戈登·蓋柯（Gordon Gekko）的追求也折射出這代人中最具才華、最聰明的一批人的夢(mèng)想。今天，優(yōu)秀的大學(xué)畢業(yè)生不再將華爾街作為職場(chǎng)上的第一選擇，而是紛紛涌向硅谷和其他頂尖高科技中心，試圖用改變世界的應(yīng)用和機(jī)遇來(lái)挑戰(zhàn)現(xiàn)狀，給這個(gè)世界帶來(lái)真正且持久的影響。有關(guān)“硅谷與華爾街人才爭(zhēng)奪戰(zhàn)”的討論熱度仍然不會(huì)消減，而且根據(jù)常理，你一定會(huì)被吸引到硅谷，從事對(duì)這個(gè)社會(huì)很有意義的工作。
這種說(shuō)法越來(lái)越常見，但準(zhǔn)確嗎？答案也很簡(jiǎn)單，不準(zhǔn)確。這種爭(zhēng)論往往會(huì)以“我們 PK 他們”的心態(tài)展開，這種心態(tài)具有誤導(dǎo)性；事實(shí)是，一些看似毫不相關(guān)的行業(yè)，卻得益于新出現(xiàn)的機(jī)遇和金融科技領(lǐng)域的創(chuàng)新，越來(lái)越有可能走到一起。
不過(guò)，在深入探討這個(gè)問(wèn)題之前，我們先來(lái)看一看引發(fā)“硅谷 PK 華爾街”討論的相關(guān)統(tǒng)計(jì)數(shù)據(jù)。
條條大路通硅谷？
科技行業(yè)正在走向復(fù)興，而且當(dāng)前這個(gè)階段完全可與受到互聯(lián)網(wǎng)熱潮推動(dòng)的 20 世紀(jì) 90 年代末期和 21 世紀(jì)初期的科技繁榮時(shí)期相媲美。涌向科技行業(yè)的畢業(yè)生比例 逐年穩(wěn)步上升 ，就如同 越來(lái)越多的學(xué)生進(jìn)入 STEM（科學(xué)、技術(shù)、工程和數(shù)學(xué)）領(lǐng)域一樣 。
另一方面，美國(guó)頂尖大學(xué)中從事金融工作的 MBA 比例卻逐年下滑，即便金融行業(yè)已經(jīng)從 2008 年金融危機(jī)的陰影中走了出來(lái)。例如，在 2013 年哈佛大學(xué)商學(xué)院的畢業(yè)生中，最終只有 27%的人從事金融工作，這一比例甚至低于 2008 年和 2009 年金融危機(jī)最為嚴(yán)重的時(shí)候。
這些數(shù)字進(jìn)一步模糊了金融與科技之間日益密切的聯(lián)系，這種聯(lián)系在對(duì)金融科技投資的快速增長(zhǎng)中體現(xiàn)地尤為明顯。根據(jù) Accenture 的最新調(diào)查結(jié)果， 全球金融科技在 2014 年獲得的風(fēng)險(xiǎn)投資已經(jīng)突破了 120 億美元 ，大概是金融科技公司在 2013 年獲得的投資（40.5 億美元）的 3 倍。這充分表明金融服務(wù)行業(yè)正在越來(lái)越多地采用新興技術(shù)，而科技行業(yè)與金融服務(wù)行業(yè)之間的相互依賴越來(lái)越明顯。
有鑒于此，核心問(wèn)題也就變成了金融服務(wù)機(jī)構(gòu)如何才能吸引那些最近流向硅谷創(chuàng)業(yè)公司的年輕人才，如何才能充分利用金融科技當(dāng)前不錯(cuò)的發(fā)展勢(shì)頭。
與金錢無(wú)關(guān)
簡(jiǎn)而言之，千禧一代人覺得，他們可以在科技行業(yè)發(fā)揮最大的作用；在科技行業(yè)，創(chuàng)新無(wú)處不在，非傳統(tǒng)思維也成為最新時(shí)代思潮的一部分。隨著大學(xué)生的職業(yè)目標(biāo)從常春藤聯(lián)盟轉(zhuǎn)向谷歌園區(qū)，以及他們紛紛加入前途遠(yuǎn)大、有機(jī)會(huì)成為“下一個(gè)大事件”的創(chuàng)業(yè)公司，很顯然科技行業(yè)已經(jīng)超越金融行業(yè)，成為一個(gè)對(duì)眾多頂尖院校畢業(yè)生更具吸引力的地方， 即便科技公司的平均收入仍然低于大多數(shù)金融服務(wù)機(jī)構(gòu) 。
這最后一點(diǎn)不應(yīng)該被忽略。盡管工資以及相關(guān)金融期權(quán)仍然是主要的招聘工具，但毫無(wú)疑問(wèn)，有才華的畢業(yè)生進(jìn)入就業(yè)市場(chǎng)的方式正在發(fā)生變化。
除了收入，他們還希望自己的人生更有意義：參與打造某種新的東西，或是改變某個(gè)進(jìn)程的基本性質(zhì)。金融服務(wù)一般被看作是一個(gè)廣闊市場(chǎng)內(nèi)更為傳統(tǒng)的行業(yè)，如今，谷歌、蘋果、Facebook 和各種各樣的小型創(chuàng)業(yè)公司經(jīng)常被打上“創(chuàng)新”和“靈活”這樣的標(biāo)簽，但在我們提到大型金融服務(wù)機(jī)構(gòu)時(shí)，卻極少會(huì)用到這樣的字眼。
