This thesis examines the ‘evaluation culture’ of derivatives ‘quants’ working in the over-the-counter markets for interest rate derivatives tied to Libor. Drawing on data from interviews with quants, financial mathematicians, and economists conducted primarily in the United Kingdom and the United States, combined with fieldwork at derivatives ‘quant’ conferences and an extensive set of technical sources, this thesis explores the historical development and contemporary patterning of modelling practices that are used within derivatives dealer banks to price and hedge Libor-based interest rate derivatives. Moreover, this thesis uses the historical development of interest-rate modelling techniques, beginning in the late 1970s, as a lens through which to understand the establishment, differentiation and separation of this ‘derivatives quant’ evaluation culture as a body of knowledge and practice distinct from financial economics. The analysis is carried out in nine chapters. The thesis begins with an introductory chapter, a chapter reviewing the relevant sociological and historical literature on economic and financial modelling, and a chapter covering the research methodology employed in the thesis. In Chapters 4-5, I provide background on the mathematical techniques used by derivatives quants and financial economists, the social and institutional structure of the Libor derivatives markets, and the instruments that are traded in these markets. In Chapter 6, I explore the organisational patterning of modelling practices in these markets and highlight the tacit and experiential nature of quant expertise. In Chapters 7-8, I investigate the ‘social shaping’ of models that are currently used to price so-called ‘exotic’ Libor derivatives. These models originated within the discipline of economics and were designed for a set of purposes different from models currently used by derivatives quants. By tracing out how these models were adapted to serve as derivatives pricing ‘engines’ within banks, I highlight how modelling practices are shaped by the organisational contexts in which they are used.

<p>Diss. Stockholm : Handelshögsk.</p>

Catholic education is at a crossroads in the United States, as rising tuition costs present significant challenges to many families’ financial resources. At the very least, affording a Catholic education calls for a reprioritization of expenses. However, in many cases, high tuition costs leave parents with no recourse but to remove their children from Catholic schools. As costs and tuition climb, only those with significant financial resources will be able to attend Catholic schools. Hence, maintaining the foundational mission of Catholic education, namely to provide access to education for the poor and oppressed, threatens to become impossible due to the inadequate revenue from tuition-dependant financial models used by Catholic school administrations. Thus, Catholic schools need a critical rethinking of their financial model in order to make Catholic education accessible to all. In order to address the financial crisis in Catholic education, it is first important to understand the various forces that influence the funding of Catholic schools. This study addresses this need by asking the question: “What are the current financial models of Catholic education?” Based on a review of the current literature, and including data from a survey of current Catholic diocesan superintendents, this study defines the current financial models used in contemporary Catholic schools in the U.S. by asking the following questions: What are the parameters or conditions of the model? Who are the beneficiaries of the model? What is the social goal or purpose of the model? What is the strength of the model? What are the weaknesses of the model? Through a summary of the survey findings, recommendations begin to emerge that are presented in the following three categories: (a) a need for a purposeful, strategic, comprehensive intentionality in the application of the various financial models available, (b) a need to reframe the leadership model for financing Catholic schools, and (c) a need to review and update the current decentralized model in Catholic education.