For the candidates: Board service

[Gandalf]

Questions for (or about) the presidential candidates:

1. When did you (or they) most recently serve on the Board?
2. What position did you (or they) hold then?
3. What was your (or their) attendance record then?
4. (Only for candidates personally, since subjective)(Don't skip the first three questions and just answer this one) What, in retrospect, was the best thing the Board did during your term, and at the time were you an active proponent of it, a mild supporter, or an opponent?

[Jeremy Gold]

I love what Gandalf is trying to do here -- relating the present candidacy to prior Board performance.

As a matter of fact -- but not an absolute requirement -- every candidate for President-Elect last served as a V.P. and every candidate for V.P. last served as an Elected Board Member. But what did they do?

The attendance question is a good start. There are only three Board meetings (and a fourth leadership development/new member orientation meeting) and these are known well in advance . Attendance should be quite high. It is. But if a Board member has missed several meetings during his/her tenure, voters might want to ask why?

Every Board member has one or more responsibilities. Many of us are assigned to SOA sections (this year I am the Board Partner to the E&R Section) to help information flow between the Board and the section council. The direction of the SOA is said to be section-driven. The Board Partner role is an important part of implementing that. So asking candidates for V.P. and President-Elect what their assignments have been is great.

I am also assigned to work with the SOA research function headed by Bruce Iverson. We have worked on the 2007 and 2008 research budgets and have realigned the governance of two of our seven research centers. The E&R Section now has oversight responsibility for CKERS (you can search for CKERS on the SOA site).

Other Board members belong to KMSAT (Mary Hardy, who was the previous E&R partner) and the other SATs and the IAC. Kathy Wong has been the V.P. for E&E. Bruce Schobel was Treasurer when he was a V.P. and thus was (along with the PE, the P and two past P's) a member of the Leadership Team that works closely with the Executive Director and other senior staff. Mike McLaughlin, a V.P. for 2005-2007, has been Treasurer for 2006-2007.

Your last question is best of all and should be related to the responsibility assigned to the candidate. A Treasurer and an E&E V.P. should have different answers because of their different roles.

I look forward to hearing from the candidates and hope the V.P. candidates will answer your questions in addition to the PE candidates. I would hope that candidates for Elected Board Member would reply in the context of their prior volunteer service. They often served on section councils and on SATs or in the E&E system.

And don't forget articles written and presentations made by candidates. Some of these have added to our science, some have added to the education of other (and future) actuaries, some have dealt with professionalism and the role of the actuarial profession in society.

[Mary Hardy]

Questions for (or about) the presidential candidates:

1. When did you (or they) most recently serve on the Board?
2. What position did you (or they) hold then?
3. What was your (or their) attendance record then?
4. (Only for candidates personally, since subjective)(Don't skip the first three questions and just answer this one) What, in retrospect, was the best thing the Board did during your term, and at the time were you an active proponent of it, a mild supporter, or an opponent?

Good questions, as Jeermy has pointed out. I'll answer as a VP candidate.
1. I will complete my three-year term as a Board member in October 2007.
2. Ordinary Board member, member of KMSAT, plus some extra responsibilities over the period, including academic relations liaison, E&R section liaison, member of the special sub-committee on the Morris Report.
3. I have missed one day of BOG meetings out of around 16 days. I returned home for my students' convocation.
4. The Board's been pretty active in the last few years. In my first year we returned modern finance theory to the exams after a year's absence, and I was a very strong supporter (in fact an instigator) of that move, as I see finance theory as essential for a finance profession. This last year I think the move to mandatory CPD is a major step forward, and again I have been a strong proponent; lifelong learning is essential for any self-respecting learned profession.

[rekrap]

Questions about the presidential candidates:

1. When did you (or they) most recently serve on the Board?
3. What was your (or their) attendance record then?


Just the facts, otherwise I'll let the candidates speak for themselves on this and question 4.

