Bankers: Bad Apples Or Bad Barrel?

Investment bankers have a bad reputation, with popular culture often portraying them as greedy, narcissistic, and sociopathic. The general public tends to dislike bankers, and media representations such as The Wolf of Wall Street paint a picture of an extravagant, cut-throat, and unethical industry. However, it's important to separate fact from fiction and understand that not all investment bankers fit the negative stereotypes.

The intense and demanding nature of the job, with long work hours and high-pressure situations, can contribute to a poor work-life balance and a competitive culture. The structure of investment banks, with short employee tenures and a fee-oriented business model, can also lead to a challenging work environment.

Additionally, the role of investment bankers in the 2008 financial crisis has left a lasting impression on public perception. Banks were criticised for their role in issuing risky mortgages, complex financial products, and their expectation of special treatment from the government.

While there are negative aspects associated with the profession, it's worth noting that not all investment bankers conform to the stereotypes, and the industry attracts individuals with a range of personalities and work ethics.

Investment bankers are bad investors themselves

Investment bankers are often seen as the villains of the financial world, with public perception of them being largely negative. While the industry does attract criticism for its role in the 2008 financial crash, the bonus culture, and the perception of greed, it is also true that investment bankers are not necessarily good investors themselves.

Firstly, it is important to note that investment bankers are marketers, not investors. They are paid based on transactions and the size of those transactions, so they are incentivised to market stocks to the best of their ability. This means that they may be inclined to focus on hypothetical growth or strong underlying assets, rather than a company's lack of earnings or poor capital allocation strategy. This deviates from sound value investing and can lead to poor investment decisions.

Additionally, investment bankers are susceptible to the same behavioural finance pitfalls as everyone else. They may try to time the market, bet on the latest trend, or buy at the top of the market due to the fear of missing out. They may also fall prey to get-rich-quick schemes or demand high returns with no risk, which is simply not realistic.

The demanding nature of the job also means that investment bankers have little time to dedicate to their own investments. They work long hours, often exceeding 40 hours per week, and are expected to be constantly committed to their jobs, day and night. This leaves little time for personal investment research and decision-making.

Furthermore, investment bankers tend to experience lifestyle inflation and are constantly running on a money treadmill. This means that even if they make poor investment decisions, they may still be better off than someone who never invested at all.

While it may seem counterintuitive that those who work in finance are not good investors themselves, it is important to remember that investment bankers are marketers first and foremost, and the nature of their job does not necessarily make them skilled investors.

The public perception of investment bankers

Investment bankers are often associated with wealth and high incomes. The allure of six-figure salaries and the prestige of working for top financial institutions like Goldman Sachs and JP Morgan attract many aspiring bankers. However, the public also perceives investment bankers as greedy and overcompensated for their work. The media and popular culture often portray them as "scumbags," "w*nkers," or even "engineers of genocide," reflecting a negative view of their profession.

The intense and demanding nature of investment banking contributes to its poor public image. The industry is known for its long work hours, with workweeks frequently exceeding 75 hours. This lack of work-life balance and the high-pressure environment can lead to a culture of overwork and employee burnout. The competitive and cut-throat nature of the industry may also contribute to the perception of investment bankers as aggressive or ruthless.

The 2008 financial crisis significantly damaged the reputation of investment bankers in the eyes of the public. Banks were blamed for contributing to the crisis by offering risky mortgages and then selling these loans to investment funds without disclosing their risks. The public perceived the banks as having cheated and lied to make profits, and the subsequent government bailout of these institutions further fuelled anger and resentment. Many people felt that bankers escaped accountability for their actions, which led to widespread economic hardship.

Additionally, the structure of the investment banking industry itself contributes to its negative perception. The short tenure of employees, intense hierarchy, and fee-oriented nature of the business can lead to a lack of mentorship, extreme competition, and intergroup politics within firms. This can result in a toxic work culture and contribute to the public's perception of investment bankers as cut-throat and unethical.

Overall, while the public is drawn to the high incomes and prestige associated with investment banking, there is also a significant amount of disdain and criticism directed towards the profession. The intense work culture, perceived greed, and blame for economic crises have all contributed to the negative public perception of investment bankers.

