In response to TraderJoe: I don't know that the corporate world requires a "thicker skin" than academia. They present different kinds of difficulty, and I'd say that academia is, on the whole, harder just because of the severe supply/demand imbalance. Certainly the corporate world has more "bolts out of the blue"; I've had friends recieve glowing performance evaluations on Monday and pink slips on Friday. In contrast, the probability of a person being ejected from a PhD program or a postdoc before the alloted time is rather low, and usually happens for objective, rule-based reasons. Even the probability of getting tenure out of a tenure-track job is high, except at the universities that have phased out tenure (but at them, being denied tenure doesn't necessarily mean a person is expected to leave); what's difficult is getting that TT job in the first place. So firing almost never happens in academe, but on the other hand, the academic career trajectory has certain discontinuous "jumps" that have high rates of permanent failure (or, at least, exclusion)-- graduate admissions, PhD-to-postdoc, postdoc-to-TT--and I'd say the academic job market, on the whole, is much harder to navigate. Though almost no one is fired/expelled during a phase, a lot of people get shut out at each juncture and permanently leave academia (of course, some choose to leave for greener pastures). In contrast, lots of people are fired/laid-off from the much more volatile corporate jobs, often for impersonal, subjective, or just plain stupid reasons. A young person embarking on a 20-year career is likely to get fired or laid off at least once these days (I'd put the expectation at 0.5-1.5 personal firings and 2.5-3 total including layoffs) but in a good market, can easily get back into the same industry with a clean slate and a new set of people. A person would have to severely fuck up (break the law, make enemies at a level no entry-level person would have such access to) in order to have a career just die, and the rope to do this isn't available until at very senior levels. Of course, getting fired still sucks, but short-term volatility is preferable to the non-repeatable long-term career risk in academia. What's hard, in my opinion, about the academic world for a young person (I don't mean to be condescending so much as self-reflecting; I'm 23 so take everything I say with an extreme grain of salt) is that most graduate students don't have the perspective (or desire) to recognize important, marketable problems from those that will leave them hopelessly specialized into an area with scant demand. The work is very intellectually demanding, but the lack of immediate results allows (within a "phase", the punishment delayed until the attempt to transition) laziness. What's hard about the corporate world, for a young person, seems to stem from uncertainty (about one's own ability, about future prospects) amid risk. In the first couple years out of college, they have no idea how "good" they are and take certain events (positive and negative) to carry more signal than they really have. Also, they're conditioned by school to believe in objective evaluations and permanent records (as if getting fired were like an F grade on one's transcript-- a permanent sign of uncommon and usually objective malperformance-- rather than simply the result of a severe but possibly faultless mismatch between person and work or environment) which add to the fear factor.

QuoteOriginally posted by: matt247ryanThey told me the reason for getting the knife was nothing to do with the work I produced but instead had to do with my failure to interact as a team player.this sounds really odd, especially for a quant jobmost banks have a procedure to follow before terminating employment - unless one is in probatory period for instanceI always thought "personality" and "team-player" to be mostly irrelevant - either someone's doing a good job or not... What do most people know about personality and team-playing anyway?e.