Cecil D. Bykerk (Elected Board Member 1984-87; Vice-President 1993-95)
Perfect attendance, over 10 and 20 years ago

October 1995 Yes
May 1995 Yes
January 1995 Yes
October 1994 Yes
June 1994 Yes
January 1994 Yes
October 1993 Yes

October 1987 Yes
May 1987 Yes
January 1987 Yes
October 1986 Yes
May 1986 Yes
February 1986 Yes
October 1985 Yes
May 1985 Yes
January 1985 Yes
October 1984 Yes


Bradley M. Smith (Elected Board Member 1996-99; Vice-President 2001-03)
Not so perfect attendance (missed at least 1 each year) over past 10 years

October 2003 Yes
June 2003 Yes
March 2003 1 day
January 2003 No
October 2002 Yes
September 2002 No
June 2002 Yes
March 2002 Yes
January 2002 Yes
October 2001 Yes

October 1999 Yes
September 1999 Yes
May 1999 Yes
March 1999 No
January 1999 Yes
October 1998 Yes
September 1998 Yes
June 1998 No
March 1998 Yes
January 1998 1 day
October 1997 Yes
September 1997 No
May 1997 Yes
March 1997 Yes
January 1997 Yes
October 1996 Yes



Dale H. Yamamoto (Elected Board Member 2000-03; Vice-President 2003-05)
Near perfect attendance (missed 1 meeting - across transition to new role?) over past 7 years

November 2005 Yes
August 2005 Yes
June 2005 Yes
February 2005 Yes
October 2004 Yes
June 2004 Yes
March 2004 Yes
January 2004 Yes
October 2003 Yes

June 2003 No
March 2003 Yes
January 2003 Yes
October 2002 Yes
September 2002 Yes
June 2002 Yes
March 2002 Yes
January 2002 Yes
October 2001 Yes
June 2001 Yes
March 2001 Yes
January 2001 Yes
October 2000 Yes

[Gandalf]

Thanks, rekrap. The idea that Dale missed a meeting due to transitioning between roles seems unlikely to me - terms likely expire on the same date - , but missing only one meeting in that period is still excellent attendance. Kudos also to Cecil for perfect attendance, though rather long ago and with fewer meetings per year.

You also answered question 2 in the process, though Jeremy Gold beat you to it.

I still hope the candidates themselves will tackle #4.

[dhyamamoto]

I owe rekrap a debt of gratitude because I wasn't sure about my attendance. I do remember missing one meeting because of a meeting conflict with the Board of Directors of the Conference of Consulting Actuaries (CCA). I made my decison on which board meeting to attend based on fact that the CCA meeting was scheduled a month earlier and posted on the international actuarial calendar before the SOA board meeting schedule was distributed. I think I may have been the only one affected at the time but I take any board meeting as important so I had to make a decision. I believe that scheduling snafu was the one and only that has occurred.

My first board assignment was continuing education. During my term there were several things changed in the spring and annual meeting to meet the needs of attendees better and I think they have all been well-received. It was during this time that the concept of "seminars within a meeting" was established because of feedback that more in-depth discussion was desired at meetings instead of the high level, one hour session that almost always just touched the surface of a topic. There has also been a increased number of seminars sponsored to give the in-depth presentation and discussion that you can't get from a meeting.

My second board assignment was basic education. This was in the middle of the redesign that is just being completed now. Given the need for continuity, I actually had Stuart Klugman continue to chair the redesign committee (he was my predecessor as E&E VP) while I spent time with the legacy exams and committee reconfiguration. Since E&E is where I had my start in SOA activities, it was nice to get involved with that process again. And, as it did when I first got involved, I was floored by the dedication of all of the volunteers in the E&E system. So, for students reading this, many joke that you should join an E&E committee when you become an FSA to torment students, but that's far from the truth of all the ones that I have had contact with...they all truly want to make the system better...not necessarily harder.


So, I was very lucky that the two main board assignments that I had were areas that I was passionate about. Of course, that's probably why I was assigned those areas.

