Blogs

I think this take is much closer to the truth, but with a bit more nuance. Specifically in finance, I believe job requirements and employer expectations will shift drastically, away from traditional academic fundamentals and toward computer literacy, innovative capability, and critical thinking. It will still be important for finance professionals to understand the fundamentals, if only to catch false assumptions or diversions from standard process. But with LLMs so rapidly expanding in parameters and training data, it seems misguided to have the scope-limited human brain handle all the memorization and cataloguing of data. Instead, I think a strong foundation of fundamental knowledge, combined with the ability to think critically and drive process improvement (through the implementation of skills, connectors, and new tools that optimize workflows) is what will unlock the full potential of both the human employee and the AI model.

Bringing this back to hiring and org structure, I don't think much changes. Most finance sub-sectors require some human element, whether client-facing or intra-organizational. These roles won't disappear, as human communication and "spirit" can't be authentically replaced by an AI model, no matter how intelligent it becomes. Nor will these roles stop needing subordinates, since the people making decisions and meeting with clients rarely have time to do the underlying work themselves. That fundamental manager-employee relationship should always hold, no matter how advanced AI gets.

I also don't think a shrinking workforce is a likely outcome under this system. Say a new AI technology, paired with an analyst who's especially skilled at leveraging it, doubles that analyst's output for roughly the same cost. In a competitive market, the answer isn't to fire half your analysts, it's to keep everyone capable of producing at that level and double your overall output for the same cost. This would allow companies in growing sectors to gain market share and separate themselves from competitors, all else held equal.

That's the piece I think most people miss when they say AI threatens jobs. A better way to structure that argument could be: AI poses a threat to those unwilling to maximize their understanding and application of it to improve their own efficiency and output.

The world is adapting quickly to this technology, and I believe the rising tide will lift every ship capable of anticipating that rise and learning as the technology advances.