這并不意味著金融服務(wù)機(jī)構(gòu)吸引后備人才的關(guān)鍵，在于改變他們的“休閑星期五”（Casual Friday）政策（這是一種幾乎完全遭到華爾街排斥的做法），而是更多地與改變組織構(gòu)建和運(yùn)營(yíng)的方式有關(guān)，鼓勵(lì)他們?cè)诳萍祭梅矫娓屿`活，對(duì)改變傳統(tǒng)流程的態(tài)度更加開放�？萍既缃袷嵌乙恢笔侵谓鹑谛袠I(yè)發(fā)展的重要推動(dòng)力。
因此，金融服務(wù)機(jī)構(gòu)越來(lái)越側(cè)重于轉(zhuǎn)變外界對(duì)他們的誤讀，即他們厭惡改變，崇尚“嘗試、失敗、再嘗試”的理念，這種理念已經(jīng)深深扎根于硅谷和其他高科技中心。在硅谷創(chuàng)業(yè)公司工作，意味著你可以直接對(duì)社會(huì)帶來(lái)影響，以有意義的方式“擁有”成果，相比之下，華爾街傳統(tǒng)上給人的感覺更官僚。
合二為一
放眼未來(lái)，幾年內(nèi)我們會(huì)看到金融和科技的聯(lián)系越來(lái)越大——到時(shí)做一些你既感興趣又有意義的工作，就不一定是在硅谷了。
這篇報(bào)道的內(nèi)容已經(jīng)開始有所體現(xiàn)。我們可以看到，除了傳統(tǒng)上的風(fēng)險(xiǎn)投資公司，傳統(tǒng)金融服務(wù)機(jī)構(gòu)（如摩根大通、 Fidelity 和 T. Rowe Price），也越來(lái)越多地參與到快速增長(zhǎng)的私營(yíng)科技公司的大規(guī)模融資中來(lái)。最近幾年，IPO（首次公開募股）的比率一直在下降，因此， 共同基金和其他一些機(jī)構(gòu)投資者不斷轉(zhuǎn)向私營(yíng)科技公司 ，尋求提升回報(bào)率的方法，這確實(shí)是合理的選擇。
同時(shí)，硅谷的公司也在改變針對(duì)消費(fèi)者的金融服務(wù)流程，為了完成這些流程，他們開始與銀行系統(tǒng)合作，而不是競(jìng)爭(zhēng)了——這種趨勢(shì)越來(lái)越明顯。變化最明顯的是借貸、支付和加密貨幣領(lǐng)域，Prosper 和 Coinbase 等公司身上就在發(fā)生著這種變化。
在這個(gè)信息時(shí)代，金融領(lǐng)域未來(lái)的領(lǐng)導(dǎo)者已經(jīng)不像從前了。他們是一個(gè)按需團(tuán)體，習(xí)慣于看到立竿見影的效果。如果需要做出改變，那么就可以進(jìn)行改變。如果一項(xiàng)計(jì)劃龐大且無(wú)效率，那么就需要放棄它而制定更簡(jiǎn)單的方案了。
金融服務(wù)相對(duì)于其他行業(yè)更加頑固，不愿改變現(xiàn)狀，這已經(jīng)不是第一次了；就在 30 年前，場(chǎng)內(nèi)交易的自動(dòng)化是不可想象的（還有人記得那種公開喊價(jià)的方法嗎？）。今天，在很多大型交易中，很難再找到場(chǎng)內(nèi)經(jīng)紀(jì)人了。同樣，在出現(xiàn)彭博終端（Bloomberg Terminals）之前，也很難想象華爾街的作用不可動(dòng)搖——但是，交易者們?cè)?jīng)要用筆和紙談?wù)摴善钡膬r(jià)格，現(xiàn)在只能通過(guò)手機(jī)進(jìn)行交易。
現(xiàn)在，金融領(lǐng)域進(jìn)行著同樣的爭(zhēng)論，而且聲音越來(lái)越大。金融服務(wù)組織機(jī)構(gòu)的各個(gè)階層都出現(xiàn)了新一代的投資者和經(jīng)紀(jì)人，我希望看到 20 年來(lái)我們熟悉的世界也發(fā)生同樣的巨變。
現(xiàn)在是那些金融機(jī)構(gòu)愿意放棄“我們 PK 他們”心態(tài)（這種心態(tài)源于硅谷和華爾街之間的較量）的絕佳時(shí)機(jī)，他們可以成為具有深遠(yuǎn)意義的合作伙伴：科技人員和金融人員一起工作的話，他們的效率會(huì)更高，工作方式也會(huì)更透明。這種新思維必將推動(dòng)新技術(shù)的推廣。
毫無(wú)疑問(wèn)，時(shí)代在變；那些能更快意識(shí)到這種現(xiàn)實(shí)并順勢(shì)而為的人，將在競(jìng)爭(zhēng)中占據(jù)優(yōu)勢(shì)。
A Closer Look At The Silicon Valley Vs. Wall Street Talent War
Eric PoirierCrunch Network Contributor
Eric Poirier is the CEO of investment management software company Addepar.
How to join the network
