7 ms·

* in the most superficial way possible. I mean, the reason why people don’t work at banks is because: - tech is still seen a cost center - processes for chan

* in the most superficial way possible. I mean, the reason why people don’t work at banks is because: - tech is still seen a cost center - processes for change are onerous - heavy focus on maintenance - teams have non-uniform quality - politics - ... None of which can be solved by furniture placement.

ShinTakuya 8y ago
It can be turned around. The Commonwealth Bank of Australia was certainly like that initially, but now they're a tech leader within the industry and have a strong tech development focus.
- mcv 8y ago
  Most Dutch banks are well aware of how important tech is, and the IT departments are run like tech companies. ING in particular tends to be maybe a bit too much on the cutting edge of front-end development. They're all reasonably Agile in my experience. Although they're also still big, old organisations, subject subject to lots of regulations, and with tons of legacy systems. So they're unavoidably more limited than startups. But within those limitations, they're doing a pretty good job in my experience.
gadders 8y ago
The reason people do work at banks: - Money (highest you will get outside of FAANG or winning the startop lottery) - quite an interesting industry.
- isolli 8y ago
  I definitely agree with your first point, but from personal experience the second one is debatable. It certainly depends on the specific activity, and will change with time. For instance, while quantitative research during the explosion of Black-Scholes-based modeling and complex financial products was intellectually interesting, after the 2008 crisis the focus moved to maintaining existing models (mostly trying not to lose money on legacy products) and implementing various regulations (e.g. central clearing requirements).
  - gadders 8y ago
    True, in the last ten years nearly all the big projects have been Reg projects. These are normally never as much fun as revenue generating projects. However, I still think banking as a whole is more interesting than a lot of others - FMCG, manufacturing etc.
    - Jorge1o1 8y ago
      Agreed. Would much rather work in finance than at Heinz as a brand manager for ketchup (if you’re lucky) or even in tech there’s some just insanely boring careers: network engineer, database admin, etc.
  - TuringNYC 8y ago
    Certain regulatory projects can be a lot of fun and interesting. I lead a stress-testing project for a big asset manager (a SIFI) and this was fun because stress tests force you to do 100x what you'd typically do once or twice. Implementing stress tests drove us to 1. Massively scale infrastructure 2. Create elastic infrastructure to allow spikes 3. Re-do our models away from ad-hoc towards parameter models 4. Invest in more interesting compute models
- bradleyjg 8y ago
  > Money (highest you will get outside of FAANG or winning the startop lottery) In some cases finance > FAANG. But you're still treated like a very highly paid janitor.
  - gadders 8y ago
    Being old (nearly 50), I think the relation between front office and IT has changed. Whereas before IT people were looked down upon, the relationship seems to be getting a lot more collegial. Traders realise that without having the best technology, they won't make as much money and are reliant on their technologists for this. A senior dev in the department I am in now who works on a front end for trading derivatives had the head of trading and other traders come to his leaving drinks. This would be pretty unheard of 50 years ago.
    - AlexTWithBeard 8y ago
      This is correct. A good IT guy is worth his weight in gold and is revered by the desk. These days if your trading system is down you can do literally nothing. Just sit there and think about the money flowing out of your book...
- throwawaymath 8y ago
  That might be the case if you're in the front office at trading firms or hedge funds, but it's not generally the case with banks. FAANG pretty much roundly beats any bank these days.
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]
faissaloo 8y ago
I can tell you why I don't - They're incredibly unethical
- gruez 8y ago
  As opposed to facebook, google, or amazon?
  - saiya-jin 8y ago
    As opposed to many companies that actually provide added values to lives of their customers. It might not look like that, but the world outside Silicon Valley is huge. But of course if you are mainly after money, your options are limited and mostly amoral
    - mcv 8y ago
      There are banks that do provide value to their customers. Not every bank is Goldman Sachs.
  - faissaloo 8y ago
    No, not as opposed to them.
- 50656E6973 8y ago
  All banks are unethical?
  - izzydata 8y ago
    I find all types of credit cards with reward systems to be unethical. Their whole purpose is to bait people into debt in order to pay interest.
    - mcv 8y ago
      I find the whole concept of credit cards themselves stupid. It's old, insecure tech that really needs to die. However, that does not make all banks unethical. There are absolutely predatory banks, but there are also banks that exist to provide value to their customers, while taking responsibility for their role in society. Avoid the former and choose the latter. (It's entirely possible that ethical banks are so because they're forced to by regulations. If you think that's the case, vote for better regulation. Dutch banks seem to be taking these things very seriously, though most of them have also been involved in at least one greed-driven scandal during the past two decades.)

