Career Advice

Hello everybody,

I'm looking for some advice on what route to take to start my career.

I graduated this year from Nottingham Trent University, and only managed to achieve a 2:2 in Mathematics. In October, I started doing a PGDip at The University of Leicester in Actuarial Science, which is a distance learning course. Upon completion of the course I earn exemption from CT1-8, but the course is two years long. Obviously I understand that entry requirements on almost all graduate training schemes as an actuary demand a 2:1, so I wondered if anybody could recommend any other positions that I could apply for which may be more realistic in my current position.

My intention is to find a job whilst doing my PGDip, which will act as suitable experience and help me to get into the profession once my course is finished.

Any help would be greatly appreciated,
Kind regards,
Danilo

 

I'd probably recommend spending all your available time studying for the moment, get some exemptions and re-assess in a years’ time (Hopefully with the maximum # of exemptions you can get in 1 year). What’s the point of getting some job that isn't what you want that doesn't have study support? It just diminishes your chance of improving your academic credentials which is what you need most at this stage.. (This is of Couse on the premise that you have applied for many jobs and can't get any of them at this stage).

 

Firstly, a 2.2 is not a barrier to enter the profession although many companies will look for higher.

What caused the 2.2 - anything for example health related can be a helpful mitigation. You may still get an interview but a question that may arise is were you expecting better...what could you have done to get better...what have you learned from the result.

It obviously hasn't been a barrier to your PGDip. I'd try to get some experience in a financial services company. Needn't be actuarial staright away. Even call centre work will go you valuable incite into how policyholders think and the needs they face. I've known people start in non-actuarial roles then get into the actuarial side of things. No guarantees of course.

As for exemptions, not all companies like you to have too many. That is because your theory and practical abilities get out of sync. And, exemptions aren't automatic in most courses. You have to do well enough to earn them.

Also think how different it will be working and studying together. Employers will want to know you can achieve this balance so neither study nor on the job performance suffers.

Not sure how helpful this is.

 

DevonMatthews: The reason I want to get a job is so that I can prove my ability to work and study at the same time, like bystander pointed out. Also, surely just having a job within insurance or any other field will still be good experience that would be useful within an actuarial role. Like you say though, my primary focus is my course so that I can at least have something good to show academically.

bystander: I sent you a message regarding some of the things you said, but I do have one question, when you say that companies don't like too many exemptions due to theory and practical abilities getting out of sync, do you mean specifically exemptions, or would it be the same if I were to do the exams through the Institute and Faculty of Actuaries?

 

You could do underwriting or claims handling or something, but they're all micro level activities, actuarial is macro level. They are the same industry, but they are not really relevant. You need to do something to demonstrate an interest in actuarial work specifically, and the best way is through qualifications. If you can demonstrate a genuine interest no one will doubt your ability to work and study at the same time.

 

I disagree that underwriting isn't relevant. I guess it depends on what's being underwritten, but I started in a reinsurance underwriting role in the london market, and helped price different treaties from scratch almost every day, which is using actuarial type skills. It was also relatively straightforward to move into a more actuarial role when I decided that's what I wanted to do. So if you can't get into a fully actuarial role, I would certainly consider related areas that would help you move into an actuarial role later on, and underwriting would be one of the best alternatives in my opinion

I wouldn't do claims handling though - boring (and not actuarial)

 

Okay maybe not irrelevant but it certainly does not make use of any real actuarial techniques

 

?? ??
Since when is pricing not a "real" actuarial technique??

The 3 main actuarial roles in general insurance are pricing, reserving, and capital modelling. I'd guess more actuaries in general insurance work in pricing than anything else, and its as real an actuarial technique as anything else in my opinion.

 

Since when have underwriters been doing tehcnical pricing? This is almost always an actuarial function. Underwriting is art, actuarial is science.

