My ambition are: the work as professionally and also to be a scientific researcher for innovative solutions and new trends in finance field, therefore My question is: Are PhD is the only Achieve my ambition? Or could have relied on the CFA Certificate and another thing to achieve this ambition? and why?
Unless you are comfortable with self education and are very clever, PhD/postgraduate level degrees are most likely the only realistic way to equip you with the tools (Matlab,R, other programming or scripting languages) and the mathematical rigour required for formal quantitative research…In my opinion, the cfa syllabus may introduce you to research topics, particularly via the references (found in the footnotes or at the end of a chapter maybe), but does not really help you conduct research per se…for example there is a very big difference between knowing the steps in the Black Litterman model from cfa books and actually implementing it using software…so basically focus on Phd and do cfa on the side if it takes your fancy.
But I found that there are some scientists who obtained the Nobel Prize in economics did not get a PhD, how so? And also I want to know the meaning of this job “Research Analyst”: Do you mean he has the skills of scientific research?
A PhD simply gives you the tools and to some extent the freedom to explore systematically a topic of your interest in great detail. Ofcourse that does not mean that the only way to obtain a Nobel prize is via a PhD…
I am not sure I understand what you think you mean when you say ‘skills of scientific research’…but intuitively, scientific research skills would include :
- Quantitative abilities
- Specialised software usage
- Analysing data
- Applying models to real world data
- Attention to detail
- In depth knowledge of your chosen field
There are probably actual ‘research analysts’ on this forum…I am sure they know much more about the job than I can list/ imagine.
i mean:
My ambition to be a scientist ;therefore Are PhD “the only” way in order to be clever in skills to develop new methods for applications in finance field as a one of ascientists ? Or there are other ways?
Science is the process of using the scientific method to uncover knowledge.
Finance and economics aren’t really science, because you can’t apply the scientific method (hypothesis testing through controlled experiments).
There are some instances of behavioral finance that actually do use scientific experimentation, but they have a hard time connecting to the main body of finance literature, and it’s also not entirely clear how to make money from their results in a consistent way.
Note that science is not the only way to generate knowledge; it’s just that if you can generate scientific knowledge through the scientific method, it’s usually more reliable and dependable than other forms of knowledge (which would include things like logical reasoning, deduction from hypotheses, simple pattern recognition, religious faith, etc.). When hypothesis testing through experimentation is not possible, one has little choice but to fall back on one of these other methods, even if they are less reliable.
But is it science or finance that motivates you? You may have to make a choice.
To make contributions to science, you will often need a Ph.D., because that sets you up to work in an environment where you are able to do that regularly. To make contributions to finance, you don’t, but you would need to read and think as much as many Ph.D.s have to.
There’s also applied science, which is the process of turning scientific knowledge into useful products and services for people. That often involves teaming up with scientists to turn their scientific skills into techologies, methods, and products that provide value. You don’t need a Ph.D. for that either, and it can be fun and rewarding when it works.
I think a PhD / graduate programmes are pretty much the only realistic methods for achieveing your goals…how else do you see yourself learning the tools of analysis in a rigourous manner??..Self study is ofcourse possible too if you are smart but PhD is probably the most common route…
You seem to want to avoid Phds M-elsafty…hehe how come?
I really want to avoid the academic doctorate"PhD" And Now I’m thinking in the professional master “MBA” and professional doctorate"DBA" Instead of MSc and PhD . Because I think that only by the MBA + DBA I will be very clever in the research and development of knowledge + As well as at the same time i will clever in the professional work . Do you agree that view?
another Question:
You answered that there are alternative routes for PhD in order to be clever in the research and innovation therefore I hope Explanation How these? How, for example the Nobel laureates in economics have innovations in scientific research without a PhD? Please explain in detail?
I don’t really know what DBA means…but if you want to avoid a PhD but still gain some related skills/knowledge…MBA/msc seem reasonable to me…but it really depends on the programme itself…
DBA mean: Doctor of Business Administration
Ok, What about Second Question ?
I would say you could do a little self-study:
- Learn a programming language.
- Find out what book PHd students/grad students are using in their courses and buy them
- Find a finance/economics journal article and try to replicate the methodology/results to get a feel for how research is done
- Be the next Madoff
- Give Alladin some money
Sorry but what is the relationship between programming and finance or research?
OP, you seem to think that the Ph.D. is some kind of regulatory license for being smart and able to contribute to scientific knowledge.
In fact, the Ph.D. is really only needed to hold a university professorship at accredited degree-granting institutions, and even this is only true because of tradition. Increasingly, universities are tapping lecturers (who generally have masters degrees, and “professors of practice,” which means that they have enough work experience that their courses can be considered to add value.
A Ph.D. basically means you have gone through university training and 1) know enough about a topic to teach classes in the discipline, and 2) you know the literature and research methods enough to publish credible articles and books that contribute to global knowledge.
It is possible to contribute to global knowledge without a Ph.D. (much of historical contributions came from non-PhDs), and there is no rule that says that only PhDs are allowed to contribute scientific knowledge.
I am not aware of non-Ph.D.s who are Nobel Prize winners in Economics. Can you name them? There are non-economists (political scientists, psychologists, etc.) who occasionally get the Economics Prize for their work, but they have Ph.D.s.
There are non-Ph.D.s who win the Peace Prize and the Literature Prize, that is true.
Ph.Ds often end up in universities, and when they are there, they have the resources, time, and freedom to pursue the sorts of research that may lead to things like Nobel Prizes and such. That’s why PhDs are often associated with these things.
There is no rule that says you must have a Ph.D. to contribute to financial or other knowledge.
Lots of people get a Ph.D. because they want to be called “Doctor.” Be careful if that’s what’s driving you, because it leads to bitterness…
Bitterness leads to anger. Anger leads to hate. Hate leads to suf-fer-ing…
(see posts by bleach)
So you can explore, in an artificial setting, whether or not an idea is correct using real world data. If you thought that the Egyptian stock exchange is going to enter a bull market whenever middle eastern politics heats up, you could gather the necessary data, write a program/script and test whether this is true or false.
thanksssssssssss
I really hate the real routine of academic doctorate " PhD" and at the same time the professional doctorate and master "DBA and MBA " is very very expensive and I see that it is unnecessary to pay all this money in the professional doctorate and master as long as I can learn research skills as you explained through other means. I love the work professionally and I do not like to work in universities, But I want to work in the research and innovations in the discovery of new knowledge and it is with the work professionally. but can you give me the advise what are these other means?
i don’t remember who won nobel without PhD but this link contain all economics won Noble :
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Nobel_laureates_in_Economics
thanksssssssssss
I really hate the real routine of academic doctorate ” PhD” and at the same time the professional doctorate and master “DBA and MBA ” is very very expensive and I see that it is unnecessary to pay all this money in the professional doctorate and master as long as I can learn research skills as you explained through other means.
I love the work professionally and I do not like to work in universities,
But I want to work in the research and innovations in the discovery of new knowledge and it is with the work professionally. but can you give me the advise what are these other means?
i don’t remember who won nobel without PhD but this link contain all economics won Noble :
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Nobel_laureates_in_Economics
I mean as long as you said that it is possible to “contribute to scientific knowledge” without Master or doctorate.and At the same time I’m going to study CFA.therefore I want from you to guide me how to start In order to fulfill my purpose>“contribute to scientific knowledge” I mean What are the steps precisely, which enables me to do that?
I don’t want anyone to contribute to scientific knowledge that we will all rely on that is asking someone else to tell them how to do it.
For the sake of humanity please don’t answer him.