Connect with us

Mergers & Acquisitions

On-the-job learning upended by AI and hybrid work

Published

on


Jamie Dimon is unequivocal about the impact of remote working on training new bankers. “It doesn’t work in our business,” the chief executive of JPMorgan Chase told Stanford’s Graduate School of Business this year. “Younger people [are] left behind.”

He has previously spoken of the importance of “the apprenticeship model . . . which is almost impossible to replicate in the Zoom world”.

In many workplaces, that apprenticeship model is as simple as sitting near a more experienced colleague or joining a client meeting to watch how it is done, while also learning the ropes by taking on often more repetitive and basic tasks.

But on-the-job learning is now facing the double threat of hybrid working, which means junior staff spend less time observing and listening to more senior colleagues, and generative AI, which is making obsolete many of the routine tasks that have long been building blocks of professional knowledge.

The effect has been noted across professional industries, from auditors and law firms to the big investment banks. Last year, the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board reported that the pandemic and remote and hybrid work had affected audit firms’ “apprenticeship model for on-the-job training, dissemination of culture, and professional scepticism”.

Others see the format as ripe for reform, anticipating that greater changes will come from generative AI.

Employers are investing heavily in AI to assist with working practices. Tools such as those rolled out by law firm A&O Shearman to deal with antitrust and contracts or Goldman Sachs to summarise complex documents and analyse data, are designed to enhance productivity. AI start-up Rogo aims to automate some of the laborious tasks done by junior investment bankers. However, some argue that by eliminating repetitive tasks, junior recruits will fail to develop muscle memory, which is essential for critical analysis, as well as the ability to identify mistakes in AI.

The changes may mean employers have to be more structured and deliberate in the training opportunities they offer junior staff, while working out how to get the best out of generative AI to free up time for their employees to do more valuable work.

Yolanda Seals-Coffield, chief people and inclusion officer at PwC’s US division, says hybrid working means that there needs to be a much more proactive approach to on-the-job training

Navid Mahmoodzadegan, the newly appointed chief executive of boutique investment bank Moelis & Co, says he hopes junior bankers will be rewarded with more “intellectually stimulating” work. Patrick Curtis, chief executive and founder of Wall Street Oasis, an online community catering to the financial services industry, predicts “this shifting more dramatically in the next 24 months as these [junior] roles start leveraging AI more, with some getting displaced outright”.

To maintain the apprenticeship model, leaders at some companies have followed Dimon in mandating five days of office attendance a week. Others, including Citigroup, are continuing with various hybrid working arrangements. Clare Francis, a partner at Pinsent Masons, a law firm that does not mandate days, says that while “junior lawyers benefit from office attendance,” some work, such as research, can be more effectively done at home. She adds that “everyone learns in different ways” and the reality is that many meetings are held on Teams so juniors “can see how they work” just as easily outside the office.

Yolanda Seals-Coffield, chief people and inclusion officer at PwC’s US division, believes hybrid working means “we have lost a little bit of that” tacit knowledge. She sees the solution in junior and senior staff being “far more intentional” about mentoring and debriefing. “We have to be [in] a world post-Covid where people are hybrid, you’re no longer sitting next to someone in an office or on a client side or at a meeting.” Staff, including trainees, at PwC US are required to be on-site half of the time. The arrangement means new recruits need to be clear about saying, “I want to actually shadow this particular behaviour”, she says. This might mean a junior associate sits in on a virtual client meeting or reviews a recorded walk-through of a technical process, followed by structured debriefs to reinforce the learning.

Rather than “a passive experience”, says Seals-Coffield, it requires bosses to think about modelling behaviour such as through guided questioning and peer feedback. AI could start to help with this by, for example, flagging to a team leader that a scheduled interview might provide a shadowing opportunity for a graduate employee who has indicated they are looking for this skill.

