Actuarial Outpost
 
Go Back   Actuarial Outpost > Actuarial Discussion Forum > Professional Surveys
FlashChat Actuarial Discussion Preliminary Exams CAS/SOA Exams Cyberchat Around the World Suggestions



View Poll Results: 2019 Merit Raise
x <0% 3 1.55%
x = 0% 7 3.63%
0% < x <= 1% 3 1.55%
1% < x <= 2% 30 15.54%
2% < x <= 3% 60 31.09%
3% < x <= 4% 47 24.35%
4% < x <= 5% 21 10.88%
5% < x 22 11.40%
Voters: 193. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #61  
Old 02-22-2019, 03:46 PM
twig93's Avatar
twig93 twig93 is offline
Member
SOA
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 34,201
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by The_Polymath View Post
So the point of an annual review is.....?
It might affect promotions / job assignments. I mean, as a teacher my pay was set by union contract and my boss (principal) had NO discretion to alter my pay, but I still had a review every year.

Also, I've worked for TWO different non-government / non-union companies where they seemed almost proud that your performance review did not affect your pay (neither salary nor bonus... although aggregate company performance affected both).

Which I did not and do not understand at all. Shouldn't they want to reward high performers? From what I can see, all being a high performer nets you is more work and a slightly better chance of being promoted earlier than you would otherwise. Maybe an *extremely* slim chance at a discretionary bonus. Seems pretty backwards. Perhaps that's why they've both had high turnover and openings when I was looking for a job.

That said, I've worked with some pretty bright and high performing people at both jobs. Maybe even more than the ones where the pay was more closely linked to perceived merit.
__________________
Originally Posted by Gandalf
The thing that is clearest is twig's advice
Reply With Quote
  #62  
Old 03-05-2019, 10:37 AM
NAMAK NAMAK is online now
Member
CAS
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 276
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by yoyo View Post
3.25% base, 37.5% bonus
is that all short term or some long term?
Reply With Quote
  #63  
Old 03-05-2019, 12:29 PM
PeppermintPatty's Avatar
PeppermintPatty PeppermintPatty is offline
Member
CAS
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 42,121
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by The_Polymath View Post
Thats not on her direct report unless they did not complete their assigned work to a good standard.
Just because you have direct reports does not mean you operate a fiefdom, where your reports have zero autonomy to do anything on their own. That is just silly.

Ultimately, this should have been solved by the other manager contacting his boss about the work. But they didn't, which is the real issue.

Calling it a negative, and pushing fault onto your direct report is quite simply bad managing. Specially at a performance review. I would have said nothing about the situation. Instead, I would have congratulated my direct report on being so helpful (what he did is a positive trait and should be encouraged), and would have then gone to talk to the other manager myself to get this sorted.
Huh? Part of your job is to let your boss know what you are doing on company time.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Colonel Smoothie View Post
I usually give my boss a heads up if I'm doing work that wasn't directly assigned by them. If they said okay then it shouldn't be a negative if that work was successful. I can understand why they wouldn't be happy, if they weren't informed.
This is the correct answer. I've never had my boss say "no" to something like this if my bread-and-butter assigned work was going well. I may have hinted that I wanted my boss to veto an extra project when I was swamped, but if I wanted to help with something else, I've always been able to. And I've always been able to tell my boss.
Reply With Quote
  #64  
Old 03-05-2019, 02:11 PM
The_Polymath The_Polymath is offline
Member
CAS SOA
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 3,157
Default

Way too many people here without initiative. You folks have a very archaic approach to management.

No wonder Actuarial tends to be a talent back-water. Most of you think holding a strong leash is beneficial.

Thats just silly. If you want to encourage initiative and independent thinking, you need to give people the autonomy to control their own work.

By not trusting their judgment, you are limiting them, as well as the company.