 

You try to find a software development/modelling trainee/junior position. Check Towers Watson. Since you did Maths you could try CT1 or CT3 (I know you can get exemptions) to put on your CV before you finish the Postgrad.

 

Well at least as long as i've been working in GI!

It depends on the underwriter, class of business, and maybe company culture, i guess. But in my experience (London market, general insurance) most underwriters don't need an actuary to price their risks for them, and if they do get some assistance from an actuary, they'll need to understand exactly what's been done.

Of course the underwriter is also responsible for pricing in in more qualitative factors, understanding market rates and issues, negotiating terms and prices, and managing their portfolio, so I think they deserve more credit than you seem to give them

 

Underwriters did the pricing long before actuaries became involved (only in last few decades). Modern practice may be very different of course.

Putting that debate aside.
A non-actuarial role (underwriting, call centre, claims handling, sales) does have its benefits, especially when you can't get an actuarial role.
An appreciation for the other roles helps in seeing the big picture, communicating with them (as an actuary), general business experience (which will be relevent to almost any financial institution and more), etc will add to your experience side and bring more to the table than just exam passes.

At some point the exam passes aren't going to add the extra value you'd expect without the attaching level of experience. Not that it's not worth doing the exams, but just that you ought to expect to wait until you've proved yourself in the practical world for the reward to catch up.

 

Comment: despite having several years at university, the thing I was consistently and regularly asked about by interviewers was the time I spent working in client services, despite that role's having no real relevance to actuarial work. It was given much more weight than I expected, and I'm glad I had it.

 

what sort of service were you providing to these clients calum?

i have also been suprised how much interviewers for actuarial roles tend to focus more on softer, transferable skills like communication, and teamwork etc rather than the technical skills. I suppose this can often be seen as the achilles heel of actuaries, and is more of an unknown, whereas an academic record/exam history largely speaks for itself (and is alot less interesting to talk about).

 

Thanks for all of the responses, it's been so useful.

I've decided that I'm going to just continue applying for actuarial trainee positions, targeting specific companies where I can. If I continue to be unsuccessful, I'll try and get some work experience within an actuarial department, and apply for underwriting roles. Depending on how it turns out, I might try and sit a couple of the CT examinations whilst still doing my course.

 

You can do CT1 without being in the Profession. To do more, though you will need to get student membership.

 

Client Services is the customer facing arm of a life office. Dull work, but somewhat vital.

 

Actuaries often look down on customer services but to me thats so wrong. They are at the sharp end and will quickly here about complaints and dealing with the customer well really does impact retention in a positive way.

Without customers there are no products to build and nothing to value so they are pretty fundamental really.

That said, much prefer the back office!

 

Help on Actuarial studies

Hello All,

I am a member of Institute of Actuaries, India (IAI). The result of my CT1 came and it was a little disappointing but also motivating since I think I missed by few marks.

Now the confusion in my mind are as follows:
1. Does it make a difference in terms of preference, quality, jobs, etc of completing Actuary from any institute say IFA, SOA, CAS, IAI?

2. Since taking exams from the above requires hardwork, extra time as the exams are difficult...what advantage do we have after passing the exams from those who go for the university courses as I think passing there may be easy since they have practicals as well?

3. Does project management certification has any value in this field?

Thanks in advance,
Warrior

 

Can someone please help me with the queries in the below post

Thanks & Regards,
Warrior

 

In theory, no; they are all meant to be matched in terms of attainment. In practice, it probably makes sense to go for the organisation that covers the region you want to work in. In the specific case of India, IAI is apparently deliberately increasing the level of the exams (without chaning the syllabus). You might want to understand why and whether that has any bearing on which set of exams you go for. Lastly, the difference can come down to the prejudices of any particular hiring manager, which is something you can't really control for!

All else being equal, someone who got the passes while working is better off than someone who has all the exemptions and no practical experience. But academic actuarial training is valuable in its own right and is only going to become more common.

I would say it's a red herring at entry level. Exams are quite enough to start with!