I'd say people and businesses that best understand and balance risks against potential rewards are the most successful. I know a couple of skydiving accountants...
Use of innovative tech in finance is one way for companies to gain an "edge" which can make them a lot of money. I wouldn't characterise people working in those particular areas as more risk averse.
OTOH finance businesses (esp. those that manage other peoples money) are regulated and can't put new tech into Production without careful change control. But this evolves over time, and controls were looser in the past.
There's a steady creep of regulation and control into tech used in finance outside and around IT: so called EUC (End-User Computing). This can be a source of "wrong tool for the job" syndrome. I've seen some hellish SQL written by non-IT people, but it got the job done. It's also an area where source code control, testing, and release processes are inevitably more human and error-prone.
There is a culture clash internal to large finance between "move fast and break things!" and "nothing can change, ever - too risky!" This leads to a mixture of the very old and very new, and inevitably, more complexity. Achieving homogeneity once the heterogeneous is out of the bottle is very hard - attempts to do so often (always?) lead to a variation on the xkcd "Standards" situation https://xkcd.com/927/
I'd say people and businesses that best understand and balance risks against potential rewards are the most successful. I know a couple of skydiving accountants...
Use of innovative tech in finance is one way for companies to gain an "edge" which can make them a lot of money. I wouldn't characterise people working in those particular areas as more risk averse.
OTOH finance businesses (esp. those that manage other peoples money) are regulated and can't put new tech into Production without careful change control. But this evolves over time, and controls were looser in the past.
There's a steady creep of regulation and control into tech used in finance outside and around IT: so called EUC (End-User Computing). This can be a source of "wrong tool for the job" syndrome. I've seen some hellish SQL written by non-IT people, but it got the job done. It's also an area where source code control, testing, and release processes are inevitably more human and error-prone.
There is a culture clash internal to large finance between "move fast and break things!" and "nothing can change, ever - too risky!" This leads to a mixture of the very old and very new, and inevitably, more complexity. Achieving homogeneity once the heterogeneous is out of the bottle is very hard - attempts to do so often (always?) lead to a variation on the xkcd "Standards" situation https://xkcd.com/927/