[Mike McLaughlin]

Could I just jump in here. The questions are good and fair, but I just want to point out, raw statistics are simply that ... raw. I've been a board member for several years and I can say that attendance is just a small part of the overall picture. Participation, and passion, and leadership are very important too. It's harder to evaluate those intangibles from a distance, it's natural to focus on attendance as a proxy for those key measures. That is fine as long as we realize that it's a proxy and we don't give it 100 percent credibility. A very busy board member who has to miss an occasional meeting, but who leads important committees and takes their work seriously, is just as good or maybe a better contributor than the guy that shows up every time but is not a creative thinker.

I would acknowledge that if one of the candidates hardly ever showed up, I would worry about that. And I probably wouldn't vote for them. So, extreme values would probably be meaningful. But that definitely is not the case here. The nominating committee considered many factors including commitment and past performance. I would say that the candidates who didn't much care about their responsibilities and duties are not on the ballot.

I am not taking sides, I just want these statistics to be given the appropriate level of significance. Gandalf's question #4 is probably the most important one.

M.

[bdschobel]

Mike's comments are, as always, insightful. And he's quite right about how the Nominating Committee selects candidates for the ballot. But in the case of president-elect candidates, the committee is required to select three candidates, and that's exactly how many applied for the position -- both this year and last year. So the committee had nothing to do with selecting them. They essentially selected themselves.

Bruce

[RDH]

So the committee had nothing to do with selecting them.

As a quick clarification...

I think most, if not all, of the Nominating Committee members would object that they "had nothing to do with selecting" this year's candidates.

The applications for all three who applied prior to the initial deadline for the PE position were rigorously reviewed, just like the VP and BOG applications. Had they not been deemed to be solid PE candidates, they likely would have not made it to the ballot; the committee would have sought out additional qualified candidates.

This year three people applied, their qualifications were very worthy for the membership to consider for PE, and all of them were placed on the ballot.

[bdschobel]

I never said that the three PE candidates this year or last were unqualified, just that they were the only applicants for the position, so the Nominating Committee did not "select" them in any way. They selected themselves.

And it's very brave to say that the committee could have simply recruited other candidates if needed. The fact of the matter is that the SOA presidency is a huge burden that very few qualified people are willing to take on. And the qualified group is quite small in the first place.

I know at least seven qualified people who considered but ultimately decided not to run in 2007. If Dale knows others who would have been willing, I'd be shocked, frankly.

Bruce

[RDH]

We probably just have to be content here that we have slightly different definitions of "select"; perhaps mine is more a little more towards the idea of "review and confirm."

[bdschobel]

Fair enough. :)

Bruce

[dhyamamoto]

Just to get us back on topic especially since I don't think I totally answered the original question..... The first year that I was on the board, we spent an inordinate amount of time on very trivial, operational aspects of the SOA, which was not productive from the point of view of leading our organization in the manner we were all elected to do. After some outside help, we reorganized the focus of the board to be more strategic and developed a short and long-term plan to achieve important goals for our members. I participated in the strategic planning committee to get that moving and I think was one of the most important accomplishments of the board...and I was very much supportive of those initiatives. It is extremely boring sitting through arguments about detailed administrative operations and the last penny on the financial reports and such a relief to focus on more strategic efforts that impact all of us.

[Brad Smith]

Sorry for the delayed response. It took a couple of days to get my account activated. Although I have periodically (since the days of Compuserve) monitored this discussion forum, I have not previously participated actively.

A prior post addresses questions 1 and 3, so I will focus on questions 2 and 4.

Three specific things stick out in my memory about my first service as a board member. The board was addressing basic education redesign at that time. While I was in favor of its general direction, I felt that excluding nation specific material was a mistake. I feel the same way today. Notwithstanding our attempts to reduce travel time to Fellowship, it still requires a number of years to get there. This entails a substantial commitment on the part of the individual as well as his/her employer. I believe that it is a reasonable expectation of both the individual and his/her employer that he/she emerges from the process, not necessarily as a finished product, but certainly as a professional capable of functioning well in their chosen place of work.