How do you folks not see this?
Reply With Quote
  #65  
Old 03-05-2019, 02:16 PM
Transitive Tangerine's Avatar
Transitive Tangerine Transitive Tangerine is offline
Member
COPA
 
Join Date: Oct 2018
Studying for FAP (hehehe nice)
Posts: 1,659
Default

you at Lloyd's yet?
__________________
Preferred pronouns: chief/matey
Reply With Quote
  #66  
Old 03-05-2019, 02:19 PM
The_Polymath The_Polymath is offline
Member
CAS SOA
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 3,157
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Transitive Tangerine View Post
you at Lloyd's yet?
I do Life & P/C now so I'm good. Would be boring to simply stick to one thing, plus my projects would be less interesting (I do international consulting now so I travel quite a bit).
Reply With Quote
  #67  
Old 03-05-2019, 02:23 PM
The_Polymath The_Polymath is offline
Member
CAS SOA
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 3,157
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by The_Polymath View Post
Way too many people here without initiative. You folks have a very archaic approach to management.

No wonder Actuarial tends to be a talent back-water. Most of you think holding a strong leash is beneficial.

Thats just silly. If you want to encourage initiative and independent thinking, you need to give people the autonomy to control their own work.

By not trusting their judgment, you are limiting them, as well as the company.

How do you folks not see this?
Just to add:

What PP and Co. suggested only really works well at EL. There you need a lot of hand-holding, so restricting their autonomy is fine. Doing the same to an experienced professional is pure managerial idiocy really, and belongs with the rest of the Actuarial management fossils from the past.
Reply With Quote
  #68  
Old 03-05-2019, 02:32 PM
The_Polymath The_Polymath is offline
Member
CAS SOA
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 3,157
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Colonel Smoothie View Post
I usually give my boss a heads up if I'm doing work that wasn't directly assigned by them. If they said okay then it shouldn't be a negative if that work was successful. I can understand why they wouldn't be happy, if they weren't informed.
And if your boss says "not ok" because he doesnt like you doing that kind of work?

Or (insert other explanation here that has nothing to do with actual work capacity)

Decisions to show initiative are usually made at the margins. Having a controlling boss destroys that.
Reply With Quote
  #69  
Old 03-05-2019, 02:37 PM
PeppermintPatty's Avatar
PeppermintPatty PeppermintPatty is offline
Member
CAS
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 42,121
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by The_Polymath View Post
Just to add:

What PP and Co. suggested only really works well at EL. There you need a lot of hand-holding, so restricting their autonomy is fine. Doing the same to an experienced professional is pure managerial idiocy really, and belongs with the rest of the Actuarial management fossils from the past.
Works fine at higher levels. If it's a small amount of time, I just tell my boss that I agreed to help so and so with XYZ. If it's going to be a big time commitment, I discuss it with my boss.

Quote:
Originally Posted by The_Polymath View Post
And if your boss says "not ok" because he doesnt like you doing that kind of work?
then you have a shitty boss and you should be looking for a new position.

Quote:
Originally Posted by The_Polymath View Post
Or (insert other explanation here that has nothing to do with actual work capacity)

Decisions to show initiative are usually made at the margins. Having a controlling boss destroys that.
Meh. I've changed plenty of processes, but I've usually approached my boss first and said, "Here's the problem, here's how I'm going to fix it, it will add X weeks the first time we do it, but will be (faster, easier, more accurate, easier to sell to underwriting...) and that will pay for it.
Reply With Quote
  #70  
Old 03-06-2019, 07:23 PM
Maphisto's Sidekick's Avatar
Maphisto's Sidekick Maphisto's Sidekick is offline
Member
CAS
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: South Park Genetics Lab
College: Ardnox
Favorite beer: The kind with alcohol
Posts: 3,103
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by NAMAK View Post
is that all short term or some long term?
I can't speak for yoyo, but my bonus (in the mid-upper 30's (%)) is just an annual company/personal performance bonus.

Some companies' compensation strategy calls for managers-and-above to see a pretty big chunk of their compensation be tied to performance. It gives us an extra incentive to be successful, and it provides a bit of a cushion in the form of a reduced expense ratio in otherwise bad years.

My salary looks at first glance to be low for my position/experience. An average bonus makes up the difference, plus a little more.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:10 PM.


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
*PLEASE NOTE: Posts are not checked for accuracy, and do not
represent the views of the Actuarial Outpost or its sponsors.
Page generated in 0.24991 seconds with 10 queries