Later

Three months on, and where am I at?

We continue to consolidate changes where I work. That translates into multiple openings in my group and at the segment level. A couple of them I even have a shot at.

I've been networking as well. As people leave and come in, hopefully I get some new opportunities.

Meantime, the recent Market "correction" (really? seems a bit more) has been fascinating to watch in the wake of S&P's downgrade of the US credit rating. What's maddening is to watch the market's movements as a direct response to the downgrade, when in fact most of it is being driven by the Eurozone's inability to adequately restructure Greece and other distressed sovereign debts. Furthermore, the downgrade isn't based on Congress having increased the debt ceiling; far from it, the downgrade is based on the fact that an influential group of congressional leaders openly stated that default on our debts was an option they were willing to accede to rather than come to an agreement over spending.

When you tell people upfront that you're willing to not pay your debts, they will lower your credit rating. it's that simple.

Globalization

I was on the train early this morning with a friend from out of town. She was here for my convocation ceremony, and we got to talking about the frequent mention of globalization. There was a lot of talk about being a global school, preparing for global leaders in a global community fully globalized global global global. I was surprised when she expressed wariness.

I asked her what her concerns were, and as she described them, along with anecdotes about people she knows, it became clear that she equates globalization with offshoring - jobs leaving the country. She isn't ignorant, but she didn't mention new markets, growing a market, or expanding wealth through trade.

We talked some more, and exchanged ideas. I tend to focus on markets due to my degree, and in particular, the idea that overall job growth can be achieved through trade. She has her doubts. "What about factory workers, in their fifties, really, how retrainable are they?"

To that point, I said it was the role of education to prepare people to continue learning. It does know good to learn a trade and just work that trade for life. People have to know how to learn. Either their trades will change so much that they are unrecognizable, or they will switch trades.

For me, it was a glimpse of the fears so many people have. I've generally always supported globalization. I haven't understood fully why people fear it. Yes, it is disruptive, but it is for the greater good. I believe so, anyway.

Done

Well, Commencement and Convocation have come and gone. I don't have my degree in hand (or on the wall), but I am officially graduated. Julie McCoy, B.A, M.B.A.

While it's been a long road, in retrospect the time went quickly. Because I attended part time, I have had two parallel tracks: professional and academic. It is true that I've been able to bring real world examples into the classroom, and turn classroom lessons into tools for understanding my workplace.

That said, turning those tools into actions and accomplishments is a separate endeavor.

Regardless, I now have an MBA. This may sound like Kool-Aid talk, but I do feel like I have a much stronger grasp of business fundamentals, especially financial analysis and strategy. I have what I sought; a formalized framework in which to apply what I have already known about business.

So yay. Yay Me! I did it. Now I need to decide what I'll do next.

The End is Nigh

I wish I had more time to write here. In retrospect, I wish I'd had more time to more thoroughly document my MBA experience. Coming in to the final weeks, it does indeed seem like a blur, like I started just last fall, or maybe the year before.

It's been three academic years - just 2.5 calendar years. In the that time I've met and befriended completely new people, learned WAY more about finance than I ever imagined possible, hobbed with the nobs, revised my resume countless times and gone to any number of career fairs, interviews, and networking events, and soon . . .the real world.

It's challenging, making a career change. Have I done enough? Have I done the right things? Should I settle in to my field and simply apply towards management in that area? It's hard to say.

What' clear though is that school changed me for the better - and I had to change before that just to get in. I was an OK student before. I had to become much more organized before I could even imagine applying to Stern, and when I was accepted - it's been a log ride. Now, we're approaching the splash.

A Frank Conversation

I had a chat with a manager today, and in the conversation I asked him about the status of a project he's been managing. I was involved in the early stages and knew it was supposed to be done by now.

"They're looking for funding," he said. This was a surprise, since everything to date had been painted in very bright lines of "this is important and will happen".

So this prompted the question: are we working for cheapskates?

Not too long ago I had an interview with a firm that builds out solutions for health care and financial services providers. It was appealing to me because I am interested in both of those industries, and functionally it's similar to what I already do. When describing my transferable skills, I launched into familiar refrains: cutting costs, curtailing choices, and addressing very specific functionality.

Imagine my surprise when I was asked how I would pitch a solution that generates revenue.

It clicked - I've been working for so long in an environment that is focused on lowering costs, headcount, doing rote repeatable work on the cheap, that I've forgotten what it means to present something of value. Saving money is always valuable of course, but how does one generate value? What does one do with those savings?

The conversation is echoed in the current political climate. There is much talk of cutting spending, lowering taxes, less, less, less, but not so much talk about what to build. Good idea or bad, what is the value in building a high-speed rail network, or funding education, or subsidizing childcare for the poor?

In an IT world, it's easy to reduce, reduce, reduce, to do less work. But what about more, more, more, increasing productivity, higher costs leading to disproportionately higher service levels?

Final Lap

Well, I'm in. My final semester at Stern is starting, graduation is just 4.5 credits away. I have a six week course and a twelve week course.

I figure after spring break in mid-March, I'll be mentally checked out.

The short course is Venture Capital Finance. The longer course is Implementing Strategy.

Meantime, I continue to look for jobs. Some nibbles. Also, planning to network. I'm really interested in Turnaround Management, which is a stretch with my background, but I always need a long-term goal.

State Bankruptcy

Two articles crossed my desk (well, my Kindle and my iPhone) recently, both on how to manage bankruptcy of US states.

States are not allowed to declare bankruptcy. One of the challenges in managing state-level financial distress is ensuring that the state is able to meet its contractual obligations while maintaining services. Unlike a corporation, a state cannot simply declare bankruptcy, and does not go bankrupt when it breaks a covenant.

NYT article on movement towards resolving distressed US states. Notably, prospect of removing primacy of pensions and senior bondholders in restructuring:

What they're getting it is two-fold: 1) in bankruptcy, the debtor basically turns over his finances to the court for restructuring. A sovereign state can't do that - without sacrificing sovereignty. 2) For a a state to meet its contractual obligations and covenants, it would have to cut back on services first. This isn't sustainable. So, how does a state renegotiate its obligations and covenants if it can't enter bankruptcy?

Peter Orszag briefly touches on state default in this FT piece - regards it as alternately unlikely yet devastating should it occur:

So, I call trial balloon. We have an NYT piece full of chatter about the nature of the problem and some of the ideas about how to resolve it, but no real commitment. We have a former administration official, a financier and economist, talking more bluntly about the nature of the problem. I think we're being prepped. I think in 2011 we're going to see some movement towards regulation and possibly legislation to allow state and municipal governments to renegotiate at least some of their debt obligations.

This is huge. How does a government clear up its debt? More importantly at the state and muni level, how does one government do this without casting a pall on all others? I agree with Orszag that comparisons to Europe are overblown - by the order of magnitude if nothing else - but if one city or state oes bankrupt, it's certainly going to affect borrowing costs for others for years.

The challenge here is to provide a mechanism for resolving government distress without damaging the ability of governments to afford the carrying costs of their operations. All these nutters going on about how we can't keep borrowing have no idea about what life would be like if governments could not borrow at all. Let's hope none of his get to experience that.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/21/business/economy/21bankruptcy.html

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/10612eec-24cc-11e0-a919-00144feab49a.html#axzz1Bnex2eOZ