrogant assholes, simply because they think they can handle advanced math that humanities guys can't. Truth is, nobody gives a shit about whether one can solve a tough indefinite integral - but they'll shit on you if you aren't going to be part of the revenue generating arm of a firm (aka Sales).
Sure STEM people can be arrogant, but there's no shortage of arrogant humanities majors. I don't think it really matters what someone majored in. There can be successful STEM and humanities students who aren't driven by the coursework but by their intellectual curiosity. This is what drives long term success not what you studied in university.
Probably gonna get MS for this.
CS Major here. I think kids who are just Big Three (Econ/PoliSci/Pre-Med) majors are generic and boring, especially at targets where they make up ~25-50% of undergrad majors. When I come across these kids, I just think "Another kid with no real passion, chasing $$$/fame." (I'm fine with people having that mindset btw, but spending hours in IB with someone like that is miserable) The most interesting/brilliant people I've worked with have all been none of these majors. They either A) Were interested in things beyond a pre-determined path, or B) Realized that they could get where they wanted to go without taking the road most traveled. Both mindsets are rare, and make for great colleagues. Given all of that, I prefer STEM majors AND Humanities majors. They both just seem to "get it" in ways that traditional strivers don't. I feel like that sets them apart from everyone else.
Most of the STEM people I sat in classrooms with had a bizarre superiority complex over all other students. The STEM people who were true nerds and were studying it because of a deep passion were few and far between. Most of the conversations with my fellow STEM majors seemed to revolve around complaining about problem sets.
This was my experience too. But then again, modern society has made a fantastic job of forcing people into learning stuff that barely interests them, or suits them.
There are intelligent individuals in all majors. Just because they chose History over Econ, doesn't necessarily make them less capable to do the job. To some peoples point, yes, a finance major can hit the ground running quicker, but that won't necessarily make them a better banker in the long run.
After reading this thread I no longer feel insecure about my sports education degree
Wtf were you thinking? Your mom must've went to bed in sweats every night.
lol I swear I didn't throw MS. Most of what I say is sarcasm - I didn't major in Sports Ed.
Majored in Finance with a minor in Love
I don't work in banking but from what I've heard, read, etc it seems that you could major in Women's Studies or 17th Century French Literature at Harvard, UPenn, Yale, etc and make it into banking so long as you learn the technical interview questions.
If you're at a non-target majoring in the humanities or liberal arts you can just fuck right off. This is why I HATE when you hear pundits talk about the importance of a liberal arts education.
Bullshit! It only matters where you get said liberal arts degree or education from. Williams College? Harvard? Awesome!
University of Houston, Akron, FSU? Get the fuck out of here!
To answer OPs question: Does your major even matter? Assuming all else being equal, if you have Excel skills and understand what IB Analysts do and you can walk through a DCF and understand the financial statements do you really need anything else?
I don't think so. And no a humanities degree doesn't really set you apart unless you're debating the pros and cons of Utilitarianism.
Plus when would you even use these said "skills" gained from a humanities degree? Are you going to apply Socratic analysis in deciding whether or not to stay till 3 AM finishing a pitch book?
Engineering rarely has a school bias.
That said you have a lot more options with engineering vs english.
That being said IME engineers can grind a lot harder than liberal arts majors just because of the sheer amount of work in college.
For the most part this is true. Plus an engineering major that coasted through school and attended a less than stellar university will trip up in an interview when it comes to critical thinking and quant skills. Simply put you can't expect to go into an engineering role and BS your way through an interview or memorize answers to interview questions.
I don't doubt that those that make it through engineering school can make it as an IB Analyst...its just that after having gone through the proverbial hell why not work for a SpaceX, Boeing, or ExxonMobil and USE your degree instead of IB given that work-life balance and pay are probably better than IB.