ShinTakuya 8y ago

It can be turned around. The Commonwealth Bank of Australia was certainly like that initially, but now they're a tech leader within the industry and have a strong tech development focus.

mcv 8y ago
Most Dutch banks are well aware of how important tech is, and the IT departments are run like tech companies. ING in particular tends to be maybe a bit too much on the cutting edge of front-end development. They're all reasonably Agile in my experience. Although they're also still big, old organisations, subject subject to lots of regulations, and with tons of legacy systems. So they're unavoidably more limited than startups. But within those limitations, they're doing a pretty good job in my experience.

gadders 8y ago

The reason people do work at banks: - Money (highest you will get outside of FAANG or winning the startop lottery) - quite an interesting industry.

isolli 8y ago
I definitely agree with your first point, but from personal experience the second one is debatable. It certainly depends on the specific activity, and will change with time. For instance, while quantitative research during the explosion of Black-Scholes-based modeling and complex financial products was intellectually interesting, after the 2008 crisis the focus moved to maintaining existing models (mostly trying not to lose money on legacy products) and implementing various regulations (e.g. central clearing requirements).
- gadders 8y ago
  True, in the last ten years nearly all the big projects have been Reg projects. These are normally never as much fun as revenue generating projects. However, I still think banking as a whole is more interesting than a lot of others - FMCG, manufacturing etc.
  - Jorge1o1 8y ago
    Agreed. Would much rather work in finance than at Heinz as a brand manager for ketchup (if you’re lucky) or even in tech there’s some just insanely boring careers: network engineer, database admin, etc.
- TuringNYC 8y ago
  Certain regulatory projects can be a lot of fun and interesting. I lead a stress-testing project for a big asset manager (a SIFI) and this was fun because stress tests force you to do 100x what you'd typically do once or twice. Implementing stress tests drove us to 1. Massively scale infrastructure 2. Create elastic infrastructure to allow spikes 3. Re-do our models away from ad-hoc towards parameter models 4. Invest in more interesting compute models
bradleyjg 8y ago
> Money (highest you will get outside of FAANG or winning the startop lottery) In some cases finance > FAANG. But you're still treated like a very highly paid janitor.
- gadders 8y ago
  Being old (nearly 50), I think the relation between front office and IT has changed. Whereas before IT people were looked down upon, the relationship seems to be getting a lot more collegial. Traders realise that without having the best technology, they won't make as much money and are reliant on their technologists for this. A senior dev in the department I am in now who works on a front end for trading derivatives had the head of trading and other traders come to his leaving drinks. This would be pretty unheard of 50 years ago.
  - AlexTWithBeard 8y ago
    This is correct. A good IT guy is worth his weight in gold and is revered by the desk. These days if your trading system is down you can do literally nothing. Just sit there and think about the money flowing out of your book...
throwawaymath 8y ago
That might be the case if you're in the front office at trading firms or hedge funds, but it's not generally the case with banks. FAANG pretty much roundly beats any bank these days.
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]

faissaloo 8y ago

I can tell you why I don't - They're incredibly unethical

gruez 8y ago
As opposed to facebook, google, or amazon?
- saiya-jin 8y ago
  As opposed to many companies that actually provide added values to lives of their customers. It might not look like that, but the world outside Silicon Valley is huge. But of course if you are mainly after money, your options are limited and mostly amoral
  - mcv 8y ago
    There are banks that do provide value to their customers. Not every bank is Goldman Sachs.
- faissaloo 8y ago
  No, not as opposed to them.
50656E6973 8y ago
All banks are unethical?
- izzydata 8y ago
  I find all types of credit cards with reward systems to be unethical. Their whole purpose is to bait people into debt in order to pay interest.
  - mcv 8y ago
    I find the whole concept of credit cards themselves stupid. It's old, insecure tech that really needs to die. However, that does not make all banks unethical. There are absolutely predatory banks, but there are also banks that exist to provide value to their customers, while taking responsibility for their role in society. Avoid the former and choose the latter. (It's entirely possible that ethical banks are so because they're forced to by regulations. If you think that's the case, vote for better regulation. Dutch banks seem to be taking these things very seriously, though most of them have also been involved in at least one greed-driven scandal during the past two decades.)