I’m optimistic that the tools will enable juniors to think about the material critically

New graduates might also be more fluent in AI than their supervisors, potentially opening up new responsibilities for them to take on. Patrick Grant, project director of legal tech and innovation at the University of Law, says they have developed courses to encourage students to use tools such as ChatGPT critically and ethically in assisting with research, organisation and editing, and to spot “errors or hallucinated references”. They encourage students, for example, to compare drafts of clauses with AI outputs to understand the tools’ lack of nuance.

Francis points out that junior lawyers using generative AI for research is not that different from past generations switching from books to the internet. “Today, the workflow of junior lawyers is not yet fundamentally different [from] how it was before AI was a tool at the disposal of legal teams. Lawyers at the outset of their training continue to learn by verifying results.” The role will “adapt and evolve” alongside AI.

Some argue that by eliminating repetitive tasks, juniors can progress more quickly by taking on more sophisticated and creative work earlier. Francisco Morales Barrón, a partner at Vinson & Elkins law firm in New York, is sceptical about the traditional model. “A lot of older generations will say you learn so much from reviewing thousands of contracts . . . somehow magically you learn through the process of repeating it hundreds of times. I’m optimistic that the tools will enable juniors to think about the material critically.” Francis agrees: “How much do you learn from a monotonous task?”

Seals-Coffield says employers need to get to grips with the desired outcomes of graduate training by separating the task from the skill: “If they’re not [going to] have the opportunity to do that task 50 times, they still need to be able to evaluate it, they still need to be able to provide the critical judgment and independent thinking that is important to evaluate the work that AI might be producing.”

This could include simulations in training, says Francis, “to develop, test and challenge the lawyer both on legal expertise as well as on soft skills such as communication and negotiation”.

Others suggest that any freed-up time will not be spent on more creative tasks, but on additional grunt work — or cutting the number of junior jobs.

According to Oxford Economics, a consultancy, “there are signs that entry-level positions are being displaced by artificial intelligence at higher rates”.

But in some organisations this could be a while off. “Analysts in my class are in a relatively favourable position in which we will have the aid of AI without it replacing us just yet,” reports one investment banking analyst.

Additional reporting by Anjli Raval and Sujeet Indap



Source link

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Mergers & Acquisitions

FTAV’s further reading

Published

on



AI and jobs; Oklahoma and towers; India and retailers; AI and cybercrime; Norway and elections



Source link

Continue Reading

Mergers & Acquisitions

Trump Intel deal designed to block sale of chipmaking unit, CFO says

Published

on


Unlock the White House Watch newsletter for free

The Trump administration’s investment in Intel was structured to deter the chipmaker from selling its manufacturing unit, its chief financial officer said on Thursday, locking it into a lossmaking business it has faced pressure to offload.

The US government last week agreed to take a 10 per cent stake in Intel by converting $8.9bn of federal grants under the 2022 Chips Act into equity, the latest unorthodox intervention by President Donald Trump in corporate America.

The agreement also contains a five-year warrant that allows the government to take an additional 5 per cent of Intel at $20 a share if it ceases to own 51 per cent of its foundry business — which aims to make chips for third-party clients.

“I don’t think there’s a high likelihood that we would take our stake below the 50 per cent, so ultimately I would expect [the warrant] to expire,” CFO David Zinsner told a Deutsche Bank conference on Thursday.

“I think from the government’s perspective, they were aligned with that: they didn’t want to see us take the business and spin it off or sell it to somebody.”

Intel has faced pressure to carve off its foundry business as it haemorrhages cash. It lost $13bn last year as it struggled to compete with rival TSMC and attract outside customers.

Zinsner’s comments highlight how the deal with the Trump administration ties the company’s hands.

Analysts including Citi, as well as former Intel board members, have called for a sale — and Intel has seen takeover interest from the likes of Qualcomm.

Intel’s board ousted chief executive Pat Gelsinger, the architect of its ambitious foundry strategy, in December, which intensified expectations that it could ultimately abandon the business.

White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt told reporters on Thursday the deal was being finalised. “The Intel deal is still being ironed out by the Department of Commerce. The T’s are still being crossed, the I’s are still being dotted.”