Gordon Gekko is but a distant blip in the rear-view mirror for this generation’s best and brightest. In lieu of Wall Street, today’s top graduates are flocking to Silicon Valley and other top technology hubs in droves, drawn in by visions of challenging the status quo with world-changing apps and the opportunity to make a real, lasting impact in the world. Talk of the “SiliconValley vs. Wall Street Talent War” continues unabated — and popular wisdom suggests that you need to be anchored in Silicon Valley to do meaningful work these days.
While it’s an increasingly common narrative, is it accurate? In a word, no. The “Us vs. Them” mentality that this debate often takes is misleading; the reality is that there is an increasing opportunity for seemingly disparate sectors to unite through the budding opportunities and innovations in fintech.
Before digging into that, though, let’s look at some relevant statistics that fuel the “Silicon Valley vs. Wall Street” debate.
All Roads Lead To Silicon Valley?
The technology sector is experiencing a renaissance that rivals even the frenzied, dot-com-driven heights of the late 1990s and early 2000s. The rate of graduates flocking to technology has steadily increased on an annual basis — as has the number of students enrolling in STEM fields.
The rate of MBAs from the nation’s top universities who go into finance, on the other hand, has been shrinking on an annual basis, even as the sector has largely recovered from the 2008 crisis. Consider, for instance, that 27 percent of graduates from Harvard Business School entered finance in 2013 — a lower rate than during even the depths of the recession in 2008 and 2009.
These numbers obscure the broader marriage between finance and technology, which can be evidenced in the massive growth of investments in financial technology, or fintech; according to a recent Accenture study, global investment in fintech ventures topped $12 billion in 2014 — more than three times the $4.05 billion invested in fintech companies in 2013. This is indicative of the financial service industry’s increasing adoption of emerging technology, fostering a greater interdependence between the tech and financial services industries.
