Large or Small?

[succi]

Hello there!

I need your opinion on this. For a first job, is it better to start off in a large company or a small company? I heard that at larger companies, they can offer more training. At smaller companies, you can see more of what they do. Thanks.

[anon789]

I've worked at a small company. Drawbacks: no job rotation, limited positions available. Pluses: better potential advancement (less competition) IMO, much broader job responsibilities.

For me, being responsible for pricing products from start to finish, with only assistance and input when required, was really cool.

[Joo]

I absolutely wholeheartedly agree. You get exposed to so much working for a small company. I switched to large life insurance company after 5 years working for a small firm, and I felt like I was part of an endless assembly line... But there were a lot of students there who thought that it was more important to have a recognizable name on a resume. You would probably get better exam support in a large company, but that is up to you to explain to your hiring manager that having adequate study time is really important to you.

[anon789]

Well, my experience may not be representative, but I found the study program at a small company great. My manager didn't interpret the rules too tightly, so they paid for seminars, and airfare, and meals and lodging, etc. I think I had to burn study time, but that's it. Probably not something you'd get at a larger company. On the negative side, I was frequently the only person writing a given exam so I had no support from other students.

[Maine-iac]

First job, you might want to opt for the large firm. You are part of an assembly line, but via rotation (not worth it unless there is a rotation program) you get a notion of where your interests lie (what lines of business, pricing vs. reserving vs. finance, etc.) The student fresh out of school is usually clueless as to what the possiblities are.

But I do agree that once you do have a clue where your interest lies, you will learn much more, much faster, and in a more interesting manner, in a small firm, in most cases.

[urysohn]

Go small! Forget the rotation program, it'll be like rotating on a daily basis. As the new low-(wo)man-on-the-totem-pole, you'll work on a little bit of everything and get a whole lot of exposure to a bunch of different things. If you like it, stay. If not, you can decide which aspect of your job (instead of which rotation) you liked best and then look for a new job that focuses on that area.
But make sure your managers don't think "small company" means they can skimp on the student program, pay, or other benefits!

[Anonymous]

Go large.

Work is work and will never be a thrill. Big companies have more young people like yourself which makes for a much, much better social life. A small company will probably mean you'll be the youngest person by 20+ years. While you're ready to go to Happy Hour and meet people, your co-workers will need to go home to their spouses/kids...

I started small and went to large after 7 months, so I'm preaching from personal experience. If you want to be an FSA, you'll never do it in a company where you're the only one suffering from studying...

[Anonymous]

I started out large, left after 8 months b/c I felt insignificant and bored. Went to a small company and have felt like I got a lot more experience and responsibility sooner. However, my personal experience is that it hurt my exam success. Part of it is the increased responsibility (w/ fewer candidates to fill in for you while you study). Part of it is the isolation of not having coworkers with whom to discuss exam subject matter. It DOES make a difference -- it's tough being the only one taking an exam. I've had a great deal of difficulty since the syllabus changed. Oh, and someone's comment about the social aspect has been largely true too. Another thing, other departments really resent the couple people in actuarial who get to take paid study time. They feel like they should get paid time to study for LOMA and HIAA exams too. No way to convince them they're talking apples and oranges... Another downfall at small companies can be the lack of resources to learn from, especially technological stuff. A small company might not have the money to invest in the newest technology, or maybe there's just nobody around who knows how to use it. I worry that if I go to a large company I'll be behind on the learning curve on some software and such. I guess I'd recommend that for most people it's probably best to "use" a large company at first, then move to a smaller company when you're sufficiently far along in exams.

[MNBridge]

Small company -- You get face time with some of the higher ups much sooner.
Plus you get to see how the process is done start to finish. (i.e. ratemaking) --
1) some agent calls and says your rates are high.
2) You do a competitive analysis
3) You goto the IS department directly to get the data that you feel is necessary for your project
2) You do indications, class relativities, territorial relativities, etc.
3) Of the things in 3 above often you get to make the choice on which ones to do. (time constraints) -- i.e. we haven't changed LDF's for 5 years or The competitive analysis has us cheap here and expensive here, let's look at territorial relativities.
4) You go to the VP's / regional directors and find out their thoughts
5) You talk to underwriters about what's changed
6) You come back with suggested rate changes
7) You file the rate change

At my first position I basically had an entire LOB that I was responsible for all of the above on after 6 months of working there. That was with 3 exams. At a large firm you MAY get to do 1 of the above for ONE state and be unaware of the other work.

Disadvantage (which I would not have thought of except it's mentioned above): You do not have alot in common with your direct co-workers and there is little/no social interaction outside of the workplace.

[Anonymous]

On 2002-01-02 14:33, MNPoker wrote:
Small company -- You get face time with some of the higher ups much sooner.
Plus you get to see how the process is done start to finish. (i.e. ratemaking) --
1) some agent calls and says your rates are high.
2) You do a competitive analysis
3) You goto the IS department directly to get the data that you feel is necessary for your project
2) You do indications, class relativities, territorial relativities, etc.
3) Of the things in 3 above often you get to make the choice on which ones to do. (time constraints) -- i.e. we haven't changed LDF's for 5 years or The competitive analysis has us cheap here and expensive here, let's look at territorial relativities.
4) You go to the VP's / regional directors and find out their thoughts
5) You talk to underwriters about what's changed
6) You come back with suggested rate changes
7) You file the rate change


Another disadvantage to working in a small company: apparently you forget how to count.

[Joo]

I disagree with the anonymous on the technological aspect. Our company is lucky enough to have a superbly rich parent, and we were pretty much on the cutting edge technologically compared to the large company I went to later. Although bigger companies MIGHT have more money, they have so many different areas of actuarial using the same software package, that it takes a long time to upgrade/get everyone on the same footing. In a small company it is much easier to switch to a more recent version (think 5000 upgrades a year you get from TAS) and train people.

[Anonymous]

I guess I'd say if you're going to work for a small company make SURE you're getting a good boss. Obviously you always want a good boss, but at a big company you could probably get moved to a different manager if you didn't quite gel. Or if your boss is inept, there's someone else who knows what's going on and can help you figure things out. I've found at a small company, since there's only one boss, if s/he isn't good at what s/he does, you're screwed. Of course, it's really hard to know until you're there. My boss could probably give a pretty good snow job to some unsuspecting new hire...

[42]

My 2¢: One of the most important factors to consider for your first actuarial job is how much exam support you are going to get - not just how much time, but whether or not you will actually be able to take that time. Large companies tend to do better on that front because it's easier to shift some of the work away from those writing exams when you have more people to shift the work to. But this is a broad generalization, and you really need to talk to the students at the company to get the real story. After you have most of the exams under your belt, you may want to consider a smaller company (for all of the reasons cited in the posts above).