Executive Summary
Scott Galloway’s first job out of college was with Morgan Stanley in investment banking—a role he says he hated and was terrible at. Though he disliked nearly all aspects of it, he still credits the experience with teaching him foundational skills in discipline, attention to detail, and developing resilience. He later came to recognize that traditional corporate paths didn’t suit him, leading him toward entrepreneurship and advising young people to use early career stages to “workshop” their strengths rather than rigidly following passion. [1][2][3]
Analysis
Scott Galloway’s reflections on his investment banking experience are revealing for multiple reasons—particularly for how they inform career strategy, professional development, and managing expectations in high-pressure fields like banking.
Firstly, Galloway emphasizes that early exposure—even if difficult—serves as incredibly valuable training. Despite describing his two-year analyst program at Morgan Stanley as miserable, stressful, and a mismatch, he remembers that period teaching him “attention to detail,” “how to get up early and put on a tie,” how to navigate credit markets, and how to work under high expectations. These are skills that translate broadly across industries and are especially relevant in finance, consulting, and startup environments. [3][4][5]
Secondly, he highlights the importance of knowing what you are not good at. Recognizing that he lacked certain temperamental traits—being insecure, uncomfortable in big-company dynamics, and unable to bear seeing people he considered less competent get promoted—Galloway concluded he was not cut out for corporate life. Rather than persisting in a role that didn’t fit, he pivoted into entrepreneurship, where his own style was better aligned to autonomy and building his path. This underscores strategic self-assessment: early signals of mismatch should prompt exploration rather than doubling down. [3][5]
Thirdly, Galloway contends that the oft-heard advice to “follow your passion” is overrated, especially for people who do not come from secure economic backgrounds. Passion is often a luxury. Instead, he suggests treating early jobs as experiments—workshop roles, test different environments, measure where effort yields impact—and then lean into what you are gradually becoming good at. Skills, adaptability, and resilience win out over romantic notions of passion. [2][5]
Fourth, he stresses the mindset of forgiveness and endurance. He says that failing, being bad at something, or having moments of defeat is expected; what matters is the ability to redo, move on, receive feedback, and continue showing up. These soft skills are less discussed but perhaps more determinative of long-term success than raw aptitude alone. [5][4]
Strategically, young professionals in fields like investment banking should frame early entry not as a long-term commitment but as a learning lab. Use those early years to build operational and presentation discipline, expose oneself to high standards, and understand interpersonal dynamics and corporate politics. But also remain aware: not all environments will align with one’s temperament or values, and that is a signal—not failure.
Open questions include: how do systemic factors like economic background or workplace culture influence who benefits vs who suffers in these “learning” roles? What safeguards (mental, financial) should young professionals have if they realize early on that a high-pressure corporatelike investment banking isn’t for them? And finally, does Galloway’s success offer replicable lessons for those without similar safety nets during pivots?
Supporting Evidence
- Galloway joined Morgan Stanley right out of college via a two-year analyst program but says he was “terrible at it” and that neither he nor the firm liked the role. [3][7]
- He says he “hated investment banking,” including the people, the environment, the office, and often the substance of the work. Yet he acknowledges it was “a great training ground.” [7][5]
- He recognized key signs that he wasn’t suited for traditional corporate life: persistent insecurity, overthinking what others thought of him, frustration with promotions of people he believed less capable. These were signals that led him toward entrepreneurship. [3][7]
- He critiques advice to “follow your passion,” calling it privileged, and instead encourages young people to workshop multiple paths, try different roles, and observe where they naturally excel. [2][5]
- Early failures and unemployment—at one point returning to live with his mother—alongside these harsh lessons, were not only painful but formative. Galloway underscores emotional endurance as a part of success. [4][9]
- He traces a key shift when he realized that, structurally, he lacked traits beneficial in large organizations: for example, he needed autonomy and direct control, disliked bureaucracy and unfairness, and struggled with internal competition dynamics. This led him to leave the corporate path. [3][7]
Sources
- [1] www.wsj.com (The Wall Street Journal) — 2019-xx-xx
- [2] www.benzinga.com (Benzinga) — 2025-05-01
- [3] www.jordanharbinger.com (Jordan Harbinger) — 2025
- [4] www.iheart.com (iHeart / Jay Shetty) — 2025
- [5] www.thestreet.com (TheStreet) — 2025
- [6] finance.yahoo.com (Yahoo Finance) — 2024-08-26
- [7] www.profgpod.com (Podcasts / transcript aggregators) — 2025