Image source: Weibo
Guan Qingyou, a famous economist, who was still not sleeping at 12 o'clock in the middle of the night yesterday, suddenly posted such a statement on Weibo.
I don't know if he has recently been a little irritable about giving people college entrance examination professional consultation, or is too worried about the future of Chinese young people, in short, as the object of worship of countless financial students, Guan Teacher's words have stirred up infinite waves, and the comment area is all echoed.
Seeing that everyone was neatly lined up in a long line of approval, the deans of the finance colleges of various universities were so angry that they did not dare to speak with liver pain, and the people who asked me for my opinion with the words of the teacher disturbed me and collapsed, and I really couldn't sit still.
As a bachelor's degree in finance, a graduate student who has studied finance, and a financial migrant worker who has been in the financial circle for more than ten years, I must show up and say my point of view clearly and clearly:
I have great respect for Teacher Guan, but I disagree with the statement that "there is no need to study finance at the undergraduate level".
When we evaluate a sentence, we must look at the background of the person who said it.
Guan Qingyou, the proposer of "Undergraduate Financial Theory", is a famous Economist in China, and his personal academic background is naturally very deep, graduated from the Graduate School of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, obtained a doctorate degree in economics, and a postdoctoral fellow at Tsinghua University. As for undergraduate colleges and majors, I did not find out in the publicly disclosed information, who knows the trouble to tell me.
Of course, it doesn't matter what he does in his own science, not because of his words, but because of the times he lives in.
He was born in 1977, and he began to engage in finance in the past few years after graduating with a master's degree, just in time for the dividend period of the rapid development of China's financial industry. Not only did he become a witness to the first wave of financial booms in China, the nature of his work determined, and to some extent, he was also the rule-maker of financial reform.
Image source: Network
People who have experienced that period of dividends know that at that time, as long as you are lucky enough to enter the financial industry and eat the food of finance, no one cares what your undergraduate major is.
And as long as you can keep up with this fast running train, no matter what you learn, you will have a long way to go.
Therefore, Guan Qingyou, a famous Chinese economist who grew up in this background, is not wrong to say this sentence, because it is his personal feeling.
In particular, his vision and pattern give him the opportunity to meet more outstanding financial elites, which also makes him more convinced that people who do not study finance as undergraduates and transfer finance to graduate students have a higher ceiling and go further.
Source: Quartet
But in my opinion, this is a typical top-down statement, a thesis that infers the cause from the result.
Yes, as we know, Van Gogh was a famous painter of Impressionism, he did not come from a study of fine arts, and because he was not bound by the rules and regulations of art teaching, he showed a unique talent.
And can you deduce from this that "if you want to be a painter, don't study art"?
Can't ah, because of what?
Because most of us are not Van Gogh!
<h1 class="pgc-h-arrow-right" data-track="53" > Source: Van Gogh: A Life in Painting</h1>
In the same way, let's take a look at what kind of people agree that "if you want to do finance, you don't need to study finance as an undergraduate"?
I'll summarize it in two ways:
The first is a master's degree in finance, or a practitioner. Undergraduate did not study mathematics such as basic subjects, to graduate or work stage, found that the work needs to use relatively deep mathematical knowledge, so began to sigh, began to regret.
The second is to be admitted to a graduate school major in finance from a basic discipline such as undergraduate mathematics. Feel good and then enthusiastically pass on your experience to others.
Both of these people make sense, but unfortunately, they are typical, that is, to generalize small-probability events.
<h1 class="pgc-h-arrow-right" data-track="65" > Source: Watermelon</h1>
You think, the first type of people have not experienced the process of changing majors to majors, but have observed some successful people who have changed majors, so they began to fantasize that "if I had studied mathematics in the past, I would be doing these jobs now, it would be more easy", while the second type of people are successful people who have transferred to graduate school, and a large number of unsuccessful people have long become the silent majority and have been eliminated from the sample.
To explain it economically, the second type of person is actually a typical inverse choice. Because when they studied mathematics as an undergraduate, they had a strong interest in finance and economics, and they put in more efforts, so they successfully changed majors and developed better and better.
But that doesn't mean that if they had studied finance as an undergraduate, they wouldn't have had the success they have now. Nor does it mean that anyone who follows their path can overtake in a corner and achieve more than an undergraduate student in finance.
So, what am I trying to say?
The teacher's words are reasonable, but this advice only applies to the student bully.
It is the kind of mathematical competition that can win the national award, the learning ability is super strong, and the hard and self-disciplined student bully. The composite background of undergraduate basic disciplines + graduate finance can indeed enhance their comprehensive strength, enhance their development ceiling, and achieve their more ambitious pursuits and ambitions.
But if you are just an ordinary person, you know that you are not a top god, nor are you a player who can stab stocks with a head hanging beam, and you just want to successfully enter the financial circle and find a stable job to make some money, then I will advise you:
Don't go around the bend in the matter of choosing a major, if you want to do finance, you can directly learn finance, and if you want to find a good job in the financial circle, you should learn the most appropriate, the hottest, and the most long-lasting technology.
Young people's time is precious, and the brain can move for just a few years, don't waste it.
Conversely, why do I think that "undergraduate mathematics, graduate school entrance examination finance graduate", this path of learning one major to let yourself overtake in another professional curve, is not an effective path.