I served as Director of Publications during my first tenure as a board member. This was the period during which the North American Actuarial Journal was being designed and introduced. This required a substantial time commitment on my part and resulted in a publication that we were all very proud of. As Director of Publications I was a member of and participated in regular meetings of the executive committee of the board (it may have been called something else at the time, I do not recall).

Additionally during this time, I was chairperson of the 50th anniversary celebration of the SoA culminating in its meeting in Washington, DC in October of 1999. The celebration encompassed not only planning the meeting, but developing and coordinating the activities involved in the publication of the commemorative book and monographs marking our first 50 years. The planning began three years prior to the meeting and ramped up considerably during the 18 months immediately prior.

My second tenure as a Vice President of the board was focused primarily on my responsibilities as chairperson of the board’s governance audit task force. The deliverable of that task force was recommendations that form the basis for the proposed bylaw changes that will be voted on by the membership this fall. The recommendations were presented to the board during my final board meeting and were endorsed by the board at that time. Whether this turns out to be important depends, at least partially, on the outcome of the vote by the membership. However, even if not adopted, I believe that the discussions, deliberations, thought and consideration given to the topic has and will continue to help the board function in a more efficient manner.

Some may question my commitment given that during my tenure as a board member I missed a few meetings. As you can see, attendance at board meetings, for me, was a relatively small part of my total responsibilities as a board member. As I sit here today I do not recall what caused me to miss these meetings (prior commitment, commercial emergency, family responsibilities or illness). However, it is hard to imagine anyone involved during these periods who would question my commitment to board responsibilities or to the actuarial profession in general.

I hope this helps each of you in your deliberations.

Brad

[Cecil Bykerk]

Sorry, my response is a bit delayed. I was tied up with some Board meetings that I had to prepare for and attend. As previously mentioned, my last term on the Board was as VP from 1993 to 1995 and my attendance was perfect. While not on the Board of Governors since 1995, I have not been inactive. I served on the AAA Board from 1999 to 2002, on the Actuarial Foundation Board from 1996 to 2001 including as Chair during 1997-1999 and Secretary-Treasurer during 2000-2001. Since 2003 I have served on the Actuarial Standards Board (with perfect attendance) and have served as Chair during 2006 and 2007. I have served on the IAA Education Committee since 1996 only missing one meeting which was in Cyprus in late January (and I was Chief Actuary of Mutual of Omaha at the time) which was a bad time and location for yearend work. For a good deal of this time, neither my company nor the Society reimbursed me for expenses for these trips; more recently the SOA has provided partial reimbursement for travel expenses.

During my time on the BOG, I served as Vice President for E & E as well as on a number of other Board committees. While major changes to the Education system were being worked during that time and I continued to be involved in that even after my departure from the Board (attending numerous BOG meetings for a number of years to report), I would choose to point out two accomplishments from some of the other more recent activities indicated above. During my time as Foundation Chair, the Foundation merged with AERF. This was a very difficult merger but in the best interest of the actuarial profession. I played a major role in the negotiations. During my 6 years as Chair of the IAA Education Committee, I lead the Committee in developing a set of Education Syllabus and Guidelines that was accepted by the International actuarial community, a very difficult task.

Now looking forward, I have developed a set of objectives for my tenure as a Presidential officer of the Society of Actuaries. They are:

Main Objectives for my term as President of the Society
• Be a major contributor in the transition of Greg Heidrich as our new
Executive Director
• Ensure a superior education system
• Maintain the SOA as a worldwide leader in the actuarial profession
• Grow and enhance our image
• Promote the new Chartered Enterprise Risk Analyst credential
• Continue the cooperative efforts between the US actuarial organizations
• Use my diverse skills, experience and knowledge to promote the Society of
Actuaries and the actuarial profession as a mover and shaker in North
America especially the US

I invite you to view my newly updated website at
http://members.cox.net/oakoffice1/

BTW Pictures with my wife in them will be up soon.

[bdschobel]

For what it's worth, the guy with the best Board attendance record won the election -- although the difference between Cecil's and Dale's records is certainly insignificant. I expect Cecil to continue his perfect attendance streak -- for four more years!!! :D

Bruce