Company Prestige?

[Goody-No-Shoes]

In fields like law and investment banking, you area better off working for a more prestigious firm (ex. it helps your resume more to be an analyst at Goldman Sachs as opposed to other banks). Is there such a thing in the actuarial profession? Is it better to choose New York Life over, say State Farm? (Hypothetical question; I don’t know that one is better than the other)

[Elisha]

Not really. The "prestige" of a company has a marginal to minor +/- effect. Exams passed, skills/knowledge acquired, project/work accomplishments and people you know are much bigger factors.

[MountainHawk]

I'm thinking the only time it's a bad thing is if you were the Chief Actuary or Reserving Actuary at a company that ends up in liquidation due to bad reserve estimates, or some other such thing.

[Dr T Non-Fan]

Prestige may be a factor if you are at a "better" company now and are applying at a "lesser" company. Won't be for a parallel-company move. The "stealing" factor might come into play for a move from one better company to another better company.

[Goody-No-Shoes]

Thanks for the replies. It's good to know, especially since there is a good deal of luck that determines where you wind up.

[Westley]

Prior employers is probably in the top ten list of things that catch my eye, but way below exams, experience, etc. There's nobody in the actuarial profession that carries the prestige of Goldman, McKinsey, or some of the top tier law firms.

[Salzmann]

Some companies are known as very good training grounds. I would imagine that someone finishing up their first few years at ISO would be in a good position to get a job at a primary company, for example.

But, if you worked for a smaller company you may have had exposure to more things, so that would be a point in your favor.

I'm not as concerned with who the previous employers were as much as what you did there.

[Brains&Beauty]

Aegon, swiss re as far as ins companies are concerned. But if I were you I'd try to get into McKinsey,Goldman, Fidelity, or any top bank, if you can. They do hire actuaries. It's easier to go throm banking to insurance than the other way around. Don't limit your options this early in your career.

[joeorez]

How about the prestige of the actuary who trained you?

I would think it means more to say you worked under and were trained by a well-known and well-respected actuary, than by someone who is not.

[Westley]

But if I were you I'd try to get into McKinsey,Goldman, Fidelity, or any top bank, if you can.Why?

[_BullDog_]

How about the prestige of the actuary who trained you?

I would think it means more to say you worked under and were trained by a well-known and well-respected actuary, than by someone who is not.

Who are the well known actuaries?

[joeorez]

Who are the well-respected actuaries?

Obviously everyone has his or her own opinion. But within casualty, I'll share a few of mine:

In no particular order:

Sholom Feldblum
Glenn Myers
Steve Philbrick
Gary Venter

[Sonny]

Who are the well-respected actuaries?

Obviously everyone has his or her own opinion. But within casualty, I'll share a few of mine:

In no particular order:

Sholom Feldblum
Glenn Myers
Steve Philbrick
Gary Venter

Joe Orez makes a good point -- the actuary who you work under will have a strong influence on your professional development.

However, I wouldn't necessarily go looking to work for a "famous" actuary. There are some big-time actuaries (not necessarily anybody on that list) who are brilliant thinkers, but poor trainers.

I started out in 1990 working under an FCAS who probably isn't a well-respected or well-known person. I mean, he doesn't write papers or serve on CAS committees or things like that. But he was a fantastic mentor and trainer. I learned a ton in four years under him.

So my advice would be to see how the interview goes, and see if your potential boss is someone who communicates well and takes an interest in people. But, also, keep in mind that people leave jobs. If you take a job hoping to work for a certain actuary, that person may leave -- will you still like the job then?

[Take 2]

Working at a big, well-respected co might or might not enhance 'prestige' (whatever that is), but it does create a cadre of contacts that can be very helpful later on.

[Lucy]

Who are the well-respected actuaries?

Obviously everyone has his or her own opinion. But within casualty, I'll share a few of mine:

In no particular order:

Sholom Feldblum
Glenn Myers
Steve Philbrick
Gary Venter

I know most of those actuaries. And they are certainly all smart. But there's no way I would prefer to hire someone because he once worked for one of them. The idea is sort of funny.

Insurance companies are usually considered better initial training. Large and small companies have different advantages and disadvantages - small ones probably have the most potential for learning, especially if you get lucky. Rating agencies are an excellent place to begin, but other types of employers can be suspicious of people who have worked for too long in a rating agency. Consulting firms offer training in a different skill set - after a certain point in a career it can be hard to move between consulting and company work as each type of employer tends to prefer people with that sort of background. (Of course, well-known semi-retired actuaries often consult, but that's a little different.)

[Listerine]

The better known an actuary is, the less likely he/she is to be in training any new hire -- including those four, probably. BTW, neither here nor there, but one of them does work at a rating agency.

[JTBenson]

When you say Rating Agency, do you mean places like ISO and NCCI or do you mean AM Best and S&P? AM Best is a rating agency. They review insurance company financial positions and apply a rating to that company. I would consider ISO and NCCI to be loss cost advisory and statistical reporting companies.

[Salzmann]

Some companies are well-known as good training grounds. There are fewer of them now; HR and training budgets have been cut along with everything else and most companies just throw you in and hope your boss explains everything to you. ISO is an example of a company that probably still has a reputation as a place with a good training program, which can give you an edge in looking for another job.

I work for a sub of a Fortune 50 company and we have a management training track. All of the bright young people we brought through and trained in Actuarial and other areas the year before last are gone- moved on to bigger and better opportunities elsewhere.

[Take 2]

We use a P&C consulting actuary. She's been self-employed 10 years; says her entire practice has come from former CIGNA co-workers.

[mr.c]

I work for a sub of a Fortune 50 company and we have a management training track. All of the bright young people we brought through and trained in Actuarial and other areas the year before last are gone- moved on to bigger and better opportunities elsewhere.

"Elsewhere" other departments or "Elsewhere" other companies?

[mr.c]

I started out in 1990 working under an FCAS who probably isn't a well-respected or well-known person. I mean, he doesn't write papers or serve on CAS committees or things like that. But he was a fantastic mentor and trainer. I learned a ton in four years under him.

And part of my history was the opposite of this :(

[Salzmann]

"Elsewhere" other departments or "Elsewhere" other companies?

Other companies, unfortunately.