Company reputation/brand

[Elisha]

I'm curious what you guys think. HR seems to think that it is a rather high priority to prospective employees.

[Maine-iac]

Nothing wrong with working for a less well known company that does business in a quiet manner and/or a small market.

But I would not want to work for a company with a reputation for short-cuts or sleazy dealing.

[Lee Mellon]

I agree with Maine-iac. Surprises me that your HR thinks so and they still work there.

[Ron Weasley]

I concur with Maine-iac and the General.

This is a difficult question to answer because "brand" doesn't mean that much to me in an employer but the way my employer conduct's its business and its reputation within the actuarial community does.

RW

[42]

Ditto. And a lot depends on how you define "reputation". I would certainly include the way it treats its employees if I was considering working for a company.

[Intents]

The implication of "brand" is that you have a higher percentage opportunity of making the really big bucks.

[Lee Mellon]

Like the folks at a big eight used to be able to expect, you mean?

[Kitten]

I'll add my agreement to Maine-iac and General as well. :)

[E. Blackadder]

"reputation" is a pretty vague word.

[openminded]

...

[Intents]

Consider your immediate reaction to a person who

1) is a doctor, or
2) has a Harvard (or some other school that raises eyebrows) MBA


Is the immediate reaction one of credibility? Do you even wonder the likelihood that a "contribution" or connection getting the person in the school?

Our system has a huge rotten streak, no doubt showing its smell right now. Additionally, our system has a huge investment in creating class envy as a motivation. This is done institutionally. You may be great in math, but without that degree, you won't be given a chance as an actuarial trainee new hire.

Taking these seemingly disjointed items to a conclusion, the top notch firms supposedly hire top notch people and do so by paying top notch dollars. One of the key concepts capitalized, and imitated throughout the consulting industry, by the recently troubled accounting firm is "arrogance". Take a look at one of their employee attitude handbooks in this light. Further, I wonder if the attitude currently expressed on the board portends a sea change or a distancing from port. I would heartily welcome the former.

[openminded]

...

[Ron Weasley]

Um . . . Intents? I really don't get what you're trying to say. Would you please connect the lines for me?

[Mtl guru]

There is a difference if it is a positive/negative reputaion.

I would not go out of my way to join a company with a good reputation, but I would not work for one with a bad reputation. Especially with respect to ethics and stuff like that.

[jerrytuttle]

Assuming we're not talking about working for a sleazy company, how about working for a big company as your first job, where there are lots of experienced actuaries to learn from and lots of possibilities for job rotation to learn several different areas?

Then you can move on to smaller and more specialized companies later.

[Wannabe Actuary]

so-so in terms of importance.