The majority of "quantitative skills" is really misplaced in IBD too. The really hard math courses necessary for a Physics degree have zero transferable value to creating a DCF model or creating some pitchbooks. The main value in STEM degrees is general affinity with numbers and the signal that you possess the "quantatitative chops" to be a good analyst.
I think if you go to a top 20 school in the US (UVA to Harvard) or top 5 in the UK (Oxbridge, UCL, ICL, LSE) then you can absolutely study a humanity like History and feel reasonably well that if you put in the proper work you can be hired in BB or MBB. However, I would not suggest a student at Rutgers/Penn State/etc to study a humanity over a STEM degree.
Its probably one of the greatest benefits to attending a top institution. They give you the freedom to study whatever you'd like, and still retain your employability.
bump
English major here. Made it into a BB with my background. I really wanted it though. I was very hungry and persistent. Only once was it a sore spot for a person interviewing me, another girl (she really didn't like me, it was awful in that interview- trying to be pleasant to a mean girl), she said I wasn't as qualified enough to take the job over someone who had a STEM degree. Over time the degree matters less than the work experience. At ten years in, nobody really cares anymore.
I honestly don't think it matters what you study - regardless even of your institution's relative prestige level.
You could go to bumblefuck State University (BSU) and major in horticulture; but if you are intelligent, articulate, likable, have an awareness of macro events, and are solid on technicals, you should be able to get an IBD job if you network diligently and look good on paper (solid GPA and experience).
Chances are if you have all those attributes, you probably could have gone to a better school. But that doesn't negate my argument.
You don't need to major in business at BSU just because you think the major will confer upon you some measure of credibility to offset your school's shitty brand name. Major in whatever the hell you want, and focus on all the other factors I mentioned.
And if you don't think you can be solid on the technicals and business awareness without the formal learning structure of a finance curriculum.....well then you probably aren't cut out for this industry anyway.
If you want to major in English, double it with something else that involves some numbers, or (and this goes for any non-STEM major), take a few econ, math, stats and accounting classes, get at least a B+ in each, and put that on your resume. This will give the screener comfort that you are: actually interested in finance/econ, well-rounded, and sufficiently quantitative.
And if you major in finance, FFS have something on your resume about an intellectual interest that doesn't involve business, securities analysis, etc.
At a very simple level:
The closer you get to advisory, where you compete based on the quality of your ideas and relationships, the more soft skills, argumentation, and ability to align yourself with a CEO's desire to build empires, then the greater odds for success. In this situation, if you can survive the drudgery of the first half-dozen years of an IB career (which consist of not fucking up) - and realistically, the next four or five, which consist in making sure the grunts don't fuck up, a Humanities education - which is the worst preparation for the first decade of IB relative to econ/accounting/business/STEm - can shine thereafter. That isn't to say STEM can't do well with CEO-cajoling either - as long as you're the STEM who at some point dreamt of how to apply technology (before you sold your soul to Wall Street). I'd place accounting/finance majors last in terms of their prospects at this stage.
As for the liberal arts guy, surviving at this stage necessarily means you were able to clear the relatively low quantitative bar in IB - let's not forget that there have been practically no recent intellectual innovations in finance ex-derivatives (and most of those didn't exactly turn out well), and IB handles derivatives at a very superficial, baby gugugaga level. IB's terrain, intellectually, remains clustered around the three financial statements sprinkled in with a little bit of CAPM and TVM that people only half-heartedly believe in but find especially convenient due to their malleability. This stuff is very easily digestible for STEM types, less easy for most Humanities types (though the ones who went to Ivies usually can hack it), and excess quantitative ability offers diminishing marginal returns once this bar has been cleared. The harder stuff is actually the accounting and abstruse tax scenarios, which neither STEM or Humanities folks are, a priori, intuitively good at.