With this in mind, the question shifts to what financial services institutions can do to attract more of the young talent that has recently gravitated toward Silicon Valley startups, and how they can harness the momentum of fintech in particular.
It’s Not About The Money
Simply put, the tech sector is where millennials feel they can make the most impact. It’s where innovation happens and outside-the-box thinking is part of the current zeitgeist. Be it transitioning from an Ivy League campus to the Google campus or joining an up-and-coming startup with a chance to become the next big thing, the tech sector has clearly surpassed finance as the more appealing career path for many graduates of top institutions, even if the average tech salary falls short of those offered by most financial institutions.
Working at a Silicon Valley startup allows people to have a direct impact and “own” results in a meaningful way, whereas Wall Street is traditionally more bureaucratic.
This last point is not to be overlooked. While salaries and associated financial options remain a major recruiting tool, there has undoubtedly been a change in the way talented graduates are approaching the job market.
More than salary, they want to be impactful: a part of building something new, or changing the fundamental nature of a given process. Financial services is generally seen as one of the more traditional, if not lucrative, industries within the broader market — but it’s rare that you see the words “innovative” or “agile” mentioned in context with a large financial institution in the way that you do with a Google, Apple, Facebook or any host of small startups.
This is not meant to say that the key for financial services institutions looking to lure back talent is simply a matter of changing their Casual Friday policies (a practice Wall Street has almost universally rejected, anyway). It’s more a matter of changing the way organizations are structured and operated, and encouraging more agility in terms of technology adoption and an openness to changing long-tenured processes. Technology is and has always been a critical enabler of finance.
Financial institutions are thus increasingly focused on shifting the perception that they are change-averse and embracing the “try and fail and try again” ethos that has permeated SiliconValley and other high-tech hubs. Working at a Silicon Valley startup allows people to have a direct impact and “own” results in a meaningful way, whereas Wall Street is traditionally more bureaucratic.
When Two Become One
The coming years will see a deepening of the relationship between finance and tech — and a broader acknowledgement that you don’t have to be based in Silicon Valley to do interesting and meaningful work.
The writing is already on the wall. Consider the uptick in traditional financial institutions like J.P. Morgan, Fidelity and T. Rowe Price increasingly participating in high-profile funding rounds for fast-growth private tech companies in addition to (and often in place of) traditional venture capital firms. The rate of IPOs has slowed in recent years, so it makes sense that mutual funds and other institutional investors are increasingly turning to private technology companies as a means to boost returns for investors.
There’s also an increasing trend of Silicon Valley companies that are changing consumer-facing financial services processes and working with, not against, banks to do so. This is most notably happening in the lending, payments and crypto-currencies spaces, with companies like Prosper and Coinbase.
The future leaders of finance have been weaned during the Information Age. They’re an on-demand group accustomed to seeing immediate results. If a change is needed, it can and will be made. If a design is bulky and inefficient, it’s time to blow it up and develop something simpler.
This isn’t the first instance in which financial services have been more change-averse than other industries; just 30 years ago, it was unthinkable that floor trading would be automated (anybody remember the Open outcry system?). Today, you’re hard-pressed to find a floor broker at many of the major exchanges. Likewise, it’s hard to imagine that Wall Street existed before the advent of Bloomberg Terminals — but there was once a time when traders were indeed forced to price bonds with pencil and paper, and trade exclusively over the phone.
The same type of conversations are happening in finance today, and they are becoming louder and louder. A new generation of investors and brokers has penetrated the ranks of financial services organizations, and I expect a similar sea change from the world we’ve known for the past 20 years.
There’s a tremendous opportunity present for those financial institutions willing to push back against the “Us vs. Them” mentality currently ascribed to Silicon Valley and Wall Street, and instead embrace meaningful partnerships where the hoodies and the suits work together in a more impactful, transparent way that fosters increased adoption of new technology.
There’s no doubt that the times are changing; those who are quicker to recognize and adapt to this new reality will be the ones to come out on top.
埃里克·普瓦里耶 
techcrunch 
2015-07-01 08:17:36