QuoteOriginally posted by: almosteverywhereIn response to TraderJoe: I don't know that the corporate world requires a "thicker skin" than academia. They present different kinds of difficulty, and I'd say that academia is, on the whole, harder just because of the severe supply/demand imbalance. Certainly the corporate world has more "bolts out of the blue"; I've had friends recieve glowing performance evaluations on Monday and pink slips on Friday. In contrast, the probability of a person being ejected from a PhD program or a postdoc before the alloted time is rather low, and usually happens for objective, rule-based reasons. Even the probability of getting tenure out of a tenure-track job is high, except at the universities that have phased out tenure (but at them, being denied tenure doesn't necessarily mean a person is expected to leave); what's difficult is getting that TT job in the first place. So firing almost never happens in academe, but on the other hand, the academic career trajectory has certain discontinuous "jumps" that have high rates of permanent failure (or, at least, exclusion)-- graduate admissions, PhD-to-postdoc, postdoc-to-TT--and I'd say the academic job market, on the whole, is much harder to navigate. Though almost no one is fired/expelled during a phase, a lot of people get shut out at each juncture and permanently leave academia (of course, some choose to leave for greener pastures). In contrast, lots of people are fired/laid-off from the much more volatile corporate jobs, often for impersonal, subjective, or just plain stupid reasons. A young person embarking on a 20-year career is likely to get fired or laid off at least once these days (I'd put the expectation at 0.5-1.5 personal firings and 2.5-3 total including layoffs) but in a good market, can easily get back into the same industry with a clean slate and a new set of people. A person would have to severely fuck up (break the law, make enemies at a level no entry-level person would have such access to) in order to have a career just die, and the rope to do this isn't available until at very senior levels. Of course, getting fired still sucks, but short-term volatility is preferable to the non-repeatable long-term career risk in academia. What's hard, in my opinion, about the academic world for a young person (I don't mean to be condescending so much as self-reflecting; I'm 23 so take everything I say with an extreme grain of salt) is that most graduate students don't have the perspective (or desire) to recognize important, marketable problems from those that will leave them hopelessly specialized into an area with scant demand. The work is very intellectually demanding, but the lack of immediate results allows (within a "phase", the punishment delayed until the attempt to transition) laziness. What's hard about the corporate world, for a young person, seems to stem from uncertainty (about one's own ability, about future prospects) amid risk. In the first couple years out of college, they have no idea how "good" they are and take certain events (positive and negative) to carry more signal than they really have. Also, they're conditioned by school to believe in objective evaluations and permanent records (as if getting fired were like an F grade on one's transcript-- a permanent sign of uncommon and usually objective malperformance-- rather than simply the result of a severe but possibly faultless mismatch between person and work or environment) which add to the fear factor.Also, A PhD requires long hours of working on one's own. When you're working for a corp you're always dependent on some other schmuck going for his promotion and ass-licking medals of achievement. They make it this way. You have to contend with all manner of pricks starting with HHs, then moving onto HR idiots, then project managers who mostly couldn't manage their way out of a paper bag, Team Leaders who could demotivate a teenager on his first date, and finally CEOs who would be lucky to be shining shoes if Lady luck hadn't somehow delivered them out of banality (there are a few creative exceptions like Steve Jobs). If you like working on your own and doing your own thing, STAY_IN_ACADEMIA.

QuoteWhen you're working for a corp you're always dependent on some other schmuck going for his promotion and ass-licking medals of achievement.Academia emphasizes individual achievement, rather than "I'll make you rich(er) if you make me rich" (through the roundabout way of giving me the skills to eventually make myself rich). It's true that very few people in companies will mentor others without getting something for it. On the other hand, academics don't serve as advisors just because it's a nice thing to do: they want to grow the importance and prestige of their fields, and realize they can't do this without spreading seeds. QuoteYou have to contend with all manner of pricks starting with HHs, then moving onto HR idiots, then project managers who mostly couldn't manage their way out of a paper bag, Team Leaders who could demotivate a teenager on his first date, and finally CEOs who would be lucky to be shining shoes if Lady luck hadn't somehow delivered them out of banality (there are a few creative exceptions like Steve Jobs).You seem to be comparing awful corporate experiences to an idealized view of academia. Academia has incompetents and assholes, too. I'll agree that academia is better, by far, than the vast majority of companies. However, most companies suck for a reason: many people are intellectually, industrially, socially, or morally mediocre-- none of which seem to preclude a person from holding a position of high compensation, responsbility, and leadership; if you fail in all four categories, you get to blow up countries!-- and therefore have shitty ideas, poor execution, and/or bad intentions. This is a "people problem", not a structural one, and can just as easily pop up in academia, nonprofitland, or anywhere else where people get together to form groups. QuoteIf you like working on your own and doing your own thing, STAY_IN_ACADEMIA.Most people like autonomy just as they like money, so I don't agree fully, but I'd agree with you to the extent that, for those for whom autonomy is a nonnegotiable, top priority, academia is the best place to be. Those willing to condescend to moderate levels of autonomy in exchange for other benefits (work is more relevant to others = learn more due to increased interactivity, get paid more) can survive outside of it.

QuoteOriginally posted by: TraderJoeAt the end of the day, one can really only be oneselfThat's why TJ is TJ, however hard he tries to be a quant.

I subscribe to this view of The Corporation.It's pretty accurate in my humble experience .

again with the vanishing messages !according to the forum list:last message Thu Jun 07, 07 02:50 PM by TraderJoe,yet everything after his post of Fri Jun 01, 07 12:04 PM has been removed

QuoteOriginally posted by: ppauperagain with the vanishing messages !according to the forum list:last message Thu Jun 07, 07 02:50 PM by TraderJoe,yet everything after his post of Fri Jun 01, 07 12:04 PM has been removedI noticed this last night as well....