MA career path

[farris]

Hello everyone,

 

In August I will be starting a MA Applied Economics program in Texas. For background and context, I attended a crappy undergrad (unranked) university where I graduated with a BBA Economics but didn't learn anything except how to draw charts. Zero math was required and econometrics wasn’t offered, just to give you an idea. Reasons for going to that undergrad include naïveté about career potential, not wanting to leave friends/family (hometown school), and finances. However, I have done quite well professionally since graduating in 2010, albeit not in a super-interesting or competitive industry.

 

Initially, the purpose of attending was to remove the ‘glass ceiling’ associated with not having a grad degree. My current employer implicitly requires an advanced degree for any positions manager level and above. So the plan initially was to leave as an analyst, and return as an associate or manager. This scenario is now a fall-back plan. But the process of researching grad schools (which is ridic competitive btw) led me to discover many extremely interesting career paths I wasn’t aware were possible.

 

One is research based. Upon graduating I can reasonably expect a RA position at the Federal Reserve. I personally know one of the most senior economists and a board member of the 11^th district who would vouch for me and should lead to at least an interview. My first question is what is the typical career progression of a RA who has a MA but doesn’t plan on continuing education for a PhD? Are positions at other NGOs (IMF, World Bank, etc) possible? Because of the lack of PhD will I always have a RA/support role? What about ‘economist’ positions in the private sector? (plz keep in mind I don’t even know if I will enjoy this type of work as I have basically zero research experience, but it does sound interesting. My 1^st research thesis would be in grad school).

 

Another possibility is in the energy sector, either in IB or trading. I would have to start in a more junior role because I don’t have industry experience but even these positions start out at ~$55k for logistics (trading eventually) or $80k for IB. The program I’m attending is a semi-target for energy IB or trading firms so landing an internship and FT position shouldn’t be a problem.

 

I guess what I’m wondering is whether or not a research-based position would be a good idea for someone with a terminal MA degree. Is there anything you recommend I do in the next 3.5 months that would help me get a better idea of how I would do or enjoy in a research based role?

 

Thanks for reading!

Edited April 22, 2014 by farris

[MemphisMike]

Well, as far as research organizations go (in my experience), you'll top out pretty quick w/o a PhD. If you are not planning to do a PhD, steer clear of academic research and head on into industry. There are plenty of interesting jobs you can do w/ only an MA and make plenty of money. An in between option might be more policy oriented jobs. With only an MA, you can build a nice career in the UN, World Bank, etc.

[farris]

Hm that is interesting. In my mind I have always conflated policy and research but you make it sound as if those are two very different things. Can you describe briefly what a policy economist position would entail?

[MemphisMike]

Well, there can be overlap, but not always. There are places that try to publish policy relevant research in peer reviewed journals (IFPRI, RAND, etc) where you'd need a PhD to climb the ladder, however there are places that publish policy briefs and so on where you don't necessarily need a PhD (UN agencies, some projects in the World Bank). Google "policy analyst" UN jobs and you'll see what I mean. Basically, if you're intention is not to do a PhD, steer clear of the places where the priority is to publish in peer reviewed journals b/c w/o a PhD you won't be able to move up.

[adam12]

I was in a somewhat similar situation. I got my masters in applied econ because, initially, I wanted to change careers and do private-sector energy and land-use research. I went on the job market with just a masters and no directly relevant experience, and employers weren't sure what to make of my résumé. I was overqualified for entry-level jobs, didn't have the work experience for advanced/managerial positions, and didn't have the academic credentials for serious high-level research. Basically, after a year of interviews and no offers I decided to get my PhD for the career potential and research flexibility it would provide.

 

Of course, everyone's experience is different. I'm sure a master's degree works out great for some people, and it was even worthwhile for me because none of my PhD applications would have been accepted without it, but I seriously overestimated its value in achieving my initial goals.

[TheTemp]

Well, there can be overlap, but not always. There are places that try to publish policy relevant research in peer reviewed journals (IFPRI, RAND, etc) where you'd need a PhD to climb the ladder, however there are places that publish policy briefs and so on where you don't necessarily need a PhD (UN agencies, some projects in the World Bank). Google "policy analyst" UN jobs and you'll see what I mean. Basically, if you're intention is not to do a PhD, steer clear of the places where the priority is to publish in peer reviewed journals b/c w/o a PhD you won't be able to move up.

 

If by "climb the ladder" you mean end up as a "researcher" or PI then I agree. There are other ways to move up in some of the organizations you've mentioned which do not require a PhD. OP- I work for a think tank currently and a have a fairly good feel for some of the types of positions one can get with a masters. Feel free to PM me for some additional info.

[farris]

I was in a somewhat similar situation. I got my masters in applied econ because, initially, I wanted to change careers and do private-sector energy and land-use research. I went on the job market with just a masters and no directly relevant experience, and employers weren't sure what to make of my résumé. I was overqualified for entry-level jobs, didn't have the work experience for advanced/managerial positions, and didn't have the academic credentials for serious high-level research. Basically, after a year of interviews and no offers I decided to get my PhD for the career potential and research flexibility it would provide.

 

Of course, everyone's experience is different. I'm sure a master's degree works out great for some people, and it was even worthwhile for me because none of my PhD applications would have been accepted without it, but I seriously overestimated its value in achieving my initial goals.

 

Thank you for the reply.

 

Did you have the opportunity to intern during your program? It sounds like you wanted a research intense career right?

 

For a position in IB or trading (energy sector, Houston specifically), you definitely need experience or education very specific to that role. Did your Applied Econ program not offer classes focused on your preferred industry?