Because of this assumption, many practical dilemmas are ignored.
First of all, do you know how fierce the competition in the financial circle is now, and how high the threshold for changing majors is?
A basic common sense, inter-professional examination and research has always been much more difficult than this professional examination, coupled with the fact that it is a hot major in finance, which is fiercely competitive.
Show you the annual score line of the financial examination and research, and you will know it clearly.
Originally, in order to improve the competitiveness of employment, the undergraduate students of the financial science class were already fighting to study for graduate school, and the IQ of others was not low, and they were all tested with high scores in the college entrance examination.
People take the straight road in four years of college, you take the corner, the test is the knowledge that has not been learned at all, how can you ensure that you have competed with them?
Change the path and switch majors to finance during college? This is even harder.
Domestic universities originally have a very limited number of places to transfer majors, transfer majors to see GPA, mathematics departments such a place is not the most lack of competition students to ensure students, and finance this popular major every year and a large number of outstanding students squeeze their heads to want to transfer in, how sure do you think you can PK over these top students?
Source: "Sparkling You"
Some people still have a trick, "Then I will take a class in the mathematics department, and I will make up more financial knowledge after class, and find an internship, right?" ”
Then I have to tell you, Mission Impossible.
Because this involves the biggest advantage of mathematics and many basic subjects, but also the biggest disadvantage -
The curriculum is too hardcore and requires a lot of energy.
Students in the finance book can skip class from time to time to go out for internships, but for students in basic disciplines such as mathematics, it takes all their strength to keep up with the course, and the remaining limited time only wants to lie flat.
The same goes for finding a job.
Unlike other industries, what do you think is most important for finding a job in the financial industry?
It's an internship!
No matter what major you study, as long as you go to a financial institution to apply for a job, you will face a problem:
Under the same academic conditions, do you think that a finance master's student who has saved a lot of internship experience, or a mathematics master's student who has been doing nothing in the GPA, which has an advantage in the eyes of the interviewer?
Source: "Unborn"
I know, you must say that students with a master's degree in mathematics and finance have stamina, and the upper limit is high.
I admit it, but what is the most important thing for you in the critical stages of finding a job?
Is it staying power? Is it an upper limit?
No, the most important thing is:
Yes! merit! enter! door!
After successfully entering the door, do you guess how much basic subject knowledge such as mathematics and statistics will help financial work?
Judging from my personal experience and observations of the people around me, there are, but very small.
Moreover, I found that more than 99% of people who advocate that "learning mathematics is very helpful for finance" do not understand neither mathematics nor finance.
If you ask them "what finance does exactly", I guess they'll probably think about quant.
Yes, quant is indeed part of the financial work, and it is necessary to build various mathematical models and use a deeper mathematical knowledge.
But but however, do you know what the number of employees in the field of quant in the financial circle is?
Probably less than 1%.
And what are the other 99% of financial practitioners doing?
Do investment banking, do fixed income, do asset management, do trust, do PE/VC, in the bank head office of the various development directions...
In front-office positions in these core areas, you only need to do a few days to know that the professional skills in finance and law are far more important than mathematics.
Source: "Supermarket Sleepless"
Even if it is divided into primary markets and secondary markets according to the capital market, the primary market does not use mathematics at all, and only a small part of the secondary market is related to mathematics.
Therefore, if you want to do finance, from my personal experience and the current demand for recruitment, it is basically more advantageous to have a financial capital + a master's degree in finance.
As for traders, derivatives, and fixed income practitioners, they only need to have a clear mind about mathematics and be able to calculate the numbers.
Besides, the undergraduate education of finance in major universities now belongs to general education, and the disciplines you can contact will be more complex and complex, such as calculus, linear algebra, statistics, macroeconomics, microeconomics, business, accounting, econometrics, asset management, corporate finance, derivatives and so on...
Learn these mathematical skills taught by undergraduates, do most of the basic work in the financial circle, such as account managers, venture capital, investment banking, etc., basically no problem.
Because financial work, this is the work of dealing with people, compared to hard-core mathematical ability, determines how far you can go, more or soft power, and Schrödinger's... luck.
Repeat my point of view, if you are a real student, don't say that the science of mathematics, statistics, physics, even if you study physical education, there is no problem, the compound background of undergraduate basic disciplines and graduate students in finance can definitely become your hard core strength, whether it is used or not, sooner or later it will be useful.
But if you are just looking for a decent financial job in a big city and learning some skills to make some money, then don't say a word, directly choose a finance major, read 985211 a master's degree in finance.
Because this is a relatively easy path that does not toss and turn, and it is also a path with a higher probability of success.
Of course, there is a kind of exception, you know, the college entrance examination when the mathematical science and other basic majors admission score line is much lower than the popular major of finance, if you love finance very much but can not reach the financial major, at least you can first learn the basic discipline curve to save the country.
Perhaps, saving and saving, rescued a broader choice...
So what, finally send another latest Weibo of Guan Qingyou teacher.
Deeply.
Therefore, what people who study finance say, let's study it seriously, but just listen to it.
And people who do finance, if they don't want to be by finance, the most important thing is that they really never learn any discipline, but —
What kind of person are you?
Share.