Intel received $5.7bn of the government investment on Wednesday, Zinsner said. The remaining $3.2bn of the investment is still dependent on Intel hitting milestones agreed under a Department of Defense scheme and has not yet been paid.

He said the warrants could be viewed as “a little bit of friction to keep us from moving in a direction that I think ultimately the government would prefer we not move to”.

He said the direct government stake could also incentivise potential customers to view Intel on a “different level”.

So far, the likes of Nvidia, Apple and Qualcomm have not placed orders with Intel, which has struggled to convince them it has reliable manufacturing processes that could lure them away from TSMC.

As Intel’s new chief executive Lip-Bu Tan seeks to shore up the company’s finances, the government deal also “eliminated the need to access capital markets”, Zinsner explained.

Given the uncertainty over whether Intel would hit the construction milestones required to receive the Chips Act manufacturing grants, converting the government funds to equity “effectively guaranteed that we’d get the cash”.

“This was a great quarter for us in terms of cash raise,” Zinsner added. Intel had also recently sold $1bn of its shares in Mobileye, and was “within a couple of weeks” of closing a deal to sell 51 per cent of its stake in its specialist chips unit Altera to private equity firm Silver Lake, he noted.

SoftBank also made a $2bn investment in Intel last week. Zinsner pushed back against the idea that it had been co-ordinated with the government, as SoftBank chief executive Masayoshi Son pursues an ever-closer relationship with Trump.

“It was coincidence that it fell all in the same week,” Zinsner said.



Source link

Continue Reading

Mergers & Acquisitions

Nuclear fusion developer raises almost $900mn in new funding

Published

on


Unlock the Editor’s Digest for free

One of the most advanced nuclear fusion developers has raised about $900mn from backers including Nvidia and Morgan Stanley, as it races to complete a demonstration plant in the US and commercialise the nascent energy technology.   

Commonwealth Fusion Systems plans to use the money to complete its Sparc fusion demonstration machine and begin work on developing a power plant in Virginia. The group secured a deal in June to supply 200 megawatts of electricity to technology giant Google.

The Google deal was one of only a handful of such commercial agreements in the sector and placed CFS at the forefront of fusion companies trying to perfect the technology and develop a commercially viable machine.

CFS has raised almost $3bn since it was spun out of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology in 2018, drawing investors amid heightened interest in nuclear to meet surging energy demand from artificial intelligence.

“Investors recognise that CFS is making fusion power a reality. They see that we are executing and delivering on our objectives,” said Bob Mumgaard, chief executive and co-founder of CFS. 

New investors in CFS’s latest funding round, which raised $863mn, include NVentures, Nvidia’s venture capital arm, Morgan Stanley’s Counterpoint Global and a consortium of 12 Japanese companies led by Mitsui & Co.

Nuclear fusion seeks to produce clean energy by combining atoms in a manner that releases a significant amount of energy. In contrast, fission — the process used in conventional nuclear power — splits heavy atoms such as uranium into smaller atoms, releasing heat.

CFS is also planning to build the world’s first large-scale fusion power plant in Virginia, which is home to the largest concentration of data centres in the world.

BloombergNEF estimates that US data centre power demand will more than double to 78GW by 2035, from about 35GW last year, and nuclear energy start-ups already have raised more than $3bn in 2025, a 400 per cent increase on 2024 levels.

But experts have warned that addressing the technological challenges to the development of fusion would be expensive, putting into question the viability of the technology.

No group has yet been able to produce more energy from a fusion reaction than the system itself consumes despite decades of experimentation.

“Fusion is radically difficult compared to fission,” said Mark Nelson, managing director of the consultancy Radiant Energy Group, pointing to the incredibly high temperatures and pressures required to combine atoms.

“The hard part is not making fusion reactors. Every step forward towards what may be a dead end economically, looks like something that justifies another billion or a Nobel Prize.



Source link

Continue Reading

Trending