Quote:
Originally Posted by Unregistered
I'm not the original poster but the guy giving him some options.
I get where you are coming from. And I'll say it is true. But I'm trying to describe the scenario of the other say 10% that didn't take the usual route you describe, which I'll agree is the definitive way to get into banks after PhD.
I'm giving him the angle that the 4 years of pure PhD work should count for something in the eyes of the HR. The most common example I can think that out of the 10,000 thesis topics out there, the poster's thesis is the ONE thesis they're looking for. That's why I was specific in my responses which in summary is:
Bank could be looking for GPU programmer. OP did GPU research.
Bank could be pricing double barrier options. OP did stochastic calculus to price those options.
Bank could be looking regime state switching models. OP did machine learning research into that.
I'm really not wanting to sound smarter than I am. But since the OP defends his 4 years of PhD knowledge, that's why I'm trying, yes trying, to communicate him at that level. HR hiring a PhD probably expects someone who knows that specialized knowledge.
Basically, OP needs to find an employers who is seeking that very specialized knowledge the OP has. The matches brings the job opportunity.
|
I am in agreement with you here actually.
My post was not meant to denigrate TS's PhD. I was just explaining to him that he's got the whole quant recruitment expectation and process wrong.
I'm sure the banks will look kindly to his qualification on IT architecture or systems implementation type of roles and this could be his way of joining a bank. But that doesn't change the fact that joining as a quant upon leaving school is pretty much a no-go for him. Too competitive and he's missing too many critical ingredients.