[MemphisMike]

I've been working for a think tank for about 5 years, and it's true that there are a few ways to move up w/o a PhD. There's the communications department, administrative positions, accounting, etc. non of which require an MA in economics. There has been 1 or 2 RAs that managed to break out of research support and do a little project management. However b/c they don't have a PhD, they'll never be promoted to any position that pulls in more than 65-70K a year. These folks would have been better off at a UN agency, or in the private sector.

 

 

If by "climb the ladder" you mean end up as a "researcher" or PI then I agree. There are other ways to move up in some of the organizations you've mentioned which do not require a PhD. OP- I work for a think tank currently and a have a fairly good feel for some of the types of positions one can get with a masters. Feel free to PM me for some additional info.

[adam12]

Did you have the opportunity to intern during your program? It sounds like you wanted a research intense career right?

 

For a position in IB or trading (energy sector, Houston specifically), you definitely need experience or education very specific to that role. Did your Applied Econ program not offer classes focused on your preferred industry?

 

I wasn't able to intern or do any RA work - funding at the program was limited and I needed to keep working (at an unrelated job) while I attended classes. I finished my masters having taken courses that very specifically focused on my areas of interest - a lot of optimization and energy/environmental/minerals econ. I even worked on a couple of class projects that professors and PhD students incorporated into private- and public-sector industry-specific presentations.

 

Most of the masters students already had industry jobs they worked at part-time during the program- they tended to be engineers or geologists that were getting a masters to move up to managerial level positions. Students who didn't come in with a job tended to be successful if they interned somewhere during their second year - if they did a decent job they could usually secure a position where they interned or a something similar. My problem was I didn't have the first and couldn't afford the second.

[Catrina]

How would you feel about a government position? A number of graduates from my economic policy program go on to get government jobs doing policy analysis. At some agencies, you can even get positions with the title of economist without a PhD, but those positions are different from the type that PhD educated economists get

 

My school also sends a fair amount of students to healthcare policy research organizations

[Kaysa]

I have several colleagues that are working in research based positions and that have MAs. The general consensus among my friends is that their work is boring. Most are only assigned work that the PhD economists did not want to do, such as cleaning and organizing data. After one to two years, just about everyone of them left their positions and jumped to the private sector. Most were as analysts rather than economists, and generally did not continue to use their economic research skills.

[farris]

I have several colleagues that are working in research based positions and that have MAs. The general consensus among my friends is that their work is boring. Most are only assigned work that the PhD economists did not want to do, such as cleaning and organizing data. After one to two years, just about everyone of them left their positions and jumped to the private sector. Most were as analysts rather than economists, and generally did not continue to use their economic research skills.

 

Which organizations (or type or org) where the work wasn't interesting were your colleagues working at?

 

Another question for anyone reading the thread..what have you heard or experienced with Economic Consulting or Litigation Consulting? NERA, Analysis Group, Bates White, etc

[Econ2014Phd]

Isn't MA used only as a ticket to US? Can't see any other reason to do a master

[MemphisMike]

Kaysa is dead on. However, an MA can be more than just a ticket to the US. Many analyst type jobs require an "advanced degree" and even if an MA in econ doesn't mean so much for research, industry is interested in seeing you have something above a BA.

[Econhead]

I have been doing consulting for 7 years-first five years part time (seasonal), then full time for the past two years. Personally, I despise it: long hours, deadlines everyday, and more stress than anyone should ever live with. The stress is a result of the constant deadlines, which can carry the weight of whether you work another day or get sued. You should always be confident in your abilities and what you produce, but when you are dealing with a client paying your hundreds of thousands or millions of dollars, suddenly you're not worried about your abilities but just the potential that you made a mistake, or will miss a deadline. I would expect to work 45-50 hours each week with busy weeks or months measuring 70. Expect to work weekends, holidays, and miss/cancel vacations on account of 'new' unforeseen deadlines. The bottom line is that you only do consulting because you want to make more money than the alternative. I have never met a person (save the owners) that has ever claimed to 'love' consulting.

 

Disclaimer: I have never worked Economic consulting, but based on the comments on this forum, consulting is consulting.

[farris]

Isn't MA used only as a ticket to US? Can't see any other reason to do a master

 

I was personally pursuing a MA so I could be eligible for management positions at my current employer. Now I'm viewing this as a potential career rebranding. Most people pursue an MBA for these purposes but I find Econ more interesting because of the quant emphasis relative to MBA.

[Kaysa]

Which organizations (or type or org) where the work wasn't interesting were your colleagues working at?

 

Another question for anyone reading the thread..what have you heard or experienced with Economic Consulting or Litigation Consulting? NERA, Analysis Group, Bates White, etc

 

BEA, Census, Dept Labor, Federal Reserve Bank, and the World Bank.

[farris]

BEA, Census, Dept Labor, Federal Reserve Bank, and the World Bank.

 

Because most MAs don't include rigorous research, it seems reasonable to get a couple years experience at these types of organizations. For someone who is not interested in the time commitment required for a PhD (or can't get into a decent program) this route of MA -> 2 years research ->private sector would be an interesting alternative.

 

Can you give me an idea of the private sector placement of your colleagues? I ask because there are tons of jobs doing market sizing research, cost analysis, financial modeling, etc where you would use economics/econometrics but maybe not research.

 

Thanks everyone for the valuable information!

[Kaysa]

Booz Allen Hamilton - Analyst

PWC - Financial Analysis

PWC - Financial Analysis

Chase Bank - Financial Analysis

 

Some people might call what they do "economics" but in my opinion what they are doing is not what an economist would consider economics. Some continue to use their econometrics training, but in a very limited capacity.