The impact of investment bankers on the 2008 financial crash

The 2008 financial crisis was triggered by multiple factors, including the collapse of the subprime mortgage market, poor underwriting practices, overly complex financial instruments, deregulation, poor regulation, and a complete lack of regulation in some cases. The crisis led to a prolonged economic recession and the collapse of major financial institutions, including Lehman Brothers and AIG.

Investment bankers were among those blamed for the 2008 financial crash. The press and the public hold negative views of investment bankers, seeing them as greedy and responsible for the financial crisis. However, bankers themselves feel they are unfairly scapegoated and that consumers who took out mortgages they couldn't afford and the system at large were also to blame.

In the years leading up to the 2008 financial crisis, investment bankers were selling toxic mortgage debt in the form of mortgage-backed securities and collateralized debt obligations (CDOs). These were billed as low-risk investments, but when the housing bubble burst, they became near-worthless, costing investors trillions.

The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) also relaxed net capital requirements for five investment banks in 2004, allowing them to leverage their initial investments by up to 30 or 40 times. This fuelled greater risk-taking among banks.

The long hours and high-stress work culture of investment bankers

The work culture of investment banking is notorious for its gruelling long hours and high-stress environment. This is particularly true for junior bankers, who often feel pressured to work over 100 hours a week to impress managers and advance their careers.

A typical workday for an investment banking analyst involves working frantically into the night and early morning to complete a pitch book, rushing home to shower and change, and then heading straight back to the office for a meeting. The high-pressure nature of the job, with multiple competing deadlines, means that employees must be able to cope with, and even thrive under, high levels of stress.

The intense competition, constant deadlines, aggressive atmosphere, and lack of work-life balance have been linked to mental health issues and burnout among financial services employees. Young investment bankers are increasingly being hospitalized with heart conditions, with a 10% rise in cardiac arrests among bankers under 30 in the last decade, according to a London cardiologist.

The long hours and high-stress culture of investment banking can be attributed to several factors. Firstly, there is a "hazing" culture, where senior bankers expect junior bankers to "pay their dues" by working extremely long hours, reinforcing this culture as junior bankers move up the ranks. Secondly, there are often bottlenecks in the banking process, with junior bankers bearing the brunt of last-minute changes and re-doing work due to poor communication between groups. Thirdly, bankers are often poor managers of their own and others' time, frequently assigning mundane and time-consuming tasks to junior bankers that keep them at the office late into the night. Finally, the competitive nature of the industry means that employees are driven to work long hours to impress managers and advance their careers.

While some banks have implemented policies to track working hours and restrict weekend work for junior staff, critics argue that a deeper cultural shift is needed to address the long hours and high-stress culture of investment banking.

The poor culture of investment banks

One of the main issues contributing to the poor culture of investment banks is the long and demanding work hours, often exceeding 75 hours per week. This is due to the deal-oriented nature of the industry, where speed of service is crucial. As a result, investment bankers often work weekends and vacations, leaving little room for a healthy work-life balance. The competitive culture also encourages extra-long hours, with a 9-to-5 routine being almost non-existent. This can lead to a high-stress environment, where analysts work frantically to meet deadlines.

The short tenure of employees in investment banks is another factor that contributes to the poor culture. Analysts typically stay at a firm for only 2 to 3 years before moving on, making it difficult for seniors to invest in mentorship. This creates a hierarchical structure where juniors are treated more like resources than valued team members. The disparity in knowledge and effort leads to a culture of extreme hierarchy and "star" culture, with some analysts being worked twice as hard as others, creating a feeling of resentment and unfairness.

The fee-oriented nature of the business model can also lead to intergroup politics, with senior bankers competing for the same deals or pitching different products to potential clients. This can create a culture of competition and individualism, rather than cooperation and resource-sharing.

Additionally, the culture of immediate financial gain and high bonuses within the industry can lead to poor conduct, as seen in the LIBOR scandal, where several major banking institutions colluded to manipulate interest rates. This "greed culture" can make banks more likely to be dishonest and prioritize financial gain over ethical considerations.

To improve the culture within investment banks, changes in regulation and a shift in mindset are necessary. The Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) and Prudential Regulation Authority (PRA) have introduced individual accountability regulations to make everyone in the banking institutions accountable for their conduct. However, more detailed guidelines and a clear leadership strategy are needed to effectively change the culture within the industry.

Frequently asked questions