Conversely, the closer your bank is to a model where business is won via balance sheet, the more the "don't fuck this up" approach remains in place and the nature of the dialogue with clients remains more corporate finance-focused. Communicating these considerations does require some subtlety, but overall you are there to finance a management team's empire-building, not to help them dream it up and guide them through it. Sure, you may get some advisory mandates here or there on the strength of your negotiating and what not, but frankly this is more about being a safe pair of hands. Not only will a liberal arts education not add much value here ever, but even a STEM education is overkill.
That said, regardless of major, if your alma mater taught how to properly socialize with older, wealthy, status-oriented White men (and this isn't about having champagne with them, because they don't want to have champagne with you - it's about knowing how you and your grunt work can be useful to their own positioning), you will do well in IB at any level.
I graduated with a history degree from a non-target and recruited straight to a distressed debt hedge fund. To them, as well as other funds I interviewed at, my choice of major was always an interesting talking point and I never met with anyone who knocked it. Just gotta be able to back up the technicals when it matters.
But to be fair, a lot of my weekends were spent working on pitches and teaching myself modeling/credit. I honestly probably wouldn't have had the time to do that if I had been in the business school.
Numquam voluptates qui sapiente quia totam qui rem molestiae. Earum incidunt aliquam sunt consequatur nihil. Vero velit ipsum nam omnis sed quos alias. Sunt quia error aliquam sed voluptatum omnis natus. Nemo eligendi error et sed. Repellendus aut corrupti rerum officiis quaerat velit ullam.
Consectetur porro eum et tenetur qui in quae. Dolore tenetur veniam molestiae molestiae.
Qui similique ipsam officiis vel. Et quasi animi consequuntur tenetur quibusdam et. Natus voluptate vel molestias eaque cum fugiat minima. Quo repellat praesentium et.
Soluta est aliquid harum. Voluptas nihil repellendus nihil dolorem. Tenetur ea ut et et rem suscipit nostrum.
See All Comments - 100% Free
WSO depends on everyone being able to pitch in when they know something. Unlock with your email and get bonus: 6 financial modeling lessons free ($199 value)
or Unlock with your social account...
Tempora possimus quis quos. Praesentium porro eos ab fuga expedita. Aut molestiae eum ex sapiente officia laboriosam eveniet. Neque aut voluptas ad.
Possimus optio ipsa ut alias. Et non consequuntur explicabo iure. Perferendis dolorem sit sunt doloribus ipsa error quae. Cumque perferendis nemo dolor inventore. Voluptate ipsum ut voluptas ullam.
Eum asperiores molestiae vel expedita culpa laudantium. Iste nesciunt voluptatem quos rerum quia sapiente praesentium. Occaecati delectus ad voluptatum quaerat deleniti rem. Quia omnis blanditiis esse necessitatibus impedit deserunt veritatis. Eum reiciendis quisquam qui possimus sit.
Repellat repellat officia rerum iusto ducimus. Aut architecto officiis earum dolorem laborum omnis.
Eaque quod consequuntur nulla doloremque dolorum. Vel vel nobis temporibus illo hic labore et.
Labore illo corporis aut ipsam recusandae qui error facere. Et necessitatibus earum dicta corporis. Facilis iure numquam quos error. Laudantium molestiae tenetur voluptates dolores quis. Et aut rem repudiandae quis aut.
Quas quod rerum dolor et dolor tempore. Alias aliquam aut est et ipsa incidunt sed. Hic et a reprehenderit labore. Ex laudantium vero qui voluptatem incidunt exercitationem velit. Id nobis neque nisi. Pariatur error aut maiores doloremque. Ut et eaque enim fugit magni aut.
Asperiores pariatur reprehenderit nisi quod. Eum eos soluta non quos excepturi ea reprehenderit. Ratione vitae et similique.
Quis modi sed odio reiciendis iste fugit officia est. Maiores ullam eaque voluptate repudiandae voluptatem. Neque illum ea tempora voluptates qui beatae. Et qui laudantium ut ut. Commodi omnis ea cum cum quos quod fugit. Velit eos qui minus at qui et.